Recounts President Woodrow Wilson's abortive efforts to preserve democracy in Mexico amid political chaos.

American response to foreign revolution is the theme of this carefully documented diplomatic history of the attitudes and policies of Presidents Taft and Wilson toward revolt in Mexico. Professor Haley's detailed examination is based on extensive research in the papers of members of both administrations and in State Department records. Part One of his book describes the setting of the Mexican conflict and investigates the Taft administration's response toward protecting American lives and property in Mexico (1910 to 1913). Part Two takes up the outbreak of revolutionary civil war and the Wilson administration's attempt to control the course of events (1913 to 1917). This study of the Mexican experience points up problems presented to the U.S. government by uprisings in any country where there are considerable American interests, and in an epilogue the author suggests ways in which the United States might fashion a new response to revolution abroad. The diplomacy of Taft and Wilson in fact reflected two Americas, "the one fleshy, corporate, and pragmatic, the other ascetic, religious, and idealistic." Economic expansion and the acquisition of foreign markets and investments called into being Taft's "Dollar Diplomacy," which was reflected in Mexico by his emphasis on nonintervention during a relatively tranquil period but tempered by his willingness to place order above reform when it came to protecting and stabilizing American interests there. On the other hand, the "New Diplomacy" of Woodrow Wilson reflected his desire to lead other nations to transcend traditional patterns of action and to conform to the American and British model of political development. When war broke out in Mexico, Wilson tried but failed to persuade the two sides to accept an armistice and a neutral provisional government until national elections could be held to establish a new constitutional government. The author seeks to explain the paradox of Wilson's diplomacy-his constant meddling with unrealistic proposals for mediation and his outright support of the Constitutionalist revolutionaries. These diplomacies, Professor Haley points out, offer lessons with contemporary applicability. The Mexican revolution is linked to other twentieth-century uprisings in several ways: in fierce regulation of private property and of foreign investment, and in emphasis on social welfare rather than on political freedom. Lack of anti-communist sentiment makes the experience particularly useful for those who are interested in determining the influence of communism on America's response to later revolutions. The author concludes that in responding to revolution, foreign governments must choose between intervention by overwhelming force at an early stage (Russia in Hungary and Czechoslovakia, America in the Dominican Republic), and the frustrating pursuit of influence through diplomacy with a smaller range of possibilities and lower priorities. Attempts like Wilson's to find a middle ground of limited intervention in a social revolution invite entanglement and failure. Meanwhile, he adds, Mexican diplomatic skill in exploiting the inconsistencies of Wilson's administration demonstrated a deep understanding of American politics and should provide a model that countries in Latin America would do well to look toward.

In early 1918 the French government adopted the policy of unremitting hostility that characterized its early relations with the Soviet government. That policy brought about political, economic, and military intervention in the Russian Revolution, and the diverse motives behind that intervention emerge in this study. When a population exasperated by the sufferings of war overthrew the tsarist government in early 1917, French interests- military, diplomatic, business, and financial - hoped that revolution could be turned back. But although the French government viewed with distaste the subsequent Bolshevik seizure of power, it did not reach its decision to intervene without internal debate or dissent. French stakes in Russia were high because of the long-standing Franco-Russian alliance and the heavy French investments there. As World War I drew to a close in late 1918, the French government planned to send troops freed by the armistice to Russia to begin the task of reversing Soviet power. Events proved this undertaking too difficult for a war-weary French citizenry, who rather admired the government of the Soviets and who had seen more than enough sacrifice. French troops sent to the Ukraine and Crimea were not willing men, and their commanders were unable to rally the local population to fight the Bolsheviks. In April 1919 the last French troops were withdrawn from the Crimea as mutiny swept the French fleet in the Black Sea. Still not prepared to reconcile itself to Soviet Russia, the French developed the policy of a cordon sanitaire to contain the revolutionary expansion of Bolshevism until, they hoped, the Russian people would come to their senses and overthrow the Soviet regime. This book, the first to concentrate on French involvement in the Russian Revolution, is based on an intensive use of French archival sources, closed until recently. It is unique in its examination of the economic motivations behind intervention and provides new insights into France's relations with its allies.

