INTRODUCTION ‘The postwar conjuncture in Latin America: democracy, labor, and the Left Leslie Bethell and lan Roxborough ‘The years between the end of the Second World War and che beginning of the Cold War, that is to say, 1944-5 0 1947-8, constituted a critical conjuncture in the twentieth-century history of Europe (boch West and East), the Middle East, India, China, Southeast Asia, and Japan, In contrast, although important political changes occuered in several Latin American countries during chese years — the rise of Juan Domingo Perén in Argentina, the election of Juan José Arévalo in Guatemala, the end of the Estado Novo in Brazil, the seizure of power by Accién Democritica in Venezuela, the Civil War in Costa Rica, for example ~ this period has not by and large been regarded as constituting 2 significane watershed in the history of the region as a whole, not least because of Lacin America’s relative international isolation. It is the aim of this volume to establish that although its participation in the Second World War had been only marginal (in military cerms at least), and alchough ic was aot a focal point of conflict in the Cold War (in the early stages at least), the years 1944~ 8 nevertheless also represented an important conjuncture in the history of Latin America in the twentieth cencury. Each of the twenty Latin American republics has ies own history in the yeats immediately after the Second World War. Nevertheless, despice differences of political regime, different levels of economic and social development, differences in the strength and composition of both dom- inant groups and popular forces, and different relations with the Uniced States — the region's “hegemonic power" — there are striking similarities in the experience of the majoricy of ehe republics. “This inadction i bed in pet on Lee Bethel nd an Resborough, “Latin America beeen the Sccond World We and the Cold Wee: Some Refecon: onthe 1945-6 Conjncete,” Jura flat Amaia Sidi 290988), pp. 167-8, nd Lie Behl, "Pa the Second Word Wat {the Cok War, 1944-54" in Exurig Demurary: The Unita Sa an Lan Avr, ed. Abra F.Lowendul @akimote, 1991), pp. 41-70, wheeca moredetaed deusin of VS, ~Latin American rslaton can be fadFor most of Latin America the immediate postwar period can be divided into ewo phases. The fist, beginning in 1944, 1945, or 1946 (depending oon the country concerned), and often tantalizingly brief, was characterized by three discince but intecrelaced phenomena: democratization, a shife 0 the Left, and labor militancy. Throughout the continent dictatorships fell, popular forces were mobilized, and elections with a relatively high level of participation were held. For the firse time, a number of reformist, “progressive” political parties and movements came to power and suc. cessfully articulated the demands of che urban middle class and of che working class (though not yet those of the rural population) for political, social, and economic change. Even more notable perhaps were the gains, albeit more limiced, made ac this time by the orthodox Marxist Lefe, which for the most part meant the Latin American Communist parties. (Only Chile and to 2 lesser extent Argentina and Ecuador had Socialist parcies of any significance.) The period at the end of the Second World War also witnessed scrike waves, increased unionization, and a bid for ‘greater union independence in those countries where the labor movernent was closely controlled by the state. In 2 number of countries the incor- poration of organized labor into democratic politics occurred for the first In the second phase, beginning in some cases as carly as 1945, and ‘more generally in 1946 or 1947, and completed almost everywhere by 1948 (with the notable exception of Guatemala where che postwar “spring” lasted uncil 1954), organized labor was disciplined, brought under closer control by the state, and in many cases excluded feom politics; Communist parties almost everywhere suffered proscription and severe repression, reformist patties moved co the Right, and the democratic advance was for the most pare contained, and in some cases reversed. The popular forces, in particular the working class (but also in some cases the urban middle class), the Left, and democracy itself suffered a historic defeat in Latin America in che'period immediately after the Second World War. An opportunity, however limited, for significane political and social change was lost. ‘The 1944~8 conjuncture in Latin America — and its eventual outcome, which had far-reaching consequences for Latin America’s development in the second half of the ewentieth ceneury — can only be understood by examining the shifting balance of