Posted April 2005 - Released by the Office of the Historian, US Department of State.

SUMMARY:

Guyana

In 1964, U.S. policy towards British Guiana was heavily influenced by the Cold War fear that Cheddi Jagan, the elected Prime Minister of the United Kingdom's colony of British Guiana, was an avowed Marxist who would create "another Cuba" in the Western Hemisphere if the colony were granted independence with Jagan in power. In October 1963, Duncan Sandys, the British Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs, convinced Jagan and the other Guianese leaders at the London Constitutional Conference to accept an electoral system based on proportional representation, new elections to be held before formal independence, and the convening of another constitutional conference following the elections to settle any remaining constitutional issues and to fix the date for independence. Furthermore, the British Government refused to lower the voting age to eighteen.

Such decisions spelled political trouble for Jagan who enjoyed virtually all the support of the East Indian population (the fastest growing segment in British Guiana and soon to be the majority). Anti-Jagan political leaders and parties combined their efforts to defeat Jagan's People's Progressive Party (PPP) candidates in the pre-independence election. Also in 1964, British Guiana underwent a period of civil strife with violent labor disputes in the sugar plantations and killings and assaults in the villages and towns. Jagan asked the British to postpone the elections, allow him to form a coalition government, and send a special emissary by Washington to try to improve his relations with the Johnson administration, all to no avail. (381, 384)

The United States exerted continual and strenuous influence upon the British Government to suspend the constitution, to impose direct British rule, to assume control over internal security and the police, and to maximize U.S.-U.K. cooperation against Jagan. (371, 385) The United States persuaded the British to prevent the entry of personnel, funds, and arms from Cuba into the colony for Jagan's benefit, and assisted in this effort. The U.S. Government also convinced the British to hold the elections as soon as possible after the U.S. election, despite efforts by Jagan with the British Governor and, after October 1964, the new Labor Government, to get them postponed. (380, 387)

Jagan believed with good reason that Washington's opposition was one of his main problems. While these diplomatic efforts were underway, the U.S. Government acted on a covert political plan to defeat Jagan by funneling secret financial support, campaign advice and expertise, and other assistance to the two main opposition parties, Linden Forbes Burnham's People's National Congress (PNC) and Peter D'Aguiar's United Front (UF). (370) Realizing that Burnham, as the leading Afro-Guyanese politician, was Jagan's most able and by far his most popular opponent, the U.S. Government focused its efforts on him and the PNC. (391, 414) The U.S. Government supplied anti-Jagan films and publications, cut almost all aid to British Guiana, and refused all of Jagan's overtures for high-level meetings with U.S. officials, hoping to undercut his prestige.

Burnham and the PNC won the December 1964 election. With the pro-American leader in power, the United States, with British approval, provided assistance to Burnham, his party, his political allies in the United Front party, the police, the unions, and on the country as a whole. (403, 405, 423, 433) Presidential Special Assistant for National Security Affairs McGeorge Bundy, Consul General (later Ambassador) Carlson, and the small group of officers in the Department of State and the CIA formed a management group determined to keep Jagan out of power. With Burnham in office and in control, they encouraged the British to grant independence sooner rather than later. (411) After independence was granted by the British in May 1966, the country took the name of Guyana. The United States supplied economic assistance for road building and other development projects, and it also provided food assistance. When political disputes and personal animosity between Burnham and Peter D'Aguiar of the United Front threatened the anti-Jagan front, U.S. officials worked to keep the two parties allied and the government together until the last days of 1968. (407) The United States again provided financial support and electoral expertise to get Burnham reelected in 1968. (419) Burnham met with President Johnson and other U.S. Government officials several times during this period after formal independence in May 1966. (420, 426)

Even though East Indians became the majority group in the country and despite friction between Burnham and other members of his coalition, the PNC won the elections in December 1968 and Burnham was returned as Prime Minister. Part of Burnham's success was based on the use of absentee overseas Guyanese voters, a plan of which the United States was aware and did not oppose. (419, 421, 422)

370. Editorial Note

During the Johnson administration, the U.S. Government continued the Kennedy administration’s policy of working with the British Government to offer encouragement and support to the pro-West leaders and political organizations of British Guiana as that limited self-governing colony moved toward total independence. The Special Group/303 Committee approved approximately $2.08 million for covert action programs between 1962 and 1968 in that country.

U.S. policy included covert opposition to Cheddi Jagan, the then pro-Marxist leader of British Guiana’s East Indian population. Aportion of the funds authorized by the Special Group/303 Committee for covert action programs was used between November 1962 and June 1963 to improve the election prospects of the opposition political parties to the government of Jagan’s People’s Progressive Party. The U.S. Government successfully urged the British to impose a system of proportional representation in British Guiana (which favored the anti-Jagan forces) and to delay independence until the anti-Jagan forces could be strengthened. Through the Central Intelligence Agency, the United States provided Forbes Burnham’s and Peter D’Aguiar’s political parties, which were in opposition to Jagan, with both money and campaign expertise as they prepared to contest the December 1964 parliamentary elections. The U.S. Government’s covert funding and technical expertise were designed to play a decisive role in the registration of voters likely to vote against Jagan. Burnham’s and D’Aguiar’s supporters were registered in large numbers, helping to elect an anti-Jagan coalition.

Special Group/303 Committee-approved funds again were used between July 1963 and April 1964 in connection with the 1964 general strike in British Guiana. When Jagan’s and Burnham’s supporters clashed in labor strife in the sugar plantations that year, the United States joined with the British Government in urging Burnham not to retaliate with violence, but rather to commit to a mediated end to the conflict. At the same time, the United States provided training to certain of the anti-Jagan forces to enable them to defend themselves if attacked and to boost their morale.

Following the general strike, 303 Committee-approved funds were used to support the election of a coalition of Burnham’s People’s National Congress and D’Aguiar’s United Force. After Burnham was elected Premier in December 1964, the U.S. Government, again through the CIA, continued to provide substantial funds to both Burnham and D’Aguiar and their parties. In 1967 and 1968, 303 Committee-approved funds were used to help the Burnham and D’Aguiar coalition contest and win the December 1968 general elections. When the U.S. Government learned that Burnham was going to use fraudulent absentee ballots to continue in power in the 1968 elections, it advised him against such a course of action, but did not try to stop him.

371. Memorandum From Secretary of State Rusk to President Johnson/1/

Washington, February 6, 1964.

/1/ Source: Department of State, INR/IL Historical Files, British Guiana Chronological File 1964. Top Secret. Drafted by Burdett on February 5 and forwarded to McGeorge Bundy under cover of a February 7 memorandum in which Burnett assumed Bundy would "wish to talk to the President personally" about it.

SUBJECT
Visit of British Prime Minister Home; British Guiana

I recommend you make the following points to Sir Alec Home regarding British Guiana:

1. You are as concerned as President Kennedy over British Guiana.

2. Emergence of another Communist state in this hemisphere cannot be accepted; there is grave risk of Jagan’s establishing a Castrotype regime should he attain independence.

3. Prime Minister Macmillan and President Kennedy agreed that British Guiana should not become independent under Jagan/2/ and that a change of government must be sought.

/2/ Documentation on the Kennedy administration’s policies toward British Guiana is in Foreign Relations, 1961–1963, volume XII.

4. Jagan must be defeated in the next election.

5. Suspension of the constitution and imposition of direct rule would help defeat Jagan.

6. Direct British control over internal security, strengthening the police, and a broad interpretation of the powers reserved to the UK in foreign affairs to prevent entry of personnel and funds from Cuba would help overcome the atmosphere of intimidation Jagan is trying to create.

Sir Alec will probably
(1) confirm the Macmillan/Kennedy understanding;
(2) endorse the importance of assuring Jagan’s defeat;
(3) question the feasibility of a resumption of direct UK rule unless the grounds can be publicly shown to be fully justified.

Dean Rusk/3/

/3/ Printed from a copy that bears this typed signature.

Attachment

Paper Prepared by the Department of State

BRITISH GUIANA

Background

In a letter of July 18, 1963, to President Kennedy from Prime Minister Macmillan /4/ the British advised us of their decision ". . . to impose a system of proportional representation without a referendum and then to hold elections under a new system". This letter also informed us of a British expectation to "renew direct rule for a period of six months to a year while a new constitution is introduced and new elections held under it". The latter assertion was made on a British assumption that Jagan would resign when informed of the new electoral system at a Constitutional Conference held October 22–31. He did not do so, but has repeatedly stated that he does not feel bound to accept the British decisions.

/4/ A copy is in the National Archives, RG 59, Presidential Correspondence: Lot 66 D 204, UK/Macmillan.

Jagan seems uncertain and a little desperate but he is unlikely to resign voluntarily. No occasion has yet arisen to show whether he will obstruct the carrying out of the decisions but probably he will try to hang on, temporizing and avoiding flagrantly illegal acts. His regime has been organizing a protest march on Georgetown as well as secretly promoting a rash of arson in the countryside. The regime is likely to try to foster an atmosphere of intimidation and potential terror in an effort to attract international attention and more particularly to discourage opponents of the regime.

