For more than a decade, talking about US involvement in Brazil’s 1964 military coup was considered a conspiracy theory. However, in 1976, the situation changed completely when the contents of communications between the American ambassador to Brazil, Lincoln Gordon, and the US government between 1961 and 1966 were revealed.
A letter dated March 27, 1964, four days before the coup, said: “Both I and my advisors believe that here support may be given to the conspirators to prevent a disaster that could turn Brazil into the China of the 1960s.” It is written as “
This was the first thread in an ongoing story explaining how our last dictatorship (1964-1985) had the connivance and support of the United States. Gordon’s letter is evidence of Operation Brother Sam, which deployed U.S. troops to support coup masterminds like General Castelo Branco and help overthrow the government of João Goulart (commonly known as “Django”).
The plan, which was discussed by President John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Gordon, had to be put into action because the government of Joao Goulart showed no resistance, historians heard by Brasil de Fato explained. There wasn’t.
US strategy before 1964
“It could refer to the actions of the United States in Brazil before the coup, which tried to move Brazil away from socialism,” said Marcus Dezemone of the Federal University of Fluminense (UFF). “The first[of these activities]was the Alliance for Progress, which started in 1961.”
“The project is aimed primarily at rebel state governments such as Carlos Lacerda (Guanabara, now part of the state of Rio de Janeiro), Magalhães Pinto (Minas Gerais), and Ademar de Barros (the state of São Paulo), as well as American propaganda. “The purpose was to strengthen the opposition so that Django would be weakened in the 1965 elections and unable to elect a successor,” he says.
“The second step was to provide funding to the Brazilian Institute of Democratic Action (IBAD, in Portuguese), which will produce anti-communist content such as documentaries that will be shown in theaters before the main movie. “We created a series of films that presented themes such as the Cuban problem and attempts to prevent war, the so-called ‘Cubanization’ of society,” Desemone said. In addition to videos, IBAD also produced soap operas and content for radio and television channels.
“The money the United States spent on the 1962 Congressional elections exceeded the money spent on the presidential campaign the year before Kennedy was elected.The idea was to elect a pro-American congressman to run against Joan Goulart. Ta.”
The fourth front invested in so-called soft power. “Politicians and influential people in society, such as politicians Mario Cobas and Ulysses Guimarães, went to the United States at all their own expense, saw the system working, and felt good about the country. Build that mentality,” Desemone says. The researchers recall that this strategy was repeated in the early part of this century by inviting members of the judiciary, such as former judge and federal deputy Sergio Moro and former federal deputy Deltan Dallagnol, to visit the United States. There is.
The final element, he said, was the closeness between the two countries’ militaries after World War II, “when our military abandoned the French model as an organizational standard because it quickly capitulated to the Germans.” .
“The military college was established in the 1940s with great interaction with the United States and trained the officers who assumed power in 1964,” Desemone said.
James Green, an American researcher and one of the experts on the subject, told Brasil de Fato that the United States “started a socialist revolution simply because Django knew how to deal with left-wing politicians.” “I made the wrong decision about Django, thinking he would be interested in it.”
“A decision was made to support the coup, which then took place in April or May 1964. However, when things reached a climax on March 31st, Gordon[the American ambassador to Brazil]intervened. , then US President Lyndon Johnson intervened, immediately recognizing the legitimacy of the new government,” he said.
“The United States intended to send troops to support the conspirators in the event of resistance or civil war. But there was no need, so the United States began denying any involvement,” he explains.
The United States then opened up funds to Brazil’s military government to help build major projects such as the Trans-Amazon Highway and the Rio Niteroi Bridge, leading to an increase in foreign debt.
At the same time, the U.S. spy agency, the CIA, used the fight against communism to oust countless governments in Latin America and helped those countries improve their repressive systems.
change in relationship
Denial of involvement in the Brazilian dictatorship continued until 1976, when the first clues in the story came to light. But why then?
“There are a variety of reasons,” Green explains. “There was the politicization of the Vietnam War, the emergence of a new generation critical of U.S. foreign policy, and the moral crisis after Watergate exposed corruption in the Nixon administration in 1973.”
“Democrats were elected who argued that the United States should not support totalitarian regimes in Latin America.There had been attempts in the U.S. Congress since 1972 to cut aid to Brazil.In 1976, President President-elect Jimmy Carter said: “One of the criteria for national recognition[by the United States]is respect for human rights, and that pressured the Geisel administration to ease the repression in Brazil.”
The scholar emphasizes that the movement is an anomaly in US foreign policy and that “normalcy” will return in 1980 under Republican President Ronald Reagan.
But even under the Reagan administration, Brazil’s move toward democracy and the revelation of US involvement in Brazil’s internal affairs has been an unstoppable process since the 1980s.
Is the story over?
Thousands of documents have since been made public, and there has been pressure from U.S. politicians, including Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, for the State Department to release more. James Green is the director of the Opening Archives Program, a partnership between Brown University and the State University of Maringa (Parana state), which is releasing the documents that have already been uncovered.
“We have already released 55,000 documents, we still have 20,000 left and we are asking for another 1,500 to be released,” the academic explains, adding that he is optimistic about any bombshell revelations. He says he hasn’t.
“I doubt we’ll find anything too unexpected. But even if nothing big is revealed, it’s important in the name of transparency,” he says.
Desemone is of a similar opinion. “I don’t think we’ll see any more new facts come to light that change the prevailing interpretation of historiography. But, for example, documents are beginning to emerge that acknowledge that the U.S. government recognized torture as an institutional practice. “There will be more documents to this effect in the coming years,” he says.
future
The Brazilian historian points out that his profession is far better at interpreting the past than predicting the future. Still, he is optimistic that the military alliance between Brazil and the United States is not built to last forever.
“It’s just a historical process. It wasn’t always like this. So there’s no reason for it to last forever. The Red Army defeated Nazism on the battlefield. The largest army in the world is the Communists.”
“There is no natural contradiction between the military and communism,” says Marcus Desemonet.
Editor: Nicolau Soares
