Source I In the Western Hemisphere, the United States must exercise an international police power in cases of wrongdoing or inability to maintain order by n...

This is a "How far do you agree?" question worth 10 marks about whether the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine was primarily about protecting American economic interests. You must build a balanced argument using the source and your own knowledge.

What the source contributes: Roosevelt's letter (December 1904) explicitly mentions "the protection of American investments" as a goal of intervention. He frames US action as necessary when neighbouring nations show "wrongdoing or inability to maintain order," suggesting that instability threatening economic interests justifies American police power. The source also claims the US does "not seek territory" and aims only to ensure stability and commerce.

Arguments supporting the statement (primarily economic):

• American investments in Latin America and the Caribbean grew rapidly in this period.
• The US intervened in the Dominican Republic in 1905 to take over customs collections and ensure debt repayment to American and European creditors.
• American companies like the United Fruit Company had extensive holdings throughout Central America.
• The Panama Canal (completed 1914) represented a massive American investment requiring regional stability.
• Dollar Diplomacy under President Taft (1909-1913) explicitly used American financial power to extend influence.

Arguments against (other motivations):

• The Corollary also served strategic and security purposes. Roosevelt wanted to prevent European powers, particularly Germany, from using debt collection as a pretext for establishing military bases in the Western Hemisphere.
• The Venezuelan crisis of 1902-1903, when Britain, Germany, and Italy blockaded Venezuela over unpaid debts, demonstrated the real risk of European military intervention in the region.
• Roosevelt's language about maintaining "order" and preventing the "loosening of the ties of civilised society" reflects racial and cultural assumptions of the period, not purely economic calculation.
• The original Monroe Doctrine (1823) was about security, and the Corollary extended that logic.

Reaching Level 4 (9-10 marks): The strongest answers recognise that economic, strategic, and ideological motivations were intertwined. The source itself reveals multiple motivations. The word "primarily" in the question requires you to weigh the relative importance of different factors, not simply list them. A sophisticated conclusion might argue that economic interests were the most frequent trigger for specific interventions, but the broader framework of the Corollary was shaped by security concerns and cultural attitudes about American superiority.