clear that, in order to deal effectively with the threat, individual and collective action was necessary. To this end they prescribed in Resolution II 23 of that meeting three measures. First, they directed the Council of the OAS to maintain all necessary vigilance against acts of aggression, subversion, or other dangers to peace and security resulting from the continued intervention of Sino-Soviet powers in the hemisphere and to make recommendations to the governments for dealing with such acts. Second, to advise the Council in the maintenance of this vigilance, and the governments should they also desire, they authorized a Special Consultative Committee on Security. This Committee has been operating effectively for a year, assisting the Dominican Republic on one occasion and more recently the Council of the OAS.24 And third, the foreign ministers urged the member governments to take appropriate steps for their individual or collective selfdefense and to cooperate as necessary to strengthen their capacity to counteract the threats arising from the continued intervention of SinoSoviet powers. This recommendation clearly was intended to cover the furnishing of material and training assistance to member governments to strengthen their internal security capabilities in anticipation of resort to violence by subversive elements. This type of help we are providing to many Latin American countries today. It also covers the provision, upon request, of military forces to maintain surveillance against threatened aggression from abroad or otherwise to help a government threatened by a Communist takeover. Certainly the United States, and I am sure many other members of the inter-American system, are prepared to respond to any such call for help in preserving the peace and security of the hemisphere, as more than half of them did during the missile crisis last fall.25

Events since the Punta del Este meeting-the Cuban arms buildup, the missile crisis, Castro's open encouragement of violence-have served to give a new sense of urgency for action to counteract Communist subversion in the hemisphere. This is reflected in the attention being paid by governments to improving their security forces and keeping closer watch over Communist subversive elements as well as working out cooperative arrangements with other governments.

Since the meeting of OAS foreign ministers early last October 26 a committee of the Council of the OAS has been studying three important aspects of Communist subversion: use of Cuba as a base for training in subversive activities, the flow of Communist propaganda, and the transfer of funds for Communist subversive purposes. This report has now been virtually completed, and I expect it will be presented to the Council this week.27 Meanwhile, seven of the American governments the five Central American countries, Panama, and the United States-have moved ahead in a cooperative effort to bolster their defenses against Castro Communist subversion. Pursuant to a

23

Text in American Foreign Policy: Current Documents, 1962, pp. 322–323. 24 Ante, doc. III-19.

See American Foreign Policy: Current Documents, 1962, pp. 399 et seq.

26 See ibid., pp. 391-393.

"Ante, doc. III-29.

decision reached at the San José Meeting of Presidents last month,28 high-level representatives with primary responsibility in the security field from these seven countries met in Managua just a few days ago and agreed on a series of specific, practical steps to deal with Communist subversive activities.29 Central to the recommendations contained in the OAS study, as well as in the Managua decisions, is recognition that, while individual action is the first line of defense, cooperation among states is indispensable if individual measures are to achieve maximum effectiveness.

From this brief summary I think it is fair to conclude that the Communist threat in this hemisphere has given the American governments a new appreciation of their interdependence in political matters. It has brought a further recognition that the principle of nonintervention cannot be permitted to serve as a cloak behind which a member state or domestic subversive forces can threaten the peace and security of the continent or of individual countries by associating with and receiving aid from hostile extracontinental powers and serving as their beachhead. And it has been demonstrated that an effective means for fighting Communist intervention is to confront it with the collective action of the inter-American community.

The mutuality of interest in promoting representative democracy in this hemisphere is widely accepted as a general proposition not only for its own sake but in recognition of the fact that a strong democracy is the best defense against communism. However, appropriate collective action to promote its observance remains a sensitive issue for some governments, which fear it would undermine the principles of self-determination and nonintervention.

I believe such fears to be unfounded. If governments accept the fact that political problems are interlocked with economic problems and it is impossible to solve the latter without finding an adequate solution to the former, and that progress must be made on both fronts to defeat international communism, I think they should be as concerned about the practice of democracy as about the levels of public education, health, industrialization, and world trade. By the same token, if the inter-American community can discuss and make recommendations on how to improve economic and social conditions, it should be able under proper circumstances to consider the conditions of the democratic process of the hemisphere and the means for improving it. Efforts at this have been made at recent inter-American conferences, particularly the Fifth Meeting of Foreign Ministers in 1959.30 The decisions reached at these meetings, however, have not gone beyond general exhortations and provision for studies. They have not entered into an analysis of specific problems impeding fuller exercise of the democratic process and how the community might work together to resolve them.

In my opinion our interdependence makes it important that we in this hemisphere put to one side traditional attitudes which are obstacles

28 Ante, doc. III-6.

29 Ante, doc. III-9.

30 See American Foreign Policy: Current Documents, 1959, pp. 354–373.

to promoting representative democracy. We must recognize that failure of the democratic process in any one of the member states is a matter of concern to the entire community, that interruptions of democratic and constitutional governments in one country inevitably en courage antidemocratic elements elsewhere.

We need to give the principle of self-determination its true and vital meaning: freedom for the people periodically to decide through elections who their leaders should be and the policies they should follow. It has been said that we should not concern ourselves with changing the present regime in Cuba for that would violate the principle of selfdetermination. Until that regime is ready to seek the sanction of a free election, as Castro often promised to do in the early days, it has no claim for the protection of this great principle. And we should come to the realization that the active pursuit of ways for improving the quality of democracy in our respective countries does not constitute a violation of the principles of nonintervention.

