Pan-Americanism in dispute. U.S. leaders, Bolívar, and San Martín in the centenaries of the Monroe Doctrine and the Amphictyonic Congress of Panama (1923-1926)

ABSTRACT

This paper analyzes the representations of U.S. statesmen, Bolívar, and San Martín during the centenaries of the Monroe Doctrine (1923) and the Congress of Panama (1926). On the one hand, it examines the characterizations of U.S. leaders and Bolívar, as well as the connections established between them, in the public interventions of various agents and articulators of U.S. Pan-American policy in the Americas during both commemorations. On the other hand, it explores the tensions and exchanges that these operations generated with “Bolivarian” political and literary referents, who insisted on presenting the Liberator as the unique father of Pan-Americanism. Finally, this article focuses on the efforts of some important politicians and intellectuals of Argentine and Chilean origin who tried to attribute to San Martín and other historical figures of the time a significant role in the birth of continental solidarity and cooperation. Ultimately, I argue that these centenaries triggered a series of complex political-ideological interactions among numerous diplomats, politicians, and intellectuals from across the continent, proving that the 1920s was a time of strong hegemonic expectations in which history became a powerful and effective resource in the attempt to reorganize and/or secure the hierarchies of the inter-American order.

KEYWORDS:

• Pan-Americanism
• Monroe Doctrine
• Congress of Panama
• centenaries

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. The “eminent Cuban writer” to whom Alfaro refers is Manuel Márquez Sterling.

2. On Hispano-Americanism, see (Marcilhacy 2006). For an analysis of U.S. foreign policy between the end of the 19th century and 1940, see (Gellman 2019; Schoultz 1998; Spellacy 2006).

3. For an analysis of Latin American Anti-imperialism and Anti-Americanism, see (Bergel 2011; Grandin 2006).

4. Between 1902 and 1903, the Argentine government of President Julio Argentino Roca, with Luis María Drago as Minister of Foreign Affairs, sent a note addressed to the Argentine Minister in Washington, Martin García Merou, to be presented to the U.S. government of Theodore Roosevelt in which they expressed their rejection of the joint invasion of Venezuela by Great Britain, Germany, and Italy to coerce payment of the foreign debt. The Drago Doctrine thus established that the use of military force was inapplicable to debtor-creditor relations. In this regard, see (Cisneros and Escudé 2000).

5. The correct date of Agent Aguirre’s appointment by the Supreme Director of the United Provinces of South America is April 28, 1817.

6. For an analysis of Quesada’s intellectual itinerary, see (Bergel 2009).