While the UK agrees as to the importance of getting rid of Jagan, it is reluctant to impose direct rule unless Jagan’s actions so clearly call for such a course as to pose no presentational problems for the UK. In addition, the UK tends to put somewhat less weight than we do on the advantages of such a step. The UK believes that Jagan would pose as a martyr and could be more dangerous in opposition than as Premier.

In view of the above circumstances, we think it desirable that the UK increase security and interpret its reserved powers in the foreign affairs field broadly in order to frustrate communist aid to the Jagan regime.

372. Memorandum of Conversation/1/

Washington, February 12, 1964, 4:30 p.m.

/1/ Source: National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1964–66, POL 14 BR GU. Top Secret. Drafted by Armstrong and approved in the White House on February 24 and in S on February 27. The memorandum is part V of VI. The meeting was held at the White House. Prime Minister Douglas-Home made an official visit to Washington February 12–13.

SUBJECT
British Guiana

PARTICIPANTS
British Side
Sir Alec Douglas-Home, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom
R. A. Butler, Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs
Sir Harold Caccia, Permanent Under Secretary, The Foreign Office
Sir David Ormsby Gore, British Ambassador
Sir Timothy Bligh, Principal Private Secretary to the Prime Minister
Sir Burke Trend, Secretary to the Cabinet

U.S. Side
The President
The Secretary of State
Governor Harriman, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs
David K. E. Bruce, Ambassador to Great Britain
McGeorge Bundy, Special Assistant to the President on National Security Affairs
William R. Tyler, Assistant Secretary, EUR
Richard I. Philips, Director, P/ON
Willis C. Armstrong, Director, BNA

[2 lines of source text not declassified] that they were now engaged in registering parties, and he gathered that there had been some problem in the development of splinter parties. Mr. Bundy remarked that people were engaged in party cultivation, but that it was stony ground. The Secretary noted that the East Indians who don’t like Jagan are reluctant to come forward. It was understood that party activity was being closely observed. The Secretary went on to say that it was very important not to let Jagan take over in a situation of independence. [11/2 lines of source text not declassified] The Prime Minister said that at some point there would have to be an election, and he thought December might be a good time. /2/

/2/ In a February 27 memorandum for the record, Burdett noted that Bundy stated that the President and Prime Minister had discussed British Guiana privately during the latter’s visit and that they had reaffirmed the agreements existing between President Kennedy and Prime Minister Macmillan, and in particular the understandings reached at Birch Grove the previous summer. (Department of State, INR/IL Historical Files, British Guiana White House Meetings) Kennedy and Macmillan met at Birch Grove, England, on June 30, 1963, where the British proposed, and Kennedy agreed, that independence should be delayed, that a proportional representation electoral system be established, and that the alliance between the leading politicians opposed to Jagan be supported; see Foreign Relations, 1961–1963, vol. XII, Document 295.

373. Memorandum of Conversation/1/

Washington, February 19, 1964, 10 a.m.

1 Source: National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1964–66, POL BR GU. Confidential. Drafted by Thomas M. Judd, Officer-in-Charge of UK Affairs. The meeting was held in Tyler’s office. The memorandum is part 2 of 2; part 1 was not found.

SUBJECT
British Guiana

PARTICIPANTS
US
William R. Tyler, Assistant Secretary for European Affairs
William G. Burdett, Deputy Assistant Secretary, EUR
Willis C. Armstrong, Director, BNA
Thomas N. Judd, BNA

UK
Patrick Gordon Walker, Labor "Shadow" Foreign Minister

Mr. Tyler asked Mr. Gordon Walker what he thought about British Guiana. Gordon Walker replied that he knew Mr. Tyler was thinking of an article which appeared in The Reporter on February 13 which purported to represent Gordon Walker’s views. Since the article had come out, he had been giving considerable thought as to what he had really said to the man who had written the article. To the best of his recollection, he had made the following points which, he emphasized, were his own views which had not been fully checked out with the Labor Party:

1. It makes the Labor Party uncomfortable not to grant independence to any country when the situation is ripe.

2. He recognized the primacy of U.S. interests in British Guiana.

3. Labor believed there would be social revolutions in Latin America. Some of these would be ugly ones which would not fit in with the pattern of the Alliance for Progress. Some Nasser-type governments would undoubtedly emerge.

4. Labor would like to find a way to give independence to British Guiana without affronting or injuring the U.S. Britain of course cannot afford to appear as an agent of the U.S. The way in which the Douglas-Home government was trying to do this was completely unacceptable to the people of British Guiana because it makes the entire country into one constituency. Some other form of proportional representation /2/ might well be considered by Labor.

/2/ At a Constitutional Conference in London in October 1963, the major British Guiana party leaders asked British Colonial Secretary Sandys to devise a constitution, "since they were unable to agree among themselves." Sandys then decreed a new registration and general election under proportional representation for a single house legislature. "Jagan was furious at being outsmarted." (Memorandum from Cobb to Rusk, September 15, 1965, Department of State, INR/IL Historical Files, British Guiana White House Meetings)

There was a discussion of the menace represented by Jagan. Mr. Tyler said we were seriously concerned with the way Jagan conducted himself. We could not live with a Castro-type government on the South American continent. Mr. Gordon Walker thought the U.S. exaggerated the menace of Jagan. There was a limit to what he could do, in view of the racial division in British Guiana; for example, he could hardly have complete control in a situation where the capital of the country was against him.

Mr. Tyler added that we were worried about the Castro aspects— that British Guiana would be used as a base for subversion on the continent. Mr. Gordon Walker replied that a bit of this sort of thing was bound to develop in Latin America. However, if a way could be found for the U.S. to put its troops into British Guiana, the Labor Party would not object. Britain did not want to keep its troops there indefinitely. Britain had no real reason of its own to stay. Furthermore, its troops were spread too thin. One battalion now in British Guiana was not enough.

374. Memorandum From the Deputy Director for Plans of the Central Intelligence Agency (Helms) to the President’s Special Assistant for National Security Affairs (Bundy)/1/

Washington, March 18, 1964.

/1/ Source: Johnson Library, National Security File, Intelligence File, British Guiana, Special File. Secret; Eyes Only. A marginal note in Bundy’s handwriting reads "OK."

SUBJECT
British Guiana

1. Reference is made to my memorandum of 7 March 1964 concerning the efforts of the Jagan-controlled Guiana Agricultural Workers’ Union (GAWU) to gain control of the sugar workers in British Guiana./2/ During the past week the strike has continued and the situation is still serious. The intimidation by GAWU has forced still more workers to remain away from their jobs, and Ministers of Jagan’s government, including Jagan himself, have given their full and open support to the strike. Thus far the management group has remained firm in not recognizing the GAWU, but events may force the companies at least to allow a poll of the sugar workers to determine which union they wish to represent them. This in itself would be a defeat for the anti-Jagan Manpower Citizens’ Association (MPCA), which presently represents the sugar workers, and further withdrawals from the MPCA could result in its complete loss of control of the sugar workers.

/2/ In this memorandum to Bundy, Helms reported on GAWU-inspired violence and killings. (Ibid.)

2. The police force has been vigorous in its efforts to control the intimidations and demonstrations, but the force is not large enough to handle the situation completely. British troops have not yet been used.

[2 paragraphs (221/2 lines of source text) not declassified]

5. A copy of this memorandum is being sent to Mr. Burdett. RH

375. Memorandum From the Deputy Director for Plans of the Central Intelligence Agency (Helms) to the President’s Special Assistant for National Security Affairs (Bundy)/1/

Washington, May 1, 1964.

1 Source: Johnson Library, National Security File, Intelligence File, British Guiana, Special File. Secret; Eyes Only.

SUBJECT
British Guiana

1. An essential element to winning the next general elections in British Guiana /2/ and forming a successful coalition government after the defeat of Premier Cheddi Jagan is the behind-the-scenes co-operation of Linden Forbes Burnham, leader of the People’s National Congress (PNC), and Peter S. D’Aguiar, leader of the United Force (UF). Although the two opposition leaders worked closely together at the London Constitutional Conference in October 1963 and agreed to continue joint discussions when they returned to Georgetown, these discussions have not taken place and there has been no co-operation.

/2/ In a February 19 memorandum to Bundy, Helms reported that [text not declassified] had informed the CIA that the new general elections in British Guiana would be held during the last 3 months of 1964 and that [text not declassified] had agreed that [text not declassified] could inform the leaders of the two main opposition parties [text not declassified] of this timing. (Ibid.)

2. In April 1964 [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] sent a political adviser for each party to British Guiana to assist with preparations for voter registration and secondly to work out a [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] understanding between Burnham and D’Aguiar for co-operation during the election campaign and for the future coalition government. These advisers have arranged for two meetings between Burnham and D’Aguiar, one on 24 April and the second on 28 April. Thus far Burnham and D’Aguiar have agreed to the following:

a. to share poll watchers in certain areas and to share the costs of challenges in these areas;

b. to co-operate in a joint publicity campaign before and during the registration period;

c. to refrain from attacking the other party during the election campaign outside of "honest politicking";

d. to review their progress at mid-point in the registration period and consult on any corrections that might need to be made;

e. to decide if specific areas of responsibility are desirable, based on the results of the registration.

3. The two leaders have also discussed cabinet posts for a future coalition government, but have not yet reached agreement on this matter. The advisers report that the meetings have been harmonious.

