The United States and the Uruguayan Cold War, 1963-1976
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ABSTRACT SUBVERTING DEMOCRACY, PRODUCING TERROR: THE UNITED STATES AND THE URUGUAYAN COLD WAR, 1963-1976 In the early 1960s, Uruguay was a beacon of democracy in the Americas. Ten years later, repression and torture were everyday occurrences and by 1973, a military dictatorship had taken power. The unexpected descent into dictatorship is the subject of this thesis. By analyzing US government documents, many of which have been recently declassified, I examine the role of the US government in funding, training, and supporting the Uruguayan repressive apparatus during these trying years. Matthew Ford May 2015 SUBVERTING DEMOCRACY, PRODUCING TERROR: THE UNITED STATES AND THE URUGUAYAN COLD WAR, 1963-1976 by Matthew Ford A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in History in the College of Social Sciences California State University, Fresno May 2015 APPROVED For the Department of History: We, the undersigned, certify that the thesis of the following student meets the required standards of scholarship, format, and style of the university and the student's graduate degree program for the awarding of the master's degree. Matthew Ford Thesis Author Maria Lopes (Chair) History William Skuban History Lori Clune History For the University Graduate Committee: Dean, Division of Graduate Studies AUTHORIZATION FOR REPRODUCTION OF MASTER’S THESIS X I grant permission for the reproduction of this thesis in part or in its entirety without further authorization from me, on the condition that the person or agency requesting reproduction absorbs the cost and provides proper acknowledgment of authorship. Permission to reproduce this thesis in part or in its entirety must be obtained from me. Signature of thesis author: ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First and foremost I would like to thank my fiancé, Jamie San Andrés, who has given unwavering support and motivation in my academic endeavors. Our lives are filled with daily conversations (and often debates) about Latin American politics, culture, and history. Her insight has always pushed me in fruitful intellectual directions and reigned me in when I got off track. Without her and the entire San Andrés family in the United States and Ecuador, I may not have made it through my first months of travel in South America, and this thesis may have never been written. Because of them, I am in constant contact with the politics and culture of the region I truly love, and for this, I am forever grateful. Huge thanks are also in order to my loving family. We have all made it through some truly tough times, which have always made the beautiful moments more beautiful. They have never failed to support me in more ways than I thought were possible and I am certain that without them, I would not be writing these words. Lastly, I would like to thank the faculty at Fresno State. In my undergraduate years in the sociology department, I was exposed to critical perspectives from which I now see the world. For this, I must especially thank Dr. Andrew Jones, Dr. Matthew Jendian, and Dr. Tim Kubal. Before I began the master’s program, Dr. Maria Aparecida Lopes began teaching me what it meant to be a Latin American historian. During this pivotal year in my life, I was not enrolled as a student, yet Dr. Lopes kindly met with me regularly to discuss book after book. She is v one of the few amazing people that put effort into things that are not required, and I will never forget this kind gesture that pushed me to pursue a graduate degree in history. Dr. William Skuban encouraged and supported me when I made the potentially dangerous decision to change research topics in the middle of my first year. His support, insight, and guidance made this thesis what it is. I would also like to thank Dr. Blain Roberts for her invaluable efforts at improving my writing. When we met to discuss my work, it was always covered in red ink and she kindly took the time to explain each and every marking. She will never know how much this has pushed me to become a better writer. Finally, without Alison Cowgill at the Henry Madden Library, I would have never been able to find the sources from which this thesis grew. I am forever grateful for her efforts to scour documents from some of the most inaccessible places. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................ 1 The Historical Landscape ................................................................. 4 CHAPTER 2: THE PICTURE OF DEMOCRACY ...................................... 12 The Office of Public Safety ............................................................. 16 CHAPTER 3: THE OPS FIGHTS THE URUGUAYAN COLD WAR ............ 