[104-10170-10064.pdf — page 1]
# CONTINUATION OF DISPATCH2.  COLOMBIA.a. Bogota. The AMSPELL team arrived in Bogota on 12 February 1964 but were unable to make contact with the local ASPELL/AMBARB contact until the next day. They were unable to get adequate advance publicity and had trouble finding space for the exhibit. About 200 persons attended the exhibit, and AMSPELL conferences were attended by approximately 485 persons. HLBA-6911reported GISNEAKER-9's observations on the local reaction to the tour, which he judged to be indifferent. The AMSPELL team freely admitted to WAVE that the Bogota operation was something less than successful, but blamed the lack of advance preparations and the existence of an unfriendly press for their failure. It should also be noted that the AMSPELL team was not on the best of terms with some of the local Cubans, and this fact probably had a good deal to do with the poor showing.b. Medellin. The showing in Medellin was better than in Bogota. The press was lukewarm but the director of the Caracol radio station gave them considerable publicity, and they were able to hold the exhibit in a central spot in the city. About 400 persons visited the exhibit over a period of three days, and 850 persons attended conferences given by the team.c. Cali. The team received good advance press play in Cali, which was perhaps one reason for the fact that the local Communist party was also well prepared for their arrival. On the very first morning of the exhibit, a large crowd of Communists tried to enter the exhibit with the obvious intention of starting trouble. and when they were locked out began to throw rocks and "stinkbombs" into the exhibit hall. The incident provided considerable publicity for. AMSPELL, as reported in BOGO 4332. A total of 100 persons attended the exhibit. The AMSPELL team claimed that the Communists were very strong in Cali and that working there was like swimming upstream.3. ECUADOR.a. Quito. The team arrived in Quito on 25 March, after spending several days in an unsuccessful attempt to obtain visas for Peru. QUIT 5867 reported the AMSPELL team's personality clashes with the local AMBARBS and the consequent poor performance by the AMSPELL team, who complained of the absence of police protection, adequate facilities for the exhibit, etc., and departed just two days later on the 27th. One member remained in Bogota to hold conferences, attended by 325 persons. While not accepting the blame for this fiasco, the AMSPELL team generally corroborated the above story in their debriefing by WAVE. After such incidents as reported in QUIT 5867, we are reluctant to recommend any future tours.b. Guayaquil. The AMSPELL team considered Guayaquil their most successful operation, an opinion seconded by Guayaquil base who termed it a "resounding success." (See QUIT 5867 and HEGA 2900). The exhibit received front page coverage in "El Universo" and "El Telegrafo", and they were given a half hour on a major TV station. An estimated total of 1,200 persons visited the exhibit, and the team spoke before 40 members of a local group, Frente de Defensa Nacional.4. Santiago, Chile.The AMSPELL team arrived in Santiago on 5 March to coincide with the opening of the Latin American Youth Congress (LAYC). The Santiago operation was a complete loss because Chilean customs authorities would not release the exhibit during the congress and the AMSPELL team was unable to obtain space of any kind to hold conferences due to competition from the congress for space. (See SAGO 6577). The AMSPELL team had been counting on a contact in the Catholic University, Fernando SANHUESA, to facilitate their activities but SANHUESA told them that the LAYC was a failure from the Communist side and that the AMSPELL team could contribute more by remaining quiet than by actively propagandizing