While we wait for hemispheric opinion to crystallize around a more positive approach to the promotion of the exercise of representative democracy, we can derive satisfaction over some of the progress being made in this direction. I would mention these examples:

1. The increasingly categorical reaffirmation of respect for human rights and the exercise of representative democracy emanating from recent inter-American meetings not only in connection with the Cuban situation but with regard to problems arising in our own hemisphere. In this connection I would mention specifically the paragraph in the declaration, accompanying the Charter of Punta del Este establishing the Alliance for Progress which reads:

This Alliance is established on the basic principle that free men working through the institution of representative democracy can best satisfy man's aspirations, including those for work, home and land, health and schools. No system can guarantee true progress unless it affirms the dignity of the individual which is the foundation of our civilization."

2. The active and vigorous role being played by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in the promotion of respect for human rights.

3. The example set by the Dominican Republic in making use of services provided by the OAS in its difficult transition from dictatorship to democratic government.

4. The increasing use being made by governments in inviting outside observers selected from panels furnished by the OAS to witness elections.

5. The growing manifestations of concern by governments when forcible and unconstitutional seizures of power take place in one of our countries.

6. The fact that the American governments have agreed to consider the general problem of the effective exercise of representative democracy at the Eleventh Inter-American Conference when it is held.

"Text ibid., 1961, pp. 393–395.

While these achievements may seem small in the context of the objectives sought, they augur well for the future.

In closing I want to repeat what I said at the outset: that after working together in this hemisphere for close to three-quarters of a century, we have developed a large community of mutual interests which give the inter-American system a unique character and strength. It is now being tested on the one hand by the grave peril of Communist subversion and on the other by the challenge of bringing about a social and economic transformation of our hemisphere within a democratic framework. In meeting both tests we should not allow ourselves to be paralyzed into immobility by inapplicable dogmas of yesterday. As time and circumstance change we must reexamine basic concepts to make sure that they are interpreted and adapted meaningfully to changing requirements. We must each zealously guard our independence, but in doing so we should not let it stop us from enriching and strengthening it by acting fully and jointly upon the challenging 20th-century truth of our interdependence.

III-63

UNITED STATES RECOGNITION OF THE NEW GOVERNMENT OF GUATEMALA: Statement Issued by the Department of State, April 17, 1963 32

The Department of State announced today [April 17] that the United States Government has extended recognition to the new government of Guatemala headed by Col. Enrique Peralta.33

This action has been taken by the Government of the United States after having ascertained that the new government in Guatemala is in full control of the country and has pledged itself to respect Guatemala's international obligations.

The recognition of the new government in Guatemala has been extended following consultation by the United States with other governments in this hemisphere.

3 Department of State press release No. 199 (text as printed in the Department of State Bulletin, May 6, 1963, p. 703).

* Colonel Peralta had overthrown the government of President Miguel Ydígoras by a military coup on Mar. 30, 1963.

III-64

"IT IS NOT COINCIDENCE THAT WHEREVER POLITICAL DEMOCRACY FLOURISHES IN THE MODERN WORLD THERE IS ALSO A STRONG, ACTIVE, RESPONSIBLE, FREE TRADE-UNION MOVEMENT": Message From the President (Kennedy) to the Inter-American Conference of Ministers of Labor on the Alliance for Progress, May 7, 1963 34

I look to the Inter-American Conference of Ministers of Labor 35 as among the most important events of this second year of la Alianza para el Progreso. The essence of the Charter of Punta del Este 36 is that ours shall be an alliance of peoples as much as of governments; an alliance of men of good will within the borders of our separate countries, as well as across them.

The first goal established by the Declaration to the Peoples of America adopted at Punta del Este 37 is "To improve and strengthen democratic institutions through application of the principle of selfdetermination by the people." The fifth goal is "To assure fair wages and satisfactory working conditions to all our workers; to establish effective systems of labor-management relations and procedures for consultation and cooperation among government authorities, employers' associations, and trade unions in the interests of social and economic development." These goals are the immediate concern and in many ways the first responsibility of the ministries and departments of labor of all our nations. Much attention has been paid the technological revolution that has transformed the means of material production in the modern world and for the first time given to men the prospect of liberation from the ancient bonds of scarcity and want. But far less attention has been paid to the administrative revolution that has made it possible to transmit the benefits of technology evenly and equitably throughout an industrial society. I give you the thought that modern technology without the science of social welfare administration would be a barren and negative thing, eliminating jobs and widening the gap between wealth and poverty, rather than creating a shared abundance.

It is equally clear that technology cannot be forced on a people, save by a tyranny that destroys as much as it creates. The full cooperation of workers, through their trade unions, must be achieved. This is a rule of economic development, and equally a fundamental tenet of a free society. It is not coincidence that wherever political democracy flourishes in the modern world there is also a strong, active, responsible, free trade-union movement. The Americas will be no exception.

We have a larger vision and a better understanding than those who

34 White House press release dated May 7, 1963 (text as printed in the Department of State Bulletin, June 3, 1963, pp. 884-885).

The Ministers met at Bogotá, Colombia, May 5-11. Secretary of Labor W. Willard Wirtz was the Chairman of the United States delegation. See infra. Text in American Foreign Policy: Current Documents, 1961, pp. 395-409.

"Text ibid., pp. 393–395.

Doc. III-64