Every now and then we get therads about how we can get Latin American nations more involved in one of both world wars. IOTL, as we know, there wasn't much fighting here in any of both wars, so it's natural for those interested in aH to ask how we can change this.
The problem is that Latin America was under either the American or the British sphere of influence till 1930 (depending on the country), and entirely under the American sphere of influence after 1945, and both countries happen to be in the same side of both world wars. Being a region strongly dependent on foreign trade to sell waw materiald and get industrialized goods, no Latin American government, no matter its ideology, would have sided with a country who was an enemy of its main trading partner and/or and enemy of the country that could cut its links with its main markets.
That's way, even if the government who came to power in June 1943 by a coup in Argentina had fascist sympathies, they would never dare to declare war on the allies: it was not only because by then it was clear that the Axis was losing, but mainly because any war with Great Britain would disrup foreing trade, as britain was the main market for our exports.
No other country except the US or Great Britain had ever an influence over the region comparable to the one exerted by those two countries. Germany had some investments after 1900 in the South Cone, but those were mostly abandoned after WWI. Japan was never a big player.
Of course, a country like the USSR, which was a world power who was also the leader of an ideology that was at a time quite atractive for many in Latin america who were fed up of inequality, backwardness and other nations meddling in internal affairs, might be lucky enough to have one country of the region to side with them even if it means a great risk for such a country, as the local hegemon may easily cut all links with this country and the rest of the world. Only a powerful ideology can make the leaders of a country and its people take such a bet. But even so, this "gift" may not be easily exploited by the outside power, as the power which exerts influence over the region would only tolerate a country under its sphere of influence to side with its rival power if this outside power isn't allowed to use this country as a base for its operations. This is why Cuba was only allwed to stay communist as long as no nuclear missiles, Russian submarines or other military stuffwas deployed there.
So, to have a more "intersesting" (in a Chinese sense) Latin America during a world war, we'd have to either reduce the influence the US and BRITAIN exerted and have other players involved (which is hard) or we could have those two countries in different sides in a world war.
If, for example, there was a war between the US and Britain in 1900, you could have Argentina, Uruguay and Chile siding with Britain, and Brazil siding with the US. It would be like OTL Chaco war in the 1930ies, were the US covertly supported Bolivia, and Great Britain backed Paraguay (or was it the other way round), but in a much bigger scale.
The problem is that Latin America was under either the American or the British sphere of influence till 1930 (depending on the country), and entirely under the American sphere of influence after 1945, and both countries happen to be in the same side of both world wars. Being a region strongly dependent on foreign trade to sell waw materiald and get industrialized goods, no Latin American government, no matter its ideology, would have sided with a country who was an enemy of its main trading partner and/or and enemy of the country that could cut its links with its main markets.
That's way, even if the government who came to power in June 1943 by a coup in Argentina had fascist sympathies, they would never dare to declare war on the allies: it was not only because by then it was clear that the Axis was losing, but mainly because any war with Great Britain would disrup foreing trade, as britain was the main market for our exports.
No other country except the US or Great Britain had ever an influence over the region comparable to the one exerted by those two countries. Germany had some investments after 1900 in the South Cone, but those were mostly abandoned after WWI. Japan was never a big player.
Of course, a country like the USSR, which was a world power who was also the leader of an ideology that was at a time quite atractive for many in Latin america who were fed up of inequality, backwardness and other nations meddling in internal affairs, might be lucky enough to have one country of the region to side with them even if it means a great risk for such a country, as the local hegemon may easily cut all links with this country and the rest of the world. Only a powerful ideology can make the leaders of a country and its people take such a bet. But even so, this "gift" may not be easily exploited by the outside power, as the power which exerts influence over the region would only tolerate a country under its sphere of influence to side with its rival power if this outside power isn't allowed to use this country as a base for its operations. This is why Cuba was only allwed to stay communist as long as no nuclear missiles, Russian submarines or other military stuffwas deployed there.
So, to have a more "intersesting" (in a Chinese sense) Latin America during a world war, we'd have to either reduce the influence the US and BRITAIN exerted and have other players involved (which is hard) or we could have those two countries in different sides in a world war.
If, for example, there was a war between the US and Britain in 1900, you could have Argentina, Uruguay and Chile siding with Britain, and Brazil siding with the US. It would be like OTL Chaco war in the 1930ies, were the US covertly supported Bolivia, and Great Britain backed Paraguay (or was it the other way round), but in a much bigger scale.