334. Letter From the Ambassador in Mexico (Hill) to the Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs (Rubottom)1

Dear Dick: As is generally recognized, there has always been present in Mexican political thinking and actions a certain historical residue of ill-will toward the United States. Since the new Administration of President López Mateos took office in December, 1958, we have observed for the most part an outward friendliness and spirit of cooperation which, on the surface at least, reached its peak immediately following the visit of President Eisenhower to Acapulco in February, 1959.

Mindful of the latent feelings of the Mexican body politic and its reluctance either by words or actions to be labeled as too pro-U.S., we have endeavored as the new Administration matured in office and began to face problems of long standing, to determine if the surface signs were truly reflective of a definite change of attitude, or whether the old cautions and suspicions would again manifest themselves either openly in a less friendly attitude, or covertly through its actions against U.S. interests without prior advice, consultation, or opportunity for discussion.

While our analysis is far from complete and our evidence not conclusive, I should like to mention a few observations and a few events which have transpired which might in the future prove to have been the forerunner of a developing trend toward a less friendly, less cooperative Mexico:

(1)
President López Mateos has not proven to be as friendly toward the United States and U.S. officials as his predecessor, Adolfo Ruiz Cortines. Insofar as the Mexican Cabinet is concerned, however, I have observed for the most part an open and apparently genuine friendliness. In the case of the new President himself, of course, it may well be that he is proceeding with the utmost caution and is still unsure of himself.
(2)
The influence of former President Lázaro Cárdenas, known to be pro-Soviet and anti-U.S., who was particularly impressed by the Communist China commune systems following his world tour early this year, which included the Soviet Union and the United States. It was reported to me by a knowledgeable Mexican that Cárdenas had a five-hour conversation with President López Mateos the night prior to Cárdenas’ visit to Habana to participate in the July 26th celebrations. [Page 880] [1 sentence (2 lines of source text) not declassified] It is reliably reported by persons at the Cabinet level that the President, recognizing that Cárdenas still enjoys a considerable following in Mexico, adopted a “hands off” attitude neither approving nor directly interfering with the Habana visit. Cárdenas’ influence could be such as to make the President hesitate to follow a program which would arouse the opposition of Cárdenas and his followers, particularly where such program might be politically labeled as too protective of U.S. interests and too pro-U.S.
(3)
The cool reception afforded General Lemuel Shepherd, U.S.M.C., Chairman of the Inter-American Defense Board (high-level Mexican Defense Department officials failed to participate). While the Mexican official attitude toward the Inter-American Defense Board has been known for a long time, with Mexican participation in the deliberations of such Board practically nil, this is the first outward manifestation of Mexican official coolness toward a well-known U.S. military personage.
(4)
There is considerable speculation among informed Mexicans and members of the Diplomatic Corps as to the reasons why President López Mateos has been reluctant to set a firm date for his visit to the President of the United States.2 During Dr. Eisenhower’s visit President López Mateos informed him he was prepared to visit Washington in October, 1959. President López Mateos has not fixed a definite date for his arrival in Washington as of this writing, but the Foreign Office has recommended to the President the date of October 9th. The Foreign Office also states he may visit Canada although this is not sure at present. It is interesting to note that Foreign Minister Tello has remarked to me that President López Mateos must bring back to Mexico some evidence of accomplishment as a result of his U.S. visit; that otherwise his prestige in Mexico may suffer. While the Embassy feels that it is a good thing for him to visit Canada, his decision in this regard may well be influenced by a desire to make his U.S. visit more plausible to the Mexican people. By including Canada in his itinerary he may be able to minimize somewhat the importance of his U.S. visit. Mrs. López Mateos has never been included in any of the plans insofar as we know. During Dr. Eisenhower’s visit here she emphatically stated in the presence of President López Mateos that she was going to accompany him to the United States, but the President made no comment whatsoever to indicate his approval. The newspaper Excelsior several days ago came out with an editorial recommending against President López Mateos’ visit to the U.S. at this time in view of its proximity to the visit of Premier Khrushchev. The article commented [Page 881] that the U.S. press would logically highlight the Soviet leader’s activities, statements, etc. We have no information at present to indicate that this represents the official views of the Mexican Government.
(5)
The declining by President López Mateos of a luncheon invitation honoring Dr. Milton Eisenhower who arrived in Mexico on August 12, 1959. The reason given (and one which has appeared in the Mexican press recently as the reason for his declining of other invitations) is that the President had to prepare his annual report on the State of the Union. This did not keep him from accepting, however, a luncheon invitation of Ambassador Carrillo Flores after the arrival of Dr. Eisenhower.3
(6)
The avowed purpose of the present Administration to carry forward an extensive land reform program which, according to an Agrarian Department source involves the acquisition by the Government of roughly one million hectares of land which will be turned over to ejidos, colonizers and small farmers. In this regard the expropriation of properties belonging to American citizens appears to be taking place. For example, the Government is making efforts to expropriate cattle ranch properties in the State of Chihuahua belonging to American citizens: Mr. and Mrs. James H. Cherry, Mr. Calvin King, and Mr. Paul Williams. In implementing these activities the Agrarian Department appears to be ignoring the legal rights of the U.S. citizens involved.4
(7)
Repeated anti-U.S. lectures (by professors), speeches and activities by faculty and students at the National University and other schools in Mexico. These are believed to have increased considerably in recent months. A number of U.S. students have come to me recently saying they were quitting the National University to go back home because the lectures have been anti-U.S. They did not feel that they were given opportunity to exchange ideas with the professors as it was a “one-way street.” Nabor Carrillo Flores, the brother of Ambassador Antonio Carrillo Flores, is the present Rector at the University.5
(8)