domestic political forces in each country. Bucic is also essential co explore the complex interaction between domestie and international politics as the Second World War came to an end, as 4 new political ~ dnd economic ~ internacional order was created in the aftermath of the war, and as, almose simuleaneously, the Cold War began. And here the role played in Latin American affairs, both direce and inditect, by the United States is particularly important. Postwar conyunciare in Latin Amertca 3 At the beginning of r94q ic could be argued that of the twenty Latin ‘American republics only Uruguay, Chile, and, less convincingly, Cosca Rica and Colombia, had some claim eo call themselves representative democracies: their governments were civilian and had been elected (how- ever limited the suffrage and however restricted the political parcicipacion); policical competition of some kind was permitced (however weak the party system); and the rule of law obtained and basic civil liberties ~ freedom of speech, association, assembly, and so forth — were at least formally honored (however precariously at times). Of these four countries, Uruguay alone had (since before che First World War, chough briefiy incecrupted in che 19305) an executive freely and fairly elected by universal suffrage. Argentina had been democratic for a decade and a half before 1930, but during the “infamous decade” of the 1930s, Argentine democracy was distinctly fawed and in any event was overthrown in June 1943 in a ‘nationalist military coup. Revolutionary Mexico was a special case: Pres- idenes were elected (Lézato Cérdenas in 1934, Manuel Avila Camacho in 1940) and were emphatically nor eligible for reelection, but elections, though competitive, were firmly controlled by ehe official ruling revo. lucionary party, the Partido Revolucionario Mexicano (PRM). Mexican democracy was largely rhetorical, and che revolution itself remained the principal source of political legitimacy. Elsewhere in Latin Americ sowly oligarchical and often repressive regimes and milicary ot milicary- backed dicrarorships, some benevolent, some brutal, and most person- alistic, predominated. During the final twelve months of the Second World Wat and the frst ewelve months after the war, democracy was consolidated in those coun- tries where in some limited sense ic already existed. In Costa Rica in 1944, President Rafael Angel Calderén Guardfa, elected in 1940, handed ‘over power to Teodoro Picado, who had himself been elected (chough not without accusacions of fraud and intimidation). In Colombia, President Alfonso Lopez, a Liberal, who had been elected in 1942 (chough here, too, the elections had nor been wichout violence and fraud), resigned in July 1945 and was replaced by his foreign minister, Dr. Alberto Lleras ‘Camargo, as acting president. The presidential elections of 1946, in which cone of the two Liberal candidates, Dr. Jorge Eliécer Gaitin, arcempced for the first time to broaden the party's popular base, were won by the Conservative candidare Mariano Ospina Pérez running on a bipartisan ‘Nacional Uniomticket, thus bringing toan end ~ democratically — sixteen yeats of continuous Liberal rule. In Chile, elections in 1946 brought to power Gabriel Gonzalez Videla, the third Radical president elected in succession since che formation of the Popular Front in 1938. These two years (mid-1944 co mid-1946) also witnessed significant4 Insradection ‘moves in the direction of democracy in councties that were less obviously democratic, bue not ouctight dictatorships. In Ecuador in May 1044, @ popular rebellion, in which the Alianza Democricica Ecuacoriana (ADE) - coalition of Socialists, Communists, Conservatives, and dissident Liberals — played a prominent role, led co the military coup thar overthrew the fraudulencly elected and repressive regime of Carlos Arroyo del Rio and brought to power the leading opposition figure José Maria Velasco Ibarra (in exile at the time). The following year a Constituene Assembly vwas elected and confirmed Velasco in the presidency. Fulgencio Batista, ‘who had dominaced Cuban politics for more than a decade and served as president since 1940, permitted fiee elections in June 1944, which were won by Ramén Grau San Marcin, che heit to che popular revolution of 1933-4 and che candidate of che oppesition Auténticos. In Panama in May 1945, a Constituent Assembly was eleceed that appointed an interim president, Enrique A. Jiménez, who was supported by a coalicion of ‘opposition groups led by the Partido Renovador. In Peru, free elections were permitted for the first time in June 1945; they were won over. whelmingly by José Luis Bustamante y Rivero of the Frente