VE–36. Memorandum from the Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs (Rubottom) to the Deputy Director for Operations of the International Cooperation Administration (Fitzgerald)1
SUBJECT
- Mutual Security Program for Venezuela.
In your memorandum of August 26, 1959 on this same subject,2 you noted this desire of ICA to terminate its present activities in Venezuela.
[Typeset Page 1285]Without commenting specifically on the projects which comprise the ICA program in that country at this time, the Bureau of Inter-American Affairs considers that to terminate the program in Venezuela would be contrary to the best interest of the United States.
Although, as your memorandum pointed out, the per capita income of Venezuela is in excess of that of most other countries in Latin America, this figure is misleading when viewed either as a measure of the economic and social development of the country or as a measure of its ability to carry forward in economic development without outside technical assistance. In spite of the country’s high per capita income, the majorities of Venezuelan people, and especially those in rural areas, have a standard of living which is roughly equivalent to that prevailing in the rest of Latin America. The economic development of the country as a whole, excluding two or perhaps three urban centers, is in a rudimentary stage. Moreover, standards in health, education, agriculture, public administration and other technical fields vital to economic progress are still low.
Venezuela, like most of Latin America, has a one-product economy, and is dependent on this commodity, petroleum, far from 60 to 70 percent of the Government’s annual revenue. Although marketing conditions for petroleum have been reasonably favorable in recent years, so that the country has been outwardly prosperous, relatively little progress has been made either in diversifying the basic economic pattern or in moving ahead in the technical fields enumerated above. We believe that this situation is due in large part to the developmental emphasis which the dictatorial regime, which until recently governed Venezuela, placed on the largest urban areas, with little attention to basic nationwide problems. The present government, which was installed subsequent to the overthrow of the dictatorship by revolution, is a constitutional regime brought into power through free elections. It has wide popular support and is pledged to a broad program of general economic improvement and diversification.
The foregoing indicates that Venezuela’s need for outside technical assistance is likely to be greater in the immediate future then has been the case in the past. The opportunity for the United States to participate in a sound and meaningful program is correspondingly greater. Although [Facsimile Page 2] the Venezuela Government has not progressed to the stage of consulting this Government with respect to possible technical cooperation in its economic development effort, the fact that there have been several approaches in the field of health and sanitation indicate that other and more significant approaches in broader fields may well be forthcoming. Consequently, this does not seem to be the appropriate time to adopt a policy which would make it more difficult to take advantage of the opportunity when it is offered.
[Typeset Page 1286]On the political side, one of our major problems in Venezuela is the prevalent belief there that the United States is partial to dictatorships in Latin America and, more specifically, in Venezuela. Inability or unwillingness on our part to respond affirmatively to requests of the present constitutional government for technical assistance would tend to strengthen this belief. Moreover, it is in the best interests of the United States to support the present Venezuelan Government insofar as possible and to maintain and improve our relations with it, as a bulwark against a recurrence of military dictatorship on the one hand or the establishment of a far left-wing regime on the other. So far, most of the matters which the Venezuelan Government has taken up with us have been such as to preclude U.S. acceptance of Venezuelan proposals, and therefore the U.S. attitude toward Venezuelan requests has had to be largely negative since the inauguration of the present Venezuelan Government. We are consequently most anxious to find ways in which the Venezuelan Government can be accommodated and the negative impression which the Venezuelan Government has can be dispelled. I therefore believe that we should keep the door open for technical cooperation with Venezuela and should examine each request from the Government of Venezuela on its merits, in the hope that we may be able to accede to some of them and in so doing take advantage of opportunities for increased U.S. influence in Venezuelan economic development and planning. I agree with your view that the GOV can probably afford to pay for much of the cost of these programs and I regard this fact as a positive aspect of the possible future expansion of technical cooperation activities there. However, in the interest of maintaining and extending U.S. influence in Venezuelan economic development, I believe that cases may well arise which would justify the expenditure of U.S. funds. No action should be taken at this time which would tend to preclude freedom of action in such cases.
Recognizing, however, that the rise of the program in Venezuela at this time may not justify the administrative and supervisory overload presently devoted thereto, I concur in the suggestion contained in your last paragraph that for the present, at least, the program be limited to responding affirmatively to Venezuelan requests for short-term services of experienced U.S. technicians.