354. Memorandum From Robert W. Zimmermann, Director of the Office of East Coast Affairs, ARA/ECA, and the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs (Ryan) to the Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs (Shlaudeman)1

SUBJECT

  • Congressman Koch—Bureau Contacts

Per your request, I attach the letter sent by Hew Ryan to Congressman Koch regarding the latter’s proposed amendment to terminate all U.S. security assistance to Uruguay because of poor performance in the field of human rights. I also attach the talking points prepared for Bill Luers’ meeting with Koch to discuss human rights in Uruguay.

In a bureau meeting in mid-May it was agreed that Bill Luers would request a meeting with Congressman Koch to discuss with him the human rights situation in Uruguay, to make it clear that the Department did not confirm the extent of Amnesty International’s allegations concerning Uruguay, and to explain why we would oppose an amendment to terminate US security assistance to Uruguay. This meeting was scheduled for May 26 but was cancelled.

In a subsequent bureau meeting it was agreed that a letter making the same points would be sent to Koch. The letter from Hew was then prepared, cleared and ready for mailing. In the interim, Bill Luers’ meeting with Koch was rescheduled for June 10 and it was thought [Page 946] that Bill might deliver the letter in person. Subsequently, however, it was decided to mail it instead.

We understand that you have instructed “H” to make the Department’s views concerning the Koch amendment known on the Hill and indicated that we should try to retain full or partial U.S. security assistance to Uruguay if at all possible.

Attachment

Letter From the Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs (Ryan) to Rep. Edward I. Koch 2

Washington, June 11, 1976

Dear Mr. Koch:

I am sorry that you have sponsored an amendment to the Foreign Assistance Appropriation Act to cut off all security assistance to Uruguay. I particularly regret that in support of your amendment you have stated that “terrorism by the Uruguayan Government against its own people is a well established fact, documented by Amnesty International and confirmed by the State Department” and that you have cited a Department witness as having “confirmed Amnesty International’s assertion that Uruguay is at least the equal of Chile in terms of torture.” While we share Amnesty International’s concern about human rights in Uruguay we do not share their conclusions about the human rights situation there.

It is in our national interest to maintain good relations with Uruguay, in part because of the influence that Uruguay—in spite of its small size—exerts in hemispheric and world affairs. Uruguay has been consistently friendly toward the United States and plays a moderating and constructive role in the Organization of American States and the United Nations. Last year, when most of Latin America was attacking our Trade Act, Uruguay’s reaction was moderate and realistic. In the UN General Assembly Uruguay sided with the United States on such important issues as the anti-Zionism resolution and Korea.

The human rights situation in Uruguay leaves much to be desired. There have undoubtedly been cases of serious violations of human rights and the police and judicial procedures are not such as to provide [Page 947] guarantees against recurrences. However, the situation is clearly better than it was when the struggle against the Tupamaro terrorists was at its height two or three years ago. Furthermore, the friendly relations between our two governments has permitted us to discuss this problem in a frank and friendly manner. We have been assured that such violations as may occur are contrary to the Uruguayan Government’s policy. We believe that our private diplomatic representations have had a positive effect in strengthening the Uruguayan Government’s resolve to improve the human rights situation in that country.

It is inaccurate to describe the Uruguayan Government as a military dictatorship. In fact, power is shared by the civilian government, with which we conduct our formal relations, and the military, with whom we deal primarily through US military contacts, which are facilitated by our modest security assistance program. In view of the complexity of the political situation in Uruguay and the open channels of communication to the Uruguayan Government which our traditional friendly relations have given us, the Department does not believe that a legislated denial of assistance to Uruguay would serve the cause of human rights in that country or serve the interests of the United States in international affairs.

If you would like to discuss further the human rights situation or the political situation in Uruguay, either formally or informally, the Department would be happy to make officers with the appropriate background available to you.

Sincerely,

Hewson A. Ryan Acting Assistant Secretary for Inter-American Affairs
  1. Summary: Zimmermann and Ryan outlined the Department’s contacts with Koch over the course of May and June.

    Source: National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy File, P840001–0322. No classification marking. The talking points prepared for Luers were not attached, but a set of relevant talking points is in the National Archives, RG 59, HA Country Files 1977, Lot 80D177, Human Rights—Uruguay—1976.

  2. Source: National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy File, P840001–0323. No classification marking. The text of the letter was sent to Montevideo in telegram 148535, which stated that the letter was signed and sent to Koch on June 11. (National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy File, D760233–0661)