22 Tupamaros .................................................................................... 28 CHAPTER 4: THE LAST CHANCE FOR DEMOCRACY AND THE PLUNGE INTO DICTATORSHIP ................................................... 43 Ending US Support ....................................................................... 47 CHAPTER 5: CONFRONTING THE LEGACY OF DICTATORSHIP ........... 54 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION On August 10, 1970, the body of Dan Mitrione was found in the backseat of a stolen Buick on Lucas Moreno Street in Montevideo, Uruguay.1 As a public safety officer for the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) working closely with the Uruguayan police, Mitrione was targeted and murdered by one of the most sophisticated guerrilla groups of Latin America, the Movemiento Liberación Nacional, Tupamaros. United States government officials condemned the murder as a “cold blooded crime against a defenseless human being,” while portraying Mitrione as a “servant of freedom” who was “devoted… to the cause of peaceful progress in an orderly world.”2 However, uncovering the context of this crime as well as Mitrione’s role as a representative of the Office of Public Safety reveals a more complex story. The Mitrione murder foreshadowed the intensification of the Uruguayan Cold War that transformed the country from one of the oldest and most stable democracies in the western hemisphere into a brutal dictatorship. In the early twentieth-century, foreign diplomats regularly referred to Uruguay as the “picture of democracy” due to its unique politics of co-participation and peaceful transitions of power.3 However, by 1976 the Uruguayan Parliament was closed and the nation was being 1 Ernest Lefever, “Murder in Montevideo: The AID/Mitrione Story,” Freedom at Issue, no. 21 (1973): 14. 2 Acción. August 12, 1970, quoted in Franco Solinas, State of Siege (New York: Ballantine Books, 1973), 192. 3 Martin Weinstein, Uruguay: Democracy at the Crossroads (Boulder: Westview Press, 1988), 16-35. 2 ruled by a military regime that held the most political prisoners, per capita, in the world, and was named by Amnesty International as a regular practitioner of torture and human rights abuse.4 Waves of Uruguayans fled from their homeland and exile communities formed all over the world. The transformation from democracy to dictatorship and the role of the United States government in shaping this era of Uruguayan history is the subject of this thesis. By examining US government documents, many of which have been recently declassified, this study traces the US involvement in Uruguay in the years of neoliberalism, insurgency, and dictatorship. I argue that the actions of the US government—predominately through the Office of Public Safety (OPS) of USAID—helped to subvert Uruguayan democracy and provided political, material, logistical, and financial support to a repressive apparatus that tortured and brutalized the Uruguayan population. United States support transformed the Uruguayan police force from an antiquated and underused institution into a significant political actor with modern equipment and capabilities. The rise of the leftist Tupamaro insurgency provided a justification for increased support for Uruguay’s repressive apparatus, which, in turn, created an escalation in violence. The brutality of the police was met with an increase in guerrilla violence, plunging Uruguay into a bloody internal war which gave way to dictatorship in 1973. 4 Human Rights in Uruguay and Paraguay: Hearings Before the Subcommittee on International Organizations of the Committee on International Relations, House of Representatives, 64th Cong., 2d sess., June 17, July 27 and 28th and August 4, 1976, 37; Ivan Morris, “Torture in Uruguay,” New York Times, March 18, 1976. 3 From 1973 to 1985, Uruguay was ruled by a military dictatorship not unlike is neighbors in Chile, Argentina, and Brazil. According to the famed Uruguayan writer, Eduardo Galeano, “every Uruguayan was a prisoner except for jailers and exiles—three million of us, though only a few thousand seemed to be.”5 The history of the Uruguayan dictatorship has not yet been written. By focusing on the era of active US involvement in supplying military and police assistance to Uruguayan from 1963 to 1976, this thesis serves as a contribution to a much larger historical analysis henceforth missing from the scholarship. With the return to democracy in 1985, Uruguay began a long struggle with its legacy of dictatorship that continues today.6 In contrast to Argentina, Chile, Guatemala, Nicaragua, and other Latin American nations who have made great strides in prosecuting those responsible for human rights violations, Uruguay has failed to follow suit. Very few of the members of the military regime and police responsible for the crimes committed