The US Conquest of the Philippines

At the end of the nineteenth century, successive US administrations were actively involved in trying to advance their interests in the Pacific region. Many of the East Asian regimes appeared weak and were controlled by European colonizers. There was a general international belief - the zeitgeist - that East Asia was of critical strategic importance and controlling its economic potential was crucial for maintaining international stability. It was thought that China might break into pieces and come under rival control. German fleets were in evidence and had already given evidence of militarism. The Spanish control of the Philippines, on the other hand, was seen to be degenerate and, in its relentless centralization and extraction of wealth, considered to be an unwelcome reminder of the depredations of previous empires. Besides, which, it was weak.

The US fleet had been active in Philippine waters for some time before the almost certainly accidental sinking of the Maine provided an opportunity for hostilities to be declared. The resulting military debacle saw the US fleet completely destroy the Spanish forces in full view of the population of Manila. Subsequently, the US forces cast around for ground troops to support an occupation and also enlisted the support of the exiled Aguinaldo as a putative leader of the country. Initially, it was only Manila itself which resisted American control but supremacy was quite quickly established.

However, the devil was in the detail of management of a country quite used to other styles of control and rule and initially somewhat nonplussed by the liberal stance of American leaders. Emergency training of teachers and administrators versed in the American methods but with appropriate language skills were always following after events rather than leading them. Elections revealed a people extremely eager for self-determination but at operational levels more and more American personnel were required to be enlisted to run the country.

Americans did not behave particularly dishonorably in this regard but every action that was taken led to the deeper embedment of Americans within what should have been a sovereign state, albeit one that needed considerable assistance in developing a functioning democracy. Around 250,000 people were killed in the decade-long resistance to US military occupation, most of them civilians. Currently, there are major threats to international and local stability posed by terrorists and separatists on many Philippine islands.

Hardt and Negri observe that "A first principle that defines imperial administration is that in it the management of political ends tends to be separate from the management of bureaucratic means (Empire, p.340)." In other words, the administration of a country becomes removed from political leaders and follows its own purposes. Inevitably, they argue, this leads to a paradox in which "imperial administration acts rather as a disseminating and differentiating mechanism (ibid.)." Running a country for another set of people leads, therefore, to unexpected and undesirable forms of discrimination and, its unavoidable complement, resentment and rage.

Go To Page: 1 2

Articles in this Topic    Discussions in this Topic