Democtitico Nacional (which had been formed the year before) with the support of Victor Rail Haya de la Torre's Alianza Popular Revolucionatia Americana (APRA), Peru's most popular political movement. (APRA, which had bbeen excluded from politics for more than a decade, had been legalized 8 month before the election and in January 1946 joined Bustamance’s cabinet.) In Venezuela, still in che aftermath of the long dicearorship of Juan Vicence Gomer 1908-35), President Isaias Medina Angarita, coward the end of the war, pursued a policy of gradual liberalization in association with Unign Popular (che legal front of the Venezuelan Communise Party), bur refused co allow direct presidential elections in 1946. On 18 Occober 1945, @ military coup in the name of democracy backed by Rémulo Berancourt’s Acciéa Démocritica (AD) broughe down the Medina admin- istration and Jed to Veneaueln's first experiment with democracy (1945 8). Even in Mexico the ruling party, in January 1946, introduced primary elections of candidaces 10 poses other chan chat of presidene.‘ Miguel Alemén, che presidential candidace (albeit che first civilian and the first luniversity-educated candidate) of the PRM was, however, chosen in the traditional manner and safely elected (also in the traditional manner) in July. The PRM was renamed che Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRD in December 1946. More signifcanely, there were during the same period four successful transicions from military or military-backed dictatorships of various kinds t0 democracy broadly defined. In Guatemala, a popular uprising led to ‘he downfall ofthe thieteen-year dictatorship of Jorge Ubico in July 1944 1 We owe this iformaton ¢o Bisnis Toes, inaiaesibiiiaiia Pastwar conjuncture in Latin America 5 and the election in December of Juan José Arévalo, the “spiricual Socialist” schooleeacher returned from exile in Argentina. In Brazil ac the beginning of 1945, Getilio Vargas, who had been in power siace 1930, took the fisse steps toward che dismantling of the Bstado Novo (1937—-45). On 28 February, he announced that within three months a date would be set for residential and congressional elections, and under the electoral law of 28 May national elections were indeed held on 2 December — the frst relatively democratic elections in the councry’s history. In Argentina, May and June 1945 saw the reactivation of he liberal opposition to che ne. sionalist military regime of Edelmiro Farrell and Juan Perén chat cul. ‘inated on 19 September in a massive demonstration by several hundred thousand people in Buenos Aires, “The March for Constitution and Lib- erty,” and the first concrete steps toward democratic elections the follow. ing year (February 1946). Finally, the nationalist military government in Bolivia supported by the Movimiento Nacional Revolucionario (MNR) of Victor Paz Estenssoro, which had come co power as che result of a coup in December 1943, was brought down in July 1946 by a violene popular ‘evolt in which President Gualbereo Villarroel was lynched. The driving force behind the revole was a newly formed coalition of che Liberal Right and the Marxist Left, the Frente Democrético Ancifascista (FDA), which immedistely promised vo hold democratic elections in January 1947 Thus, there had been a sudden and dramatic advance of democracy throughout Latin America at the end of the Second World Wat. "The years 1944 and 1945," weose a contributor to Inzer-American Affairs 1945, an annual survey edited by Arthur P. Whitaker, “brought more demo. cratic changes in more Latin American countries than perhaps in any single yeat since the Wars of Independence."* No single country moved in the opposite direction. Indeed, by the middle of 1946, the only Latin American states that could not claim to be in some sense popular and democratic in their origins, if not in their practice, were Paraguay and a handful of republics in Central America and the Caribbean: El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, and the Dominican Republic. And most of thes dictatorships that had survived the postwar wave of democratization had been shaken; some had been obliged to make at least token gestures toward political liberalization In El Salvador in May 1944 ~ a few weeks before the fall of Ubico in Guatemala — popular uprising had accually overthrown the thirceen- year dictarorship’ of General Maximilian Hernindez Martinez, but in October an election campaign was aborted and a dictatorship restored. In Honduras chere hed also been disturbances in May 1944, bue they wese 2 William Bhentin, “Poi! and Social Though in Loca Americ" in neds Affe 4945, ef. Artur P. Whiesker (New Yor, 1946), p39,