343. Telegram From the Secretary of State to the Embassy in Brazil1
239. During courtesy call on Brazilian Ambassador yesterday he brought up atomic energy situation. This is further evidence his government’s preoccupation over effect in U.S. of August 31 resolution. His remarks generally in line statements to Holland when latter summoned him September 10 (Deptel 231 September 14)2 with several additional observations:
Amaral Peixoto mentioned recent talks with atomic energy interests in U.S. especially preparations for research reactor at Sao Paulo. He confirmed Brazil’s keen interest therein and expectation U.S. still disposed proceed with this project. I replied U.S. of course desired collaborate with Brazil in development atomic resources but pointed out such collaboration to be effective also requires atmosphere [Page 722] in Brazil conducive to success of our joint efforts. I said we could accordingly only view with concern irresponsible and unjustified attacks of last month which culminating in aforesaid resolution was forcing us to review general atomic situation.
Ambassador asked whether Embassy Rio has “heard from Foreign Office.” I referred to my conversation with FonMin September 6 (Embtel 266 September 63) and gathered from Pexioto his question referred to FonMin’s statement that “new negotiations” might be undertaken with U.S. rather than to preparation basic atomic legislation. I told him insofar Department informed Embassy has had no further discussion with FonMin this subject since September 6.
Ambassador made further remarks belittling importance of resolution and reiterating desire Kubitschek administration to utilize U.S. facilities, experience, et cetera in developing Brazilian nuclear resources. In that connection he said Congressman Archer4 phoned him from Rio September 13 reporting departure that night for Great Britain and France to discuss business matters, returning via Washington to consult with Ambassador. Archer according to Ambassador professed friendship for U.S. and desire to be helpful in present situation. Peixoto apparently sought to imply Archer has turned over new leaf. I remarked that if this true public indication is change of attitude would be of interest, having in mind Archer one of principal proponents of last month’s anti-U.S. campaign.
FYI foregoing and previous Brazilian efforts to give impression August bonfire of nationalism really feeble spark in wet leaves, now extinguished, I find unconvincing except as indicative of hope U.S. Government may overlook recent developments and proceed as if nothing has happened, without requiring action by Brazilian Government. Further comment in succeeding telegram.