Latin America–United Kingdom relations

There were no actual wars directly involving Britain, however there were several confrontations. The most serious came in 1845-1850 when British and French navies blockaded Buenos Aires in order to protect the independence of Uruguay from Juan Manuel de Rosas, the dictator of Argentina.[16] Other lesser controversies with Argentina broke out in 1833, with Guatemala in 1859, Mexico in 1861, Nicaragua in 1894, and Venezuela in 1895 and 1902. There also was tension along the Mosquito Coast in Central America in the 1830s and 1840s.[17]

London's interest in Central America began in the 17th century, focused first in Belize, Roatán, and the Mosquito Coast (which became the east coast of Nicaragua and Honduras). Washington's interest began in 1824 with the diplomatic recognition of the five states of Central America. Britain consolidated its hold on the Caribbean shore and an unforeseen result was a direct clash with the United States. In 1848 the U.S. saw the need a transoceanic canal, a plan reinforced by the flood of gold seekers using a Central-American transit route in 1849. One route under consideration went through Nicaragua but was frustrated by British control of the Mosquito Coast. This conflict was resolved in 1850 when the two powers agreed in the Clayton–Bulwer Treaty to renounce territorial possessions along the route of a possible canal. To prevent the domination of Pacific trade routes by the other, each agreed that any canal would be neutral and they would not acquire formal colonies on the route. In 1901 Britain renounced its claims in the Hay–Pauncefote Treaty, allowing the United States to build the Panama Canal, which opened in 1914.[18]

In a highly influential interpretation, John Andrew Gallagher and Ronald Robinson argue that the pause in British expansion in the mid-19th century is misleading, for Britain's was in fact successful in achieving its main goal of building an informal empire, with strong economic relationships to small independent countries, especially in Latin America. Other historians have found that coercion was seldom necessary in Latin America and the British government played a passive role.[19] The British Royal Navy made sure that London's fast overseas network was well protected. London provided finance, insurance, and shipping, handled imports and exports, purchased and refinanced of bonds and government debts, and sent money and engineers to build the railway network. Young British agents on temporary duty in every major port provided close links to the mother country, and provided a model of middle-class business and cultural leadership that many Latin Americans emulated.[20] Latin American business realized the advantage of close ties with the world's leading banker and trader. Gallagher and Robinson argue that using:

informal dependencies in the mid-Victorian age there was much effort to open the continental interiors and to extend the British influence inland from the ports. The general strategy of this development was to convert these areas into complementary satellite economies, which would provide food and raw materials for Great Britain, and also provide widening markets for its manufactures....Once entry had been forced into Latin America ... the task was to encourage stable governments as good investment risks, just as in weaker or unsatisfactory states it was considered necessary to coerce them into more cooperative attitudes.[21]

Cotton textiles were Britain's leading manufacturing product in the mid-19th century, and most of the raw cotton came from the southern United States. The American Civil War cut off most of the supply, although small amounts were available through blockade runners, and through purchases in New York of cotton controlled by the Union. It became a high British priority to find new sources, looking especially Egypt, India, and to the slave plantations of Brazil.[22]

They established diplomatic relations on 15 December 1823. By mid-century, London bankers were sending in capital, to invest in railways, docks, packing houses, and utilities. London sent in 3000 agents to handle shipping, insurance, and banking.

There was still a labor shortage, which was solved when British ships started bringing in Italian and Spanish immigrants.[23] Britain was the main purchaser of Argentine beef and grain. During the Second World War, Argentina refused to go along with the American anti-German policies. Washington responded by trying to shut down Argentine exports. President Franklin Roosevelt asked Prime Minister Winston Churchill to stop buying Argentine beef and grain. Churchill refused, saying the food was urgently needed.[24]

They went to war—the Falklands War—over ownership of the Falkland Islands in 1982; Britain drove out Argentine invaders.

In 1807, all members of the royal court of Portugal (probably 4000 to 7000 individuals) relocated to Brazil in the Transfer of the Portuguese Court to Brazil to avoid Napoleonic control. Prince Regent John VI of Portugal ruled because his mother the queen was insane. Brazilian trade had been limited to the mother country, but now the Prince Regent expanded it to encourage commerce with all friendly nations, especially Great Britain. This expansion of trade led to the economic and eventually political independence of Brazil from Portugal in 1822.[25]