4. A copy of this memorandum is being sent to Mr. William C. Burdett of the Department of State.

RH

376. Research Memorandum From the Deputy Director of Intelligence and Research (Denney) to Acting Secretary of State Ball/1/

REU–33

Washington, May 12, 1964.

/1/ Source: Johnson Library, National Security File, Country File, British Guiana, Vol. 1, Memos, 12/63–7/64. Secret; No Foreign Dissem; Limited Distribution; Controlled Dissem.

SUBJECT
Outlook for More Violence in British Guiana

Abstract

In an effort to prevent the holding of a UK-imposed proportional representation election, expected to be held late this year, the Jagan regime has been resorting to intimidation and violence. What began some 12 weeks ago as a strike by the pro-Jagan sugar workers’ union has developed into a campaign of beatings, bombings, and arson in which 19 persons have been killed and more than a million dollars’ worth of property and sugar cane have been burned. This violence has exacerbated the racial tensions between the majority East Indians and the minority Negroes to such an extent that some officials fear that the situation may get out of hand.

Contributing to this concern has been the agitation of activists in the Jagan regime, who have attacked not only members of the competing sugar workers’ union but also the opposition parties, which are composed mainly of Negroes and other non-Indians. Local police have uncovered arms buried by members of Jagan’s youth organization. [3 lines of source text not declassified]

As the proportional representation election which threatens to oust him from office draws nearer—registration began on May 8—Jagan’s despair is deepening. In the hope that the election may be postponed, he has invited Prime Minister Williams of Trinidad to try to mediate the differences between him and the leaders of the opposition parties. It seems unlikely, however, that the opposition parties, hopeful of victory in a proportional representation election, will agree to Williams’ proposals. As the Jagan regime grows more desperate, its extremist elements may well be tempted to undertake more ambitious acts of terrorism. Such acts could provoke the threatened Negro minority into large-scale retaliation.

[Omitted here is the remainder of the memorandum.]

377. Telegram From the Department of State [text not declassified] to the Consulate General in British Guiana/1/

Washington, May 13, 1964.

/1/ Source: Department of State, INR/IL Historical Files, Messages between Consul General/Ambassador Carlson and Ranking Department Officials [file name not declassified] re: Situation in British Guiana, Vol. 1, March–September, 1964. Secret.

Following is a [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] State [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] cable for Carlson [less than 1 line of source text not declassified]:

1. We concur with guidance to Burnham not to resort to counterviolence and that he can be assured that if PPP makes effort take over country by force the U.S. Govt will not stand by and see opposition crushed by terror, and Carlson’s comments on arms to Burnham (Congentel 377). /2/

/2/ Telegram 377 from Georgetown, May 6. (National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1964–66, POL 23–8 BR GU) 

2. We are now exploring possibility of giving counterterrorist training to selected members of opposition. /3/ While this will not have any immediate positive effect on containing violence, it may give boost to opposition. We will inform you when final decisions and plans are made. [less than 1 line of source text not declassified]

/3/ In an April 30 memorandum to Bundy, Helms wrote that if the situation deteriorated "to the extent that it is decided to furnish the trainees with the necessary material, this would be furnished them [text not declassified] British Guiana." A marginal note in Bundy’s handwriting reads "Approved by phone. May 7." (Johnson Library, National Security File, Intelligence File, British Guiana, Special File)

3. Meanwhile we suggest you discuss [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] steps which could be taken to control violence. /4/ It our view that frequent use of [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] mechanism should be made not only to work out locally solutions to problems but also to give true picture to Governor so he will in turn influence ColOff. Request cable summary of all [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] meetings [less than 1 line of source text not declassified].

/4/ In a March 23 memorandum to Bundy, Helms reported that "the Colonial Office has taken note of the request by the Department of State that the British Guiana elections not be held prior to the U.S. Presidential elections on 3 November 1964." (Ibid.)

4. Please note Deptel 285 /5/ re our approach to British here.

/5/ Telegram 285 to Georgetown, May 9. (National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1964–66, POL 23 BR GU) 

378. Memorandum From the Deputy Director of Plans of the Central Intelligence Agency (Helms) to the President’s Special Assistant for National Security Affairs (Bundy)/1/

Washington, May 22, 1964.

/1/ Source: Johnson Library, National Security File, Intelligence File, British Guiana, Special File. Secret; Eyes Only.

SUBJECT
British Guiana

1. On 21 May 1964 the Consul General in Georgetown [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] reported that [3 lines of source text not declassified] it was now evident that the security situation had reached the point where it would be essential for a state of emergency to be declared./2/ The Governor has urged both Cheddi and Janet Jagan to end the strike on the sugar estates and to give him the necessary advice of the Council of Ministers to declare a state of emergency, as reported in my memorandum of 21 May./3/ The Governor has reported that Premier Jagan would be prepared to give him the advice of his Ministers on either 22 or 23 May; he said the legal documents were ready for the emergency order, but there were still a few decisions yet to be made. However, the Jagan emergency order may not contain sufficient powers to control the situation, such as the right to search and detain without a warrant.

/2/ [text not declassified] State [text not declassified] telegram from Georgetown, unnumbered, May 21. (Department of State, INR/IL Historical Files, British Guiana 1964 [file name not declassified] Progress Report [file name not declassified] State Memos)

/3/ Memorandum from Helms to Bundy, May 21. (Ibid.)

2. [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] wished that influence could be brought to bear on Richard Ishmael, president of the Manpower Citizens’ Association (MPCA), which is the anti-Jagan sugar workers’ union, to co-operate with the pro-Jagan arbitration committee which has been set up to mediate the dispute. [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] representatives pointed out to [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] that this would be giving in to Jagan and that Ishmael probably would not follow [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] advice in this matter. [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] agreed with this, but said that he would not like [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] to urge defiance from Ishmael.

3. In view of the above, a [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] State [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] cable has been sent to the Consul General [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] in Georgetown,/4/ giving [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] the following guidance:

/4/ No other copy of this cable has been found.

"a. Our principal objective is to defeat the PPP in the forthcoming elections and to bring into power a coalition government of the People’s National Congress, the United Force, and alternative East Indian party(ies), headed by Linden Forbes Burnham. While retaining tactical flexibility, all our moves must be directed at attainment of this objective.

"b. We believe that in terms of accomplishing our objective things at this time are going well despite the current wave of violence. Registration of voters to date and the increasing nervousness of the PPP support this assessment.

"c. Therefore, we should make every effort to adhere to the present schedule, i.e., elections under proportional representation in early November, and to avoid being deflected from our present course. The PPP is clearly making every effort to upset this schedule.

"d. We believe that resumption of direct British rule at this stage would impede the attainment of our objective. Resumption could delay elections, make it easier for the British Labour Party, if it comes to power, to tamper with Sandys’ decision, and give the PPP additional campaign issues.

"e. We share the view of the Governor that the declaration of a state of emergency probably will be required to cope with the security situation. The British may have to buttress the declaration by dispatching additional troops to British Guiana. We see advantages in the declaration resulting from ‘advice’ of the Ministers. If ‘advice’ from the Ministers is not forthcoming,/5/ declaration by a special Order in Council may well be necessary.

/5/ In telegram 298 to Georgetown, May 22, the Department reported that the British Embassy in Washington had informed it that, under pressure from the Governor and the Commissioner of Police, Jagan had notified the Governor that he would "advise" the Governor to declare a state of emergency on May 22 or 23. (National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1964–66, POL 23–8 BR GU)

"f. Tactically we would prefer to allow HMG on its own initiative, without urgings by the U.S., to arrive at the conclusion that a declaration of emergency and probably the dispatch of additional troops are required.

"g. We agree with your reasons that it would be disadvantageous for the MPCA to consent to co-operate with the committee to investigate the sugar dispute, which is obviously stacked in favor of the PPP. We also agree that Ishmael is not likely to co-operate. In discussions locally you should continue to take the position that Ishmael should be allowed to make his own decision.

"h. [1 line of source text not declassified]"

4. A copy of this memorandum is being sent to Mr. William C. Burdett of the Department of State. Ambassador Bruce in London has been informed of the above.

RH

379. Memorandum of Conversation/1/

Georgetown, May 25, 1964.

/1/ Source: National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1964–66, POL 19 BR GU. No classification marking. Drafted by Cobb. The meeting was held in Jagan’s office.

SUBJECT
Call on Premier Cheddi Jagan

PARTICIPANTS
Premier Cheddi Jagan of British Guiana
Delmar R. Carlson, American Consul General, British Guiana
William B. Cobb, Jr., British Guiana Desk Officer, Washington

We were received by Premier Jagan in his darkened, air-conditioned office. Jagan explained that because of astigmatism his eyes suffered from the intense glare and therefore he was more comfortable in a dim office.

Jagan said he was most discouraged about the situation in British Guiana. The efforts of the sugar workers to throw off the burden of the company union had led to tension in the community and racial animosities had been aroused. He did not know what would happen now. The struggle against the company union, and the BGTUC is nothing but a company union nowadays, should be resolved and he had appointed a committee to try to resolve it but only the sugar workers were willing to cooperate.

