Caudillos, Annexationism, and the Rivalry between Empires in the Dominican Republic, 1844?1874

Abstract

Traditionally, the annexationist tendencies of the Dominican caudillos Pedro Santana and Buenaventura Báez have been simplistically dismissed as antinational maneuvers by self-serving strongmen.1 That Santana and Báez were self-serving characters whose primary object was to stay in power is undeniable, but they were not the only Dominicans who wanted at one time or another to persuade other nations to take over their country. Similar sentiments and strategies were embraced by other national and regional leaders, among them Manuel Jimenes González, Matías Ramón Mella, José María Cabral, and prominent elements of the Cibaeño bourgeoisie. Dominican annexationism also changed over time in terms of its intensity and the objects of its metropolitan intentions: France, Spain, or the United States. This article seeks to explain the motivations behind the Dominican caudillos' seemingly chronic annexationism from Dominican independence (1844) to the end of Báez's fourth presidential term (1874), as seen against the backdrop of imperial rivalries over the struggling Dominican Republic. It contends that Dominican annexationism peaked precisely during the periods of intensified rivalry over the republic and that the nature of the caudillos' annexationist preferences was dictated by geopolitical circumstances beyond their control. It thus establishes a correlation between the evolution of North Atlantic imperial rivalries and political developments within the Dominican Republic that testifies to the importance of examining the effects of international politics on local affairs. It also focuses upon the activities of foreign envoys who intermittently sought to prod Haitian forces into invading Dominican territory and shows how the manipulation of racial issues was at the heart of the conflicting policies regarding the infant republic. In sum, this article seeks to shed new light on the historical phenomenon of nineteenth-century Dominican annexationism by looking at the broader Atlantic context, and in doing so, it suggests a paradigm applicable to other Caribbean experiences, most notably Cuban annexationism.