Teodoro Moscoso, the Puerto Rican figure who was appointed: by Kennedy to head the "Alliance for Progress," was not the Least among the ‘complainers, .
“Secondly ~~ and more importantly -- the "Alliance for Progresa" program. did not alter by an iota the real policy pursued by Washing-~ ton in Latin America, This has always been to throw America's weight, including dollars and guns, on the side of reaction, In the case of liberal or radical movements, which appear from time to time, Washington invariably tries to slow them down, erode them and eventually bring them to nothing by favoring the right wing and seeking to strengthen it at the expense of the left,
The policy can be traced in action in an often spectacular. way since the emergenco of the United States on the world scene as a — major imperialist power; that is, since the Spanish-American War.# In accordance with the style of the times, naked gun-boat diplomacy was one of the features of Washington's Latin-American policy until Franklin D, Roosevelt was elected, He introduced a tactical modifi-~ cation, Instead of the "Big Stick" of Theodore Roosevelt, he offered
¥The policy actually goes back to the slavocracy and oarlier r, but the Spanish-American War marked a definitive turning point.
=~Jie
the "Good Neighbor" policy, The real policy, however, remained unchanged, . The most dramatic evidence of this was Fulgencio Batista, one of the products of Roosevelt's neighborliness,
If Kennedy's "Alliance for Progress" echoed Rooseveltts "Good Neighbor" policy, Johnson's new, as yet unnamed policy, echoes Theodore Roosevelt's "Big Stick. " The proof of the continuity of Washington's basic Latin-American policy could hardly be more glar~ ing.
Under the “Alliance for Progress" a series of governments were toppled in military coups d!état and replaced by juntas or civilian puppets. These include Argentina, Peru, Ecuador, the Dominican Republic (overthrow of Bosch) and Guatemala (where even the reaction= ary Ydfgoras was deposed),
In not one single Latin-American country enjoying the benefits of the "Alliance for Progress" has an oppesite process occurred, Washington's policy in overy country has been to strengthen the oligarchy and the military caste that serves the interests of this reactionary. social formation,
Finally in Brazil, by far the most important Latin-American country from the viewpoint of size, population, economic strength and strategic location, the real policy of U.S. imperialism was brazenly displayed. The "Alliance for Progress" proved to be a less substantial scrap of paper than Johnson's cable of congratulations to the plotters of the coun terrevolutionary coup d! état.
Even Teodoro Moscoso found this ombarrassing, and he drew the inescapable conclusion.
Will Johnson continue to talk about an “Alliance for Progress"? It is quite likely that he will, His shabby demagogy, however, will represent little more than part of the sound track, offering * Texas corn for the presidential election campaign.