On the political scene he was also discouraged. The British Government had imposed PR although it was admittedly a most unsatisfactory voting method and he wondered what it might lead to. The British had pushed him around since he first organized the PPP and had changed the system on him time and again gerrymandering districts, changing the number of districts, and now even PR. It was most discouraging and Indian voters might well become disenchanted with the so-called parliamentary system of democracy and turn elsewhere if the Guiana experience was any example. Perhaps it was a result of the cold war tensions but parliamentarianism and democracy seemed on the way out. In Latin America for example there are many more dictatorships today than ever before since World War II.

"No matter what I try to do," Jagan said, "I can get no where. I am opposed by everyone, including the CIA which I suppose is the American Government. I laid my cards on the table to President Kennedy, and he gave me to understand that he would help me but he didn’t and I can only conclude that he was a liar or that he was influenced to change his decision. The people in BG know that I am trying to help them. They are not dumb. But they see that I am being frustrated by every turn. When I see newspaper correspondents they distort what I tell them. I am being maligned by a press agency in Miami, presumably run by Cuban refugees, which has distributed an article saying that I advocated wiping out the Negroes in B.G. This is completely untrue—it’s a deliberate distortion."/2/

/2/ Telegram 403 from Georgetown, May 30, reported Carlson’s observations of the meeting with Jagan, including Jagan’s view that the United States turned against him after what he thought had been a successful visit to Washington, presumably because "pressure had been brought on President by right wing groups or by CIA." Jagan visited the United States and met with President Kennedy on October 25, 1961; for a memorandum of conversation, see Foreign Relations, 1961–1963, vol. XII, Document 259. Jagan also felt the only answer to the present situation was a grand coalition but that "speaking man to man," Burnham would not join in because the United States would not let him. Carlson reported that he responded that he could not believe that the Premier, or Burnham, or D’Aguiar were or could be puppets of anybody. (National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1964–66, POL 15 BR GU)

In his rambling exposition Jagan mentioned that he listened often to the VOA, and referred specifically to a panel program which discussed the situation in Vietnam. He said that one of the speakers pointed out that the war in Vietnam was being lost because it was not supported by 80% of the population. He inferred that the turmoil in South East Asia was a direct result of American involvement.

380. Memorandum From Gordon Chase of the National Security Council Staff to the President’s Special Assistant for National Security Affairs (Bundy)/1/

Washington, May 25, 1964.

/1/ Source: Johnson Library, National Security File, Country File, British Guiana, Vol. I, Memos, 12/63–7/64. Secret; Eyes Only.

SUBJECT
British Guiana

I talked to Bill Burdett today about the situation in British Guiana. Bill made the following points:

1. The present unrest in British Guiana is still a long way from being serious. Only a few people have been hurt and the British response has been and has needed to be only a moderate one. The unrest, in part, is a sign that we are on the right track; Cheddi Jagan and/or his people are beginning to feel that they are on their way out and are stirring up trouble in the hope that they can reverse the trend. We will see more of this sort of thing over the next few months.

2. We should keep our eye on November. Apostponement of elections might give a Labor Government in the UK an opportunity to throw a monkey wrench into our effort to get rid of Jagan. /2/

/2/ In a May 28 memorandum Chase reported to Bundy that he had spoken to Burdett about preparing for a Labor Party victory. Burdett advised against talking to Labor before the election, but also recommended that, if Labor won, "our Ambassador should immediately talk to the new Prime Minister." Chase added that he would talk to Burdett’s replacement, J. Harold Shullaw, about the need for further contingency planning with respect to a Labor victory. Amarginal note in Bundy’s handwriting next to this sentence reads "good." (Ibid.)

3. Our policy with respect to BG is the right one and we should stay with it. With a little luck, the events between now and November will be controllable. With a little more luck, events after November, with Jagan in opposition, will also be controllable.

4. There does seem to be an area where some useful work can be done. We probably can usefully do more planning with respect to the moves we will take once Jagan is gone. (I will look into this one—to see what planning has been done and what else needs to be done.) /3/

GC

 /3/ A marginal note in Bundy’s handwriting next to this sentence reads: "Also contingency planning for a Labor victory in United Kingdom."

381. Memorandum From the Deputy Director for Plans of the Central Intelligence Agency (Helms) to the President’s Special Assistant for National Security Affairs (Bundy)/1/

Washington, June 9, 1964.

/1/ Source: Johnson Library, National Security File, Intelligence File, British Guiana, Special File. Secret; Eyes Only.

SUBJECT
British Guiana

1. On 3 June 1964 Linden Forbes Burnham, leader of the People’s National Congress (PNC), proposed in the Legislative Assembly that a three-party coalition government be formed to run British Guiana until elections are held under proportional representation (PR) later this year. Burnham’s reasoning for suggesting a coalition now with the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) and the United Force (UF) was that it would lessen tensions and allow for more vigorous police action to control the situation. He further believed that acceptance of an interim coalition would mean that Premier Cheddi Jagan had acknowledged PR as the voting system. Burnham, however, indicated that he would go no further with this idea unless it was accepted by Peter D’Aguiar, leader of the UF.

2. D’Aguiar refused to join the coalition. Meanwhile, Jagan was preparing a counter proposal for a coalition of the PPP and PNC, excluding the UF. Jagan’s proposal was contained in a letter sent to Burnham on 6 June. His coalition would last for from two to four years before new elections are held; these elections would be held under a combination of PR and the old voting system of first-past-the-post. Jagan proposed that the ministries be equally divided between the two parties, with Jagan as Prime Minister and Burnham as Deputy Prime Minister. Jagan suggested that the coalition continue after independence when the Ministries of Home Affairs and Defense would be divided between the two parties. Between now and independence Jagan asked that a United Nations presence be introduced in British Guiana and that the UN and Commonwealth nations be asked to aid in the creation of security and defense forces.

3. In reporting the above, Consul General Carlson [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] in Georgetown said that [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] Jagan found this to be the expedient moment to propose such a coalition government: G.W.Y. Hucks, British electoral commissioner, had announced publicly on 4 June that voter registration had been very high in the Corentyne, a Jagan stronghold, and low in Georgetown, where Burnham is strongest. [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] Jagan may have been encouraged over his chances in the coming election or simply believes that now is psychologically an opportune time to press ostensibly reasonable terms of a coalition government on Burnham, hoping that he will panic into settling for half now rather than risk losing it all later on.

 [3 paragraphs (141/2 lines of source text) not declassified]

7. A copy of this memorandum is being sent to Mr. J. Harold Shullaw of the Department of State.

RH

382. Memorandum From Gordon Chase of the National Security Council Staff to the President’s Special Assistant for National Security Affairs (Bundy)/1/

Washington, June 13, 1964.

/1/ Source: Johnson Library, National Security File, Country File, British Guiana, Vol. I, Memos, 12/63–7/64. Secret.

SUBJECT
British Guiana

1. Attached is Georgetown’s 422 /2/which reports that the Governor of BG has taken over the emergency powers from the Council of Ministers and has started to pick up some of the people who are suspected of being responsible for the recent violence. /3/ This action by the Governor does not detract from the other responsibilities of the Ministers, which remain intact.

 /2/ Telegram 422 from Georgetown, June 13, not attached, reported Governor Luyt’s new Order-in-Council "which in effect puts him rather than Jagan regime in charge of emergency." (National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1964–66, POL 23–8 BR GU)

/3/ A June 12 memorandum to Bundy reported that a number of prominent PPP leaders were scheduled for immediate arrest under the secret and about-to-be-invoked Order-in-Council emergency regulations, which permitted the detention of persons suspected of being involved in terrorist activity. (Johnson Library, National Security File, Intelligence File, British Guiana, Special File)

2. Harry Shullaw (Bill Burdett’s successor) tells me that State (Harry, Alexis Johnson, and Bill Tyler) feels that the Governor is the best judge of the present situation and that his step may give us a breather for a while. Harry feels that there are few negatives involved in the move. Jagan’s forces may try to use the development as a new reason for postponing the elections, but unrestrained violence probably works toward this end even more effectively.

3. The Committee of 24 at the UN has been hearing appeals from the Jagan forces and renewed appeals can probably be expected. The British will probably be able to continue to stall off a UN inquiry on the grounds that BG is an internal British matter and that the British are already working towards a solution (i.e. PR). Neither we nor the British favor a UN inquiry since such an inquiry could conceivably lead to a UN recommendation that PR be substituted by another scheme.

4. In general, I think the situation in BG is still tolerable. It merits close watching, however, and I will continue to keep an eye out.

GC

383. Telegram From the Consulate General in British Guiana to the Department of State/1/

Georgetown, June 27, 1964, 1600Z.

/1/ Source: National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1964–66, POL 15 BR GU. Secret; Limdis. Repeated to London.

443. Premier Jagan called me to his office late afternoon June 26 and talked over an hour along following lines. For first time he is seriously worried about what is happening in BG and where it is going. Several years ago he thought BG had bright future; there was much waiting to be done in way of economic development and possibility help solve problems outside BG. For example, Jamaica, Barbados and Trinidad were all facing pressing economic problems resulting partly from exploding populations. They were trying solve this by some industrialization but would never be able to keep up. In fact, all these places were just barely keeping the lid on. (He apologized at this point for digressing.)

