Swing to Neutralism

"In the contest between East and West, should your country take sides with the East, take sides with the West, or stay out of it altogether?" Asking such well-pointed questions, teams of Latin American pollsters working for LIFE EN ESPANOL recently queried their way through six capital cities. Carefully gathering answers from every group in the socio-economic spectrum, the pollsters were out to discover just how Latin America feels about the U.S. after the stoning of Vice President Nixon in Lima and Caracas. This week LIFE EN ESPANOL (July 28) published the eye-opening results.

To the question of East, West or neutrality, Latin Americans in every capital except Lima voted overwhelmingly and ominously in favor of the enticing neutral position.

Neutral Pro-West Pro-East

Caracas 68% 16% 6%

Lima 34% 54% 8%

Mexico City 66% 30% 1%

Bogota' 49% 32% 6%

Montevideo 51% 40% 1%

Buenos Aires 62% 23% 6%

Carrying this theme further, the opinion takers asked a true-or-false question: Is the U.S. trying to dominate Latin America economically for its own benefit? The trues had it: 70% in Caracas, 63% in Lima. 62% in Mexico City, 61% in Bogota, 51% in Montevideo, 71% in Buenos Aires. But apparently some of those who answered true were not overly outraged at the notion of U.S. economic domination. More than 58% of the people polled (as high as 81% in Bogota) said they felt that the U.S. was still a good neighbor.

Were they content with the present level of U.S. investment, did they want more, did they want less or none? In every city except Caracas, where U.S. investment had become identified with Dictator Marcos Perez Jimenez before his overthrow, the vote for more investment outweighed the have-enoughs and the lessor-nones. As for economic aid, only in Mexico City did a majority feel that the U.S. was sending enough; elsewhere more than 57% thought the U.S. was not.

In their general objections to U.S. policy toward Latin America, the Latin Americans showed greatest interest in economic matters. Dictator coddling, a charge hurled at Nixon at every stop, was the chief concern of only 7% in Caracas, 5% in Montevideo, 2% each in Buenos Aires and Bogota, 1% in Mexico City and less than half of 1% in Lima.

"Do you think Nixon's trip did more good than harm or more harm than good?" asked the poll takers. In every capital, at least a plurality voted for more good than harm--and in Lima, where stones flew, 72% voted approval of Nixon's visit.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.