Figure 1.--This is a Red Cross refugee center in San Salvador, the Salvadoran capital in 1969. This was an early stage of the Central Americam crisis in 1969. |
|
Central America was donated by land-owning forces which for years resisted change and reform and resorted to brutal violence. The situation was especially acute in the northern Central American countries south of Mexico (Guatemala, Honduras , Nicaragua, and El Salvador). The situation and ensuing developments varies in each of the four countries. These were countries with substantial indigenous populations which did not participate in the national society. These countries were very isolated, but after World War II the same anti-colonial ferment in Asia and Africa affected Latin America. Many became convinced that Communism and socialism were the key to the future and they began to challenge the region's conservative power structure. The region became embroiled in the Cold War. The first outbreak of violence occurred in Guatemala (1954). The United States help suppress the Government Jacobo Ãrbenz who was a rare elected president of the country and initiated a land reform effort. The United States was concerned about Communist influences in the Government and pressed by the United Fruit Company, supported a coup. It was over with quickly. Fidel Castro's Revolution in Cuba introduced a Communist bridgehead in the region which supported revolutionary groups. These groups proved effective in attacking dictatorial regimes, especially the Somoza dictatorship which democratic forces could also be recruited. This was same tactic Castro had used in Cuba where he gained control over the 26 of July Movement which began as a democratic movement. No one can defend Somoza and other dictators. The problem is that the Communists only want to replace one dictatorship with another. And it is clear from the Cuban and Venezuelan experience as well as other Communist efforts in Europe, Asia, and Africa is that the Communists do not have the ability to crate a prosperous economy. This can only be achieved by capitalist economies which usually means democracies. We see this clearly in the Asian Tigers.) The Communist controlled Sandinista movement supported by Cuba and Soviet arms overthrew the corrupt Somoza dictatorship (1979). And this facilitated the flow of arms and money to revolutionary groups into the region causing what became a civil war when the United States supporting anti-Communist groups who became known as the Contras. Civil wars and communist revolutions engulfed the region. The United States feared that victories by communist forces would create another Cuba and expansion of Soviet power causing the rest of South America to become isolated from the United States if the governments of the Central American countries were overthrown and pro-Soviet communist governments were installed in their place. The United States has bee criticized for causing this problem. But this simplistic narrative common in left-wing circles ignores the three centuries of Spanish colonial rule (16th-18th centuries) and independence when Spanish colonial society remained important (19th century). It is true that the United States has been involved in various ways in these countries, especially in the 20th century. The problem with this assessment is that developments in Central America were not unlike developments in South America, a much larger, area in which American influence had been minimal. Clearly the predominate influence was Spanish and Portuguese colonial rule. In the fighting that followed, refugees fleeing the fighting became a serious problem. .
Central America was dominated by land owning forces which for years resisted change and reform and resorted to brutal violence. The situation was especially acute in the northern Central American countries south of Mexico -- the northern triangle (Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and El Salvador). The situation and ensuing developments varies in each of the four countries, but there were considerable similarities. These were countries with substantial indigenous populations which did not participate in the national society. All were a small part of the vast Spanish Empire, usually ruled from Mexico City. The Spamish Empire was financed by the duscovery of vast silver resources in Bolivia and Mexico. One aspect of Spamish Imperial rule was that the colonies existed for the nenefit of Spain. Industry was basically prohibiyed. The colonies were to buy manufactured goods from Spain not produce them and compete with Spain. Independence did not sugnificantly change the economic and social system. The region continued to primarily be africultural and a producer of raw materials. And the prospects of the vast proportion of the population. The countries continued to be controlled by the large land owners and merchants in the still fairly small cities. There was virtally no omdistry. The bulk of the population was still in the countryside. There were farmers with small plots, but many were kandless farm workers in large estats. Few of the children attended school. There was very littke investment in the principal resource -- their people. This was the genrral situation throughout Latin America. The economy in the Northern Triangle was agriculture. Control of the land by the latifundia, but inefficent agricultutral methods was also imprtant. In the Unites States, a farmer feeds something like 155 people. In Cebtral America a farmer feeds only a handful of peoole. This inevitavly affects the income and live prospects of the population. And the poor education and lack of a vibrant capitalist economy provide only limited prospects for those who manage to get an education, although this was not recognized by much of the population which by the mid-20th century had been attracted to Socialist economic ideas and Communist propaganda.
These Central American countries countries were very isolated, at least the great bulk of the population, but after World War II the same anti-colonial ferment in Asia and Africa affected Latin America. Many became convinced that Communism and socialism were the key to the future and they began to challenge the region's conservative power structure. The region became embroiled in the Cold War. The first post-War outbreak of violence occurred in Guatemala (1954). The United States help suppress the Government Jacobo Ãrbenz who was a rare elected president of the country and initiated a land reform effort.
The United States was concerned about Communist influences in the Government and pressed by the United Fruit Company, supported a coup. It was over with quickly. Fidel Castro's Revolution in Cuba introduced a Communist bridgehead in the region which supported revolutionary groups. These groups proved effective in attacking dictatorial regimes, especially the Somoza dictatorship which democratic forces could also be recruited. This was same tactic Castro had used in Cuba where he gained control over the 26 of July Movement which began as a democratic movement. No one can defend Somoza and other dictators. The problem is that the Communists only want to replace one dictatorship with another.
