American Co-Regional Hegemonies?

I'm reading a good AAR on Victoria right now, and the U.S. just agreed to back Brazil at the expense of Venezuela/Colombia in the late 1800s/early 1900s.

This brought up an interesting idea- what if the U.S. had ever tried to forge loose, unwritten "alliances" with regional powers at the expense of others? Europe's out, I think- the early U.S. was way too isolationist to get too muddled with backing any particular Old World country too much. But what if the U.S. made agreements with any of the particularly stable, powerful nations in Latin American and/or Caribbean in order to maintain its interests? And in this, I don't just mean tinpot regimes- I mean with actual nations. So I'm seeing American-Brazilian joint policing of South America, and I don't know- Costa Rica in Central America? Was the Dominican Republic ever strong enough in the Carib.?
 
In the Carribean, the US is simply too big to play "equals" with any other country, though Cuba would be the best to play policer. (IE, it's significantly bigger than most others.)

I would think that the US would at least try to team with whoever is already strong in a region, so long as it doesn't run the risk of later being kicked out as the other country grows stronger. Brazil could make sense, but possibly Japan in the Pacific?
 
How about an American and Brazilian alliance based upon military and economic cooperation with a designated purpose of countering British influence in the hemisphere. I could see this emerging thanks to much worse Anglo American relations and Britain forging an alliance with Argentina while recognizing its claims on Uruguay.
 
Was I right in choosing Brazil? They seem to be similar to the U.S. in that 1) they are huge and powerful, 2) they, being Portuguese speakers, are probably seen by the rest of Latin America with distrust, and 3) they were both last to abolish slavery. That has to indicate some sort of cultural/political compatibility, right?
 
Top