Latin America

ON THE WORLD TODAY

THE Inter-American Conference on Problems of War and Peace, which ended in Mexico City on March 8, went off surprisingly well. Here are the main achievements: —

1. The Conference strengthened the whole mechanism of collaboration between the American republics.

2. It made a constructive beginning toward threshing out the post-war economic problems of the Western Hemisphere.

3. It improved the prospects of a concerted stand by the American governments at the San Francisco Congress of the United Nations. This in turn points to a considerable degree of regional autonomy within the world peace organization.

4. It greatly strengthened the political and military facilities of the other American republics for dealing with possible aggressions of Argentina or, indeed, of any other American government which is tempted to go on the loose.

These are large gains, particularly in view of the rifts over the Argentine situation and the discontent of many of the republics in 1944 with the way in which their individual problems were being handled under the stress of the war.

At Mexico City many a dangerous trend was reversed. The foreign ministers saw that their countries needed more unity than prevailed at Rio, and also swifter facilities for acting together, especially if they were to be protected from the excessive influence of the great world powers in the coming international peace organization.

The key resolution came, in fact, from the United States delegation. The proposal, adopted by the Conference with only minor changes, provided for the mandatory holding of general Pan-American conferences every four years, and for annual meetings of the foreign ministers of the republics, with even more frequent emergency consultations when fifteen or more republics request it.

A Pan American League of Nations

In everything but name, indeed, this resolution sets up, under the auspices of the Pan American Union, the machinery for a regional League of Nations. The new league has a broader base of operations than the Union has had. The United States abandons its titular chairmanship of the Governing Board of the Union, held by the Secretary of State in Washington for more than half a century. The new resolution requires that the office be rotated among the Board members appointed by the American nations, with re-elections strictly banned.

Although the headquarters of the Union are to remain in Washington, American governments no longer will be required to be represented on the Governing Board of the Union by their ambassadors to the United States — who have sometimes been accused of being unduly under the influence of our State Department. In other words, the United States voluntarily abandoned an often embarrassing official pre-eminence.

From the United States delegation, too, at Mexico City came the key economic resolution of the Conference— a document christened “The Economic Charter of the Americas.” The Charter, less specific than the resolution on Pan-American reorganization, provides for help in the industrialization of the Latin American countries, for the elimination of trade barriers, for free access by the American peoples to the economic resources of the world, and for living conditions for labor according to the standards laid down by the International Labor Office; but it does so in very general terms. Many of the Latin American delegations, in fact, were uneasy about certain inferences which they drew from the Charter. They felt that its provisions would stand in the way of adequate tariff protection for their infant or prospective industries. Hence, as the Conference closed, the Charter was regarded more as a statement of good intentions than of concrete policies.

Argentina at arm’s length

The dilemma of the Argentine was attacked fairly directly in a resolution “regretting” the conditions requiring the republic’s absence from the Conference. It also stipulated that Argentina must declare war on the Axis, abolish Axis activities in the republic, sign the United Nations Declaration, and agree to all decisions made at Mexico City, before she can be readmitted to full standing in inter-American society.

But, in a more fundamental way, the Argentine case was both regarded and treated as symptomatic of the grave dangers which might threaten the peace of the Hemisphere, and the security of individual nations, from any country which refused to live up to the rules of international conduct concurred in by the organization of the American republics. This led to the most spectacular resolution of the Conference, the Act of Chapultepec.

The Act of Chapultepec is the product of several varying resolutions introduced by Uruguay, Colombia, and Brazil, together with two vital amendments proposed by the United States. It provides that when an aggression occurs, or is threatened, from within or without the Hemisphere, against the territories or the independence of an American nation, the other American republics shall consult and take jointly whatever diplomatic, economic, or military steps may be necessary to repel or prevent the aggression.

Two amendments from the United States delegation provide that for the rest of the war all necessary measures to prevent aggressions within the Hemisphere will be taken under the wartime powers of the governments; but after peace, treaties will be negotiated converting the engagements of the Act of Chapultepec into formal diplomatic obligations. It was also provided that the procedures required by the Chapultepec document shall be consistent with the principles emerging from the Congress of San Francisco.

This agreement serves notice on the Farrell-Perón government that any attempt to extend Argentine boundaries through imperialist war in South America, or even any effort by Argentina to subvert the independence of her neighbor countries by converting them into satellite states, will immediately encounter the united opposition of the other American nations; and that, if opposition is not enough, they will use their full military power. Argentina, in effect, has been put under an international peace bond.

As a functioning regional unit in the world peace system, the American powers, in another resolution, made several direct recommendations to the San Francisco Congress. They asked for a strengthening of the powers of the United Nations Assembly and of the International Court of Justice suggested in the Dumbarton Oaks plan. They also requested revisions in the Dumbarton Oaks proposals to give permanent representation to the Latin American states in the Security Council, and an agreement at San Francisco that disputes involving American countries exclusively should be settled “in accordance with interAmerican methods and procedures.”

Where muscle was lacking

On certain other points, however, some of the virtuous decisions of the Mexico City meeting suffer — as has happened before at inter-American conferences — from a lack of enforcement muscle.

There is a resolution, for instance, providing for the free exchange of news and of information between the republics without interference from censorships. Theoretically, this is an excellent device, aimed at dictatorships, since dictators thrive on suppressions of news and information. But nothing in the resolution prevents a dictator from insisting that news or information which comes from his country is free.

Similarly, a resolution was adopted for dealing with foreign fifth-column agitations against the peace and normal functioning of the American governments — especially fifth columns with Axis antecedents. But, partly as a result of United States pressure, nothing specific was done to identify the agents of the Spanish Falangist government with current or future fifthcolumn menaces — even though the Spanish Falange is recognized today as practically the official heir of many of the troublemaking enterprises of the Axis. Neither are there any provisions in the resolution to prevent an enterprising dictator from jailing political opponents as dangerous agents of foreign fifth columns.

In spite of these shortcomings, the positive achievements of the Mexico City meeting broke the alltime records of inter-American conferences. The full effectiveness of the Act of Chapultepec, the Economic Charter, and the Reorganization Resolution cannot be fully evaluated until they have been tested. But if the new institutions and procedures pass the tests even halfway, the American peoples during the coming decades will live and work in a much closer union.