Moral Diplomacy: America's Path To World War I

Woodrow Wilson's moral diplomacy was a guiding principle of his foreign policy as the 28th President of the United States. It was rooted in the belief that the US had a moral obligation to promote democracy and freedom worldwide. This policy was a departure from the dollar diplomacy of his predecessor, William Howard Taft, which prioritised economic support to improve bilateral ties. Wilson's approach, however, was not without its challenges and contradictions, particularly in Latin America, where he frequently intervened in the internal affairs of countries like Mexico, Haiti, and the Dominican Republic. The ultimate test of his moral diplomacy came with World War I, where he advocated for US entry based on the notion of making the world safe for democracy.

Explore related products

warreplica British WW1 Long Puttees/British Wool Leggings Wraps / WW1 British Leg Wraps Gear- Historical Reproduction Military Gaiters for Authentic World War I Uniform Costume or Collectors Display

$17

US WW1 45 AUTO Double Magazine Pouch/US WWI COLT 45 AUTO Double Magazine Pouch 1918

$8.99

World War Supply WW1 US Army Dismounted M1917 Cartridge Belt M1903 Springfield JT&L 1918

$49.99

CHAPEAU TRIBE Adult WW2 Ally Military Army Helmet – Adjustable Strap – Lightweight Cosplay Helmet – Universal Size – Plastic with Elastic Foam Inside – Olive Green

$14.99

WW1 US Army Putties / M1910 Leggings Wraps - Reproduction British WW1 Gear

$15.99

World War Supply US WW1 M1910 Canteen Cover Khaki Marked JT&L 1918

$19.99

Wilson's moral diplomacy replaced the dollar diplomacy of William Howard Taft

Woodrow Wilson's foreign policy was dubbed "moral diplomacy" because his decisions were guided by his beliefs and moral principles. Wilson's policy focused on pulling American investments out of foreign lands and protecting people from oppressive governments. He was an intense critic of imperialism and was determined to reverse Roosevelt's "big stick" policies and remove all elements of William Howard Taft's "dollar diplomacy". Taft's "dollar diplomacy" encouraged American investment in foreign nations to help stabilize struggling nations and open new markets for US businesses.

Wilson's belief in the superiority of democratic governments inspired him to intervene in foreign nations on multiple occasions. He aimed to stabilize the Caribbean and Latin America during the onset of World War I, with minimal American involvement. However, he faced pressure from imperialists and American industrialists. Wilson's stance on the authoritarian rule of Victoriano Huerta in Mexico, which contrasted with the welcoming attitude of most European nations, is an example of his moral diplomacy. He refused to recognize Huerta's government and supported anti-Huerta forces, ultimately leading to the rise of Venustiano Carranza, whom he recognized as the de facto president of Mexico.

Wilson's "moral diplomacy" achieved mixed results. While he successfully reversed some expansionist policies, he also intervened in foreign nations, and his handling of the conclusion and aftermath of World War I has been criticized as irrationally idealistic. In 1918, he outlined his vision for a "new diplomacy" in the "Fourteen Points" speech, advocating for open covenants, territorial evacuations, dismantling the imperial order, and general disarmament.

Wilson's diplomacy was driven by his belief in the spread of democracy and collective security through US leadership in international organizations like the League of Nations. However, the US ultimately declined membership in the League due to Article X, which committed the country to defending any League member under attack. Despite his efforts for peace, Wilson's response to the German submarine warfare and the Zimmermann telegram led to Congress declaring war on Germany, marking the US's entry into World War I.

Wilson's belief in American exceptionalism and the spread of democracy

Woodrow Wilson's belief in American exceptionalism and the spread of democracy was a key tenet of his foreign policy approach, known as Wilsonianism. Wilson believed that the United States had a duty and responsibility to spread democracy and liberty worldwide. This belief was rooted in the idea of American exceptionalism, which holds that the United States is uniquely destined to be a "city upon a hill" and a beacon of democracy for the rest of the world.

In his 1914 address on "The Meaning of Liberty," Wilson alluded to America's potential to be "the light which will shine unto all generations and guide the feet of mankind to the goal of justice and liberty and peace." He put these ideas into action through moral diplomacy, which aimed to curb imperialism and spread democracy, particularly in Latin America. Wilson frequently intervened in the affairs of other countries, stating in 1913, "I am going to teach the South American republics to elect good men."

