10.1 Historical Role of the Military in Latin American Politics

Latin American militaries have played a pivotal role in shaping politics. From Cold War-era coups to economic policies, armed forces intervened in governance, often with U.S. support. This history has left lasting impacts on democracy and human rights in the region.

Military regimes in Latin America were characterized by authoritarianism and repression. They embraced national security doctrines, anticommunism, and developmentalist ideologies. These governments centralized power, restricted civil liberties, and left complex legacies that continue to influence politics today.

Military Interventionism in Latin America

Factors Leading to Military Interventions

Top images from around the web for Factors Leading to Military Interventions

• 

  File:Cold War alliances mid-1975.svg - Wikimedia Commons View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Book review: A Short History of U.S. Interventions in Latin America and the Caribbean by Alan ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Cuban Missile Crisis - Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  File:Cold War alliances mid-1975.svg - Wikimedia Commons View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Book review: A Short History of U.S. Interventions in Latin America and the Caribbean by Alan ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Factors Leading to Military Interventions

• 

  File:Cold War alliances mid-1975.svg - Wikimedia Commons View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Book review: A Short History of U.S. Interventions in Latin America and the Caribbean by Alan ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Cuban Missile Crisis - Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  File:Cold War alliances mid-1975.svg - Wikimedia Commons View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Book review: A Short History of U.S. Interventions in Latin America and the Caribbean by Alan ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• Political instability and weak civilian institutions created power vacuums that the military often filled
  • Justified their interventions as necessary to restore order and protect national interests
• Economic crises, social unrest, and perceived threats from leftist movements frequently triggered military coups
  • Armed forces positioned themselves as guardians of stability and anti-communist bulwarks
• The Cold War context and U.S. foreign policy often supported or tolerated military interventions in Latin America
  • Viewed military as allies against the spread of communism in the region (Containment Policy)
• The professionalization and politicization of the military led to an expanded role in politics and governance
  • Influenced by doctrines like national security and developmentalism
• Historical legacies of caudillismo and personalist rule in Latin America contributed to a culture of militarism
  • Acceptance of military intervention in politics (Juan Manuel de Rosas in Argentina, Porfirio Díaz in Mexico)

Cold War and U.S. Foreign Policy Influence

• U.S. supported anti-communist military regimes as part of its global Cold War strategy
  • Provided military aid, training, and diplomatic backing (School of the Americas)
• U.S. intervened directly to overthrow leftist governments and support military coups
  • 1954 Guatemalan coup, 1973 Chilean coup
• U.S. tolerated human rights abuses by military regimes in the name of fighting communism
  • Operation Condor, a campaign of political repression and state terror
• The end of the Cold War and shift in U.S. policy contributed to the decline of military regimes in the 1980s and 1990s
  • Promoted democratization and human rights (albeit inconsistently)

Impact of Military Regimes

Political and Social Consequences

• Military coups often led to the suspension of democratic processes and repression of opposition groups
  • Dissolution of political parties and stifling of political participation and pluralism
• Military governments typically restricted civil liberties, censored the media, and engaged in human rights abuses
  • Created a climate of fear and repression that undermined social cohesion and trust in institutions
• The suppression of labor unions, student movements, and other civil society organizations weakened the foundations for democratic participation
  • Weakened social mobilization and advocacy
• Extended periods of military rule eroded the institutional foundations of democracy
  • Weakened the independence and legitimacy of the judiciary, legislature, and electoral bodies

Economic Policies and Consequences

• Military regimes frequently adopted state-led development models
  • Import-substitution industrialization, nationalization of key industries, and public investment in infrastructure projects
• Economic policies often prioritized stability and control over growth and redistribution
  • Led to increased income inequality and the concentration of wealth among elites
• Some military governments implemented neoliberal economic reforms in the 1970s and 1980s
  • Privatization, deregulation, and trade liberalization (Chile under Pinochet)
• Economic mismanagement, corruption, and external debt crises often characterized military regimes
  • Contributed to economic instability and social unrest (Argentina's "Dirty War" and economic crisis)

Consequences of Military Rule

Legacy of Human Rights Violations

• The legacy of human rights violations and impunity under military regimes created deep societal divisions and mistrust
  • Complicated efforts at national reconciliation and transitional justice
• Forced disappearances, torture, extrajudicial killings, and other atrocities were widespread
  • Targeting of political opponents, activists, and marginalized communities (Argentina's "Desaparecidos")
• Impunity for human rights abusers and lack of accountability in the post-authoritarian period
  • Amnesty laws and limited prosecutions (Chile's Amnesty Law of 1978)
• The experience of repression and trauma under military rule had long-lasting psychological and social impacts
  • Shaped political attitudes and behaviors in the democratic transition and beyond

Weakening of Democratic Institutions

• Prolonged military rule stunted the development of political parties
  • Limited their ability to effectively represent diverse interests and mediate political conflicts in the post-authoritarian period
• The centralization of power and decision-making under military governments weakened local governance and civil society
  • Hampered their capacity to hold authorities accountable and advocate for change
• The legacy of military rule contributed to the fragility of democratic institutions in the region
  • Challenges in establishing civilian control over the military and strengthening the rule of law (Peru's Fujimori regime)
• The experience of military rule shaped political culture and attitudes towards democracy
  • Lingering support for authoritarian solutions among some sectors of society

Characteristics of Military Regimes

Ideological Foundations

• Military regimes often embraced a national security doctrine
  • Prioritized the defense of the nation against internal and external threats
  • Justified the use of repressive measures and the expansion of military power
• Anticommunism was a central ideological pillar of most military regimes
  • Led to the persecution of leftist parties, unions, and social movements
  • Alignment with U.S. Cold War policies
• Many military governments adopted a developmentalist ideology
  • Emphasized state-led modernization, industrialization, and infrastructure development
  • Seen as means to achieve economic growth and social progress (Brazil's "economic miracle" under military rule)

Leadership and Governance Style

• Personalist leadership and the cult of personality were common features of military regimes
  • Charismatic generals concentrated power and decision-making in their hands (Augusto Pinochet in Chile, Jorge Rafael Videla in Argentina)
• Military governments frequently invoked nationalist and patriotic discourses to legitimize their rule
  • Portrayed themselves as defenders of the nation's sovereignty, unity, and traditional values
• Technocratic governance, relying on civilian experts and military officers with specialized training, was a hallmark of many military governments
  • Reflected a belief in the superiority of technical solutions over political deliberation
• Centralization of power and decision-making in the executive branch
  • Marginalization of legislative and judicial branches
• Restricted political participation and limited electoral competition
  • Banned political parties, controlled elections, or established single-party systems (Mexico's PRI during the "perfect dictatorship")