|
An Introduction to the Spanish
American War of 1898
The sparking of warfare between two or more parties
that tend to clash with each other upon the pretext
of a particular contention in possible concern
to racial, political or national ideological is
something that the world has experienced frequently
over the course of written history. More often
than not, moreover, these wars have come to a
grudging end as a result of the signing of various
treatises and agreements based on propagating
lasting peace between the number of parties involved
in the particular war. We will, however, consider
the chain of events leading up to and continuing
during the war before addressing the relevance
of such documents in concern to the Spanish American
War. Take into consideration, for instance, the
fact the Spanish American war; a war incepted
primarily as a result of the [still unresolved]
sinking of a US Battleship within the water of
Havana on a peace mission.
The Spanish American War: the triggering mechanism
The USS Maine was destroyed in the Havana harbor,
Cuba, on February 15, 1898. The USS Maine was
a second-class battleship that had been built
between 1888 and 1895. The battleship was sent
to Havana during the first month of the year 1898,
one of the prime factors for this initiative on
the part of the US navy being to protect American
interests within and during the long-standing
revolt of the Cubans against the Spanish government.
On the evening of the 15 of the very next month
[February], however, the forward gunpowder magazines
of the Maine exploded, consequently causing her
to rapidly descend in an inferno that left nearly
three-quarters of the battleship's crew dead (The
Naval Historical Center, 1998). In spite of the
fact that the precise cause of this momentous
tragedy remains unsettled to this day, contemporary
American popular opinion [at the time] fervently
blamed Spain. It was barely surprising, thus,
that [the Spanish American] war followed within
a few months.
It would also be relevant to here acknowledge
the fact that one of the more relevant features
of this war was that it was, practically exclusively,
a war that was waged upon water. In addition to
several smaller clashes, the Spanish American
War basically featured two major naval battles,
‘one in the Philippines and the other off
Cuba’ (The Naval Historical Center, 1998).
While the Spanish American was eventually incepted
as a result of the sinking of the USS Maine, it
must be considered that ties between the two nations
had been growing hostile for quite a considerable
period of time before the sinking. Take into consideration,
for instance, the fact that the Cuban revolutions,
which the Cubans had long been attempting in order
to free themselves from Spanish rule was something
that the US supported. While the US’s support
and concern for Cuba was primarily fueled by the
increasingly inhumane measures being taken by
Spanish government in order to calm the Cuban
revolutions, it must be acknowledged that the
presence of American citizens no the island was
an even more crucial factor for opposing Spain.
Chain of consequences: the battle at Manila Bay
& a relevant document
In addition the significant political contentions
in Cuba, moreover, another of the grounds upon
which the US opposed Spain was the latter’s
ruling of the Philippine Islands, also a region
that revolted, though unsuccessfully. The sinking
of the USS Maine was rendered an especially significant
disaster as a result of the fact that the battleship
had been sent to the waters of Havana so as to
ensure the safety of US citizens on the island
in addition to overseeing possible revolutions.
The board of inquiry that the US Navy subsequently
set up eventually came to the conclusion that
the explosion had been caused by the detonation
of a mine under the vessel. It wasn’t too
long before the prevalent American sentiment in
concern to the guilt of Spain in regard to the
destruction of the USS Maine culminated into the
collectively conclusive US decision to go to war
with Spain.
Indeed, it was only a couple of months later,
on the 1st of May, 1898, when Commodore George
Dewey's flagship Olympia led seven U.S. Navy cruisers
and gunboats into Manila Bay before dawn. 8 a:
m of the same morning saw the location and destruction
of virtually the entire Spanish naval force in
the Philippines at the hands of Dewey's Asiatic
Squadron. Furthermore, Dewey had managed to ‘eliminate
any threat that the Spanish Navy could have posed
to U.S. Far Eastern commerce and placed Spain's
centuries-long rule of the Philippines in grave
jeopardy’ within only a few hours (The Naval
Historical Center, 1998). Of even more significance
in concern to the naval capabilities was the fact
that the damage to the American ships was insignificant,
and their crews suffered no fatalities and with
little or no injuries.
