43. Letter From the Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs (Rubottom) to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (Radford)1
Dear Admiral Radford: I am in receipt of a letter dated October 26, 1956 from Colonel L.H. Watson, Jr., Executive to the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff,2 informing me that you are considering a trip to South America about December 26, 19563 and that your primary interest will be in visiting countries with which the United States has military programs. Colonel Watson requests my comments regarding countries which should be visited and items which would warrant your attention.
Although the time available for your visit is relatively limited, I recommend that you visit all the South American countries with which we have military assistance programs (Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru and Uruguay) and, in addition, Venezuela and Argentina.
With regard to the countries with which we have grant military assistance programs, I believe that Brazil would warrant your closest attention while Ecuador and Uruguay would be of least interest in connection with your review of our support of their military forces. Nonetheless, I should recommend you visit both Ecuador and Uruguay, even if briefly, since failure to do so would unquestionably be resented by those governments and could not be easily justified if you visit countries where we have no grant military assistance programs.
Ecuador presents a special case. As you are aware, there is a keen jealousy and still some smoldering bitterness between Ecuador and Peru, originating in their border dispute, and each is keenly conscious of the military preparedness or any military build-up of the other. A visit to Peru, without a visit to Ecuador, would therefore be politically inadvisable.
The value of Venezuela to the United States as a source of strategic materials needs no mention, and the staff talks and agreement between military authorities of both countries early this year is evidence of the importance which the United States attaches to the [Page 273] maintenance of the internal security and stability of the country. Even though the United States has no military assistance agreement with Venezuela, there are in the country relatively large missions from all three Armed Services. I feel that you undoubtedly should, and would wish to, include Venezuela in this visit.
Inclusion of Venezuela in your visit raises the question of inclusion of Argentina as well. If your visit were limited to those countries with which the United States has bilateral military agreements, then consideration might be given to the omission of Argentina from your itinerary. However, if Venezuela is included, I believe that Argentina should not be omitted. Although Argentina feels that for internal political reasons the moment is not opportune for the signing of a bilateral military assistance agreement with us, she has recently signed an Air Force Mission Agreement and has requested the assistance of the United States in meeting her military needs. I feel that it is to the interest of the United States to encourage what appears to be an increasing orientation of the Argentine military—and the present government is a military government—toward the United States. I believe that your visit at this time would contribute toward this end.
Inclusion of Argentina and Venezuela also raises the question of the type of publicity to give to your visit. I believe that such publicity should state that the purpose of your visit is to give you an opportunity to become better acquainted with the area, to meet your counterparts there, and to discuss United States military programs with our diplomatic and military representatives. I think that reference to the fact that your primary interest is in visiting those countries with which we have bilateral agreements should be avoided, insofar as possible.
I should like to make a few general observations on our relations with Latin America and our programs which may be useful to you. After your proposed schedule of visits is more firm we would be pleased to supplement these remarks with a more detailed briefing if you so desire.
Our relations with all of the countries which I have suggested you visit are good. Our relations with Argentina have improved materially over the last year and I believe we have probably never had a better opportunity to strengthen those relations. For her part, Argentina has been making a concerted effort during the last year to get back on the inter-American team.
With the exception of Venezuela, all of the countries are experiencing difficult economic times, Peru probably less than the others. We have had economic discussions with all of them except Uruguay and Venezuela with a view to assisting them in solving these problems and active efforts are continuing in this regard. One of the [Page 274] factors that has aggravated their economic situation is expenditures for military equipment which are generally in excess of their military requirements. To cite just a few examples, the Colombians recently ordered two destroyers in Sweden at a total cost of approximately $25 million. Colombia has also purchased from Canada six F–86 jets at a cost in excess of $3 million and is considering the purchase of an additional nineteen jets. At the same time, Colombia has commercial dollar arrearages on the order of $300 million, has sought a loan from the Export-Import Bank of $25 million for a steel mill, and has informed the United Nations that it cannot afford to pay any of the dollar costs of its participation in the United Nations Emergency Force for the Middle East.
Peru has apparently over-extended itself by purchasing a squadron of Hawker-Hunter jet fighters and a squadron of Canberra jet bombers in England after purchasing a dozen F–86s from us and ordering two submarines costing in excess of $16 million from the Electric Boat Company.
Ecuador, which can ill afford any such expenditures, has recently purchased two destroyers, a squadron of jet fighters and eight jet bombers from the United Kingdom and an undisclosed quantity of arms from Argentina—expenditures estimated to total more than $12 million. Yet Ecuador states it cannot pay for the transportation of our military mission personnel to and from Ecuador and has found it necessary to seek a stabilization loan in the United States to shore up its currency.
I believe that it would be helpful, in discussing military matters with Latin American military officials, to discourage such expenditures which are in excess of what the Joint Chiefs have indicated are Latin America’s requirements for military forces.
All of the countries concerned, with the possible exception of Peru, have expressed dissatisfaction with the general level of United States military assistance. You are probably aware of Colombia’s desire for increased grant assistance because this has been discussed by the Joint Chiefs twice during the last two years. Argentina is now seeking substantial military equipment, which it states it desires to buy, but in fact wants on a grant basis without signing a military assistance agreement. Discussions are now being held between the Argentine Embassy and the Department of Defense to determine Argentina’s military equipment needs, and the price and availability of this equipment. I should like also to call to your particular attention recent telegrams from our Embassy at Rio de Janeiro (telegrams No. 477 and 482 of November 12 and 13, respectively)4 [Page 275] which indicate the deterioration of our military relations with that country at a time when we are most in need of Brazil’s strong cooperation in furnishing essential military facilities to the United States. I believe we will have to give careful study to this problem and take prompt and remedial action to reverse the apparent unsatisfactory trend in our military relations with Brazil.
Sincerely yours,
- Source: Department of State, Central Files, 102.201/4–1657. Secret. The source text, a copy of the original, was found attached to circular airgram 8533, dated April 16, 1957. The airgram informed the Embassies in Latin America that Radford was planning a trip in late April and the first 3 weeks in May.↩
- Not found in Department of State files.↩
- Radford eventually made the trip the following spring. See Document 47.↩
- Neither printed. (Department of State, Central Files, 735.5621/11–1256 and 732.5622/11–1356, respectively)↩
- Printed from a copy which bears this typed signature.↩