MEXICO CITY (AP) — Historians and observers have accused the Trump administration of trying to rewrite American history to justify its own foreign policy decisions toward Latin America by publishing a “historically inaccurate” version of the Mexican-American war.
Monday’s White House statement commemorating the war’s anniversary described the conflict as “a legendary victory that secured the American Southwest, reaffirmed American sovereignty, and expanded the promise of American independence across our majestic continent.” The statement drew parallels between the period in US history and its own increasingly aggressive policies towards Latin America, which it said would “ensure that the Hemisphere remains secure.”
“Guided by our victory in the fields of Mexico 178 years ago, I spared no effort to defend our southern border against invasion, uphold the rule of law, and protect our homeland from forces of evil, violence and destruction,” said the statement, although it was not signed.
In the post, the White House does not mention the main role played by slavery in the war and glorifies the wider period “Manifest Destiny”, which resulted in the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Native Americans from their land.
It provokes criticism
Alexander Aviña, a professor of Latin American history at Arizona State University, said the White House’s statement “reduces the massive amounts of violence it took to expand” the United States to the Pacific Rim at a time when the Trump administration is sticking its hand in Latin American affairs in a way not seen in decades, deposing the president of Venezuela, interfering in the elections and threatened military action in Mexico and other countries.
“The political leaders of the United States since then have seen this as an ugly aspect of the history of the United States, this is a pretty clear example of the imperialism of the United States against its southern neighbor,” Aviña said. “The Trump administration is actually embracing this as a positive in US history and framing it – historically inaccurately – as some sort of defensive measure to prevent Mexico from invading them.”
On Tuesday, criticisms of the White House’s statement quickly swirled on social media.
Asked about the statement in her morning newscast, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum laughed, shrugged and noted “we must defend sovereignty.” Sheinbaum, who has walked a tightrope with the Trump administration, responded to Trump in a balanced tone and sometimes with sarcasm, such as when Trump changed the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America.
A historical sticking point
The Mexican-American war (1846–1848) was caused by long-standing border disputes between the United States and Mexico and the United States’ annexation of Texas in 1845. For years leading up to the war, the Americans had gradually moved into what was then Mexican territory. Mexico had banned slavery and US abolitionists feared that the US land grab was in part an attempt to add slave states.
After the outbreak of hostilities and successive victories in the United States, Mexico ceded more than 525,000 square miles of territory — including what is now Arizona, California, western Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas and Utah — to the United States.
The moment turned Texas into a key chess piece during the US Civil War and led former President Ulysses S. Grant to later write that the conflict with Mexico was “one of the most unjust ever waged by a stronger nation against a weaker nation.”
The Associated Press was formed when five New York City newspapers financed a pony express route from Alabama to bring news of the Mexican War – as it is sometimes known in the United States – north faster than the US Post Office could deliver it.
The war continues to be a historical sticking point between the two countries, particularly as Sheinbaum repeatedly reminds Trump that her country is a sovereign nation whenever Trump openly weighs taking military action against the Mexican cartels and pressures Mexico to bend to his will.
Rewriting history
The White House statement is in line with broader actions taken by the Trump administration to shape the language of the federal government around its own creed, said Albert Camarillo, a history professor at Stanford University, who described the statement as a “distorted, ahistorical, imperialist version” of the war.
Aviña said the statement serves “to rhetorically affirm that the United States is justified in establishing its so-called ‘America First’ policy across the Americas,” regardless of historical accuracy.
The Trump administration ordered the rewriting of history on display at the Smithsonian Institution, saying it would “restore truth and sanity to American history.”
The administration has scoured government websites with history, legal records and data it finds inconsistent. Trump also ordered the government to remove any signs that “inappropriately disparage Americans of the past or living,” including those that make reference to slavery, the destruction of Native American cultures and climate change.
“This statement is consistent with so many others who try to whitewash and change the history of the United States and erase generations of historical study,” Camarillo said.