Imperial Interactivities

Author(s):  
Oliver Charbonneau

This chapter considers the role of diverse interactivities in shaping the encounter in Mindanao-Sulu. It recounts how the region maintained its own culturally hybrid character despite its portrayal as a colonial backwater as it was facilitated by links to maritime Southeast Asia and the wider Muslim world. U.S. actors moved within European colonial circles. It also cites multiscalar connections that underwrote imperial power in the Southern Philippines beyond the obscuring language of American exceptionalism. The chapter highlights how the United States took possession of the Philippines from Spain during a period of rapid Euro-American territorial expansion, where imperial formations simultaneously competed with and drew from one another. It details the interaction of U.S. colonials in Mindanao-Sulu with other imperial powers as it encountered preexisting connections that stretched between and through localities, colonies, regions, and empires.

1975 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 18-21
Author(s):  
Gerald J. Bender

In addition to our discussions today of the current situation in Angola, I would like to direct my remarks to the question of what role, if any, the United States should play with regard to Angola, and concretely, how the Congress can assist in the formulation and execution of a responsible American policy toward Angola. We have all learned a number of important lessons from recent revelations about the conduct of American policy in Southeast Asia, about Government coverups such as Watergate, corporate bribery of foreign officials and political parties, and about the illegal and unacceptable activities of the CIA as described in the Rockefeller Commission report and elsewhere. Certainly we can apply some of these lessons to our present consideration of U.S. policy toward Angola; hopefully we will learn the vital facts and ask the necessary questions now, rather than, as has too often been the case, after the fact.


Author(s):  
Brian Shott

When the United States declared war on Spain in 1898, American troops battled Spanish forces in Cuba and across the Pacific in Spain’s longtime colony, the Philippines. There, American troops initially fought alongside Filipino rebels, but after the defeat of Spanish forces the United States annexed the islands and fighting broke out between the rebels and their new occupiers. American soldiers, including nearly 6,000 African Americans, struggled to understand their adversaries, employing varied conceptual frames that mixed scientific racism, the notion of Manifest Destiny, and American exceptionalism and that encompassed long-standing fault lines in American identity, including religion. The chapter draws material from diaries of soldiers, black and ethnic newspaper presses, and diplomatic sources to describe a potent but ephemeral mix of racialist thinking during and immediately after the Philippine-American War.


1954 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 611-613

On September 8, 1954, representatives of the United States, United Kingdom, France, the Philippines, Thailand, Pakistan, Australia and New Zealand signed the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty, a protocol designating the areas to which the treaty was to apply, and the Pacific Charter, a declaration setting forth the aims of the eight countries in southeast Asia and the southwest Pacific. Negotiations leading up to the actual signature of the treaty had been underway throughout the summer of 1954 and had culminated in an eight-power conference in Manila which opened on September 6.


Author(s):  
Chia Youyee Vang

In geopolitical terms, the Asian sub-region Southeast Asia consists of ten countries that are organized under the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Current member nations include Brunei Darussalam, Kingdom of Cambodia, Republic of Indonesia, Lao People’s Democratic Republic (Laos), Malaysia, Republic of the Union of Myanmar (formerly Burma), Republic of the Philippines, Singapore, Kingdom of Thailand, and Socialist Republic of Vietnam. The term Southeast Asian Americans has been shaped largely by the flow of refugees from the American War in Vietnam’ however, Americans with origins in Southeast Asia have much more diverse migration and settlement experiences that are intricately tied to the complex histories of colonialism, imperialism, and war from the late 19th through the end of the 20th century. A commonality across Southeast Asian American groups today is that their immigration history resulted primarily from the political and military involvement of the United States in the region, aimed at building the United States as a global power. From Filipinos during the Spanish-American War in 1898 to Vietnamese, Cambodian, Lao, and Hmong refugees from the American War in Vietnam, military interventions generated migration flows that, once begun, became difficult to stop. Complicating this history is its role in supporting the international humanitarian apparatus by creating the possibility for displaced people to seek refuge in the United States. Additionally, the relationships between the United States, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Singapore are different from those of other SEA countries involved in the Vietnam War. Consequently, today’s Southeast Asian Americans are heterogeneous with varying levels of acculturation to U.S. society.


