Foreign Relations of the United States: Diplomatic Papers, 1944, The American Republics, Volume VII

839.00/9–544

Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Caribbean and Central American Affairs (Cabot) to the Acting Chief, Office of American Republic Affairs (Armour)

[Washington,] September 12, 1944.

Mr. Armour: I believe that the viewpoint expressed by Ambassador Briggs in the attached despatch¹⁷ is of such interest that it should be read in extenso. With the exception of a few details, which I shall mention later, I most strongly endorse Mr. Briggs’ view that the time has come to take a strong position regarding the running of our foreign relations by other governmental departments.

We are all familiar with the efforts of the war agencies, notably the FEA¹⁸ and the Coordinator’s Office,¹⁹ to muscle into the field of foreign relations, and we have seen the disastrous results of their overzealousness on our relations. I am afraid that we have not taken a firm enough stand against the old line departments, notably War and Treasury in matters vitally affecting our foreign relations.

It seems to be an unfortunate fact that the military leaders we have had in the Caribbean area have found themselves more at home in the dictatorially-run countries than in those which have stirrings of democracy; thus Ubico²⁰ and Trujillo were always the Army leaders’ fair-haired boys, an admiration which was warmly reciprocated by the two dictators. On the other hand, Costa Rica seems to have always been in the Army’s bad books. At the present juncture, I do not think we can afford to show particular friendship for hard-boiled dictatorships, even though they have cooperated in the war effort. Quite apart from the fact that their administrations, and notably that of Trujillo, are anything but democratic, we do not wish to give the appearance of violating our non-intervention policy by favoring the existing regimes.

The friendship between Trujillo and our military men (notably those of the Marine Corps) existed even before Trujillo seized power in the Dominican Republic. Not only has this friendship (as illustrated by Brett’s two visits mentioned in the attached despatch) given a distorted impression of our policy to the public but also there have been occasions when advice given by our military men to the dictators has run directly contrary to our governmental policies. The same comments might be made only to a lesser degree of Guatemala. While the friendship and respect of the dictators for our military men can at times be used to our national advantage, I consider it intolerable that they should intrude in the political field, frequently at cross purposes to our established policies, without so much as consulting our missions first.

With regard to Ambassador Briggs’ points, starting on page 3, I offer the following views:

1 (Visits of officers to be approved by missions).

I emphatically agree.

2 (Acceptance of decorations by officers).

I agree.

3 (Discussions of pending business without approval of mission).

I emphatically agree.

4 (Public statements regarding political conditions in other republics).

I most strongly agree.

5 (Restrictions on political, economic and other extraneous reporting by Military Attaché).

I entirely agree with this in theory. As a practical matter, we recently signed an agreement with the War Department.²¹ I would suggest that we would be in a stronger position if we waited at least until the end of the war in Europe before again broaching this subject.

With regard to Mr. Briggs’ views in connection with the proposed staff conversations, please see attached telegram.²² I am afraid that Ambassador Briggs does not fully understand what we are driving at. Unless you see objection, I will show him the so-called Leahy letter²³ when he returns to Washington. I trust that that will satisfy him that we are on the right track.

If it meets with your approval, I should like to bring this up at the Staff Conference on Saturday, with a view to your presenting recommendations to the Secretary. I cannot overemphasize my belief that we must insist that proper instructions be issued to the military in the other republics and adjacent areas; and that we must carry this matter to the highest levels, if necessary, to achieve our ends.²⁴

17. Despatch 291, supra.
18. Foreign Economic Administration.
19. Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs.
20. Jorge Ubico, President of Guatemala.
21. No record of such an agreement has been found in Department of State files or in War Department files.
22. Neither attached nor identified. For Ambassador Briggs’ views on the staff conversations, see his despatch 589, December 20, 1944, p. 131, and the Department’s reply of January 8, 1945, p. 133.
23. Not identified.
24. The conflict of jurisdiction between the War Department and the Department of State in connection with staff conversations was of such a character as to be referred to the President. For correspondence on this problem, see pp. 105 ff.