Wilson's belief in the spread of democracy was also reflected in his actions during World War I. When the war broke out in August 1914, Wilson initially declared American neutrality, asking the diverse nation of immigrants to remain impartial. However, as the war progressed, Wilson's commitment to democracy and his opposition to autocratic regimes led him to urge Congress to declare war on Germany. He saw the war as an opportunity to remake the world and spread democratic principles, stating, "The world must be made safe for democracy."

Wilson's vision for a new international order was outlined in his Fourteen Points speech on January 8, 1918. He advocated for a "new diplomacy" based on open covenants and the self-determination of nations. This speech launched an atmosphere of intense optimism and hope among marginalized peoples worldwide, who saw Wilson as a champion of freedom and independence. However, Wilson's idealism faced challenges, as the great powers were more dedicated to their national interests than to his vision of world peace and the spread of democracy.

While Wilson's vision did not immediately come to fruition, it had a lasting impact on American foreign policy. The twentieth and twenty-first centuries have seen increasing Wilsonian appeals by American presidents and policymakers to intervene and spread democracy throughout the world.

Interventions in Latin America, including Mexico, Haiti, and the Dominican Republic

The United States' intervention in Mexico, Haiti, and the Dominican Republic during World War 1 was influenced by its moral diplomacy, which aimed to uphold democratic values and self-determination. However, these interventions were also driven by economic interests and geopolitical strategies.

Mexico

In 1913, Mexico came under the rule of General Victoriano Huerta, a counter-revolutionary who imposed a bloody authoritarian regime. While most European nations accepted Huerta's government, President Woodrow Wilson refused to recognize it, citing concerns about democracy and the protection of American interests. In April 1914, Wilson ordered the US Navy to occupy the port city of Veracruz, a key entry point for armaments and supplies for the Mexican army. This intervention weakened Huerta, leading to his eventual ouster and the recognition of Venustiano Carranza as Mexico's de facto president.

Haiti

The United States occupation of Haiti began in 1915 and lasted until 1934. It was influenced by economic interests and the belief that Haiti was vulnerable to European influence. American businessman William B. Farnham played a significant role in pushing for intervention. He exaggerated the threat of European powers gaining control of Haitian ports and convinced Secretary Bryan of the need for American involvement. The National City Bank and the Banque Nationale de la République d'Haïti (BNRH), influenced by American business interests, seized Haiti's gold reserve in 1914, giving the US control over Haiti's finances. The US imposed a military regime, enforced forced labor, and ended the ban on foreign land ownership.

Dominican Republic

The United States intervened in the Dominican Republic in 1916, sending marines and installing Monseñor Adolfo Nouel as interim president. This intervention led to a civil war, with American troops occupying the country. The US also supported the repressive regime of Trujillo, which lasted for three decades, due to its alignment with American financial interests and protection of foreign holdings in the country.

Explore related products

Reproduction, US Army WW1 Model 1918 Olive Drab Wool Trousers Authentic Military, Non Tapered Pants

$76.4

Warreplica U.S. WWI BAR 1918 Magazine Bandolier – Reproduction Ammo Carry Pouch for Browning Automatic Rifle – WW1 Military Collectors & Reenactment

$24.98

US WW1 M1917 Brodie Helmet Doughboy Helmet 82nd Airborne Hand Aged

$99.99

Replica WWI US Army Model 1918 Olive Drab Wool Service Tunic Fully Lined, SD Style Uniform for Reenactment & Collectors

$120.33

Battle Brick 1.6 Inches Tall US Army WW1 Doughboy Soldiers Custom Minifigures| Genuine Military Minifig | Printed in The USA | World WAR | Great Gift for Ages 8+ to Adult AFOL

$24.99

WW1 US Army Reproduction Overseas Cap Olive Drab Wool Side Hat for Service Reenactment & Historical Display

$47.75

The use of force and military occupation in the name of moral diplomacy

Woodrow Wilson's moral diplomacy was a guiding principle of his foreign policy as US president from 1913 to 1921. It was rooted in the belief that the US had a moral obligation to lead by example and promote democracy worldwide. Wilson's moral diplomacy was based on the principle of self-determination, which he saw as the moral right of people to choose their form of government and leaders through democratic elections. This was in contrast to the imperialist policies of his predecessors, which he sought to curb.