Now in British Guiana there was this deplorable violence, senseless retaliation, and there seemed no end in sight. A few days ago he had to take his daughter out of school in Georgetown because of harassment by classmates. Several times he asked somewhat rhetorically "what can be done?" I asked if he were satisfied that he and the two opposition leaders had done everything that was within their power, individually as well as collectively, to stop the violence. He said he thought so but that everybody could not be controlled. He said he wanted this to be a very frank discussion. I asked him if he believed people in Mazaruni had anything to do with violence. He quickly replied that he did not think so but there was this theory of a plan. He said he wished to talk about solutions.

He said as I knew he had been seeking coalition but his efforts had come to nothing. In past few days he had been talking with Governor about such possibility and now he wished to talk with me. As long as U.S. was opposed to having PPP in coalition or in government at all, Burnham would refuse. During coalition negotiations with Burnham when Ghanaian delegation was here, Jagan had made concession after concession, including parity in cabinet, but Burnham always had another demand. This experience and subsequent ones simply illustrate that Burnham will not go against wishes of U.S.

He had thought many times about what caused his relations with U.S. to "go sour." He still did not know specifically how this happened. He used to go annually from 1957 to 1961 to the U.S. and personal relations were very good. In 1961 he had talks with President Kennedy, Chester Bowles, Schlesinger, and other top officials. They had probed him very deeply and he had every reason to believe that he had passed the test. He had been quite frank with them about his socialist views. Generally speaking he was inclined to think there were two reasons for the deterioration: opposition leaders in BG had effectively spread word in U.S. that he was Communist and secondly, there had been U.S. trouble with Cuba. These two elements, in interacting way, had given impression that he was potential menace to U.S. This was myth but was now fact of life in U.S. which he must recognize. In actual fact, he said, U.S. need have no concern on this score.

Recently he had talked with various elements in Georgetown including Pres. Chamber of Commerce, businessmen, Catholic Church, etc. about possible solution to BG problem. Several had told him that he and PPP were Communist, that there was fear of regimentation, exclusion of private enterprise, and, if independent, of invitation by him to Soviets and Cubans to come in. He told them in essence that his record belied any danger to private enterprise. He had publicly pledged to keep his hands off sugar and bauxite industries, and as for regimentation, there could be ironclad guarantees in constitution and he was not fool enough to try tear up constitution with opposition being so strong in BG. As for Soviets and Cubans, he was prepared have treaty of neutrality, e.g., along Austrian lines. If U.S. wanted, it could have right to intervene. This was in fact unnecessary because he realized U.S. would intervene in any event if its security were threatened. Some businessmen had mentioned BG might be another Zanzibar, but he realized BG in same hemisphere as U.S. and events which take place in Africa would not be permitted to take place here.

Jagan said in final analysis only three courses now possible in BG: (1) coalition; (2) civil war; (3) partition. He thought coalition was dependent on U.S. He thought partition was no solution and recalled difficulties and suffering which ensued when India was partitioned. Economically partition would not make sense, but BG already is drifting toward partition. (I agreed that partition would not represent progress.) He could see no end to violence without coalition. Uncontrollable groups were now operating. I asked whether when he said coalition he meant all three parties. He said no, he meant PPP–PNC because their objectives were more similar and in any event there should be an opposition party. I asked whether he had in mind coalition now before election or after or both. He did not see much value in coalition before election since ministers would just be settling into their jobs "when the dog fight of elections would start in October or November," but he was willing to consider it. He was more interested in agreement for coalition after elections. While he much preferred postponement of election to give time to work out problems, he was willing to consider acceptance of no postponement. He added that PPP had not yet decided whether to contest those elections.

He then asked where U.S. stood and what my views were. I told him that U.S. was assuming that course of events would be determined by elections in implementation of Colonial Secretary’s decision and that after the elections we would presumably know with what government we would be dealing. In meantime, pending basic political decision by electorate, we were in effect simply waiting. I indicated incidental opinion that he placed far too much weight on view that Burnham acted on basis of what he thought U.S. wanted. In my experience, politicians of all kinds were guided primarily, if not entirely, by what they thought would get votes and how they would fare at polls. I suggested that what happens in BG is for parties here to decide and matters of coalition or no coalition were not matters for U.S. to determine but could and undoubtedly would be decided by political leaders here. I mentioned that if he wished I would report his views exactly insofar as possible as presented to me. He was extremely pleased. I cautioned however that there would not necessarily be any response but that channels of communication were open and I would faithfully report his views at any time.

Comment: Jagan gave controlled performance. He was purposely calm, reasonable, most courteous, earnest. Only sign of tension was slight shaking of hands at times; otherwise he seemed relaxed. It is obvious that he would give almost anything to obtain U.S. support and will leap at any possibility of favorable response. We can probably expect some more peace feelers.

Carlson

384. Memorandum for the Record/1/

Washington, June 30, 1964.

/1/ Source: Johnson Library, National Security File, Intelligence File, British Guiana, Special File. Secret; Eyes Only. Prepared by Chase on July 2.

SUBJECT
British Guiana Meeting, June 30, 1964

PARTICIPANTS
Mr. Tyler; Mr. Cobb; Mr. Helms; [2 names not declassified]; Mr. McGeorge Bundy; Mr. Chase

The meeting was called at Mr. Tyler’s request, primarily to discuss recent messages about the situation in BG.

1. Jagan’s Coalition Proposal—The group agreed with the Consulate General’s assessment that we should steer clear of a coalition government./2/ We are on the right track and should press ahead towards the elections. If necessary, we should stiffen up Governor Luyt who has given some indications that he may be weakening on the coalition issue—i.e. the Governor is very concerned about the security situation, and may feel that a coalition will reduce the terrorism.

/2/ Telegram 440 from Georgetown, dated June 27, reported Carlson’s concern about an abortive Canadian attempt to promote a PPP–PNC coalition. (Ibid., Country File, British Guiana, Vol. I, Cables, 12/63–7/64) 

2. Jagan’s Emissary to U.S.—While a dialogue with Jagan might conceivably cool down the BG security problem, it was decided that we should not accept a visit from a Jagan emissary./3/ We would be able to get no meaningful concessions from Jagan and the fact that we talked to a Jagan emissary would probably help Jagan’s cause. Moreover, it would be difficult to keep a dialogue going (for purposes of cooling down the security situation) since we would have very little to say to Jagan.

/3/ A telegram to London, July 2, reported that Jagan wished to send Attorney General Ramsahoye to Washington to discuss the British Guiana problem with Department officers. The Department requested that the Colonial Office have the Governor decline to transmit Jagan’s request. (Ibid., Intelligence File, British Guiana, Special File)

3. UN Trusteeship—The group discussed Eric Williams’ proposal that BG be made a UN trusteeship for five years. The group did not think this was a good idea since at best it would only delay a bad situation, and at worst might make the Communist menace even tougher to control. 

4. The group agreed on the following actions: First, State [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] would cable Georgetown and tell our people that we agree with their assessment and are against a coalition and emissary./4/ Second, State will tell Ambassador Bruce to talk to the British about the BG situation. Bruce will try to get the British to apply whatever force is necessary to control the security situation in BG. /5/ Third, at a somewhat lower level, the U.S. Government and HMG will get together in the near future to compare notes and insure that we are still on the same wave length.

GC

/4/ An undated telegram to Georgetown advised "we do not believe coalition talk should be encouraged" and "we have no intention of receiving any envoy from British Guiana for we do not wish to give Jagan any encouragement." It also stated that Jagan should be advised that the U.S. Government was in no position to direct Burnham to accept or reject a coalition and that any question of an envoy should be taken up with the Governor, the official responsible for external affairs. (Ibid.)

/5/ In an undated telegram to London for Ambassador Bruce, Tyler requested that Bruce inform the Colonial Office that "we are anxious that every effort be made to hold elections in November under proportional representation as planned," that additional UK forces be sent to British Guiana, and that all possible steps be taken to put down further violence there. (Ibid.) A telegram from London to Tyler, July 2, reported that the Colonial Secretary, Duncan Sandys, responded that HMG intended to go forward with the elections as planned, was most reluctant to send more troops to British Guiana, and had reached no conclusion about the possibility of a coalition, but would consult with the United States before doing so. (Ibid.)

385. Memorandum From the Deputy Director for Plans of the Central Intelligence Agency (Helms) to the President’s Special Assistant for National Security Affairs (Bundy)/1/

Washington, July 17, 1964.

/1/ Source: Johnson Library, National Security File, Intelligence File, British Guiana, Special File. Secret; Eyes Only. A marginal note in Bundy’s handwriting indicates the memorandum was sent to Gordon Chase for information.

SUBJECT
British Guiana

The following message for you was received from William R. Tyler, Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs, [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] on 17 July 1964:

"1. The US/UK talks on British Guiana on 16 July /2/ chaired by Sir Hilton Poynton, Permanent Undersecretary of the Colonial Office, produced basic agreement on an assessment of the security situation, electoral prospects, and the need to proceed on course with elections in late November or early December. There was agreement on both sides that, although results might be close, registration figures indicated that Premier Cheddi Jagan, at best, could get no more than 48 per cent and probably would not get more than 46 per cent of the vote. This calculation did not presume that an alternative East Indian party would have any strength, and both sides agreed every effort should be made to keep them from falling by the wayside.

