83. Instruction From the Department of State to
All Embassies in the American Republics1
CA–534
Washington, July 16,
1959.
SUBJECT
Enclosed for your background information are copies of three memoranda of
conversation concerning the Caribbean situation. The Department feels that
the line taken by Mr. Rubottom in
these conversations might serve as valuable background for ARA Chiefs of Mission in connection with any
similar conversations.
Enclosure 1
Memorandum of a Conversation, Department
of State, Washington, July 8, 19592
SUBJECT
- OAS Action in Caribbean
Situation
PARTICIPANTS
- Henrique Rodrigues Valle,
Brazilian Chargé d’Affaires, a.i. Maury Gurgel Valente, Counselor of
Embassy, Brazilian Embassy
- R. R. Rubottom, Jr.,
Assistant Secretary of State for inter-American Affairs John J. Ingersoll, Acting Officer
in Charge of Brazilian Affairs
After a brief call on the Secretary, at 11:00 a.m. today, to deliver a
message about Brazil’s financial problems,3 Minister Valle accompanied Mr. Rubottom to the latter’s office for
further discussion of the Caribbean situation.
Valle opened the conversation by
stating that his Government is greatly concerned over recent
developments in the Caribbean, considers them of the most serious import
for the future of Inter-American relations, and wishes to cooperate
closely with the United States in seeking a peaceful and constructive
settlement. He said that he had just returned from Rio where he had
discussed the Caribbean situation with President Kubitschek and was impressed with the
President’s
[Page 297]
serious worry over
it. The Brazilian Government agrees with the U.S., he said, that a
Council of Foreign Ministers should be called to deal with this problem,
not in specific terms of Cuba and the Dominican Republic but in the
framework of the whole Caribbean area with all the trouble spots and the
underlying causes for the trouble. A working group should be set up at
once to draw up the agenda and set the time and place for such a
meeting.
Mr. Rubottom said that he was
very pleased to hear this directly from Minister Valle, speaking for the Brazilian
Government. He said that the Brazilian Representative on the COAS, Mr. Haddock-Lobo, has been working
very closely with Ambassador Dreier in the Council but that Valle’s statements were most welcome,
particularly in the light of his very recent visit to Rio. Mr. Rubottom said that we have a good deal
of information and definite proof of Cuban official participation in the
launching of three invasion attempts against the Dominican Republic and
of Cuban implication in other disturbances in the area. He said that
Haiti is in a terrible position. It is in dire straits economically and
we have an aid program there. It is right in the middle between Cuba and
the Dominican Republic and there is good reason to fear that an attempt
might be made to strike at the Dominican Republic by invading through
Haiti.
Mr. Rubottom said that we do not
like dictators, that we have always supported the principle of
representative government and that our whole 180 years of independent
history affords ample evidence of this. However, we cannot allow
individual groups of “liberators” to pass judgment on the governments of
particular countries and to undertake from bases in other countries to
launch attacks aiming to oust violently the governments they dislike.
This amounts to anarchy. It is a shame and a mistake for anyone to imply
that our abhorrence of this sort of behavior constitutes support for or
protection of the despotic or dictatorial governments being
attacked.
Minister Valle said that he had
been working closely with Haddock-Lobo and that they have been telling
the other Latin American representatives who oppose OAS efforts to restrain the growing attacks
on the Dominican Republic that they don’t realize what they are doing.
He said that to allow outside groups of individuals or individual
governments to intervene and try to oust a Latin American country’s
government which they didn’t like would create a precedent for placing
in the hands of the overwhelmingly powerful United States Government the
justification for passing judgment on each Latin American Government and
for intervening to oust any government it considers undesirable.
Mr. Rubottom agreed, pointing out
that if U.S. public, press and Congressional opinion should become
disillusioned with the ability of the OAS and the established procedures of the inter-American
system
[Page 298]
which has been built up
with such painstaking effort, there is no telling where we might end.