The displeasure President López Mateos has expressed over:

(a)
The appointment of General Maxwell Taylor as Chairman of the Board of Mexican Power and Light Company. This displeasure on the part of President López Mateos apparently grows out of General Taylor’s identification as a professional soldier, well known member of the U.S. Military, and particularly his wide international connections which would make it difficult for the Mexican Government further to harass the Mexican Power and Light Company. This concern was made known to me by Minister Tello and by Ambassador Carrillo [Page 882] Flores. The latter asked me point blank if General Taylor had close connections with President Eisenhower. Ambassador Carrillo Flores said that President López Mateos wanted him to report on whether or not General Taylor had this type of connection.
(b)
The contract Mr. Ed Pauley has in petroleum exploration and discovery, and from which Mr. Pauley could be expected to obtain a large return from Mexican production.

Ing. Pascual Gutierrez Roldan, Head of Petroleos Mexicanos, in his talk with Dr. Eisenhower covered what he termed two “problems”: (1) the restrictive policies of the U.S. regarding importation by the U.S. of residual oil, commenting that the U.S. had lifted restrictions insofar as Canada is concerned but had not lifted these restrictions for Mexico; (2) the advisability of rewriting the contracts of certain companies operating in Mexico. Ing. Gutierrez Roldan made it clear he was specifically referring to the case of Mr. Pauley and said he wanted to buy out Mr. Pauley for the sum of Pesos 60,000,000 (roughly $4,800,000 U.S. Cy.). (It was pointed out to Mr. Gutierrez Roldan that Mr. Pauley allegedly had already invested a sum of $30,000,000 U.S. Cy. and was investing at the rate of $1,500,000 a month in Mexico; that Pauley’s contract has been in existence for some ten or more years.) According to a prominent Mexican, Gutierrez Roldan is going to try to “break” Pauley. Gutierrez Roldan has said, “The only thing we want from the U.S. is your money. We have the technicians to develop our own country.”

