Keeping The Philippines

The Spanish-American War of 1898 was the first imperialist war for the redivision of colonial possessions. The U.S. Government aimed to capture Cuba, the Philippines, and Puerto Rico, which were under the Spanish colonial rule. The USA did not only consider these territories as a valuable source of raw materials and markets, but also as an important base for the expansion of its capital to Asia and Latin America.There is no secret that the U.S. predatory seizure of the Philippines was masked with high ideas and loud promises to make the country independent. It is obvious that the U.S. invasion to the Philippines was dictated by entirely economic and strategic interests. However, it is interesting to reveal that even then the United States’ imperialist expansion disguised with hypocritical arguments about humanity, civilization, peace, and phrases about the Christian and other high ideals.The most influential people of the U.S. Government had different opinions about the country’s policy of keeping the Philippines following the Spanish-American war. For example, President William McKinley justified the U.S.’ expansionist policy by the fact that the Philippines were not able to cope with their domestic political problems: “We could not leave them to themselves - they were unfit for self-government - and they would soon have anarchy and misrule over there worse than Spain’s was” (McKinley).I think that Senator Alfred Beveridge, one of the McKinley’s supporters, gave a speech that wholly represented the U.S. Government’s aims regarding the Philippines: “The Philippines are ours forever, “territory belonging to the United States”, as the Constitution calls them. And just beyond the Philippines are China’s illimitable markets. We will not retreat from either” (Beveridge). Moreover, Beveridge compares the Spanish-American War with Indian wars and intensifies that no peace treaties with the Philippines are possible. Of course, the Senator tried to depict the U.S. policy in the most favorable light. He emphasized only positive consequences for both the American and Philippine people, and held back all the horrors of the bloody war. In addition, Beveridge supports McKinley’s idea about the Philippines’ inability to govern themselves and explicitly talks about the U.S. aggressive policy saying that the Philippines need a “uniform Government”.When the United States had no navy, they limited their expansion by the Western Hemisphere. However, with the creation of the U.S. Navy, American imperialists proclaimed the slogan: “we must build a bridge across the Pacific ocean”. President Theodore Roosevelt confirmed this slogan by his speech regarding the U.S. policy in the Philippines: “We must build the isthmian canal, and we must grasp the points of vantage which will enable us to have our say in deciding the destiny of the oceans of the East and the West” (Roosevelt). Although, Roosevelt said a lot about the inadmissibility of savage tyranny in the Philippines, he placed the U.S. power above all. However, there were the opponents of the U.S. invasive policy in the Philippines. For example, James L. Blair indicated that the U.S. Government played foul with Filipinos having seized …