Given our security interests in the Hemisphere, a considerable fillip
would be given the proponents in this country of unilateral action on
our part to intervene in the affairs of Latin American countries to
insure the existence of friendly, acceptable governments.
Minister Valle pointed out that we
must be very careful about matters of procedure within the COAS. Mr. Valente asked whether the U.S.
attitude was based on the Caracas Declaration.4 Mr.
Rubottom said that for the
present it is not; rather we are basing our position for OAS action on Articles 39 and 40 of the
Charter.
Enclosure 2
Memorandum of a Conversation, Department
of State, Washington, July 9, 19595
SUBJECT
- The Caribbean Situation: Venezuela’s Position in the COAS
PARTICIPANTS
- Dr. Marcos Falcón-Briceño,
Venezuelan Ambassador
- R. R. Rubottom, Jr.,
Assistant Secretary for Inter-American Affairs
- John C. Dreier, U.S.
Ambassador to the OAS
- John J. Ingersoll, Office
of Venezuelan Affairs
Ambassador Falcón-Briceño
expounded at length his Government’s position to the effect that
whatever action may be taken by the OAS
with respect to the turbulent situation in the Caribbean area it must
somehow be completely dissociated from the Dominican Republic’s
resolution calling for action to protect it from imminent invasion
attempts being prepared in Cuba and Venezuela.6 He
repeatedly urged that this might be done in one of two ways: (1) by
voting down the Dominican resolution or (2) by delaying action, allowing
the Dominican request to die a natural death, and then having a group of
relatively disinterested countries (like Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay,
etc.) introduce a resolution calling for a meeting of Foreign Ministers
to consider the threatening situation in the entire Caribbean area,
without any specific reference to Cuba and the Dominican Republic.
[Page 299]
Mr. Rubottom said that he fully
understands the deep emotional feelings of President Betancourt, Ambassador Falcón-Briceño and the Venezuelan
people with respect to Trujillo. But, he said, he feels that they are allowing
these to obscure a much more important and fundamental danger. He said
that he has considerable evidence, in fact unquestionable proof, of
Cuban complicity in attacks on Panama, Nicaragua, the Dominican
Republic, and now a new threat of attack on Nicaragua which might
materialize this very week. This borders on anarchy. Nobody in this
country, he said, likes Trujillo or his regime. But to allow this feeling toward
Trujillo to obstruct prompt
action to maintain the effectiveness of the OAS in preventing this sort of thing would be a sad and
serious mistake. Mr. Rubottom
said that we have incontrovertible evidence of communist involvement in
the various attempts made against several Caribbean countries. One
naturalized U.S. citizen participating as a leader in one of the attacks
on Nicaragua is closely related to Concepcion Palacios, a known
communist. Also, there have been a number of U.S. nationals (Puerto
Ricans) involved in the attempts against the Dominican Republic. We are
ashamed of these people and disavow them but that does not alter our
serious concern for the preservation of the effectiveness of the
inter-American system for the protection of all American countries from
attacks launched from other countries.
Falcón-Briceño said that this
situation poses serious problems for his Government and people. He
insisted that the passage of a whole week without any invasion has given
the lie to the Dominican request for urgent OAS action to forestall an “imminent” invasion. He argued
that since the urgency has thus been disproven it would be quite
possible to pigeon-hole the Dominican request and after a decent
interval of two or three weeks have some of the uninvolved countries
present a resolution calling for a Foreign Ministers’ meeting. He said
that Venezuela itself might be willing to present such a resolution in
those circumstances. Falcón-Briceño expressed his own confidence that if the
Dominicans should present a resolution calling for OAS action and a Foreign Ministers’ meeting
and it were put to a vote at Friday’s COAS meeting the resolution would be voted down.
Mr. Rubottom explained that we
consider the matter to be one of great urgency. One of the most
disturbing things is the terrible position of little Haiti, caught
between the two tigers (Cuba and the Dominican Republic). After a series
of Government changes and internal strife in the past 18 months the
freely elected government of Duvalier deserves a chance to straighten things out.
