Quote Originally Posted by davidbfpo View Post
Since 1945 the USA, sometimes with allies, has done a great deal of 'making' and 'persuading' in other places - nor where development was say in vogue. Places like Greece and Italy, later on and further afield Allende in Chile and Mobutu in Zaire. Many of these places no longer appear in focus.
This is true, and it's interesting to look at why many of these places are no longer in focus.

Not so long ago Southeast Asia and Latin America were the focus of American attempts to prop up "friendly" governments and destabilize "unfriendly" ones. They were seen as basket cases; the terms "banana republic" and "tinpot dictator" were coined to describe Latin American nations and governments. We poured on both military intervention and "deveopment aid", all calculated to support the governments we liked and exclude those we didn't.

Today, of course, Southeast Asia and Latin America are generally quite peaceful and are chalking up impressive economic growth and development figures. They've a long way to go, undeniably, but there is real and impressive progress. So what happened? Did America rescue them from their benighted squalor with development aid and military intervention to protect them from the bad guys within?

Actually, no. What happened was that we finally left them alone. When the Cold War ended we scaled back intervention and politically driven aid. During the Cold War we'd never have tolerated a Chavez or a Morales, and we'd have been actively subverting a Bachelet, a Kirchner or a da Silva. Without the Cold War paranoia, we've found Chavez and Morales to be minor inconveniences, easily managed, and the more moderate left-side politicians to be quite congenial partners. With less meddling and less aid these regions have actually prospered, and found their own ways to peaceful coexistence.

Possibly something to consider when looking at today's basket cases.