The two nations established diplomatic relations in 1826, after the British imposed a treaty pledging abolition of the African slave trade. By the 1830s, British financiers and merchants effectively controlled the leading sectors of the Brazilian economy.[26] A high priority of London was ending the large-scale slave trade to Brazil, but Brazilian elites strongly resisted, saying the treaties had been coerced and were not valid.[27] in 1845, the Royal Navy started treating Brazilian slave ships as pirates, seizing the ships and freeing slaves. Tensions escalated and there was a threat of war. Meanwhile, plantation owners imported as many slaves as they possibly could, 19,000 in 1846, and 50,000 in 1847. finally in 1850, Brazil past effective laws that virtually ended the slave trade. That ended the tension with Britain, but the Africans remained slaves on the plantations.[28] By the 1850s, Brazil provided about a third of the raw cotton for British factories.[29]

They were Allies in World War II, fighting alongside each other in Italy against Nazi Germany.

British naval officers assisted Chile in its fight for independence, and over the following decades a number of Britons settled in Chile such as in Coquimbo. In tandem with British investors, Chile entered world economic trade during the 1810s-1830s. the new country was poor, but investors were optimistic regarding its resources in agriculture and mining. Copper and silver production increased, as did farm output. The population grew, and trade rapidly expanded. most important, Chile developed the institutional mechanisms for sustained economic growth and more complex trade relationships.[30]

After Mexico declared its independence in 1810, Britain was the first European great power to recognize Mexican sovereignty. Soon afterwards, Emperor Agustín de Iturbide sent a diplomatic envoy to London to establish diplomatic communications between the two nations. In 1837, Mexico signed a treaty with Britain to abolish the slave trade.[31] The British established a network of merchant houses in the major cities. However, according to Hilarie J. Heath, the results were bleak:

Trade was stagnant, imports did not pay, contraband drove prices down, debts private and public went unpaid, merchants suffered all manner of injustices and operated at the mercy of weak and corruptible governments, commercial houses skirted bankruptcy.[32]

In 1861, Mexican President Benito Juarez suspended Mexico's interest payments to its creditors in France, Spain and the UK. This act angered the three nations and in October 1861 by the Convention of London the three sent a joint naval force to Mexico to demand repayment. In December 1861 the triple-alliance took the port of Veracruz and nearby towns. After a few months, both the Spanish and British government became aware that Emperor Napoleon III of France was planning to colonize Mexico in order to expand its empire and take advantage of the fact that the United States was tied down in its civil war and was not able to enforce the Monroe Doctrine. In early 1862, Britain and Spain pulled their forces from Mexico, but France took control and imposed an emperor. He was overthrown by Juarez in 1867.[33]

After 1880, the British turned their attention in Mexico primarily to investments in railways and mines, sending both money and engineers and skilled mechanics. The British invested £7.4 million in railways during the decade of the 1880s, jumping to £53.4 million in 1910s. The decade-total of new investment in mining went from £1.3 million in 1880s to £11.6 million in 1910s. Investments in land and other properties rose from near zero in 1880s to £19.7 million in 1910s. The totals reached £135 million, almost as much as the United States. In 1900, there were 2800 British citizens living in Mexico, a relatively small number in contrast to the 15,000 Americans, 16,000 Spaniards, 4000 French, and 2600 Germans. The British were famed for their sophisticated clubs, and their elaborate sports program—English football became a highly popular sport across Mexico; cricket was ignored.[34]

In 1938 the government of Lázaro Cárdenas nationalised land owned by British oil companies in Mexico.[35] After 1945, bilateral relations normalized and trade re-commenced.[36]

During the Venezuelan crisis of 1895 there was a longstanding dispute with the United Kingdom about the territory of Guayana Esequiba, which Britain claimed as part of British Guiana and Venezuela saw as Venezuelan territory. The dispute had become a diplomatic crisis when Venezuelan representatives argued that British behaviour over the issue violated the 1823 Monroe Doctrine and used its influence in Washington, DC, to pursue the matter. US President Grover Cleveland adopted a broad interpretation of the doctrine that did forbade new European colonies but also declared an American interest in any matter in the hemisphere.[37] After tense diplomatic dialogues, United Kingdom accepted the US demand for arbitration.[38][39] The status of the territory later became subject to the Geneva Agreement (1966), which was signed by the United Kingdom, Venezuela and British Guiana on 17 February 1966. This treaty stipulates that the parties will agree to find a practical, peaceful and satisfactory solution to the dispute.[40] Disputes over the territory have continued since, even after Guyana became an independent country the same year.

The United Kingdom was involved in the Venezuela Crisis of 1902–1903, in which the UK was involved in a military blockade to enforce payment of Venezuelan debts.