835.00/2–1346: Telegram
The Chargé in Argentina (Cabot) to the Secretary of State
[Received February 13—5:08 p.m.]
465. In proclamation address last night Perón returned to charges against Braden of direct intervention in Argentine political Affairs, …
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
“The stay of Mr. Braden in our country was characterized then by his interference in our Affairs, by his giving form, encouragement and directive to the amorphous political organization which opposed us by his implacable and systematic attacks on the prestige of the June 4 revolution, its men and of myself in particular. And, finally, by the offer of his friendship to all of the enemies of the June 4 movement without giving any consideration to their political affiliation and ideology.
“In the name of Mr. Braden, when he was Ambassador to our country, some fully authorized person said that I would never be [Page 211] President of Argentina and that here in our country no government could exist which is opposed to the policies of the United States.
“Now I ask: Why does Mr. Braden want in Argentina a partisan and obsequious government? Is it because he is trying to repeat in our country the schemes he failed in Cuba where it is public knowledge that he wanted to bring about the ruin of the sugar industry and where he went so far as to threaten the free press which denounced him? If through a fatal design of destiny the regressive forces of the opposition organized, supported and directed by Spruille Braden should triumph, the situation of the Argentine workers will be a terrible reality of misery, of suffering and ignominy, the same as the ex-Ambassador unsuccessfully attempted to impose on the people of Cuba.
“Consequently, let those who vote on the twenty-fourth for the Oligarchic-Communist alliance know that they are simply voting for Mr. Braden. The question of the hour is this: Braden or Perón.
“Paraphrasing the immortal phrase of Roque Saenz Peña61—let the people know how to vote!”
- Former President of Argentina, noted for promoting electoral reform.↩