The USA’s Decision to Annex the Philippines vs. Hawaii: A Historical Analysis

The United States made a critical decision in the 19th and 20th centuries regarding territorial expansion by annexing territories such as Hawaii, but not the Philippines, despite both being significant overseas acquisitions during this period. This decision was influenced by a myriad of factors, including flawed beliefs about Spanish colonial rule, a failed nation-building attempt, and the strategic and economic considerations of the time. This article explores these factors and provides insights into why the USA did not annex the Philippines like Hawaii.

Why the USA Acquired the Philippines

The US acquired the Philippines due to a misguided belief that Spanish colonial rule had been excessively harsh. The misconception about the state of governance in the Philippines under Spanish rule led to a hastily made decision to annex the territory. Initial intentions were driven by the belief that the Filipinos needed American protection and guidance to progress.

The Failure of Nation-Building in the Philippines

The attempt to create a nation in the Philippines faced significant challenges. The party that could win elections was unappealing to a large portion of the population because it could not inspire the resilience and commitment necessary to fight a civil war effectively. In contrast, the party that could rally fighters to resist the colonial efforts was often regarded with fear and aversion by the general population. This inability to forge a united and strong government structure impeded the nation-building endeavor, ultimately necessitating a prolonged military presence.

The U.S. Decision to Stay Despite Early Plans to Leave

Initially, the U.S. intended to leave the Philippines, understanding the considerable mess left after the overthrow of Spanish rule. However, the U.S. chose to stay and engage in a military conflict against the violent minority within the Philippines who sought control. While Japan's conquest eventually led to the resolution of the conflict, it came at a great cost and was not an ideal solution.

The Significance of the Spanish-American War

The Spanish-American War marked a significant turning point in U.S. foreign policy and territorial acquisition. As Spain ceded the Philippines, Guam, Cuba, and Puerto Rico to the U.S., the latter had to navigate the newly acquired territories with caution. The U.S. military presence in the Philippines continued as a response to the violent resistance from various factions, including those backed by Japan during World War II. It was only in 1946 that the U.S. relinquished sovereignty over the Philippines, upon the conclusion of the war and the subsequent peace treaty.

Philippines vs. Hawaii: Different Paths of Acquisition

The acquisition of the Philippines and Hawaii was significantly different. While Hawaii was annexed due to strategic and economic interests, primarily related to the availability of sandalwood, the U.S. approach in Hawaii was more about statehood rather than direct colonization. The Philippines, however, faced a more complex scenario due to its vast archipelago, diverse population, and a history of civil conflicts.

Conclusion: The DecisionMaking Process

The decision to annex the Philippines or Hawaii is a critical case study in both historical and contemporary geopolitical analysis. The U.S. decision to annex Hawaii was based on economic and strategic interests, whereas the Philippines, despite initial intentions, was handled with a prolonged military presence due to internal conflicts and diplomatic considerations. This decision-making process provides valuable insights into the complexities of territorial expansion and the challenges of nation-building in the global context.

Keywords: USA annexation, Philippines, Hawaii, Spanish-American War, Philippines sovereignty