The Evening Star TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 1928. LATIN AMERICA AND THE MONROE DOCTRINE.

Evening Star, Issue 19784, 7 February 1928, Page 6

The Evening Star TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 1928. LATIN AMERICA AND THE MONROE DOCTRINE.

The Nicaraguan question threatens to emerge at the Pan-American Congress in Havana in a manner most embarrassing to United States delegates. The Argentine delegation 'has launched an attack against intervention in the affairs of the Pan-American nations, i which is suspected to be directly aimed i against the United States’ intervention in Nicaragua. The Washington Government has defended its action in landing and maintaining marines in the IsthI mian State to support the claims of one presidential candidate against another as something that was required of it by the Monroe Doctrine. The plea has not been easy to follow, as it has always been understood that the sphere of that doctrine was limited to cases of interference in American affairs by a European nation. Nor, if a second plea made for the intervention is considered, that it was. necessary for the prevention of Mexican encroachment in Nicaragua, is that pretext more readily reconcilable with the doctrine. It has been l a natural conviction in the minds of Central and South Americans that the United States, in the action it has taken, has been solely concerned with the protection and possible expansion of its own great interests in Nicaragua, and that in pursuance of those purposes it has been ready to put any interpretation on the Monroe Doctrine that may give a gloss of justification to its plans. The conviction has been the cause of no little bitterness in their minds. The Latin States have benefited by the Monroe Doctrine. But they arc no longer all so feeble as they were a hundred years ago, when it was first announced. The United States has Haltered them and talked much of a Pan-Americanism, a co-operation of all the States that lie south of Canada, which should make the New World even more a world for itself than it is to-day. The Central and South Americans have welcomed that ideal, hut would go further with it. 'They see no benefits to them in a co-operation which would mean that the United States would always bo the ruling partner, laying down her own policies in regard to the rest, and overruling their affairs as she felt inclined. Their ideal has been rather for a political union, whose affairs would be regulated by the voice not of a predominant partner, most concerned for its own interests, hut of all the Slates, and that dream makes no appeal to the Washington Government. If there is to bo a Monroe Doctrine, why should it not be defined and exercised by America as a whole? That is the notion which pretty certainly underlies the efforts of the Argentine delegation at the latest congress to mould a new code of international Jaw as between the American republics in a manner not acceptable to the United States.

Tlie endeavor is nut new. Eleven years ago a President of 'Uruguay set forth ids ideas for an “American League,” to be formed on the basis of the absolute equality of all the associated Powers. This league would jointly consider ail American problems and would undertake to defend each of its members against aggression from Europe or from another American Power. All controversies should ho submitted to the arbitration of the league. There would bo no room for a lone hand to be taken by' tire United States. The Monroe Doctrine would bo in effect converted into a Pan-American doctrine. As the scheme has been more recently described, a League of Nations ■would be created lor the New "World, which might be considered as a subcommittee of the World League for the consideration of purely American questions. At the fifth Pan-American Congress, held in Santiago five years ago, tins proposal was submitted formally, but the opposition of the United States prevented it from coining to a vote. The American delegation made it clear that- tlie United States had no intention of relinquishing its solo right of interpreting the scope and moaning of the Monroe Doctrine, and of enforcing it should occasion arise. At tlie congress, not a regular one. which was held last year in Panama, the design was again brought forward, and its principle approved by a strong majority, but the United States delegation did not vote. It explained that it could neither discuss the question nor vote upon it, as it was not expected that sucli matters would be dealt with at a purely commemorative congress. The present congress at Havana is a regular one. But tlie new Pan-Ameri-can control sought for the Monroe Doctrine is not likely to commend itself more to the United States than it has done in tlie past. The proposal requires, it has been said, that “intervention, from within the two continents as well as from without, in the internal affairs of an American State shall be considered as an act of hostility against all and to be avenged by all.” There would bo no room under it for the United States’ intervention which is now causing protests in Nicaragua, or for past interventions which she has taken upon herself to make, with as drastic a hand, in Venezuela, in Cuba, in Panama, and in the Dominican republic. There would bo no room for American Imperialism. The latest Pan-American Congress is, on the face of it, a gathering of high-souled idealists, hearts that beat as one. But it conceals—and may not long conceal —a very determined revolt, on the part of Latin-American republics, against the dominance of the United States.