Southwestern Journal of International Studies
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Southwestern Journal of International Studies Three Periods of Good Understanding Between the US and Mexico: 1. Lincoln-Juarez 2. Roosevelt-Cardenas and Roosevelt-Avila 3. Bush-Salinas David Davila Villers Ph.D. Political Culture in East and West: Democracy, Globalism, and Multiculturalism Daniel German Ph.D. & Dragan Stefanovic Ph.D. Globalization and its impact on Indigenous Governance Structures Kelechhi A. Kalu Ph.D. Political Cartoons: A Research Note Dean A. Minix Ph.D. The Republic of Gabon James F. Barnes Ph.D. Kashmir Between India and Pakistan Rathnam Indurthy Ph.D. CAMPO SIN CAMPESINOS: The Transformation of the Mexican Agricultural Sector Donn Gladish Impact of the Mexican Immigrant Labor Force in the United States Economy Maria A. Padilla Volume 1 Number 1 Spring 2004 Published by the Southwestern International Studies Association SOUTHWESTERN INTERNATIONAL STUDIES ASSOCIATION President Kelechi A. Kalu, Ph.D. Professor of Political Science University of Northern Colorado [email protected] 2004 Conference Program Chair Dean A. Minix, Ph.D. Department of Political Science, Northern Kentucky University [email protected] Journal Editor Dragan Stefanovic Ph.D. Political Science/Criminal Justice Appalachian State University [email protected] Treasurer Linda Dolive, Ph.D. Professor Department of Political Science Northern Kentucky University [email protected] Ex-Officio Abbas Manafy Ph.D. Professor Political Science New Mexico Highland University [email protected] * southwestern international association is an affiliate of the southwestern Social Science association Southwestern Journal of International Studies Journal Editor: Dragan Stefanović Ph.D. Appalachian State University Department of Political Science email: [email protected] Editorial Board: Jawad Barghothi, Dept. of Political Science, Appalachian State University David Davila-Villers, Universidad de las Americas, Puebla , Mexico Rathnam Indurthy, Dept. of Government, McNeese State University Kelechi Kalu, Dept. of Political Science, University of Northern Colorado Abbas Manafy, Dept. of Political Science, New Mexico Highlands University Dean A. Minix, Department of Political Science, Northern Kentucky University Gustavo Wensjoe, Center for International Studies, University of St. Th omas Copy Editor: Web Version:Carmen Vidal-Lieberman, Department of Language and Literature, New Mexico Highlands University Print Version: Diana Garcia, Center for International Studies, University of St. Th omas, Houston, TX Etienne de Larminat, Institut Catholique d’Études Supérieures, La Roche Sur Yon, France Website Master : Daniel W. Weeks, Graduate Assistant, Appalachian State University Southwestern Journal of International Studies Volume 1 Number 1 Spring 2004 Contents Three Periods of Good Understanding Between the US and Mexico: 1. Lincoln-Juarez 2. Roosevelt-Cardenas and Roosevelt-Avila 3. Bush-Salinas David Davila Villers Ph.D. Political Culture in East and West: Democracy, Globalism, and Multiculturalism Daniel German Ph.D. & Dragan Stefanovic Ph.D. Globalization and its impact on Indigenous Governance Structures Kelechi A. Kalu Ph.D. Political Cartoons: A Research Note Dean A. Minix Ph.D. The Republic of Gabon James F. Barnes Ph.D. Kashmir Between India and Pakistan Rathnam Indurthy Ph.D. CAMPO SIN CAMPESINOS: The Transformation of the Mexican Agricultural Sector Donn Gladish Impact of the Mexican Immigrant Labor Force in the United States Economy Maria A. Padilla Three Periods of Good Understanding Between the US and Mexico: 1. Lincoln-Juárez 2. Roosevelt-Cárdenas and Roosevelt-Ávila Camacho 3. Bush-Salinas David R. Dávila Villers` Universidad de las Americas Summary: In this paper, three periods of good relations between Mexico and the United States are explored aiming to isolate the circumstances that made possible such good level of bilateral relations. Introduction It is easy enough to make broad generalizations about US-Mexico bilateral relations, but in reality the issue is an extremely complex one. The public in general tends to possess little information, if any at all, on the subject. It is actually quite remarkable how little Mexicans and Americans know about each other, as is noticeable through the manicheanism that have been used by leaders from both countries to nourish the popular imagination with stereotypes, for political purposes. Inevitably, since Mexico and the United States are growing more and more interdependent, we will all reap our share of a bitter harvest. Instead, we should focus on the good periods of understanding between our two nations, which is the main purpose of this paper. In particular, we are going to attempt to isolate some factors that made possible such