1966 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 859-863

Tenth meeting: The tenth meeting of the Council of the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) was held in London on May 3–5, 1965, under the chairmanship of Michael Stewart, Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs of the United Kingdom. Other member governments were represented by Paul Hasluck, Minister for External Affairs of Australia; D. J. Eyre, Minister of Defense of New Zealand; Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Pakistan; Librado D. Cayco, Under Secretary of Foreign Affairs of the Philippines; Thanat Khoman, Minister of Foreign Aflairs of Thailand; and George W. Ball, Under Secretary of State of the United States. Achille Clarac, French Ambassador in Bangkok and Council representative for France, also attended the London session as an observer. (On April 20 the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs had announced that France would not send a delegation to the meeting although Ambassador Clarac would be present as an observer only.)


Author(s):  
Kenton Clymer

The U.S. relationship with Southeast Asia has always reflected the state of U.S. interactions with the three major powers that surround the region: Japan, China, and, to a lesser extent, India. Initially, Americans looked at Southeast Asia as an avenue to the rich markets that China and India seemed to offer, while also finding trading opportunities in the region itself. Later, American missionaries sought to save Southeast Asian souls, while U.S. officials often viewed Southeast Asia as a region that could tip the overall balance of power in East Asia if its enormous resources fell under the control of a hostile power. American interest expanded enormously with the annexation of the Philippines in 1899, an outgrowth of the Spanish-American War. That acquisition resulted in a nearly half-century of American colonial rule, while American investors increased their involvement in exploiting the region’s raw materials, notably tin, rubber, and petroleum, and missionaries expanded into areas previously closed to them. American occupation of the Philippines heightened tensions with Japan, which sought the resources of Southeast Asia, particularly in French Indochina, Malaya, and the Dutch East Indies (today’s Indonesia). Eventually, clashing ambitions and perceptions brought the United States into World War II. Peeling those territories away from Japan during the war was a key American objective. Americans resisted the Japanese in the Philippines and in Burma, but after Japan quickly subdued Southeast Asia, there was little contact in the region until the reconquest began in 1944. American forces participated in the liberation of Burma and also fought in the Dutch Indies and the Philippines before the war ended in 1945. After the war, the United States had to face the independence struggles in several Southeast Asian countries, even as the Grand Alliance fell apart and the Cold War emerged, which for the next several decades overshadowed almost everything. American efforts to prevent communist expansion in the region inhibited American support for decolonization and led to war in Vietnam and Laos and covert interventions elsewhere. With the end of the Cold War in 1991, relations with most of Southeast Asia have generally been normal, except for Burma/Myanmar, where a brutal military junta ruled. The opposition, led by the charismatic Aung San Suu Kyi, found support in the United States. More recently American concerns with China’s new assertiveness, particularly in the South China Sea, have resulted in even closer U.S. relations with Southeast Asian countries.


Author(s):  
Atul Kohli

Born an anticolonial nation, the United States burst upon the global scene as an imperial power at the end of the nineteenth century. This chapter analyzes the American expansion into the Caribbean, Central America, and Pacific Asia. When the United States became a major industrial power in the late nineteenth century, it sought profit and power overseas, especially new economic opportunities. The United States experimented with colonialism but settled on creating stable but subservient regimes in peripheral countries as the main mechanism of control. Benefits to the United States included gains in trade, opportunities for foreign investments, and profitable loans. Countries under US influence, including the Philippines, Cuba, and Nicaragua, experienced some economic growth but became commodity exporters with sharp inequalities and poor-quality governments.


1960 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 361-362 ◽  

The Council of the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) held a special informal meeting in Washington, D. C., on September 28, 1959. According to the press, five of the pact's members, Australia, France, Pakistan, Thailand, and the United States, were represented by their foreign ministers, several of whom were in the United States for the opening of the fourteenth session of the UN General Assembly, while the Philippines and the United Kingdom were represented by their ambassadors to Washington. The proceedings were, as usual, closed to the public. At the conclusion of die meeting, the Council issued a communiqué noting, inter alia, that there had been no formal agenda and views had been exchanged on a wide variety of topics, including the uneasy military situation in Laos, a country located within the region of direct interest to SEATO and yet not a member of the organization, inasmuch as it was forbidden by the Geneva treaty of 1954 to join any military alliance. With regard to Laos, the communiqué asserted that the SEATO member nations were united in their determination to abide by their treaty obligations and would continue to follow closely any developments threatening the peace and stability of the treaty area.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document