US usually played a dual role in other parts of the Cold War: Its not that they always want dictators but rather want someone they can rein in and not deal w negative press headlines, and after the 1980s rhe overt Cold War era coups no longer are a big option

Supported Park Chung Hee, but also saved the dissident (and later first liberal Pres.) Kim Dae Jung from being thrown into the ocean after the KCIA kidnapped Kim in Tokyo

Also later w Chun, threatened him that he cannot kill Kim Dae Jung if he wanted recognition from the US

When Kim returned to Korea in 1985, after the US saw what happened w Benigno Aquino (Filipino dissident murdered by Marcos in the airport upon his return, and then Marcos was ousted by the people in ‘86 iirc) upon his return, some US congressmen acted as human shields so Chun couldn’t kill him.

Instead ofc he was arrested and put into house arrest.

Then in 1987 also sent a tank in front of the Capital Defense Command when the people rose against Chun and was exploring using the military again as he did when he took power to fire on the people, as a warning that the US armed forces will not support a possible coup - and many younger American diplomats also acted as a de facto liaison between the democratization movement and the US

Basically the US follows its interests, and after the 1980s democracy serves the American interests usually more than overt dictatorships

I am NOT saying the US is a saint or the defender of Freedom or anything BUT -it does have an image to uphold, as morality/ideology was also an equation they had to consider in the arena of the Cold War politics.

They were definitely also more ruthless to LatAm which they saw as their “backyard” as opposed to the frontlines of the Cold War that they wee a bit more delicate about