Blood and Debt: War and the Nation-State in Latin America (review)

This is a comparative historical sociology of war experiences and their impact in the development of Latin American states. Though it favors variability and contingency in the historical process rather than universal laws, the work is ultimately premised on the general assumption that war-deprived states tend to lack institutional strength; state power thus becomes shallow and deeply contested. Rejecting stereotypical views of Latin American states as almighty Leviathans, Centeno contends that in reality those states all failed in various degrees to establish institutional autonomy, acquire legitimacy, provide basic services, physically integrate society, intervene effectively in the economic sphere, monopolize the use of force, and so forth. Furthermore, even though they generally disregarded civil society when undertaking major decisions, in turn becoming "despotic," the region's states displayed comparatively low levels of militarization, having mostly avoided large-scale war. In fact, Centeno concludes that what was unique about Latin America's political history was precisely its having escaped from "both war and the formation of a strong state" (p. 11).

Blood and Debt sets out to explain the region's exceptional traits of "limited war" and "limited states," aspiring in the process not only to shed light on Latin American history but also to improve on the available theories of state development in general. Centeno's work provides an informed discussion of the nature, conditions, causes, costs, and history of Latin American's nineteenth-century wars and of the state's parallel processes of fiscal and institutional growth and centralization (or lack thereof). At the same time, he also addresses certain dimensions of the evolution of nation building and of citizenship. With regard to nation building, the author engages in an interesting analysis of nationalistic iconography, including the naming of streets and building of monuments, of issuing currency and designing postage. He finds that compared to Europe and North America, "bellicose claims and militaristic heroics" (p. 191) were not as important to Latin American nationalism and even in times of military rule there was not a marked increase in the use of bellicose icons. Nor were there myths about the people armed and united through war and sacrifice. In short, Centeno findsLatin American national iconography generally quite "underdeveloped" (p. 215) and much more focused on cultural and scientific figures.

As for the question of building citizenship, Centeno'sfocus is on the extent to which the military, through more or less massive conscription, contributed to the creation of citizens and the fostering of community. The conclusion here is that, once again, lacking the experience of massive wars in the region, participation in the armed forces has been historically low in Latin America. Thus, the military's role at instructing youth in the values of nationalism and patriotism was also quite limited. For different reasons, especially methodological constraints, Centeno's analysis is limited in its time, geographical, and thematic coverage. It concentrates mostly on the nineteenth-century; examines a narrow array of state activities, namely war-related ("bellic") functions; and it looks at a select group of Latin American states, including Mexico and the ten South American republics. As the author himself acknowledges, leaving traditionally war-torn Central America out of the analysis causes one to wonder whether or not the experience of this region confirms or contradicts the book's main claims.

Nevertheless, overall the work is quite comprehensive and comparative enough to formulate a plausible interpretation of broad patterns concerning the historical connection between war and state-building processes in Latin America and elsewhere. Theoretically ambitious, comparative, and revisionist, this work will afford students of state building, nationalism, and military history, much food for thought. Similar to the recent comparative work of Fernando López-Alves (State Formation and Democracy in Latin America, 1810-1900 [2000]), it should become required reading in seminars...