Since Latin American independence, U.S. presidents have consistently faced the issue of how to respond to domestic political conflict in the region. Since Latin American independence, U.S. presidents have consistently faced the issue of how to respond to domestic political conflict in the region. In particular, when unscheduled (and often unexpected) changes of government occur, should the United States extend diplomatic recognition to the new regime, or even revoke recognition of an already existing government? As scholars seek to explain the characteristics of post-cold war, post-twentieth century relations with Latin America, it is useful to analyze the development of recognition policy, which for many years was central to expressing approval or disapproval of governments. After the late 1960s, U.S. presidents deliberately removed recognition as a foreign policy tool. The purpose of this article is to examine U.S. recognition policy toward Latin American governments, to identify patterns in that policy, and to explain its decline.
In 1992, President Alberto Fujimori enacted a "self-coup," suspending the judiciary and dissolving congress. The Bush administration did not mention recognition at all but rather suspended nonhumanitarian aid. Despite Fujimori's authoritarian seizure of power, he never faced revocation of recognition. Then in 2000, Fujimori presided over obviously fraudulent elections. The Clinton administration simply asserted its "right to draw its own conclusions and take its own action in response" (Gutierrez, 2000). In both cases, U.S. recognition of the government was never in doubt. Yet for nearly 150 years, recognition policy represented a central component of U.S. foreign policy toward Latin America. In cases of presidents' shutting down the opposition or utilizing electoral fraud or of military officers' overthrowing a government, U.S. policy entailed deliberation over whether the government in question fulfilled all criteria for diplomatic recognition.
In the case of Bolivia, the rationale for recognition were fulfillment of international obligations.....................
