The history of Latin America can be understood through the lens of militarization. The field of military history influences nearly all aspects throughout the development of the Latin America society presently. In Latin America. After World War II, there were high levels of expectations of constant economic development and democratic union which were only partly fulfilled. Hence, military dictatorships were among the major solutions put forward.
Latin America was the work of many and was also influenced by events and policies of the time. Therefore, the military development in several nations started very poorly, highlighting a lack of will or potential to absorb or understand what foreign technology in this field could supply due to their lack of assets. Gradually, a change arises through foreign influence. The involvement of foreign military aid is mostly stressed by critics than those close to the military has had a great impact on the role of politics and military in Latin America. Especially, the US that was effective in managing security forces in many countries and these associations later played an integral part in national politics. For instance, the Mutual Security Act of 1951, “provided limited assistance to Latin American military forces through the approval of sales of certain US military equipment. The act main goal was to help poor countries develop and to contain the spread of communism”. There was also, the 1947 Rio Treaty, an agreement that ensures by all possible means to provide effective reciprocal aid to comfort armed military attack and prevent threats of aggression against any of them. As a result of this treaty, thousands of military and technical officials were trained in the US. In general, the US government since World War II was the chief source of military aid, did not influence in shaping the behavior and capabilities of the Latin America armed forces in politics. Notably, Brazil, Mexico, Argentina and Peru which received foreign missions, that slowly built-up armed forces basically beyond the level of internal security needs leading to the achievement of professional standards of institutional development. The military was condemned for disrupting political and democratic development, it is sometimes seen as overly responsive to foreign manipulation even though their behaviors have been through domestic practices. Thus, when the armed forces become politically active for self-interested motives, they tend to stop democratic forces and prevent development and democracy. The stimulating of US intervention in Latin America for the sake of supporting democracy; this pro-democratic atmosphere definitely contributed to the success of certain coups d’état that was carried out in the name of democracy such as those in Venezuela and Peru in 1945, it helped to enhance the power of some Latin America political organizations and trade unions. Communism was then incompatible with the American concept of freedom and the US wanted to fight against international communism so the pro-democratic language that the US had spoken for several years was quickly transformed into the language of ‘anti-communism’. The democratic actor did not benefit from the US foreign policy but it would be the anti-communist forces like the often quite different, the landowners, the catholic church and the armed forces. To the US democracy became identified with anti-communism, not with the rule by popular forces. Politically they have stopped the spread of communism, they also prevented the rise of political parties and trade unions. Despite all that is said, the military has its interest and biases; currently it is remembered for its repressive roles, the military withdrew from center stage and as a result budgets were cut, by the end of the cold war the military lost its domestic political role, only the war on drugs provides in some countries a justification for continuing high profile practices of the arm forces. It has become a part of the middle class since more offices are coming from that group today, but the military still enjoys a significant external role in Cuba and Chile and powerful in Columbia. Despite the trend of reducing the size and budgets or the trend of professionalizing armies like increasing the participation of women. There is also a push to internationalized militaries with 9.5% of the United Nations peacekeeping operation came from Latin America. For example, Uruguay is the largest provider of peacekeeping personnel.
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
Nevertheless, like apart of other regions in the world, the military can have both a negative and positive effect on the domestic environment. Such as in Venezuela, despite having one of the largest and strongest military troop but it should not be overlooked since Venezuela is facing an economic crisis that is gradually increasing by the days which is seriously affecting the government’s ability to sustain military expenditures, weapons acquisitions and equipment maintenance. On the contrary, Brazil with the largest and strongest in Latin America has been increasing its military in recent years, positively the Brazilian army is currently in charge of Rio de Janeiro police force, besides, it is considered one of the most qualified with expenses.
Stuck on your essay?
