ARGENTINE POLI TICS
By A SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT
THE relations between Great Britain and Argentina for the past century and a quarter have been so close and friendly that the attitude adopted by that latter country since the war began has been a painful surprise to the British people. To appreciate the situation some knowledge of the very complicated political background of Argentina is necessary.
Argentine politics follow the two-party system, both parties being. democratic in their leanings. Owing, however, to the great power vested in the President of the Republic, as the representative of the people, Argentina has never evolved the kind of democracy we have in England. Though there is a parliamentary system with two Houses, the executive actually wields powers which would not be tolerated in this country. It was in 1916, only four years after khe passing for the first time of the law calling for the secret, universal and, interestingly enough, compulsory, male vote, that the Radicals took over the reins of government, remaining in power until 1930, when they were defeated by an opposition coup d'etat considerably aided by dissension within the Radical ranks. A year later elections were held, and the Conservatives, supported by the dissenting group of the Radical Party, the Anti-Personalists, were returned to form a Coalition Government called the Concordancia, which held power until the military revolt took place last week.
The elections which brought the Conservative Party into power were, as is almost common practice in Latin America, arranged in such a manner as to favour one political group. For some forty years prior to this event there had been continuous agitation for political reform, and though the Radicals were in office as a duly elected party for fourteen years—from 1916 to 1930—the coup d'etat which overthrew them proved that the country realised that Radicalism had failed. This failure was due to a number of reasons, the two most outstanding being without doubt a lack of efficient leadership, and dissension amongst the rank and file of the party.
Apart from one outbreak by the Radicals in 1933, which was successfully suppressed by the Government, the Conservative Party has remained in undisputed power since the formation of the Con- cordancia in 1931, but this has only been made possible by further
electoral manipulation. Many may think that a Government elected in such a manner would be too authoritarian in character to enable it to satisfy a democratically-minded people ; nevertheless, a strong undercurrent of democracy has been set up during the last decade by the substantial influence of both the Press and public opinion upon those in power. This influence has resulted in a variety of attitude amongst Ministers of State, with emphasis upon questions of social service, and has provided some compensation for the absence of a Radical Government, which was most certainly the form of rule desired by the majority of the people. In the 1937 elections, Dr. Ortiz, an Anti-Personalist Radical, was elected Presi- dent, with Senor Castillo, a staunch Conservative, as Vice- President, an example of the Concordancia working par excellence. These men were the leaders of the Government when the war broke out, but in 1940 Castillo became first of all acting-President and later President owing to the ill-health and then the death of Ortiz.
The main backing of the Conservative Party comes from the land-
owners and cattle-breeders, the clergy, some of Falangist an others of anti-Communist leanings, the army and various authori tartan groups. Its doitestic policy is maintenance of power at costs—ev-O by the manipulation of elections—knd the preservatio of law and order. Truly enough, experience of Radical Governme had not been happy, and the Conservatives felt that the stron nationalist note they were prepared to sound was in the best interests of Argentina herself, both economically and internationally. The main trouble was that, owing to the absence of any co-ordinat Radical leadership, there was a tendency towards a breakdown of morale, with consequent disillusion and lack of effective action. In
December, 1941, the Government declared a " State of Siege," the more obvious result of which was that an outstandingly free Press and radio system, which had acted as .a safety-valve for public opinion, became. muzzled overnight, and all criticism of the executive power in terms of either domestic or foreign policies was prevented.
The foreign policy of the Argentine Government which most concerns us is that followed since September 3rd, 1939. It has been termed " Prudent Neutrality," but its prudence may be questioned by some, while the sinking of Argentine ships by German submarines showed that a neutral attitude was only a relative protection. The over-ruling power of the executive was demonstrated when it refused to act upon the Chamber of Deputies' recommendation of a rupture with the Axis in September last year. As a result of this rigid neutrality various forces have come into play, to the detriment of Argentina herself. Quite apart from the lack of material assistance, Argentina has suffered through the indirect action of the United States on the one hand and the advancement of the smaller members of the United Nations in the western hemisphere on the other, and an immediate consequence has been the loss by Argentina of the moral leadership of South America. It should be recognised, how- ever, that neutrality has long been eine of the main principles of Argentine foreign policy. During the last war a Radical Government maintained this attitude in the face of strong Conservative opposi- tion ; today the position of the parties is, to all intents and purposes, reversed. It must be acknowledged, too, that the Government has been genuine in its belief that neutrality was in the best interest of the Argentine.
It would be useless to pretend that the attitude of isolation has been satisfactory to Great Britain or her allies, while it cannot be anything but an embarrassment to the United States and the other nineteen American Republics, as it leaves 'a notable gap in the otherwise solid Pan-American front. Further, the presence of a German (and an Italian) Embassy in Buenos Aires is helpful to our enemies, not only as a source of information, but also as a bridge- head into South America and a centre for the direction of sub- versive activities throughout the whole continent. Moreover, this state of neutrality has prevented effective action being taken against the so-called Nazi Fifth Column, about whose existence there is no question.
The recent military revolt leading to the resignation of President Castillo has brought Argentina vividly into the foreground. It is too early to make useful comment ; but there is no doubt -that it was the foreign policy of the late Government, and the displeasure it caused among the United Nations, which brought about its over- throw. The army saw those Republics which were solidly uphold- ing the Pan-American front obtaining considerable material aid. The people, though in the vast majority heartily wishing for the victory of the United Nations, yet generally believing in the wisdom of their own neutrality, were beginning to wonder exactly where their Government's attitude was leading them.
Too speedy a settlement after the upheavals of the past week must not be expected, while a note of warning against too optimistic a view is needed in view of the disturbing fact that the new Argentine Cabinet, as to far announced, consists mainly of men un- tried in the political field and without experience of government Any immediate rupture with our enemies should not be expected, but neither must the Argentine .Government's protestations of neutrality be taken too seriously, the action of other South American Republics having demonstrated that a break in diplomatic relations is not incompatible with the preservation of neutrality.
Previous page