While the Duvalier Government may
not be a paragon of excellence it at least offers some promise of
stability. We have a grant-aid program, amounting to some $6 million per
year, in Haiti to help relieve the serious economic distress
[Page 300]
in this poorest of the Latin
American nations. To see Haiti caught in the line of fire, as a likely
route for a foreign-based invasion into the Dominican Republic is
abhorrent.
The meeting lasted a full hour with repeated reiteration and elaboration
of the opposite viewpoints described above. It ended, when Mr. Rubottom was obliged to leave for
another appointment, with no apparent resolution of the differences in
position. Falcón-Briceño said
that he would see Mr. Rubottom
in the evening (at the Argentine national holiday reception) and that
perhaps they could discuss the matter further.
Enclosure 3
Memorandum of a Conversation, Department
of State, Washington, July 13, 19597
SUBJECT
- Visit of Ambassador Dihigo
to Exchange Views on U.S.-Cuban Problems
PARTICIPANTS
- Ambassador Ernesto Dihigo,
Cuban Embassy
- Dr. Emilio Pando, Cuban Embassy
- ARA—R. R. Rubottom, Jr., Assistant Secretary
- CMA—R.
A. Stevenson, Cuban Desk
Ambassador Dihigo called at his
request to inform Mr. Rubottom
of his intention to return to Habana on July 14. He said that he expects
to return to Washington together with Mrs. Dihigo in five or six days. He also advised Mr.
Rubottom that Minister of
State Roa would return to Cuba
from New York City on Thursday, July 16. Mr. Rubottom thanked the Ambassador for
this information and told him that the Department would inform the
pertinent authorities in New York City of Minister Roa’s travel plans in
order that he may receive the proper courtesies upon his departure.
The Ambassador said that he had another matter which he would like to
discuss, namely, the Bridges-Johnston amendment to the Mutual Security
Act.8 He stressed that he wished to do this only in the spirit
of an informal exchange of views on matters of mutual interest; that he
had prepared a memorandum on the subject9 not a note or
[Page 301]
other formal communication which he desired to
leave with Mr. Rubottom. In his
view Cuba is not directly affected by the amendment, but it is an
action, nevertheless, which will be resented in Cuba, and, of more
importance, it will be considered as a threat to all of Latin America.
Although he understands the motivation of the members of the Senate who
supported this amendment, their desire to protect the interests of their
constituents, he considers this to be too narrow a focus in which to
view an action of this kind.
Mr. Rubottom thanked the
Ambassador for giving him the benefit of his views on this matter and
said that he wished, if the Ambassador’s time permitted, to take up
several topics with him. With regard to the amendment he pointed out
that the Executive Branch of the Government is not responsible for this
action; that the amendment has not yet passed; and that once passed
there is always the chance that it might be vetoed. However, with regard
to the last named possibility Mr. Rubottom noted that such action would incur the risk of
depriving many countries of the very real help which they would continue
to receive if the legislation is passed and made effective.
In Mr. Rubottom’s opinion,
however, the great significance to Cuba of this action by the Senate is
that the vote of 59 Senators in favor of the amendment signifies a real
loss of confidence in the Cuban revolution. These Senators were
concerned not so much by the effects of the Agrarian Reform Law10 on American private interests
but rather by the continued reports of Communist infiltration into many
areas of Cuban society. On January 1 Castro had an immense reservoir of good will and support
among the American people. Again when Castro came to the United States, in spite of criticisms
which he had made of this country, he received an enthusiastic
reception.11 In
the ensuing weeks, however, the frequently expressed antagonism of the
Government of Cuba toward the United States, the evidence of
revolutionary expeditions which have left Cuban shores, for example, the
foolish and ill-conceived invasion of Panama, the continued reports of
Communist activities in Cuba—all have contributed to a climate of
opinion in the United States regarding Cuba which has led to the
approval of an amendment which even six weeks ago would not have had the
favorable vote of most of these same 59 Senators.
