856A.20/135
Memorandum by Mr. Louis J. Halle, Jr., of the Division of the American Republics
Attitude of the Other American Republics to the Joint Action of Brazil and the United States for the Protection of Surinam
News of the recent Brazilian-American joint action in Surinam has been received with calm realism throughout Latin America, in official circles and in the press alike. It may, perhaps, be viewed as an indication of the success achieved by our Good Neighbor Policy that our motives in taking this action have been almost universally accepted on the basis of our own avowal. The step has not met with the fear and suspicion that it might have aroused a few years ago.
In governmental circles, the responses that have not been explicitly favorable have been merely non-committal, and only the pro-Axis press has found fault. The general view has been that the action was a logical, almost an expected forward step, in keeping with the progressive development of hemisphere defense since the autumn of 1939, and thus to be regarded as a matter of course. It has been viewed as stemming from the Act of Habana (in spirit at least) and leading toward an anticipated occupation of French Guiana at some appropriate future moment; and also as a gratifying indication of our determination to defend the Western Hemisphere. While definitely unfavorable comments are not to be found outside the pro-Axis press, notices expressing outright jubilation have appeared only in Cuba, Nicaragua, and Brazil (where pride is aroused by Brazilian participation together with some disappointment at the limited nature of that participation). However, Colombia’s El Liberal (not considered pro-Nazi) published an ambiguous comment that might be construed as an expression of alarm.
The responses of government officials have ranged from silence (Mexico, Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador) through non-committal comment (Colombia, Peru) to unqualified concurrence in the action (Dominican Republic, Haiti, Honduras [New York Times],19a El Salvador, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Panama, Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina, Chile).
The Foreign Minister of Argentina,20 in a note handed to our Ambassador, stated that his Ministry considered that “the measure mentioned assures continental defense within the spirit of American [Page 834] solidarity and of the pacts signed, which are its practical manifestation.” The Associated Press reported him as stating, also, that the move was “a normal thing,” analogous to our occupation of Iceland.
The Foreign Minister of Paraguay21 said that the action appears logical for hemisphere defense. The Chilean Foreign Minister22 expressed himself as being personally in accord. The Foreign Minister of Panama23 said that the action is greatly in the interest of all the American Republics, adding that the statement that the contingent will be withdrawn at the conclusion of hostilities should obviate any possible criticism which might have arisen.
For the most part, the Latin American press has confined itself to reporting the news without editorial comment. The press has been explicitly favorable in Cuba, Nicaragua, Brazil, Uruguay, and Argentina.
Cuba’s El Mundo stated that no one in the Americas would disapprove of the occupation of Surinam but would, rather, view it as evidence of the firm determination of the United States to maintain its rights and those of the other republics of the Western Hemisphere by force of arms. The only editorial comment in Guatemala and in Venezuela accepted the step as a natural development to be regarded as a matter of course.
The only comment in the Colombian press (that of El Liberal referred to above) foretold, as a result of the step, imminent economic complications and a radical alteration in international affairs, for which Colombia must be prepared. The only exception to the favorable reaction of the Uruguayan press has been that of the Herrerista Debate, which referred to the action as “an outrage against the rights of others.” In Argentina, only El Pampero has viewed the step with alarm; its tone, according to Ambassador Armour, was one of discouragement. The Ecuadoran press, while refraining from editorial comment, has published some news-reports of German statements that the United States has “invaded” South America.
It may be said that on the whole the Latin Americans were not shocked by our action and, except at the prompting of malice from abroad, did not misconstrue our motives.