Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, The American Republics, Volume IV

718.5614/7–754

John L. Ohmans of the Office of Middle American Affairs to the Ambassador in Costa Rica (Hill)

secret
official–informal

[ Washington ,] July 7, 1954.

Dear Mr. Ambassador: Developments over the Fourth of July weekend¹ regarding Costa Rica’s arms purchases have made it important that you have a clear idea of the Department’s line of thinking on this matter. You will recall from the earlier telegrams that the Department refrained from expediting the shipment of arms which Costa Rica purchased in order to be able to count on the support of the Costa Ricans at the then planned OAS consultative meeting on Guatemala.² You realize, of course, that the press release which the Costa Ricans made on this matter had unfortunate aspects, especially on Venezuela and Nicaragua. Now that the Costa Ricans have gone ahead and made this public announcement the United States is, as is too often the case, in the middle.

We here had to explain to both Venezuela and Nicaragua that we had finally consented to the delivery of the arms in an effort to secure the goals that they are also seeking (the departure of Betancourt; the vote in the meeting of consultation; an affirmative action against Arbenz in Guatemala). Now Figueres’ public statements make it look as if the shipment of arms to Costa Rica is action by the United States against Nicaragua and Venezuela.

In the event we are asked up here about the shipment we intend to say simply that this is a commercial transaction being directed through one phase of the Mutual Defense Assistance Act legislation and that Costa Rica is paying for the arms and is flying them to their country at their own expense.

There is some assurance from Ambassador Whelan in Managua and Ambassador Sevilla-Sacasa ³ up here that the Nicaraguans are unconcerned about the shipment, although naturally nettled about the political approach which Figueres is taking. Venezuela is a bit more difficult to understand. The plane flight over San Jose was extremely ill advised in our estimation and their representatives in Washington and in Caracas appear to take Figueres, Costa Rica, and Betancourt as their principal enemies of the moment.

With regard to Betancourt I can assure you that Venezuela is definitely out to make life miserable for him. Of course that is no secret, but in making life difficult for Betancourt they are also making life difficult for Figueres and for Costa Rica. This Henry Holland has already pointed out to Ambassador Facio, and for your background information, the Ambassador has agreed completely. He has told us that he will tell Foreign Minister Esquivel to get Betancourt to leave Costa Rica.

You have a far better knowledge of how effective Dr. Facio is with his Foreign Office. We are inclined to think that it isn’t much. However, it would be useful up here to know whether Facio has really made any approach to his Foreign Office or to President Figueres about the disturbing effects about having Betancourt in San Jose. This I know you can handle in your own casual and effective way.

Switching to another subject—referred to in the Department’s telegram No. 5 to San Jose⁴—we recognize that the Justice Department action re UFCO may look bad from your point of view. On the other hand, this action proves to the world that the position of the United States regarding Guatemala was not dictated by the United Fruit Company and had nothing to do with that issue. From that angle it was extremely well timed. However, we had nothing to do with the Department of Justice action either to hurry it or to delay action at this moment. The Department of Justice was acting on its own volition, and except for the effort last year, we in the Department of State made no attempt to intervene in any way. There is also attached⁵ for your information an editorial from today’s Washington Post on the United Fruit Company.

I also have your letter⁶ regarding Congressman Sikes’ visit.⁷ That trip is on once again and no doubt you will receive a revised schedule and probably be hearing from him. [Here follow further comments about Congressman Sikes.]

Sincerely yours,

John L. Ohmans

1. Apparent reference to the announcement by the Costa Rican Government on July 3 that a quantity of arms purchased in the United States would soon be flown to Costa Rica, and the subsequent reaction by opposition elements in Costa Rica and certain other Latin American governments. Pertinent documents are in files 718.00, 718.56, and 718.5614 for 1954.
2. For documentation relating to the OAS consultative meeting, see pp. 1149 ff.
3. Nicaraguan Ambassador to the United States.
4. The referenced telegram, dated July 5, 1954, containing information with respect to the Department of State’s position on the anti-trust suit filed by the Department of Justice against the United Fruit Company on July 2, 1954, at New Orleans, is not printed (811.054/7–554). Regarding the suit, see the memorandum of discussion at the NSC meeting, June 17, 1954, and Mr. Sparks’ memorandum, Dec. 3, 1954, pp. 224 and 262.
5. No attachment was found with the source text.
6. Not identified.
7. Robert L. F. Sikes (D.–Fla.), member of the House Appropriations Committee. Representative Sikes visited Costa Rica during the latter part of July 1954 to examine field estimates in connection with the construction of the Inter-American Highway; pertinent documents are in file 033.1100 SI for 1954.