The Banana Wars: America’s forgotten military interventions in Central America

Between 1898 and 1934, the United States engaged in a series of military interventions across Central America and the Caribbean that collectively became known as the “Banana Wars.” This era marked one of the most controversial chapters in American foreign policy, where commercial interests, geopolitical concerns, and military action merged in ways that would profoundly shape the region’s development and its relationship with the United States.

The name “Banana Wars” itself reflects the central economic driver behind many of these interventions: the American fruit companies, particularly the United Fruit Company (now Chiquita Brands International), which had established vast plantations across Central America. These companies wielded enormous political influence both in the region and in Washington, DC. They frequently called upon the US government to protect their investments from political instability, labour unrest, or nationalist movements.

Countries affected by the Banana Wars

The interventions took place primarily in six nations: Honduras, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Haiti, the Dominican Republic, and Cuba. Each conflict had its own specific triggers, but common themes emerged throughout this period. American businesses had invested heavily in the infrastructure of these countries, particularly in railroads and banana plantations, and local governments often struggled with debt, political instability, and popular uprisings that threatened American commercial interests.

In Nicaragua, for example, the U.S. Marines were deployed multiple times between 1909 and 1933, initially to support conservative forces against liberal government policies that threatened American business interests. The Marines found themselves engaged in a prolonged guerrilla war against Augusto César Sandino, whose nationalist movement would later inspire the Sandinista revolution of the 1970s. The American occupation of Nicaragua involved everything from training local constabulary forces to engaging in direct combat operations against insurgent groups.

Honduras became known as the archetypal “banana republic,” a term that originated with American writer O. Henry to describe the political corruption and economic dependence that characterised many Central American nations during this period. The United Fruit Company essentially controlled Honduras’s economy, owning vast tracts of land, the railroad system, and major port facilities. When political developments threatened these interests, US military intervention often followed, creating a pattern of dependency that persisted long after the Marines departed.

The Dominican Republic and Haiti experienced some of the longest American occupations during this era. The Dominican Republic was occupied from 1916 to 1924, while Haiti endured American military rule from 1915 to 1934. In both cases, the interventions were justified by the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, which asserted the United States’ right to intervene in Latin American affairs to maintain order and prevent European powers from gaining influence in the region. These occupations involved not just military control but also efforts to restructure local political and economic systems along American lines.

Cuba, though formally independent after the Spanish-American War of 1898, remained under significant American influence through the Platt Amendment, which gave the US the right to intervene in Cuban affairs. American troops landed in Cuba multiple times during this period, most notably in 1906, 1912, and 1917, each time to address political crises that threatened American interests or regional stability.

The military tactics employed during the Banana Wars proved influential in developing what would later be called the “small wars” doctrine. American Marines found themselves engaged in counterinsurgency operations, working to win “hearts and minds” among local populations while combating guerrilla forces. These experiences would later influence American military thinking about unconventional warfare and nation-building, concepts that would prove relevant in subsequent conflicts from Vietnam to Afghanistan.

The economic impact of the Banana Wars was profound. American companies gained unprecedented control over Central American economies, creating a pattern of economic dependency that many argue persists to this day. The infrastructure built during this period, from railroads to ports, was designed primarily to facilitate the export of raw materials to the United States rather than to promote balanced economic development within these nations. This extractive model contributed to the persistent underdevelopment and inequality that characterise much of Central America today.

Politically, the interventions had complex and often contradictory results. While American administrations typically justified their actions as promoting democracy and stability, the reality on the ground often involved supporting authoritarian leaders who protected American business interests. The US frequently established or strengthened national guard and police forces in occupied countries, many of which later became instruments of repression under dictatorial regimes. In Nicaragua, for example, the National Guard created by American occupiers would eventually serve as the backbone of the Somoza dictatorship, which ruled the country for over four decades.

The human cost of the Banana Wars remains difficult to quantify precisely, but it was substantial. Thousands of Central Americans died in conflicts directly or indirectly related to American interventions. The social disruption caused by military occupations, economic exploitation, and political manipulation created lasting trauma in affected communities.

Indigenous populations were particularly hard hit, as they often lost traditional lands to American agricultural enterprises and faced discrimination from both foreign occupiers and local elites.

The cultural impacts of this era were equally significant. The term “banana republic” entered common parlance as a descriptor for politically unstable countries with economies dependent on the export of a limited range of primary products. The interventions also reinforced stereotypes about Latin Americans in American popular culture, often depicting them as unable to govern themselves effectively or as inherently violent and unstable.

The end of the Banana Wars came with President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s “Good Neighbor Policy,” announced in 1933. This policy represented a shift away from direct military intervention toward diplomatic and economic engagement with Latin American nations. While American influence in the region remained strong, the era of routine military occupations largely ended. However, the structural inequalities and political tensions created during the Banana Wars period continued to influence regional dynamics for decades.

The legacy of the Banana Wars extends far beyond their immediate historical period. Many scholars argue that these interventions established patterns of American-Latin American relations that persisted throughout the Cold War and continue to influence contemporary regional politics. The economic dependency created by American corporations, the military doctrines developed during these conflicts, and the political relationships forged between American officials and local elites all had lasting consequences.

Understanding the Banana Wars is crucial for comprehending contemporary Central American politics and US-Latin American relations. The migration patterns, economic inequalities, political instabilities, and diplomatic tensions that characterise the region today often have roots in this formative period. The interventions also offer important lessons about the relationship between economic interests and foreign policy, the challenges of military occupation and nation-building, and the long-term consequences of prioritising short-term commercial gains over sustainable development and genuine political self-determination.

As Americans grapple with questions about their country’s role in the world, the history of the Banana Wars serves as a reminder of how economic interests, military power, and political ideology can combine to create policies that have profound and lasting impacts on other nations.

While the context and methods of American foreign intervention have evolved significantly since the 1930s, many of the fundamental questions raised by this period—about sovereignty, economic justice, and the proper limits of national power—remain relevant today.