Mr. Rubottom then referred to the
recent note which Ambassador Dihigo had sent the Department in which he stated that
the admission of Batista to the United States, should he enter U.S.
territory legally or illegally would be viewed with deep displeasure by
the Government
[Page 302]
of Cuba.12 He referred to an earlier
conversation with Ambassador Dihigo [June 12]13 in which he had mentioned certain broad
humanitarian principles which we all might wish to consider in a case
like Batista’s and remarked that
perhaps the Ambassador had misunderstood the intent of those words. Mr.
Rubottom then read aloud the
following paragraph from the note: (Page 2, second paragraph)
In the first place, with respect to inter-American relations, the
Embassy believes that the democratic nations of this hemisphere
would not view favorably, nor even with indifference, an offer
by the United States of asylum to one who completely destroyed
democracy in Cuba for no other reason than his personal ambition
for power and money, and who repeatedly refused to allow a
peaceful solution of the situation, maintaining himself in power
through brutal methods and by violating the most fundamental
rights of man. Such asylum and protection afforded a person with
such a record would doubtless be viewed as a rather
unsympathetic attitude toward the democratic movement taking
place in Latin America today, which has already eliminated most
of the dictatorships.
Referring to the above statement, Mr. Rubottom expressed in positive terms that the U.S.
considers itself among the democratic nations, and, moreover, a nation
which has favored and supported the development of true democracy
throughout the hemisphere. However, we believe that each country should
decide for itself what type of government it wants to have. In this
respect we are certainly in agreement with Latin American tradition
which has always strongly condemned the intervention of one country into
the affairs of another. In fact, Latin America has taken the lead in
demanding this principle as a key plank in the Charter of the OAS. If Latin America would now wish to do
more to encourage functioning democracy in this hemisphere, the United
States is prepared to listen sympathetically to such proposals, and
undoubtedly more could be done, but we will insist that each people
should be allowed to choose its own form of government without outside
interference. With regard to the question of political asylum, this
again has been a right and a practice advocated chiefly by the countries
of Latin America and not by the United States. We are not aware that
there is a unanimity of opinion throughout the hemisphere that Batista should not be admitted to the
United States. However, the question of Batista’s possible admittance to the U.S. is an internal
matter dependent upon the applicable U.S. laws. Until now no decision
has been reached one way or another. With reference to the Cuban
attitude in the case of Batista,
one is struck by the recent
[Page 303]
example of President Villeda
Morales in Honduras who recognized the political asylum
granted to his sworn mortal enemy, Colonel Velasquez, and then issued
him a safe conduct to leave the country.
Ambassador Dihigo hastened to
reassure Mr. Rubottom that he
well recognizes that the U.S. has always been a champion of democracy in
the hemisphere and that no implication to the contrary was intended in
his note. He stated that he feels much of the change in public opinion
in the U.S. with regard to Cuba is the result of the activities of
Batista supporters in the
U.S. who have succeeded in influencing the press and in finding special
ways to influence members of Congress. Press stories have often been
very misleading and harmful. Mr. Rubottom acknowledged that some of the critical articles
may result from the efforts of Batista agents, but that many others have appeared in
reputable papers which have heretofore been friendly to the Revolution.
He remarked that even so, in Cuba the Communist paper, Hoy, and some of the non-Communist press as well have printed
distorted and unfair stories about the United States which have not been
helpful.
Mr. Rubottom assured the
Ambassador that the Department is making a thorough investigation of the
Hidalgo affair in Miami, bearing in mind the possible applicability of
the Consular Convention between our countries,14 and that we hope to have a factual report soon
in order that we may reply to the Ambassador’s note on the subject.15 He also mentioned
that we are still in the process of reviewing the various Cuban requests
for military equipment which were the subject of a list left by the
Ambassador on the occasion of his last previous visit on June 29.
The Ambassador thanked Mr. Rubottom for his frank expression of his views and said
that he would convey them to his Government. In his opinion such
discussions offer the best prospect of arriving eventually to a solution
of our differences.
