Divisive national elections in 1957, 1961, 1964, and 1968in Guyana assisted in shaping the boundaries of political and social life. Collectively, these elections served to sustain the ethnic divide amidst an increasingly weary population. By 1968, the ruling party in government, the PNC (Peoples National Congress) began to ‘make moves’ in the state and society designed to consolidate its position. In the event, the PNC, the more identifiably moderate of the two political parties, was deemed 'socialist' and the PPP held its image as a 'communist' organisation until the 1980s. For the American and British policymakers the matter of ideology was of utmost importance. Indeed, when the country enveloped into flames in three years of ethnic violence between Africans and Indians in 1962, 1963 and 1964, it was clear that in Guyana the issue of communism had assumed serious concerns.12 This was evident in the CIA's involvement in assisting the trade unions to undermine the PPP government. By the end of 1964 when the dust had settled, scores of people had been killed and injured. The intervention of the Americans and the British in these disturbances and the participation of local politicians in that division had the effect of driving a concurrent racial and ideological wedge in the society at large. Shortly after the American and British intervention that propelled critical changes in the electoral system, the PNC regime, facilitated by an alliance with the conservative United Force political party procured power in the 1964 elections13. New World Group The first open challenge to ‘formal politics’ was exemplified by the activities of the New World grouping in the early 1960s. Established in 1963, the New World group and estab... ... middle of paper ... ...ts revolutionary commitment to subversion of governments in Latin America and the Caribbean enabled Guyana to place itself in a radical posture without seeming unfriendly to the USA.18 This duality of good relations with Washington on the one hand, and with Cuba and the Third World, would be successfully 'balanced' by the Burnham regime right up to 1985. In short, despite the diplomatic radicalisation of the PNC's foreign policy in the 1970s, "Guyana-US relations never really took the form of outright confrontation nor reached the level of irretrievable breakdown -that is, with the exception of the Angola issue in 1976. The leadership's pragmatic sensitivity to the realities of the US's hemispheric presence provided, to a certain degree, a moderating influence in terms of the limits to which Guyana was prepared to go in avoiding a total breakdown in relations."19
When focusing on Nicaragua one will need to pay close attention to the rebel group called the Sandinistas who took over Nicaragua’s previous dictator, Anastasio Somoza in 1979, in which the United States Congress decided it would be best to provide them with aid that lasted till 1981.1 Nicaragua’s geographic location made it a big concern for President Reagan based on his philosophy that surrounded the Reagan Doctrine. At that point, President Reagan ended the aid deal and adamantly advised that support be sent to those who were trying to over throw the new socialized, Sandinista leadership.2 Furthermore, the Nicaraguan’s were dealing with some of the worst warfare ever, by the mass killings that took place, which were at the mercy of death squads.3 This gruesome realization allowed President Reaga...
The U.S.’s relationship with Cuba has been arduous and stained with mutual suspicion and obstinateness, and the repeated U.S. interventions. The Platt agreement and Castro’s rise to power, served to introduce the years of difficulty to come, while, the embargo the U.S. placed on Cuba, enforced the harsh feelings. The two major events that caused the most problems were the Bays of Pigs and Cuban Missile Crisis.
The new American arrangement of popular government depended vigorously on political gatherings, so when the Democratic gathering parted, over the same subjugation issue bringing about turmoil surrounding,...
In 1979 Jean Kirkpatrick published Dictatorships And Double Standards, an article dealing with U.S. foreign policy under Jimmy Carter, including policy toward the Sandinistas in Nicaragua. Kirkpatrick argues that Carter “abhors only right wing autocrats” ((43) and that he ignores the primary goal in foreign policy which should be U.S. interests. In her world view, the end justifies the means and stability should be sought over any sentimental notions about democracy for, or sovereignty of foreign nations. She argues that Latin America is not fertile for democracy and that, in the long run, supporting right wing dictatorships will lead to a better chance at this goal, to be achieved at a later date. In her Machiavellian prescription for Nicaragua she downplays the horrors of Somoza and misrepresents the character of the Sandinista revolution. The violence that occurred under the Reagan administration in the eighties can be seen as the realization of the Kirkpatrick school of thought and the results were extremely negative for Nicaragua.
Immerman, Richard. The CIA in Guatemala the foreign policy of intervention. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1985.
The Allies’ victory in WWII marked democracy’s triumph over dictatorship, and the consequences shook Latin America. Questioning why they should support the struggle for democracy in Europe and yet suffer the constraints of dictatorship at home, many Latin Americans rallied to democratize their own political structures. A group of prominent middle–class Brazilians opposed to the continuation of the Vargas dictatorship mused publicly, “If we fight against fascism at the side of the United Nations so that liberty and democracy may be restored to all people, certainly we are not asking too much in demanding for ourselves such rights and guarantees.” The times favored the democratic concepts professed by the middle class. A wave of freedom of speech, press, and assembly engulfed much of Latin America and bathed the middle class with satisfaction. New political parties emerged to represent broader segments of the population. Democracy, always a fragile plant anywhere, seemed ready to blossom throughout Latin America. Nowhere was this change more amply illustrated than in Guatemala, where Jorge Ubico ruled as dictator from 1931 until 1944. Ubico, a former minister of war, carried out unprecedented centralization of the state and repression of his opponents. Although he technically ended debt peonage, the 1934 vagrancy law required the carrying of identification cards and improved ...
White, Robert E. 2013. "After Chávez, a Chance to Rethink Relations With Cuba". The New
Guyana, South America is South America’s monarch. It is located on the northern border of South America and is also part of the Anglophone Islands. After Jones and his flock moved to this country, he started a cult. He named this the Peoples Temple.They were located in the jungle of Guyana. In this community, Jones proclaimed that all men, except for him, were homosexual. He...
Harry E. Canden. , & Gary Prevost, (2012). Politics Latin America. (4th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
During the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, the United States was the most dominant power in the Western Hemisphere. European nations conceded to the United States their right of any intervention in the Western Hemisphere and allowed the United States to do whatever they wanted. The United States took this newly bestowed power and abused it. The United States intervened in many Latin American countries and imposed their policies on to these countries against their will. A perfect example of this aggression is what occurred in the Dominican Republic in 1904. The United States intervened in this sovereign nation and took control of their economy and custom houses. A memorandum from Francis B. Loomis, the United States Assistant Secretary of State, to the Secretary of States illustrates the United States’ goals, interests, attitudes and assumptions in the Dominican Republic and how the United States policy makers felt towards Latin America during this time period.
Edkins, Jenny, and Maja Zehfuss. Global Politics: A New Introduction. 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 2009. Print.
Tarrow, Sidney. “Transnational Politics: Contention and Institutions in International Politics.” Annual Review of Political Science, 2001.4.
Nelson Mandela’s commitment to politics and the ANC grew stronger after the 1948 election victory of the Afrikaner dominated National Party, which formed a formal system of racial classification and segregation “apartheid” which restricted non whites basic rights and barred them from government.
Kegley, Charles W., and Eugene R. Wittkopf. World Politics Trend and Transformation. New York: St. Martin's, 1981. Print.
Boyer, Mark A., Natalie Florea. Hudson, and Michael J. Butler. Global Politics: Engaging a Complex World. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2013. Print.