/2/ In a July 11 memorandum to Ball, Tyler reported that he and Shullaw intended "to discuss tactics" with the British and that "our objective continues to be the holding of elections later this year under a system of proportional representation which hopefully will result in the formation of a new Government replacing the Jagan regime." Tyler added that the threat to this objective "arises from the deteriorating security situation and from Jagan’s efforts to exploit a situation for which he and his followers are primarily responsible, so as to secure a postponement of the elections." (Ibid., Country File, British Guiana, Vol. I, Memos, 12/63–7/64)

"2. The British maintained that the principal threat to elections comes from the deteriorating security situation. They suggested that even with one division peace and order could not be guaranteed. The situation in Georgetown is particularly critical in that violence there could force the postponement of elections. The British urged that Forbes Burnham, leader of the People’s National Congress (PNC), be counselled to exercise all possible restraint on his supporters in Georgetown. They noted that the London papers played up the killing of Indian children, omitting African deaths and arson.

"3. The British said the Governor had suggested he be authorized to try to obtain a PNC/People’s Progressive Party coalition as a means of reducing tension in the pre-electoral period. They acknowledged that assurances of success were limited, but thought that failure might be attributed to Jagan and serve to discredit him. We explained the bases of our opposition and found that the British did not take issue with them.

"4. On the assumption a non-Jagan government could be formed, we said we would be prepared to extend the same financial assistance we agreed last October. The British suggested the formation of a US/UK/Canada joint development commission to work out a long term plan. We made it clear that US aid was predicated on Jagan’s not being included in the post election government.

"5. When the British inquired what policy might be should Jagan win, we reiterated that such a situation would be politically intolerable in the United States.

"6. On the question of the envoy to the United States the British said they could not oppose if Jagan came in a private capacity and expressed hope he would be received. We said we had made no plans to receive him or any other emissary and hoped the situation would not arise.

"7. The question of possible steps to assist in the security problem were discussed at length and the British agreed to explore with the Governor, who will be recalled for consultation soon:

"a. the possibility of establishing under the emergency regulations communal peace committees, seeking to obtain the public support of Jagan and Burnham for same.

"b. announcing the date of elections at this time as an indication of their firmness of intention to proceed.

"c. the formation of a national government in which all three parties would participate.

"8. Both sides agreed that little leverage existed to force Jagan to cooperate in the elections since he had everything to lose and nothing to gain. "9. An agreed minute is being prepared."

RH

386. Memorandum for the Record/1/

Washington, July 27, 1964.

/1/ Johnson Library, National Security File, Intelligence File, British Guiana, Special File. Secret; Eyes Only. Prepared by Chase on July 29.

SUBJECT
British Guiana Meeting—July 27, 1964

PARTICIPANTS
William Tyler; Harold Shullaw; William Cobb; Richard Helms; [name not declassified]; McGeorge Bundy; Peter Jessup; Gordon Chase

1. The meeting was called to discuss the attached cable from Georgetown. /2/ The cable reported Consul General Carlson’s apprehension about telling Cheddi Jagan we are not ready to receive an envoy.

/2/ Telegram Georgetown IN 35522, July 24, from Carlson to Shullaw; attached but not printed. (Ibid.)

2. The group agreed that a visit to the U.S. by a Jagan emissary would be a bad thing. At worst, such a visit would be interpreted to mean that the U.S. supports Cheddi Jagan; at best it would be interpreted as a sign that we can live with him. The visit would hurt the opposition parties in BG and would not help us domestically.

3. The group then discussed whether it would be advisable to send a lower-level official down to BG to talk to Cheddi Jagan as well as to the two opposition leaders. The advantages of this would be that we would appear reasonable ("willing to listen"), and that it might allow us to stall for time and reduce the rate of violence in the months between now and the BG elections. The main disadvantage is that any talks with Jagan will probably be misinterpreted by the uncommitted voters in BG—which number about 10%; such talks might indicate to these voters that "perhaps the U.S. does not think Cheddi is so bad."

4. The group agreed that Jagan’s request to send an envoy to the U.S. should be turned down and that we should not offer to send someone down to BG. However, we should use more gentle wording than the flat assertion now under consideration—i.e. "This proposal has been informally discussed with the Americans and they see no useful purpose for it. Therefore, it would be better if the proposal were dropped." Instead, a more flexible position should be adopted which offers a quid pro quo—i.e. when the violence stops, we will reconsider the proposal. The group decided that a cable should be drafted in this sense and sent to London, /3/ with an information copy to Georgetown (copy attached). /4/

GC

/3/ An attached undated telegram to London requested the Embassy to ask the Colonial Office to modify its instructions to the Governor to the following: "This proposal has been informally discussed with the Americans who see no useful purpose in it at this time. The Americans are obviously influenced in this point of view by continuing pattern of violence in British Guiana and widespread belief in British Guiana, as elsewhere, that PPP as governing party bears heavy responsibility this state of affairs. Their subsequent attitude toward question of emissary naturally would be influenced by course of events in British Guiana." (Ibid.)

/4/ According to an August 1 telegram from Carlson to Shullaw, the Governor delivered the message to Jagan on July 30, but omitted the part suggesting that the PPP was responsible for the violence. Jagan made no objection, observing that "it means then that if things stay quiet emissary will be received" to which the Governor responded that he could not speculate beyond the wording of the message. (Department of State, INR/IL Historical Files, British Guiana 1964 [file name not declassified])

387. Action Memorandum From the Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs (Tyler) to Secretary of State Rusk/1/

Washington, July 31, 1964.

/1/ Source: Department of State, INR/IL Historical Files, British Guiana Special Operations, 1964. Top Secret. Drafted by Shullaw. The memorandum is undated; the date used is the drafting date.

SUBJECT
Proposed Reply to Colonial Secretary Duncan Sandys’ Letter on British Guiana

Problem
Duncan Sandys has written to you (Tab B) /2/ stating that he believes order and security in British Guiana can only be restored through an all party coalition government. He asks for our support in bringing about such a coalition.

/2/ The attached July 30 message from Sandys, stated that the British were not certain they would be able to restrain racial violence sufficiently to hold elections and that they were satisfied that the only method of restoring order and security was to bring about a temporary all-Party coalition to bridge the period to the elections.

Discussion

During my talks in London with British officials July 16 and 17 I outlined the reasons why we thought a pre-election coalition of Jagan’s party and the two opposition parties was of doubtful value so far as security is concerned and dangerous from the point of view of our political objectives in British Guiana. The British officials with whom we talked were unable to make a convincing case for the coalition. Despite this Sandys has come down on the side of a coalition. I continue to believe this is an unwise and unnecessary move.

Recommendation

That you approve the attached message (Tab A) /3/ to Sandys which reiterates our doubts about a coalition and asks for further consideration before the Governor is given instructions to try to bring one about. /4/

/3/ Document 388.

/4/ Approved by Rusk.


388. Message From Secretary of State Rusk to the British Colonial Secretary (Sandys)/1/

/1/ Source: National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1964–66, POL 19 BR GU. Top Secret. Drafted by Shullaw.

Washington, August 4, 1964.

I fully appreciate your concern at continuing violence in British Guiana and your desire to find some way of preventing a situation developing which could necessitate postponement of the elections you intend holding in the colony later this year. I also sympathize with your capable and courageous Governor in his efforts to carry out his responsibilities under such trying conditions. In the circumstances I am somewhat hesitant to raise again the doubts and misgivings about a pre-election coalition which we expressed to your people at the recent London talks. Since, however, we are in complete agreement on the constructive objectives we are pursuing in British Guiana, I have no hesitation in doing so.

In the first place we seriously doubt that Jagan, who has been using violence for political purposes, would be likely to forego such tactics if a coalition were formed. Apart from that consideration there is, in our opinion, the very real possibility that a pre-election coalition would adversely affect the electoral prospects of the PNC and the UF by confusing the supporters of those two parties. Acoalition of the PPP and PNC excluding the UF would endanger the hoped for post election PNC–UF coalition which at the moment is the only possibility of replacing the Jagan Government. In short, we share your view of the importance of holding the elections later this year but are concerned that nothing be done in the pre-election period in the quest for order and security which would jeopardize the currently hopeful electoral results.

Since the London talks on July 16 and 17 there have been several developments in British Guiana which may be relevant. The strike of the sugar workers has been ended in what amounts to a defeat for Jagan. Whether this will result in any immediate improvement in the security situation, of course, remains to be seen. I also understand that Jagan has broken off his "unity" talks with Burnham and D’Aguiar. In the course of those talks he clearly indicated that the coalition he seeks has as its objective postponement of the elections. He showed no interest in a coalition limited to a brief pre-election period but insisted on a five year coalition.

I would be most grateful if you would give further consideration to these very real concerns on our part about the dangers of such a course of action. /2/

Warm regards,
Dean Rusk /3/

/2/ In a personal message to Rusk, attached to an August 17 covering note from the British Embassy, Sandys’ deputy, Sir Hilton Poynton, reported that the risk of violence was diminished and the case for a temporary coalition was therefore less strong. Poynton stated that he was sure that Sandys would agree, upon his return from holiday, that the idea should not be pursued under these circumstances. If, however, violence were to set in again at the pitch it reached in June and July, a temporary coalition might be reconsidered. (Ibid.)

/3/ Printed from a copy that bears this typed signature.