And it is clear from the Cuban and Venezuelan experience as well as other Communist efforts in Europe, Asia, and Africa is that the Communists do not have the ability to crate a prosperous economy. This can only be achieved by capital economies which usually meant democracies. We see this clearly in the Asian Tigers. And many if the Latin American countries at the end of World War II had more developed economies that the Asian Tigers, including Cuba. The difference has been the socialist ideas that have gained great currency throughout Latin America. This has meant both instability and the commitment to Government run and financed social programs. Such policies resulted in the failure of Argentina which was on the cusp of becoming a developed country. or Cuba was plunged by Fidel's Communist from a prosperous country to one of the poorest in the region. Even more stunning as Caesar Chavez socialist policies which turned oil rich Venezuela into a poor country. We might understand the failure of socialism in a poor country like Bolivia and Nicaragua, but how is it even possible to turn an oil rich country like Venezuela into a pauper country. What ever the intention of socialist rulers, their policies have moot brought prosperity--just the opposite. In contrast, it is the market. based capitalist reforms that very rapidly have succeeded in building and maintaining prosperous economies..
The Communist controlled Sandinista movement supported by Cuba and Soviet arms overthrew the corrupt Somoza dictatorship (1979). Here the Sandinista Movement was the primary effecrive opposition to the Somoza dictatorship. The leadership of the Sandanista Movement were dedicated Castroite Communists. But oar of their effectiveness was their ability toattravy democratic anti-Somoza lemebts. This was the same dunamic that allowed Casstro to seize contril of the 26th of July Movement and rventually Cuba. The victory of the Sandinmista in Nicaragua opened the way for Cuba to finnel Soviet arms and support into Central America. Herevthe fovus was on the north (El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala). To the south the Comminists found little support in democratic amd relatively prosperous Costa Rica. The north was a different nmatter. Bicaragua facilitated the flow of arms and money to revolutionary groups into the region causing what became a civil war with the United States supporting anti-Communist groups, This was the Contrasin Nocaragua. Civil war and communist revolutions engulfed the region.
The most seriious condlict was in Nicaragua itslf and El Salvador wss a special case. It was the mosr sensely populated if the four northern Central American countries. Here land reform had no chance of success. There were simply too little land and too many landless compesinos. The result was a vicious civil war. Violence also esca;ted in Honduras and Guatemala. but no wgerevapproaching Nicaragua and and El Salvador. The amazing aspect of the whole Cenbtral American emnbroligo--war, violence, and refugees. And that is si many oeople ikn the refion became convinced that Cuban styled Comminism was the answer to their problems despote the abject failure of Communism in Cuba. Notice that Central Anmericans migrants have not heased to Cuba, they have headed for the American southern border. It is akso notable that some 25 countries (from Poland to Vietnam) have attempted to schieve economic success and not one has succeeded. The Communists have proven very effective at seizing powerl but totaly incaable of achiebing prosperity for their people through socialist economic policies.
The United States feared that victories by communist forces would create more Cubas and expand Soviet power, causing the rest of South America to become isolated from the United States. Thus if the governments of the Central American countries were overthrown and pro-Soviet communist governments were installed in their place there were real national security concerns. This all seems basically trivial, because we know that the United States won the Cold War and the Soviet Union imploded. But this is a view from the ability to look back historically. This was not at all obvious at the time. In fact, at the time many saw it more likely that the Communists would win the Cold War which is part of the reason that Fidel and so many other Third World leaders signed up on the Soviet side and chose to implement socialist rather than capitalist economic economic policies and authoritarian political structures. Given that pivotal milieu. America policies to resist Soviet expansion seen a lot more understandable than assessing policies from the benefit of knowing how the Cold War played out.
The United States has been criticized for causing the Central American problem. We saw this during the Cold war and see it again during the southern border crisis (2018-19). But this simplistic narrative common in left-wing circles ignores the four centuries of Spanish colonial rule. But this simplistic narrative common in left-wing circles ignores the three centuries of Spanish colonial rule (16th-18th centuries) and independence era when Spanish colonial society remained important (19th century). It is true that the United States has been involved in various ways in these countries, especially in the 20th century. The problem with this assessment is that developments in Central America is not unlike developments in South America, a much larger, area in which American influence had been minimal Not only was American involvement minimal, but they were much larger countries, more difficult to influence than the small central American countries. Yet the problems in Central America were not unique, they were endemic throughout Latin America, clearly related to the the long era of Spanish control. A good example is Ecuadorean author Jorge Icaza's novel Huasipungo (1934) about the indigenous campesinos. Icaza does not talk about venal norteamericanos and evil capitalism he talks about the cultural and economic system created by the Spanish. Clearly the predominate influence was Spanish and Portuguese colonial rule. If the United States was the cause, than the problems of Central America would be different, but the problems are remarkably similar throughout Latin America, meaning it is the Spanish colonial influence that is the major issue.
In the fighting that developed during the Cold War. Refugees fleeing the fighting became a serious problem. .
Navigate the Children in History Website:
[Return to Main Cold War refugee page]
[Return to Main Cold War page]
[Return to Main 20th century refugee pahe]
[Return to Main Communism page]
[About Us]
[Introduction]
[Biographies]
[Chronology]
[Climatology]
[Clothing]
[Disease and Health]
[Economics]
[Freedom]
[Geography]
[History]
[Human Nature]
[Law]
[Nationalism]
[Presidents]
[Religion]
[Royalty]
[Science]
[Social Class]
[Bibliographies]
[Contributions]
[FAQs]
[Glossaries]
[Images]
[Links]
[Registration]
[Tools]
[Children in History Home]