In the summer of 1966 Allan Young wrote on ‘Paraguay and the Stroessner Régime (nlr 38). At the time, that régime seemed an isolated anomaly. In the euphoria generated by the launching of the Alliance for Progress, the Americans and their Venezuelan allies were willing to sacrifice the leader of one small country to appease world opinion and deflate the Cuban argument that America and the Latin American bourgeoisie ultimately depended upon the support of the military. The American government not only financed opposition parties, coercing them to unite into the Union nacional paraguaya (unp), but launched a virulent press campaign to call attention to the last of the caudillos. The New York Times plunged into the anti-Stroessner campaign with much enthusiasm. They claimed that Stroessner represented ‘the great, traditional evil of Right-wing military tyranny under the caudillos’. The Americans went so far as to foment the unsuccessful rebellions of 1961 and 1962.
But reading about Stroessner’s re-election today, one has the impression that all is forgiven. The same New York Times argues that Stroessner is bringing democracy to Latin America in portions that can be digested. Why this about-face?
First, in their struggle against the Latin American guerrilla movements, the Americans are now willing to take allies where they can find them.