(9)
The unfortunate experience of Eugene R. Black, President, International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, will be recalled. During his presence in Mexico at the time of the ECOSOC meetings, he had asked the opportunity to confer with President Lopez Mateos for a period of approximately one hour and a half and was prepared to offer Mexico a $250,000,000 loan over a five-year period. As you know, he was given only seventeen minutes with the President and his experience was such as to cause him to remark to Ambassador Carrillo Flores that he was shocked at the lack of preparation for the position possessed by President López Mateos. He said that the new President was not knowledgeable and doubted if he had the capacity to learn. This was related to me by Ambassador Carrillo Flores.6
(10)
A skilled observer said to me the other day that in the thirteen years he has been in Mexico, he has never seen nationalism at such a height as presently is the case in Mexico under the Administration of López Mateos. He was also of the opinion that López Mateos “does not have his hand firmly on the wheel.” (There have been reports of dissension within the Cabinet and of possible changes which would be announced at the time of the President’s State of the [Page 883] Union message on September 1. The Administration announced, however, through the Private Secretary to the President, that no Cabinet changes would be announced. I was present when the President delivered his message and it contained no Cabinet changes.
(11)
[less than 1 line of source text not declassified] Soviet Ambassador to Mexico seems to be moving with greater facility and effectiveness than ever before despite the initial actions of the López Mateos Administration in its first few months in office in declaring persona non grata two members of the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City. For example, the Soviet Ambassador has been successful in bringing to Mexico from Canada the Russian Pyatnitskiy Choir of 105 members. He also has arranged for the November and December 1959 appearance in Mexico City of a part of the Soviet exhibition which President Eisenhower and high U.S. Government officials visited in New York City.

We have discussed the foregoing with Dr. Milton Eisenhower during his visit here and after his first few days with us he remarked to me that he, too, felt that some change had occurred. It was his conclusion that it may be better at the present time in dealing with important problems to adopt the Mexican attitude and tactic of “going slow” and of saying to the Mexicans in effect, “We want time to analyze and study the problem.” He felt that this would be the report he would submit to his brother, the President, pointing out that we have extended the hand of friendship over the years during his brother’s tenure as President of the United States and that previously we have had a certain amount of appreciation by the Mexicans under the administration of Ruiz Cortines. During Dr. Eisenhower’s conversation with President López Mateos, it was necessary for him always to initiate the conversation on anything substantive. When Dr. Eisenhower brought up a substantive subject or problem for discussion, President López Mateos was quick to state that there were no problems or subjects for discussion as these were “all in channels.”

We briefed Dr. Eisenhower during the first staff meeting following his arrival in Mexico City. On the eve of his departure at the time he said goodbye to the staff he again addressed us on the possible change in the Mexican attitude. He summed up his own impressions in these words:

“The last time I spoke with you soon after my arrival in Mexico City, we talked about the fact that perhaps the upward climb (in our friendly relations with Mexico) had either reached a plateau or deteriorated slightly and that perhaps this was due to the fact that a new administration had come in and the new leaders were cautious. At first I thought I sensed this very strongly, but as time went on my own conclusion was that the worst which has happened is a temporary plateau which has to be passed over and I am certain that the upward climb will go on again.”

[Page 884]

The trend noted above may in the future be much more susceptible to careful analysis and conclusion, particularly if any further change is observed in the outward manifestations of friendship and cooperation on the part of Mexican officials in their contacts with their U.S. counterparts. We in the Embassy believe there is nothing unusual in this trend although it is naturally disappointing. We believe also that the economic facts of life and Mexico’s economic tie-in with the U.S. are sufficiently well known to responsible Mexicans and will serve as a bulwark against any open manifestation of hostility toward the U.S. I am continually received with genuine warmth and friendliness by the Mexicans wherever I travel.

We attach great importance to the forthcoming visit of President López Mateos to the United States as an event which will do much to place back in proper focus the present picture. In our own day-to-day relationships, we shall continue to follow a consistent policy of patience and good will, and we shall of course welcome from you any observations or suggestions you may have on the basis of the foregoing comments.7

With kindest personal regards,

Sincerely yours,

Bob
  1. Source: Department of State, Rubottom Files: Lot 61 D 279, Mexico, July–December 1959. Secret; Eyes Only; Official-Informal.
  2. A handwritten marginal notation at this point on the source text reads as follows: “Possibly the Khrushchev visit loomed up, as well as uncertainties re degree of formality.”
  3. A handwritten notation at this point on the source text reads as follows: “Not the same thing.”
  4. The following handwritten notation appears at this point on the source text: “True, but not at all exceptional.”
  5. The following handwritten notation appears at this point on the source text: “He should ask Don Antonio about this without indicating source.”
  6. The following handwritten notation appears on the source text at this point: “Carrillo Flores actually said this? Seems funny.”
  7. A reply from Rubottom was prepared but not sent. The undated draft letter bears the following notation: “No reply to Hill letter. File it.” (Department of State, Rubottom Files: Lot 61 D 279, Mexico, July–December 1959)