Moreover, while it was the explosion of the USS
Maine that basically triggered the consequences
leading to the war, it must be considered that
the US didn’t go to war upon these grounds.
Indeed, US president McKinley first demanded that
Spain grant Cuba its unconditional freedom, something
that the latter refused to do. It would be of
even more relevance to consider here that neither
of the nations really wanted to go to war with
a vengeance; the problem was that Spain justified
its stance in as much as the concept that God
had granted Spain its empire as a reward for the
conquest of the Moors. Spanish honor subsequently
demanded defense of its overseas possession (s).
These possessions happened to include the Philippine
Islands and Cuba as key portions of the principal
remaining area of this empire (Trask, 2002).
More on the Spanish American War: Documents &
relevance to US foreign policy
It must be considered here that one of the most
crucial aspects of the Spanish American War was
that signified the development of the US into
a political-military power of global relevance.
[The Spanish American War] stood out as a ‘turning
point in the history of the United States, signaling
the country's emergence as a world power’
(The Naval Historical Center, 2003). The US stance
in concern to the position of Cuba represents
an ideological norm that has been of key relevance
to the contemporary existence of the US as a significant
super power with no parallel.
It reshaped the US foreign policy as a result
of restructuring the nations interests in as much
as illustrating humanity and morality as their
norms. The support for Cuban revolutionaries,
for instance, was something that the US claimed
to be doing out of no self interest in Cuba other
than the desire to see the people made independent
and free of Spanish Rule. In order to emphasize
upon the fact that its exclusive purpose at the
beginning of the struggle was Cuban independence,
moreover, ‘U.S. Congress passed a resolution,
the Teller Amendment, that foreswore any intention
of annexing Cuba’ (Trask, 2002). Named after
Senator Henry M. Teller of Orlando, who proposed
its inception, the Teller Amendment basically
stated that the US control over Cuba [during the
Spanish American War] would not be permanent.
The relevance of particular documents from the
respective time frame
The amendment explicitly stated that [the US]
‘disclaims any disposition of intention
to exercise sovereignty, jurisdiction, or control
over said island except for pacification thereof,
and asserts its determination, when that is accomplished,
to leave the government and control of the island
to its people’ (Teller & Platt Amendments,
1998). While the Senate passed the amendment on
the 19th of May, it was followed by the Platt
amendment, named for Senator Orville Platt who
introduced it, in the second month of 1901. The
Platt Amendment granted the US ‘the right
to intervene for the preservation of Cuban independence,
the maintenance of a government adequate for the
protection of life, property, and individual liberty’
(Teller & Platt Amendments, 1998).
Adherence to the Teller Amendment in as much as
the self-termination of US occupation of Cuba
approximately four years after Spanish troops
left the island in 1898 and the revoking of the
Platt amendment in 1934 were two events that were
especially relevant. This is since these events
were especially instrumental to portraying US
foreign policy as one that was especially considerate
of exploited nations and cultures in addition
to being eager to expand its influence. The Platt
amendment in particular, was instrumental in this
concern. This is since the amendment ‘severely
limited its sovereignty and stimulated a dependent
relationship that affected the evolution of Cuban
society’ (Trask, 2002). This situation has
made for the frequent and negativistic assumption,
on the part of many a historian that the Spanish
American war basically brought forth nothing more
than a transition of authority within Cuba; a
transition from Spanish to American Imperialism
(Trask, 2002). While the two documents discussed
above are of especial relevance to the foreign
policy of the US, another significant event to
consider would be the treaty of Paris. Consisting
of William R. Day, Sen. Cushman K. Davis, Sen.
William P. Frye, Sen. George Gray, and the Honorable
Whitelaw Reid on the American side and Don Eugenio
Montero Rios and Jules Cambon from the Spanish
side, this treaty was produced when the two peace
commissions met in Paris to discuss initiatives
for peace. The treaty, which was signed on the
10th of December 1898, resulted in Spain’s
eventual yielding of the Philippines in spite
of the fact that they didn’t want to do
so; they had no choice. Furthermore, the US ultimately
paid Spain 20 million dollars so as to smooth
over its possession of the Philippines. ‘The
islands of Puerto Rico and Guam were also placed
under American control while Spain relinquished
its claim to Cuba’ (The Treaty of Paris,
1998).