rapprochement. Chief among such factors are some common traits of personality that presidents, Lincoln, F. D. Roosevelt and George Bush shared with their Mexican counterparts. This is a first attempt of this subject. The author pleads guilty for all possible mistakes committed in its elaboration. The reconstruction of the historical periods we are dealing with could certainly shed light over the problems; except that all historical accounts are, as accurate as it might be an informed opinion of the past. There exists two quite different perceptions, that the Mexican and the American elites have had of Southwestern Journal of International Studies 1 international affairs over time. So, far from proposing a single (the true one) account of elite complementarity, the explanation proposed in this paper is threefold: 1. That elite complementarity1 has certainly helped to bring our two countries closer. 2. That our countries perception of the international situation has sometimes. 3. That our countries can unite against a common enemy. 1. Lincoln-Juárez The lives of these two very fine presidents of the United States and Mexico are inscribed in the age of imperialist expansion. History might well be unique but the contemporary perceptions of the two nations have frequently diverged. During the 19 century in particular, the United States shared in the partition of the world among big powers, while Mexico, like many other Latin American countries, had to defend itself against foreign invasions by such major powers. The US had previously expanded to the West at the expense of France, Spain and Russia. Now France, under Napoleon III was ready for new colonial adventures in Africa (Algiers), Europe (Prussia) and America (Mexico). The meaning of the French intervention in Mexico was self stated: to build a Catholic empire to contain the advancement of Anglo-Saxon Protestantism. The British and the Spanish clearly realized that, for Napoleon III, France's intervention was far more than a debt-collect operation2. Mexico had turned into a scenario for a super-power competition. Actually, the final defeat of the French in Mexico can be considered one of the main episodes of the French withdrawal from superpower competition in the Americas3 . After 1848, the United States incorporated two million square kilometers formerly belonging to the Mexican Republic, as a result of a war that Lincoln opposed and rightly considered immoral4 . At least, Mexico was able to survive as a nation... only to find itself in a similar predicament, 15 years later, during the period of president Juárez. At the beginning of the 1 UDLAP coincided 2 The British and Spanish fleets withdrew from Veracruz on 9 April 1861 after accepting new terms for the payment of the Mexican debt. The French marched alone to conquer Mexico. 3 Another episode is, of course, the French failure to build a canal in Panama 4 He also considered it inconstitutional 2 Southwestern Journal of International Studies 1860's, the United States was about to enter the most critical period of its history, as well, with Lincoln as a president. Mexico suddenly regained importance, for in spite the blockade imposed by the Northern squads, the South continued to receive supplies through the Mexican port of Matamoros5. Apart from that trade, due to the vagaries of the Mexican wars and unrest rather than to a concerted policy, the South would try, unsuccessfully, to obtain Mexican (and European) support. Juarist Mexico, on its side, would unsuccessfully try to get help from the Lincoln administration to counter the French intervention. But the US could have been charged an accessory to declaration of war against France if it helped Mexico, with disastrous consequences for the North. So, from about 1861 until the end of the War of Secession, the US would avoid complications with the European powers. Lincoln forbade arms exports to Mexico on 2 November 1862. Interestingly enough, the Mexicans had defeated the French armies in a major battle in Puebla, on 5 May 1862. Deprived of resources and without any foreign help, the Juaristas could not prevent the French from occupying the country the following year. It is important to recall that throughout this period the Mexicans were divided between those who expected support from the US (the Liberals) and those who indeed obtained support from France (the Conservatives). The North defeated the Confederation in 1865 and the Juaristas did so with the French in 18676 . The United States would recover its stature as a major power, while France, especially after its defeats in Mexico and Europe (the French troops were encircled by the Prussians in the Metz and finally defeated in the Sedan7 ) would go into a period of civil war. Both Mexico and the United States were struggling to preserve their integrity