389. Memorandum for the Record/1/

Washington, September 11, 1964.

/1/ Source: Johnson Library, National Security File, Intelligence File, British Guiana, Special File. Secret; Eyes Only. Prepared by Chase on September 14.

SUBJECT
British Guiana—Meeting on September 11, 1964

PARTICIPANTS
Messrs. William Tyler; Harold Shullaw; Delmar Carlson; William Cobb; [name not declassified]; McGeorge Bundy; Gordon Chase

The meeting was called so that Consul General Carlson could brief the group about the current situation in BG.

1. Election Prospects—Mr. Carlson said that the election prospects are good. The Justice Party seems to be doing surprisingly well and everyone, including Jagan, seems to think that the anti-PPP forces will win. At the same time, the PPP is likely to get a plurality.

The group agreed that something would have to be done if the PPP did win. The general feeling was that, despite his conciliatory noises, Jagan is the same unrehabilitated bad egg he has always been; he has not really been "educated" by the US/Cuban experience.

2. Security Situation—Mr. Carlson said that the security situation is fairly good these days. He added that this is the thing to watch before and after the elections. If the security situation gets very bad before elections, the Governor will be inclined to push for a PPP/PNC coalition. Assuming Burnham wins the election, a deteriorating and uncontrollable security situation could conceivably push Burnham and the Governor towards accepting the formation of a PPP/PNC coalition.

3. Burnham—Mr. Carlson made these points relating to Burnham: First, while Burnham is now getting on very well with the leaders of other opposition parties, we should not expect this to last forever. The anti-PPP forces are bound to have plenty of problems with one another in the future. Second, Mr. Carlson noted that Burnham and the British do not get along. The Governor does not like Burnham, who twists the lion’s tail whenever he can. We can expect to see a growing British/Burnham problem. Third, Mr. Carlson said that while he is trying to build a relationship with Burnham, it is tough to do so. Burnham, a racist and probably anti-white, remembers slights and repays them; at the same time, he takes advantage of people who treat him softly. A recent frank exchange between Carlson and Burnham, however, proved at least partly satisfactory. Burnham said that if he gets into power he will not recognize the USSR and that he will have nothing to do with Cuba so long as he can find other people to buy British Guiana’s rice.

4. Other—Mr. Carlson reported that Burnham had said that it would be helpful if, during his campaign, he could promise the voters something concrete (e.g. the East-West road and the airport terminal). The group agreed that we should go along with Burnham on this.

The group discussed briefly the future of Atkinson Field. Mr. Tyler agreed to call DOD’s John McNaughton to get a reading on how important the facility is to us. /2/

/2/ In a May 12, 1965, memorandum to Howard Meyers, Director of Operations for the Office of Politico-Military Affairs (G/PM), Shullaw reported that the Government of British Guiana wanted to resolve the status of Atkinson Field, and asked again for a reading from the Department of Defense regarding its retention. Shullaw stated that Carlson had reported that if the United States was prepared to agree to release the field unconditionally, the Government of British Guiana in return would probably be willing to agree to unrestricted authorization for the United States to use the field whenever it wished. (Department of State, INR/IL Historical Files, [file name not declassified] 1965)

GC

390. Telegram From the Assistant Secretary of State for European and Canadian Affairs (Tyler) to the Ambassador to the United Kingdom (Bruce)/1/

/1/ Source: Department of State, INR/IL Historical Files, British Guiana Policy Papers, 1964. Secret.

Washington, September 14, 1964.

For Ambassador Bruce from Tyler. In our view, following considerations argue for desirability of expediting preparations for elections and setting election date as early in November as feasible with appropriate announcement earliest:
(1) Possible complicity of Burnham in Georgetown violence and conceivably his indictment (which Governor considering),
(2) likelihood of attempts by Jaganites and others to use such prospects to delay elections and seek alternative courses of action,
(3) uncertainty of opposition groups over date of election, and
(4) adverse effect of any late date on present momentum of opposition parties.

Appreciate Embassy conveying this thought to Coloff soonest since Governor Luyt in London this week and will be consulting Sandys.

FYI: Our primary aim with above is to avoid substantial interval when efforts might be made toy with Sandys’ decision in some fashion, especially if Burnham under indictment for conspiracy commit murder. End FYI.

391. Telegram From the Consulate General in British Guiana to the Department of State/1/

Georgetown, October 3, 1964.

IN 86222. [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] pass following message from Carlson to Shullaw:

In discussions with Burnham at his initiative early this week I found him relaxed and confident. He apparently believes election largely matter of getting vote out and having organized to do so along 1 Source: Johnson Library, National Security File, Country File, British Guiana, Vol. II, Memos, 12/63–7/64. Secret. lines of U.S. party he foresees no particular problem. Every week or so he plans to spend few days in countryside talking to small groups and has already done so in African pockets of Corantyne. He prefers this method rather than mass meetings in order minimize problem of security. He plans no concentrated campaign with mass meetings until last 3–4 weeks before December 7 election. His party manifesto will appear at start that phase of campaign. In meantime he plans issue separate pamphlets unemployment, education, roads, and rice.

Burnham was especially interested in any ammunition we could provide to counter Jagan’s exploitation of theme that Cuban rice market depends on his continuation in office. I told him we were aware of this problem and would see what we could develop.

Burnham also much interested in what specifics he could promise in way of projects.
I suggested
(1) improvement of East Coast road;
(2) maintenance of sea wall;
(3) airport improvements, including new terminal building;
(4) Berbice Bar cut. Re sea wall I pointed out he could claim regime jeopardized lives and property by failure do maintenance work over last few years. He could call attention to break in wall and flooding near Buxton early this year. He picked this up with alacrity. He also apparently liked Berbice Bar cut (which incidentally may improve his relations with New Amsterdam PNC boss Kendall who is not always enthusiastic about Burnham). He was all for East Coast road, but also suggested desirability improving road from New Amsterdam to Skeldon in Corantyne, saying need was especially great because not only is road in miserable condition but also there is no railroad. He also wanted Atkinson–Mackenzie road (estimated total cost U.S. $8 million) and mentioned desirability developing road to Potaro and eventually on to Brazil. He thought this road would open up agricultural areas. Although he sought my immediate approval to road in Corantyne and Atkinson–Mackenzie road, I made clear I was not in position to go beyond East Coast road without further authorization. He asked me to look particularly into possible authorization of Corantyne road. He has in mind after very brief respite following election to announce full-scale program. He would like during four-year term to complete as many short-range projects as possible and to have made sufficient start on number of long-range projects that public can clearly see what future portends from Burnham administration. Shortly after announcing his program he apparently wishes to make tour abroad, not only for purposes prestige or recognition but also to collect commitments for financial or economic assistance. He did not specify what countries he has in mind but it will undoubtedly include Germany and U.S. He mentioned that Jagan had apparently been given much attention when he visited Washington in 1961. I have little doubt that Burnham will expect be received by the President and that he is already leading up to this suggestion.

Comment: It would be politically desirable for Burnham to advocate Corantyne road since it would so clearly benefit Indian community as well as have immediate impact as adjunct of East Coast road. This road passes through rice and sugar areas from New Amsterdam to Skeldon and is 48 miles long. In 1949–53 this road was rebuilt and paved reportedly at a cost of about U.S. $3 million, but because of faulty engineering and construction it deteriorated almost completely after 4 years. Since then it has been occasionally patched. It is estimated that rehabilitation and paving with asphalt could be done for about U.S. $1.5 million. It is suggested that Department explore feasibility of permitting me inform Burnham Corantyne road may also be improved. /2/ The Department may wish consider whether touch base Colonial Office to obtain their concurrence to substitute Corantyne road for some other project or projects of equivalent value now on U.S.–U.K. agreed list. (Actually this road could be considered part of East Coast road.) Burnham will doubtlessly be raising matter of both Corantyne and possibly Atkinson–Mackenzie road with me shortly in order start preparing pamphlet on roads. Therefore, sooner we can decide whether we bless Corantyne road at least in principle the better.

/2/ In an unnumbered telegram to Carlson dated October 7, Shullaw reported that Burnham could be assured that the United States would assist British Guiana in road improvement projects and that this would include East Coast roads at least as far as Skelton. Regarding the Atkinson–MacKenzie road, Shullaw said that "assurances must be hedged at this time," due to the question of how best to finance all the road projects. (Ibid.)

392. Backchannel Message From the Department of State to the Embassy in the United Kingdom/1/

Washington, October 14, 1964.

/1/ Source: Department of State, INR/IL Historical Files, British Guiana, Policy Papers, 1964. Secret. Drafted by Cobb.

For Ambassador Bruce from Shullaw. There follows a paper on our interest in British Guiana which you may draw on in talking with Harold Wilson, should he become Prime Minister. /2/ Wilson will undoubtedly have

/2/ In an October 13 memorandum to Bundy, Chase stated that this cable was redrafted to delete mention of a possible Johnson–Wilson telephone call and instead stressed the need for Bruce to talk personally to Wilson, who was "sensitive to the US–UK Alliance." A notation in Bundy’s handwriting on the memorandum reads "OK, MB." (Johnson Library, National Security File, Country File, British Guiana, Vol. II Memos, 12/63–7/64)

a very tight schedule and countless other problems but we believe it would be best to go straight to him personally on this subject rather than to his Colonial Affairs Minister. So far as we can tell developments in BG are in accordance with our policy objectives and we hope Wilson will agree to continue along the charted course.

