185. Memorandum From the Executive Secretary of the Department of State (Battle) to the President’s Special Assistant for National Security Affairs (Bundy)1

SUBJECT

  • Reply to President Betancourt’s telegram on Argentina’s situation

On March 29, President Betancourt sent to the President and various other Chiefs of American states telegrams in which he strongly criticized [Page 380] the overthrow of the legal Government of Argentina and stated Venezuela would not grant recognition to the new Argentine Government. (Tab B)2 The Venezuelan Government ordered all the personnel in its Embassy in Buenos Aires to return to Caracas. In subsequent consultations with our Ambassador in Caracas, President Betancourt has indicated that although he would view sympathetically our continuance of relations with the Argentine Government, Venezuela would adhere to its position of nonrecognition in view of its plan to propose at the next Inter-American conference that there be prior consultation before recognition of de facto regimes in this hemisphere. This policy has strong backing in Venezuela.

The Venezuelan Government is especially sensitive to removal of a civilian President by the military forces as took place in Argentina. After three years it has held office longer than any previous elected government in Venezuelan history. Extremes on both left and right threaten to overthrow it by subversive activities and plots. It will endure as long as the military forces continue their support of constitutional government. It is understandably anxious therefore that nothing encourage military elements to think that they could move against the government with impunity. We have sought to make clear we support Betancourt, would deplore his overthrow and would have to review our policies toward Venezuela if he were overthrown.

Our Embassy has recommended that a reply to the Betancourt letter to the President would be desirable before we take any step toward regularizing relations with Argentina.

We agree that it would be helpful to Betancourt and to US-Venezuelan relations for the President to reply to his letter in advance of our continuance of relations with the Argentine Government. The attached proposed reply (Tab A)3 for your approval would assure President Betancourt we appreciate his position, share his concern that constitutional and democratic processes be observed and are considering the matter of relations with the Argentine Government in the light of what we can do to help strengthen democratic institutions there. If after our continuance of relations with Argentina, Betancourt should wish to release the text of the President’s message, we believe we should agree.

The Secretary believes this reply should be dispatched now. Events of the past week have led the Department to the conclusion that the present confused political situation in Argentina is not apt to be cleared up for several weeks. Nevertheless, there is a civilian government in power which has called the legislature into session. There are also disturbing [Page 381] reports of dissatisfaction among some elements of the military and of plotting to overthrow Dr. Guido. If recognition by us can strengthen civilian authority, it seems best to act promptly.

We have delayed long enough to make clear our disapproval of the military pressures which forced Frondizi from office. Some 34 governments, including Colombia, have acted to continue relations.

Earlier in the week we informed key governments in Latin America that we thought the time might be approaching for us to regularize relations. We received no protests and almost a sympathetic response from Betancourt.

Assistant Secretary Martin discussed the possibility with Brazilian Foreign Minister Dantas Thursday might. The latter was doubtful if Brazil would move yet but did not protest our acting. He requested time to consult President Goulart. Mr. Martin assured him we would wish President Goulart’s views. We are sending a message to Ambassador Gordon to follow up with Minister Dantas.

We are now also seeking a reaction to a definite proposal to move from Uruguay, Chile and Peru, and are also asking them whether or not they would wish to coordinate the timing of any action on their part with that by us.

We hope that on April 17 we may be in a position to decide what to do.

A. E. Breisky4
  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 735.00/4-1462. No classification marking. Drafted by Martin and Wellman on April 14.
  2. Attached, but not printed. Sent via commercial channels.
  3. Not attached, but sent as telegram 1104 to Caracas, April 17. (Department of State Central Files, 735.00/4-1762)
  4. Breisky signed for Battle above Battle’s typed signature.