During the 1960s, the effects of the Cuban Revolution – especially in terms of support for guerrilla warfare against U.S. allies – became all too evident, and the United States pursued interventionism with new vigor. This renewed use of power included economic and diplomatic pressures, veiled threats, covert operations, and even invasion. U.S. officials framed the Cold War as a valiant struggle to protect freedom in the hemisphere, and the cases of Cuba, Nicaragua, and Guatemala epitomized the lengths to which the United States would go to fight what it considered to be security threats. In Latin America, many elites supported U.S. policy, but a growing undercurrent of discontent also emerged, which pushed for negotiated conclusions to war and protested against the treatment of so many citizens caught in the middle. They did not share the notion that leftist or even Marxist governments necessarily constituted a threat to national security and global order. This chapter ends with a discussion of the U.S. invasion of Panama in 1989.

The establishment of the leftist Sandinista government in Nicaragua following the overthrow of the US-friendly Somoza regime in 1979 caused considerable alarm in the United States. Chapter 6 analyzes the role of human rights concerns in the battle between the Reagan administration and members of Congress over US policy toward Nicaragua in the 1980s. Fearful of Nicaragua turning into a communist stronghold in Central America, the administration conducted covert operations against the Sandinistas and supported the anti-Sandinista guerillas know as the Contras. Once these activities were revealed, the administration found itself engulfed in a public diplomacy war for congressional and public support. The chapter examines congressional attempts, predominantly by liberal Democrats, to restrict US aid for the Contras through the imposition of the so-called Boland Amendments. Ultimately, restrictions led the administration to undertake illegal actions that resulted in the Iran-Contra Affair. The chapter demonstrates how both the administration and its congressional critics invoked human rights to claim moral authority for their positions on Nicaragua. It argues that the debate over Nicaragua both raised the salience of human rights concerns in the United States and highlighted their ambiguity as it underscored the selectiveness of the administration’s commitment to human rights.