Contentious Generalities & further analysis
of the war & its impact on US Foreign policy
It would be noteworthy to consider that the Platt
Amendment was basically an imperialist initiative
that was incepted in order to enable the US sovereign
capacity over Cuba even after acting upon the
Teller Amendment. This amendment was basically
the only alternative that the US was offering
Cuba on par with being under immediate US occupation
and rule and as has already been illustrated,
it gave the U.S. unconditional right to intervene
in Cuba's internal affairs. However, even more
significant in concern to perceiving the imperialist
nature of this amendment is the fact that ‘it
granted the US perpetual rights to the coaling
station at Guantanamo Bay’ (Cushing, 1997).
In addition to this, moreover, the war also made
for a scenario that was idealistically encouraging
in concern to further collateral imperial conquests.
Take into consideration, for instance, the fact
that it was during this period that the annexation
of the Hawaiian Islands [July 7, 1898] took place.
In spite of the fact that U.S. interests had long
coveted formal control of the islands, it was
not until the government declared Hawaii territory
to be crucial as a naval base that it was formally
annexed. This is something that is relational
to the sinking of the HMS Maine in as much as
the fact that the disaster served as justification
for America's [stated] need for a naval base within
the particular territory (Cushing, 1997).
Eventually, it turned out that the war had been
especially advantageous to America and it’s
foreign policy. This, moreover, is something that
is made even more apparent when considering that
it was with the Spanish American war and its outcome
that the US began to come through to the world
as a power to be reckoned with. One of the more
subtle reasons for this, it must be considered,
was that one of the [little-noted] effects of
this short war was that it served to further cement
relations between the North and South regions
of America. This is since they were compelled,
in as much as the identification of a common enemy,
to stand against the external foe united. The
1890s, it turned out, had marked a period of reconciliation
between the American parties that had formerly
been identified as Yankees and Confederates. Consequently,
this era also saw an increase in the socio-political
harmony and consistence between Northern and Southern
politicians, something that would have been hard
to imagine as less as a decade in the past.
Conclusion (s)
It is quite apparent, thus speaking, that the
Spanish American War was especially instrumental
in concern to securing America’s position
as a world power capable of intervention and defeat.
This, moreover, is something that is made even
more apparent when considering it in light of
the fact that the Spanish American War had been
stewing a long time before the sinking of the
battleship USS Maine. The reason for this, moreover,
was wholly that the US desired to intervene into
the Spanish Cuban situation upon the pretext of
conceiving Cubans being unjustly robbed of their
freedom.
This, moreover, is emphasized upon quite strongly
when considering it in light of the implications
of the Platt Amendment. One of the factors of
relative relevance, moreover, is that the Spanish
American War primarily consisted of Naval clashed
between Spain and America due to the fact that
the latter had only just pulled free of the political
volatility caused by the civil war. The American
military forces, as a result of this, were exceptionally
scarce in terms of resources and manpower while
the naval forces were in equally exceptional form.
It would, moreover be conclusively relevant to
acknowledge that the foreign policy that the US
suggested in as much as incepting the war is something
that the nation continues to adhere to. Take into
consideration, for instance, the current conquests
within Afghanistan and Iraq, both wars that reflect
significant components of the contemporaneously
waging war on terror.
Presently under the leadership of the Bush Administration,
these conquests too, have been illustrated as
being in the best interests of the particular
cultures within the respective nations. Ironically,
the current situation is similar to the Spanish
American War in as much as the fact that even
today, there are more than a few socialists and
politicians who ascribe to the theory that these
conquests have ulterior motives. These are they
who state that the conquest [in Afghanistan and
Iraq] are naught more than US imperialism under
a farce of global overseeing and consideration
|