In that order there are many positive points, which you can develop in order to transform it without just destroying it, since there is no new order that you can buy at Sears Roebuck to put in its place. So you have to transform to reform, and not just condemn the whole thing and try to do the whole thing anew again. And in that sense I think there is a strong possibility provided that the new president understands that point. Then we can support him. If he doesn't understand that, we have to organize is very strong opposition movement to make a road open for these ideas.

Clash or Accommodation?

If you organize a strong opposition movement is this going to lead to an open clash in Brazil, or do you think that there will be an accommodation?

Well, how could I answer that ... because it all depends on the antagonists, I mean, if they accept the fact that the people are not happy with the present situation, they accept to change it, let's say a 50 percent change. I don't see necessarily a clash in the sense of open hostility, of armed revolution, or anything of that kind. But if they do resist, I think that the situation can easily evolve towards a break a clear-cut division of waters.

But I still hope that there will be some understanding because even in the army I would say that the major it is more or less neutral to those problems. As usual in any community, in any group, there are minorities who-lead it for good or for worse. But I think a minority, in the army, sort of an "avant-garde," understands [the real situation], so they can eventually agree and compromise with the public opinion.

U.S. Brazil Relations

If and when Brazil does have a free election, do you see any worsening of Brazil's relations with the United States as the result of a more free play of political expression?

That's a very interesting question but perhaps so interesting that it makes it very difficult to answer. I think that as you government lets it be believed in Brazil, true or not, that it is supporting military regimes in the name of preventing Communism to spread--in the name of anything--it would be a very ad and disturbing situation. Because nowadays 'we have a growing anti-Americanism in Brazil which is no more inspired nor controlled by the Communists.' You-see many industrialists--some of the most powerful Brazilian industrial groups--who are more anti-American than many students I know, for the first time in our history.

And if that sort of association, guilty by association, goes on, in other words, if your government does not detach itself from any responsibility in the military regime, there will be an identification of America with the destiny and the fate of the military regime. And then, of course, any candidate who run in a free election will run, for good or for worse, sincerely, hypocritically, or demagogically, on an anti-American platform. Which I think is very bad for us and eventually for you.

Anti-Americanism

So anti-Americanism exists basically because we have chosen to identify ourselves with the interests of the military government?

At least it appears like it. And in the beginning it was true. And it was justified, in a way, because instead of intervening, eventually, your government preferred to support the Brazilian group which overthrew Joao Goulart [former leftist president]. But I think after it, they should not be so happy about Castelo Branco's way of ruling the country. They should be just, well, a little aloof. And at least wash their hands and not try to let Castelo Branco identify himself too much with the American goals in Latin America.

'We have a growing anti-Americanism in Brazil which is no longer inspired or controlled by the Communists."

We have a minister of foreign affairs, a former ambassador to Washington and a general in retirement, Juracy Magalhaes, who paraphrased the famous phrase by the General Motors man here who said "Everything that is good for the United states is good for Brazil." This is not necessarily true. And it is a very unhappy way of putting it. Of Course Brazilinas resent this, and when they resent it they blame America.

I think somebody like my friend Lincoln Gordon [former U.S. ambassador to Brazil, and presently Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Latin America], who way very effective, and I consider him one of the best friends that Brazil has had up to now--I like him as a person very much and I respect him very much--but I think he should do something to show that the American government has nothing to do with the military regime in Brazil, that it is not necessarily a must for your policy to support any kind of regime, not even good ones, but even less, bad ones