Dan Kieselstein

America has a history of glorifying military achievements. Whether speaking of the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, or WWII, most any American could give you a full explanation on how, why, when and where they happened. One war, more than any other, appears to have been lost among all these famous conflicts: The Mexican War. States University of Illinois historian Robert W. Johannsen, "...the war with Mexico has become America's forgotten war." Of the few who do know of it, it is widely regarded as an unfair, unjustifiable war that should never have occurred. However, upon closer inspection, the War in Mexico seems not only justifiable, but necessary.

To find the roots of the Mexican War, one must begin in 1803, the year of the historic Louisiana Purchase with Spain. The deal, at the time, included the land that would become Texas. Despite a later treaty in 1823 nullifying this part of the purchase in exchange for the "Oregon country", many Americans continued to consider America's original border, the Rio Grande, official. Texas was a very fertile area, and it attracted Westward pioneers in search of a better life. In 1821, a man named Moses Austin received a grant from the U.S. government allowing for citizens of the United States to settle Texas. In December of that year, Moses' son brought 300 families to Texas to settle. Unfortunately for the settlers, they soon found out that Mexico had gained independence from Spain, and Texas was now part of the Republic of Mexico.

The newly Mexican citizens found that Mexican laws threatened their way of life. Mexico required all citizens to be Catholic and, starting in 1836, the Texans had no self government. The lack of self government came as a result of the rise of General Santa Anna, who installed a military dictatorship. Stifled by the oppressive government, the citizens of Texas declared their independence from Mexico and set up their own government.

Though seemingly destined for defeat after massacres at the Alamo and Goliad, the Texans turned the tide at the Battle of San Jacinto and won independence. Finally able to freely self govern, the Texans requested annexation to the United States, where they could have self government and the security of a larger military for protection. Worried about disrupting the balance between free and slave states, president Andrew Jackson refused.

As time passed, popular support grew for the annexation of Texas, though the support was mainly from the Southern states because of the added power an extra slave state would provide. Genera Santa Anna, furious that the United States was considering taking possession of land Mexico still considered its property , threatened war if the United States followed through. On April 12, 1845, Congress passed a joint resolution to acquire Texas, and the war soon followed. The border of Texas was still disputed, and, on April 30, 16 Americans were killed in the disputed territory, resulting in a declaration of war 14 days later.

The declaration of war resulted in a massive volunteer effort that, at that time, was the greatest in U.S. history. Feelings of strong patriotism swept across the nation, and men from all backgrounds joined the military in hopes of honor, adventure, and prestige. Unlike the Spanish American war, in which public support was largely the product of propaganda and "yellow" journalism, the outpouring of support was a spontaneous grassroots reaction. United States citizens wanted to not only spread the blessings of their "model republic", but prove its legitimacy to the great powers of Europe. Initially hoping for 50,000 volunteers, the military had to turn thousands of men back as states quickly filled the quotas asked of them by the government. Illinois alone provided enough men for fourteen regiments. It had been asked for four.

As romantic as the war may have seemed at the time, it can be argued that the war was nothing but greedy, unjust, and imperialistic. The United States, already having a massive amount of land due to the Louisiana purchase and other transactions, wanted purely to fulfill it's "Manifest Destiny," the idea that America had the god-given right to expand to the Pacific Ocean. Rather than a justified attempt to protect Texas, its newest state, Polk opportunistically sent forces by land and sea to California, hoping to gain as much Mexican land as possible.

One of the main arguments used to support the war effort was that it was in Mexico's best interests. This argument is certainly debatable. While many soldiers truly believed they were paving the way to a better way of life in Mexico, many others ran wild, raping and murdering civilians without a second thought. One glaring example of this was a group of Texas Rangers who murdered 40 inhabitants of a Mexican village. Even more widely condemned was the murder of 30 civilians by a group of cavalrymen called the Rackensackers. The civilians had sought safety in a mountain cave, and were massacred. No matter what one believes about the War in Mexico, these are atrocities that cannot be forgotten.

However, those violations of human rights do not define the war in Mexico. It was, in many ways, not only justifiable, but unavoidable. Polk attempted numerous times to peacefully resolve the problems that the U.S. in Mexico had. Unfortunately, these attempts were not only futile, but managed to raise Mexico's hatred towards the United States. By late 1845, tensions were so strong that war was not a question of if, but when. When the war did occur, the majority of soldiers rightly believed they were making the world a better place. They viewed Mexico as a dangerous, unstable place to live and considered it their duty as human beings to help their fellow man enjoy the same liberties Americans did.

