3. Memorandum From Secretary of State Rogers to President Nixon1
SUBJECT
- OAS General Assembly
We faced several major challenges at the just concluded OAS General Assembly, and came out much better than expected. This Assembly was more realistic and productive than other recent OAS meetings and opens the possibility of a more constructive relationship. I hope to build on the Assembly’s results during my forthcoming trip to Latin America.
The Special Study Commission
The first challenge was to reduce the element of confrontation, which marked the recent meeting of IA–ECOSOC in Bogota and the UN Security Council in Panama. Certainly your message to the Assembly and your remarks at the White House reception helped a great deal. I also sought in my speech to convey our willingness to cooperate wholeheartedly in moving from confrontation to convergence, on global as well as hemispheric concerns.
Divisive issues and frustrations were never very far below the surface, but were kept manageable. Our delegation played a low key but active role. The Latins hoped that your second administration would give priority attention to hemispheric affairs and they took a responsible, practical approach to the issues. Peru, Ecuador, and even Chile and Panama rather downplayed bilateral disputes with us, particularly after the initial speech-making.
This generally constructive attitude helped shape the resolution to form the Special Commission to Study the Inter-American System. This Commission, to be composed of representatives of each member state, is to make recommendations to the governments by November 30. Its broad mandate covers the entire inter-American relationship in an effort to make it relevant to changing conditions. We considered the study, while perhaps overly ambitious, a realistic step and are prepared to participate actively.
[Page 6]“Plurality of Ideologies”, the Rio Treaty and Cuba
The “Declaration of Principles Governing Relations Among the American States” almost derailed the conference. The original Colombian draft recognized “ideological pluralism” but balanced it with a strong re-affirmation of non-intervention. Chile linked this resolution overtly to the Cuba situation. As amended by Chile, the resolution was unpalatable to the U.S. and unacceptable to Brazil and others. It had majority support, and we risked a losing vote on a matter directly linked to Cuba.
Despite strong opposition by Chile and others, we succeeded in referring the matter to a working group where we brought about changes which made the resolution acceptable. These included substituting for “ideological pluralism” the phrase “plurality of ideologies” and specifying that the resolution was “subject to the norms and obligations of the Charter, and the Special Treaties mentioned in it” (meaning the Rio Treaty under which the sanctions against Cuba were taken). This was passed by consensus. The press in Latin America has viewed it as a success for Brazil and the U.S.
Other Significant Developments
The productive atmosphere of the conference kept bilateral disputes (a major component of confrontation) in the background. Two resolutions, aimed at the U.S. (on stock pile disposals and multi-national corporations) were in final form relatively mild. We abstained on them.
The large Latin countries, particularly Mexico, Brazil and Argentina, were often as much targets as was the U.S. in the proceedings of the conference—a new experience for these Latin countries.
The Latins showed that, while they welcome an end to paternalism, they also want active U.S. address to their concerns. Certain indications that we might even consider pulling out of the OAS had a sobering effect, and there was recognition of the advantages for both sides in a hemispheric, rather than purely Latin, organization.
The smaller nations (who command many votes) made clear the OAS is a forum of considerable importance to their interests, giving them power vis-à-vis the larger Latin nations (as well as us).
Assembly President Calvani deserves great credit. He set a tone of thoughtful realism and his personality and parliamentary skill kept the conference from falling apart. He expressed considerable gratitude to us for our constructive but discreet role.
The Future
This new, more realistic spirit is quite fragile as the basic North-South, rich-poor split, with all its problems, still exists. Decisions were [Page 7] set aside pending the work of the Special Commission, which will not have an easy task. A flareup of any of our bilateral disputes could trigger renewed confrontation. The Cuba issue is only postponed. The conference did reaffirm the treaties in force and opposition to intervention, but also recognized the reality of diverse political, economic and social systems in the hemisphere.
My Trip to Latin America
The results of the Assembly afford us an opportunity to enhance our interests in the hemisphere. I plan to explore on my trip to Latin America how we can contribute to preserving and strengthening the more realistic and constructive spirit shown at the Assembly. I also expect the trip will provide an opportunity for a frank exchange of views with senior Latin American statesmen regarding the future of the inter-American system.
-
Summary: Rogers reported the outcome of the April 4–14 OAS General Assembly and noted that the meeting opened the door for more constructive relationships in Latin America.
Source: National Archives, RG 59, Central Files 1970–1973, OAS 3. Limited Official Use. Drafted by McNeil.
↩