However, Wilson's implementation of moral diplomacy often involved the use of force and military occupation. Notably, Wilson's interference in Latin America, particularly in Mexico, Haiti, and the Dominican Republic, provides insight into his interpretation of moral diplomacy. In Mexico, Wilson refused to recognise the legitimacy of General Victoriano Huerta, who had come to power through a coup in 1913. Wilson's disdain for Huerta was due to his undemocratic rise to power and authoritarian rule. In 1914, Wilson ordered the US Navy to occupy the port city of Veracruz, which weakened Huerta's control and led to his replacement by Venustiano Carranza, whom Wilson recognised as the de facto president of Mexico.

In Haiti, Wilson enacted an armed occupation of the territory due to high levels of European investment, which threatened American hegemony in the Caribbean. He covertly obtained financial and administrative control of the island while supporting a Haitian leader of his choice. Similarly, in the Dominican Republic, Wilson intervened in 1916, citing political and fiscal unrest as a reason for his involvement. Despite overseeing elections, his failure to quell revolutionary opposition led to a full military occupation of the Republic from 1916 to 1924.

Wilson's use of force and military occupation in the name of moral diplomacy was not without criticism. His interventions were often viewed as heavy-handed and contradictory to the very principles of self-determination and non-intervention that he espoused. While Wilson's moral diplomacy aimed to spread democracy and create a more peaceful world, his actions in Latin America demonstrated a willingness to use military force and occupation to achieve those goals.

Wilson's moral diplomacy also played a role in the United States' entry into World War I. He believed that democratic nations were inherently more peaceful and stable, and by supporting democratic governments, he hoped to foster a global order conducive to peace and cooperation. However, the complexities of implementing moral diplomacy in the context of the war highlighted the challenges of aligning foreign policy with moral imperatives.

The complexities and challenges of implementing moral diplomacy

Woodrow Wilson's Moral Diplomacy was a novel attempt to instil US foreign policy with ethical considerations and democratic ideals. While it encountered significant obstacles and contradictions, it set a precedent for the United States to engage with the world as a moral leader, not just a powerful nation. The complexities and challenges of implementing moral diplomacy are evident in the contradictions and tensions that arose, particularly in Latin America, and in the difficulties of aligning foreign policy with moral imperatives.

Wilson's moral diplomacy was based on the principle of self-determination, the belief that people have the moral right to choose their form of government and leaders through democratic elections. This was in contrast to the imperialist policies of his predecessors, which sought to extend American power and control over other nations. Wilson saw moral diplomacy as a way to empower developing nations to become self-sustaining and democratic, thereby reducing war and fostering peace.

However, the implementation of moral diplomacy faced several challenges and complexities. Firstly, it contradicted traditional isolationist tendencies and had to navigate a fine line between promoting democracy and respecting the self-determination of nations. Wilson frequently intervened in the affairs of other countries, particularly in Latin America, including Mexico, Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Cuba, and Panama. These interventions were often justified as necessary to protect American interests or to promote democracy, but they were criticised for their heavy-handedness and contradiction of the very principles of self-determination and non-intervention that Wilson espoused.

Another complexity arose from the challenge of balancing idealism with realism in foreign policy. Wilson's moral diplomacy was based on the belief that democracy and freedom were universal values that the US should promote and foster. However, this idealism clashed with the realities of international relations, where power dynamics, economic interests, and geopolitical considerations also played a significant role. For example, in Mexico, Wilson refused to recognise the government of General Victoriano Huerta, who had come to power through a coup, instead supporting the more democratic leader Venustiano Carranza. This decision was based on moral principles, but it also served American economic interests as Huerta was seen as less favourable to foreign investment.

Furthermore, the implementation of moral diplomacy was challenged by the complexities of international relations and the actions of other nations. For example, in the lead-up to World War I, Wilson struggled to maintain neutrality while also upholding American values and protecting American citizens. The sinking of the British liner Lusitania by a German submarine in 1915, which killed 128 Americans, increased pressure for the US to join the war. Wilson's response to this incident and the resumption of German submarine warfare in 1917 ultimately led to the US entering the war, despite his initial attempts to pursue a diplomatic solution.

In conclusion, the complexities and challenges of implementing moral diplomacy underscored the inherent difficulties of aligning foreign policy with moral imperatives. Wilson's attempts to promote democracy and self-determination through moral diplomacy faced obstacles due to the contradictions between idealism and realism, the tensions between intervention and self-determination, and the complex dynamics of international relations. While moral diplomacy set a precedent for the US as a moral leader, its implementation highlighted the complexities and challenges of pursuing a foreign policy based on moral principles.

Frequently asked questions