John Girling’s book, first published in 1980, investigates the relationship between America and the Third World, centring on three main themes: the nature of American involvement in the Third World, the challenge posed by the rival Super-Power; and the Changes both in US-Soviet relations (from containment to détente) and in the Third World. Three propositions are put forward: that the overriding interest of American foreign policy maker is in the stability of the global system of relationships; that this interest coincides with most Third World élites; and that the global system normally operates peacefully, although continually subject to internal and external challenges.

In Part 1 of this book, Dr. Schoenhals places the Grenadian Revolution and its aftermath in historical perspective. He explores the Anglo-French rivalry over the island, the period of slavery, and the British colonial administration and gives particular emphasis to the Gairy decades (1951-1979). His discussion of the People's Revolutionary Government is based on extensive Interviews with the leadership of the New Jewel Movement, foreign diplomats, and Grenadian citizens, and on a review of documents captured by the United States during occupation of the island. In Part 2, Dr. Melanson, after briefly reviewing the nature of U.S. interests In the region and U.S.-Caribbean relations during the Nixon years, focuses on the Carter and Reagan administrations' policies in the Caribbean and relations with the Grenadian government. He examines the justification offered by President Reagan for the 1983 intervention, domestic responses to the action in the United States, and its implications for Reagan's Central American policies. Finally, he considers whether the action will prove to be a prelude to a new domestic consensus about the use of U.S. military power in the Third World.

As President Carter?s ambassador to Nicaragua from 1977?1979, Mauricio Sola£n witnessed a critical moment in Central American history. In U.S. Intervention and Regime Change in Nicaragua, Sola£n outlines the role of U.S. foreign policy during the Carter administration and explains how this policy with respect to the Nicaraguan Revolution of 1979 not only failed but helped impede the institutionalization of democracy there. Late in the 1970s, the United States took issue with the Nicaraguan dictator Anastasio Somoza. Moral suasion, economic sanctions, and other peaceful instruments from Washington led to violent revolution in Nicaragua and bolstered a new dictatorial government. A U.S.-supported counterrevolution formed, and Sola£n argues that the United States attempts to this day to determine who rules Nicaragua. Sola£n explores the mechanisms that kept Somoza?s poorly legitimized regime in power for decades, making it the most enduring Latin American authoritarian regime of the twentieth century. Sola£n argues that continual shifts in U.S. international policy have been made in response to previous policies that failed to produce U.S.- friendly international environments. His historical survey of these policy shifts provides a window on the working of U.S. diplomacy and lessons for future policy-making.

DIVA comprehensive overview by leading scholars of Mexican rural history before, during, and after the Revolution, with an extensive chapter by Adolfo Gilly on the recent Chiapas rebellion./div

In September 2017, Hurricane Maria hit Puerto Rico, completely upending the energy grid of the small island. The nearly year-long power outage that followed vividly shows how the new climate reality intersects with race and access to energy. The island is home to brown and black US citizens who lack the political power of those living in the continental US. As the world continues to warm and storms like Maria become more commonplace, it is critical that we rethink our current energy system to enable reliable, locally produced, and locally controlled energy without replicating the current structures of power and control. In Revolutionary Power, Shalanda Baker arms those made most vulnerable by our current energy system with the tools they need to remake the system in the service of their humanity. She argues that people of color, poor people, and indigenous people must engage in the creation of the new energy system in order to upend the unequal power dynamics of the current system. Revolutionary Power is a playbook for the energy transformation complete with a step-by-step analysis of the key energy policy areas that are ripe for intervention. Baker tells the stories of those who have been left behind in our current system and those who are working to be architects of a more just system. She draws from her experience as an energy-justice advocate, a lawyer, and a queer woman of color to inspire activists working to build our new energy system. Climate change will force us to rethink the way we generate and distribute energy and regulate the system. But how much are we willing to change the system? This unique moment in history provides an unprecedented opening for a deeper transformation of the energy system, and thus, an opportunity to transform society. Revolutionary Power shows us how.

Why did the world's strongest power intervene militarily in the tiny Commonwealth Caribbean island of Grenada in October 1983? This book focuses on United States-Grenada relations between 1979 and 1983 set against the wider historical context of US-Caribbean Basin relations. It presents an in-depth study of US policy during the Carter and Reagan presidencies and the deterioration of relations with the Marxist-Leninist People's Revolution Government (PRG) of Grenada. It considers in detail the murderous internal power struggle that destroyed the PRG and the decisionmaking process that resulted in a joint US-Caribbean military intervention.

Is God on America's side? Learn how the wrong cannonballs doom a British assau