Minneapolis spokesman., 1963-01-10
alliance For Progress:
Aulance FOR Fr0gre8s":
US. Has Used
Force 40 Times
In Lotin America
BY Everett LuOma

AccorulnB 70 rep. Clarence
Brown, Republican, of Ohio, United
States forces have been used some
forty times to preserve American
corporate properties within Latin
America. Castro Is symbolic Of the
failure Of this policy in the modern
world, The Alliance for Progress,
with its safeguards for American
corporations, is substituted a. an
alternative. Its intention is to give
the working classes Of Latin
America the impression that the
industrial giants are actually look
ing after their welfare to prevent
the taking over Of the corperate
properties by revOlutonaries.
Immediately prior to the Span
ish American War, the Washing
ton Post editorialized: "A new
consciousness seems to have come
about us the consciousness Of
strength - and with II . new ap-
petite, the yearning to. show our
strength The taste Of Empire
is In the mouth Of the people a1
the taste Of blood in the jungle"
The United States corporate in.
terests were apparently successful
Fin satisfying this taste Of EN-
pire." Carleton Beals. in his The
Crime Of Cuba" reports that In
1888, 90% Of the cultivated land Of
Cuba was owned or controlled BY
Americans. Capital from the Unit,
ed States also owned nearly al
the banks, railroads, streetcal
lines, electric plants, telephone
systems, and other public utilities
These utilities in other LAtir
American countries are also owned
by United States corporations
serving as a constant reminder o.
United States strength.
These holdings make the threat
Of Castro to the United States
very real indeed. AS Herbert Mat
thews reported in the New Yorl
Times april 26, 1850: IF WI
did not have Latin America on oul
side, our situation would be des
perate. To be denied the product
and markets Of Latin Americt
would reduce the us. to being {
second-rate nation and cause a de
vastating reduction in our stan
dard of living"
Land in Latin America Is IL
huge landed estates. One-third o.
Paraguay is owned by Is familie!
and United States military aiC
keeps the dictatorship in power
In Brazil, 2% Of the population
owns e0S Of the land. One estatl
in northern Brazil Is equal In sizI
to the state of Iowa. Despite tn,
poverty and malnutrition In Brazil
only 10% Of the farm and pastur'
land. IN cultivated. Tha .,thaory d
that there Is no reason to cuItivatl
more land because the povertieC
mass has no money to buy the pro
duce with anyway.
A much publicized facet Of tn,
Alliance for Progress Is that II
order to qualify for aid, the re
ceiving nation must institute some
basic reforms. It is absurd to as
sumo that the landlords will give
up their land without full compen.
sation. This means that the al.
ready indebted governments must
buy their own country. Because
Peru proposed too much reform tc
satisfy the us. equipped military
Of Peru, the military took over the
government. The United States
however found little difficulty In
reaching an agreement with the
ruling military junta.
Because the major holdings OF
the United States corporations
within Latin America are in pub.
lie utilities and natural resources
the Alliance for Progress stipulates
that no United States money ear
be used to pay for nationalized
properties. The Alliance for Pro-
gress further stipulates that if any
property is nationalized, full COM
pensation must be given. This
compensation then probably would
end up in foreign banks causing
an even greater drain on the econ.
omies of these countries. Clearly
the Alliance for Progress is not as
radical an approach to Latin
American problems as it is made
out to be.
s.