TALKING PAPER FOR AMBASSADOR BRUCE
(May be left with Mr. Wilson should he request it)

Since August 1961 the problems of British Guiana as it approaches independence have been discussed at the highest levels of our two governments with a view to seeking ways whereby the colony may obtain independence without posing a threat to the security of its neighbors in the Western Hemisphere.

As you know, Latin America is an area of the greatest importance to us. The establishment of an independent government in British Guiana under leadership which has been markedly receptive to communist ideas and vulnerable to communist subversion would create an intolerable situation for the United States and other countries in the Hemisphere. Previous British Governments have shown an understanding of this situation [1 line of source text not declassified] affording a full opportunity for the United States to express its views. [21/2 lines of source text not declassified] The President hopes you will share with him the conviction that it should continue along present lines.

It is the opinion of the United States Government that the proposed elections in British Guiana under Proportional Representation, despite the difficulties entailed, provide a democratic means through which the aspirations of all the people and races of British Guiana can be faithfully reflected. We believe that if the electorate participates fully in the elections the results can provide a basis for the formation of a representative government in which the possibility of communist infiltration will be significantly reduced. It is our intention to do what we can to assist a non-communist government in British Guiana so that the country at the earliest practicable date may attain independence with economic and social stability and have the prospect of playing a useful role in the hemisphere and in the community of free nations./3/ 

/3/ Bruce did not get an opportunity to talk to Wilson personally (the British Labor Party won the general parliamentary elections of October 15 and Harold Wilson, as party leader, became Prime Minister) and transmit this message, but did give it to Patrick Gordon Walker, the new Labor Foreign Secretary; see Document 394.

393. Memorandum From Gordon Chase of the National Security Council Staff to the President’s Special Assistant for National Security Affairs (Bundy)/1/

Washington, October 17, 1964.

/1/ Source: Johnson Library, National Security File, Country File, British Guiana, Vol. II, Memos, 12/63–7/64. Secret; Eyes Only.

SUBJECT
British Guiana

Here are a few miscellaneous items on British Guiana.

1. The election prospects still look good. One of the things we are concentrating on is ensuring that the opposition parties turn out to vote on election day; to this end the CIA, in a deniable and discreet way, is providing financial incentives to party workers who are charged with the responsibility of getting out the vote. Another thing worth concentrating on is the job of ensuring that intimidation, threats, and violence do not hamper the conduct of the BG elections; attached is a cable from Carlson which describes British planning in this area./2/

2. With respect to the impact on the BG situation of the Labor victory, State feels that the election was sufficiently close so that Labor will be chary of tampering with the present course of events in BG. While this takes some of the edge off our worry, you may still want to talk about BG with Lord Harlech the next time you see him./3/ 3. We are going ahead with our contingency planning for a likely Burnham victory. In this regard, Harry Yoe, the AID man working on BG, will make a quiet trip to BG between November 4 and November 12 to evaluate projects which we may want to initiate immediately after the BG elections.

GC

/2/ Dated October 10; attached but not printed.

/3/ Two notations in Bundy’s handwriting relating to this paragraph appear on the memorandum: one reads "Bruce and Walker talked recently," and the other reads "I did it. He assures me new Govt. will know of our interest."



394. Backchannel Message From the Embassy in the United Kingdom to the Department of State/1/

London, October 19, 1964.

/1/ Source: Department of State, INR/IL Historical Files, British Guiana Policy Papers, 1964. Secret; Eyes Only.

From Ambassador Bruce to Secretary Rusk.

Have had no opportunity to deliver message, 2 as instructed, to Harold Wilson, if elected, on British Guiana.

/2/ See Document 392.

I did, however, take subject up with Gordon Walker this morning, who will shortly discuss it with PriMin.

Foreign Secretary said present HMG had never approved policy predecessor on BG. They recognized, however, USG particular interest in safeguarding BG against Communist takeover. He will be prepared give answer during Washington trip./3/

/3/ See Document 396. 

[1 paragraph (11/2 lines of source text) not declassified]

Comment. 1. I think HMG will permit proposed December elections under proportional representation to take place. [1 line of source text not declassified]
2. Appointment of Greenwood as Colonial Secretary bodes no good for us later on in this affair. Nevertheless, I believe PriMin will keep him under strict control.

395. Memorandum From the Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs (Tyler) to Secretary of State Rusk/1/

Washington, October 20, 1964.

SUBJECT
British Guiana

/1/ Source: Johnson Library, National Security File, Country File, British Guiana, Vol. II, Memos, 12/63–7/64. Secret; Eyes Only. Drafted by Cobb.

We have just learned that Jagan is flying to London October 21 to urge the British to postpone the elections scheduled for December 7 in British Guiana. We also have a message from Ambassador Bruce/2/ who has taken up British Guiana with Patrick Gordon Walker, who says he will discuss it promptly with the Prime Minister. Gordon Walker says he will be prepared to discuss British Guiana in his forthcoming visit and to give us his Government’s position at that time. In view of the fact that we got to Gordon Walker first, we think it unlikely that the British will take any decision regarding postponement without consulting with us./3/

/2/ A handwritten notation in the margin next to this sentence reads "attached." Attached but not printed.
/3/ In an October 20 memorandum to Bundy, Chase reported that, in his "weekly gabfest on BG" that morning with Richard Sampson and William Cobb, the latter had stated that the Labor government was very unlikely to postpone the elections. (Johnson Library, National Security File, Country File, British Guiana, Vol. II, Memos, 12/63–7/64)

Our real difficulties are likely to arise after the December 7 elections, since at that time Colonial Minister Tony Greenwood will naturally expect to play an important role in British Guiana developments.

396. Memorandum From the Director of the Office of British Commonwealth and Northern European Affairs (Shullaw) to the Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs (Tyler)/1/

Washington, October 27, 1964.

SUBJECT
Recent Events in British Guiana

Several weeks after the Anglo–US consultations in July 1964 violence in BG came to a virtual halt with the end of the sugar workers strike, and the beginning of the election campaign. In mid-August a new East Indian party was formed—the Justice Party—and Jagan announced that the PPP would participate in the elections "under protest."

/1/ Source: Department of State, INR/IL Historical Files, British Guiana Chronological File, 1964. Secret; No Distribution. Drafted by Cobb.

The campaign is now in full swing with the deposit of electoral lists October 26, and the three major parties, as well as several new parties are active. As the campaign intensifies the likelihood of violence increases but every effort is being made to maintain security. To this end the US has just supplied 20 radio transmitter receivers and 10 jeeps for the police.

Jagan’s actions indicate that he is on the defensive. He is blaming his government’s failure to receive assistance on reactionary elements in the U.S. and the U.K., and he maintains that the intense internal dissatisfaction with his administration is attributable solely to outside influences. The most recent estimate from the Colonial office suggests Jagan would get only 40% of the vote if elections were held today. Last July we thought he would get from 45% to 48%.

We are preparing to move ahead with an assistance program for a non-Jagan government in BG. The program would consist of road rehabilitation, maintenance of the seawall, making a cut through the Berbice Bar to open up the New Amsterdam area, and construction of a road from Atkinson field to the interior. An AID representative will go to BG November 4 to investigate the degree to which the BG administrative services can be used in implementing the projects.

We must anticipate that if Jagan loses by a close vote HMG will press us to agree to a Jagan–Burnham coalition government after elections. They may argue that only in a PPP–PNC coalition can the major groups in the population be represented; that a government which does not contain the PPP will be under continuing attack designed to keep it from governing effectively; and that an African dominated Burnham government will seek to intimidate and repress the East Indians.

We believe a PPP–PNC coalition after the elections would only add to BG’s problems. It would be politically impossible for the US to assist a government in which Jagan and his colleagues played a role. Intense personal rivalry between Jagan and Burnham would contribute to instability and intensify racial antagonisms. We hope that a coalition government can be formed without the PPP and that it will be genuinely multi-racial./2/ We will use the influence we have in support of such a government.

/2/ Telegram 125 from Georgetown, October 26, reported a 2-hour discussion between Carlson and Burnham on October 23, during which the latter spoke of his thoughts about whom he wanted for the various cabinet positions in his coming government, with United Front and Justice Party leaders slotted for minor positions. Carlson reported that Burnham’s "current thinking somewhat disturbing because may indicate intention make coalition government unduly PNC dominated with other parties’ participation kind of sham," which Carlson said would be "very divisive" and would lead to a Burnham administration of "one term or less." (National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1964–66, POL 14 BR GU)

397. Memorandum of Conversation/1/

Washington, October 27, 1964, 10 a.m.

/1/ Source: Department of State, INR/IL Historical Files, Carlson–Department Messages, Vol. 2, 10/2/64–12/31/64. Secret. Drafted by Shullaw. The meeting was held in Secretary Rusk’s office. The memorandum indicates it is an advance copy; no final or approved copy has been found.

SUBJECT
British Guiana

PARTICIPANTS
U.S.
The Secretary
William R. Tyler, Assistant Secretary for European Affairs
J. Harold Shullaw, Director, EUR/BNA