One cannot fully evaluate a war without viewing it's aftereffects. The War in Mexico made the United States what it is today. In it, the U.S. gained Texas, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, California, an parts of Colorado, over a quarter of the land currently owned by the United States. It also proved democracy to be a legitimate basis for government, one that not only keeps its people happy and prosperous, but safe as well. One effect that seems to go unnoticed is the lasting peace that remains since that war. Until 1845, the U.S. and Mexico had been constant enemies. Since then, no way has ever occurred between the two countries.

Polk was not opposed to war, but did not make it his primary objective. He had a set of goals he came into his presidency with, and was not afraid to fight for them. One of those was the annexation of Texas. Texas was, in short, a displaced colony of U.S. citizens who had come to Mexico expecting a strong, Spanish government. When they got there, the found they were in the hands of a Mexican government that was neither stable nor fair to the citizens. In need of a greater power to help stabilize their newly independent republic, they asked to join the union. Polk annexed the republic, and Mexico declared war. While many say that Polk provoked an unnecessary war, it can be argued he was only dealing with the inevitable. War may have been avoidable with the previous government, who was more willing to work with the United States on a compromise that would appeal to both sides. Unfortunately, Mexico's government was overthrown by a militant regime that refused to make any compromises. At this point, with Mexico mobilizing it's armed forces, threatening to invade, and massing Mexican troops at the Rio Grande, war had truly become unavoidable.

The war, with all of its human violations, was rooted in protecting human rights. The United States had stepped in to protect a people it considered it's own, and believed it had a duty to defend. The soldiers who volunteered not only wanted to help their fellow citizens, but the Mexican people. Mexico was a poor country with frequent revolutions before the war. The United States, on the other hand, had been a model of stability, its political process constistently evolving and maturing aside from the failed "Articles of Confederation" in the late 1700's. Even those against the war saw it's potential to benefit the Mexican people. A New England Reformer named Nahum Capen said, "In what way could the evils of Mexico be reached, unless by the strong hand of war?". The New York Herald believed the United States was bringing order to a country in disarray, saying, "...it is part of our destiny to civilize that beautiful country." Says Johannsen, "As the world's leading republic, the United States had a duty to rescue its benighted neighbor and see justice done to its people." There is no need to justify that.

Many critics of the Mexican War fail to realize how different the United States would be without it. The Mexican cession was an enormous amount of land, one that now supports of 23% of the population. The land gained includes two of our largest states, Texas and California. It supports eight major cities including Phoenix, Los Angeles, Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, San Diego, Las Vegas, Sacramento, and San Francisco. What also goes unnoticed is the amount of money the United States eventually paid for these territories. Though it would have been able to eventually conquer them and pay nothing. The United States graciously offered Mexico fifteen million dollars, an enormous sum at the time, for the cession. The United States may arguably have been wrong for entering the war, but it's lasting effects on the country, both socially and economically, cannot be overlooked.

One of the main incentives for those who volunteered was proving the legitimacy of democracy. United States citizens felt obligated to show other countries the superiority of their system. The country that had been dismissed as fragile, and Europeans remained skeptical of its ability to win a war on foreign soil. According to Johanssen, it was said, "As for waging an offensive war...the country would surely collapse into disunity and paralysis at the very thought." The victory in Mexico proved the strength of democracy not only to other countries, but to themselves as well. Says Johanssen, "...the republic appeared indestructible." The rest of the world must have agreed, because the very same day the United States won the Mexican war, France began a revolution to overthrow their monarchy. Before the war, democracy was an unproven experiment. Afterwards, it was a model, a guide for other countries to follow.

One of the great outcomes of the war was the lasting peace it created between the two countries. The tense relations that had marked the relationship soon faded, and they could co-exist in peace. This is as a result of an important clause in the Treaty of Guadalupe Hildago. It declared that all further disagreements would be resolved not through war, but through peaceful arbitration. Since that controversial war, none have occurred between the two nations, and relations remain stable. Considering the number of enemies the United States has today, it needs as many peaceful relationships as possible, and Mexico can certainly be counted on for that distinction.

The War in Mexico may be forgotten, but it's effect on the country, and worldwide, is not. It provided over a quarter of the land now owned by the U.S., and inspired citizens around to fight for democracies of their own. Whether or not it was a fair war is certainly debatable. What cannot be debated is that it changed the world. Without it, many other countries, some as important as France, might never have become the prosperous democracies they are today. Sad as it is, sometimes bloodshed is the only way to true prove the mettle of a system. The War in Mexico was democracy's first test, and it passed with flying colors.