PAN AMERICAN DAY will have a special importance in 1948. On April 14, when the Western Hemisphere celebrates the fifty-eighth anniversary of the founding of the Pan American Union, the Ninth International Conference of American States will be meeting in Bogotá. The nations that were represented in Washington at the First Inter-American Conference in 1890 will thus have an excellent opportunity to examine again the significance, the usefulness, the tradition, and the aim of this movement, which has been in existence half a century, and which has gradually given rise to a system of law that is today the oldest and probably the most vigorous in the world.

Fifty-eight years after the first conference, there are still Americans all over the continent-Anglo-Americans and Latin Americans who believe things might

have been better if they had been handled differently. Nevertheless, the official policy of the governments, since the Good Neighbor Policy was declared, faces little public opposition, is generally accepted, is approved by the Congresses, and in many respects is so nearly an axiom or a dogma that it holds in check those who think they have better solutions for the great problem of inter-American relations. But there exist, in spite of everything and underneath what might be called the official interAmerican policy, two principal heterodox currents. In fact, rather than currents they are fixed positions of small groups in the United States and in Latin America, which maintain a critical attitude toward the efforts of Pan Americanism to solve the vital problem of the relations among the American States. It cannot be said that in the United States those sentiments that

created the spirit of "manifest destiny," whose practical application was found in the "big stick" policy, have been entirely rooted out. There are still those who believe that a natural historical process would necessarily have widened the boundaries of the United States until they had reached the limits of the hemisphere. For these people an imperialistic policy of this kind would have had the same excuse which all the earlier policies had: a superior civilization would extend over backward nations, bringing with it the material benefits that inept governments and constant revolutions had prevented the inhabitants of the vast Latin American region from enjoying. With this excuse, what might be thought selfish conduct would be justified as a logical development of the original missionary spirit of the great Anglo-American nation.

This reactionary position, now without influence in United States public opinion, has its counterpart in Latin America. There also is found a reactionary group, small and contentious, that usually makes dramatic outbursts, taking advantage of any untoward circumstance. It should not be surprising that at present it sometimes speaks with the voice of the extreme left. In its view, the true United States design is not that expressed by its government, through its Congress and its public and

private agencies, and in the press; but on the contrary, it is the imperialistic spirit, even though reduced to silence. To this supposed threat there is an instinctive defense: a close alliance of the Latin American countries in opposition to Pan Americanism, which the group in question considers a Trojan horse created by the United States and designed to weaken the moral resistance of the Latin American nations.

Between these two extremes, both of which had powerful adherents during the first quarter of this century, Pan Americanism has developed, gaining ground from one and the other to become not only the official but the popular policy of the twenty-one American republics. And with what difficulty! Let us not forget that the modest Commercial Bureau of the American Republics which was founded in 1890 and which became the Pan American Union had to survive and, what is more, progress in exceedingly difficult times. Often during this period relations between the United States and Latin American republics were broken off; on some occasions United States marines landed on the shores of Latin American countries; there were military occupations under the pretext of maintaining order or protecting the interests of the United States; and in general, some of that country's most

serious imperialistic actions took place in this era. Thus the Pan American Union can well be compared to the Biblical Ark of the Covenant, supported by a few faithful hands under the most trying circumstances. But, perhaps thanks to it, Pan Americanism did not die then, destroyed by its own creators. The juridical system that was slowly being fashioned continued, taking unsteady steps but always advancing, and at last it achieved such strength that it was able to isolate forever the two reactionary groups and establish a third, one of American understanding. On the one hand imperialism had to stop, and on the other, resentment and lack of confidence had to withdraw before unmistakable demonstrations of good will. But there are still people in the United States who consider the Pan American policy to be a web of subtle words and ingenious commitments that only ties the hands of that powerful nation and thwarts its manifest destiny. At the same time, in Latin America, those who lived by the exploitation of a deep and sincere anti-imperialist popular sentiment still believe that Pan Americanism is a fraud and a system of penetration chosen by the greatest military power on earth to dominate the defenseless nations to the south.

However, what was at first only an official policy of the governments has over the

years been adopted by the peoples of the hemisphere. Their support is still tinged. with suspicion, to be sure, but it is growing ever more sincere. It is obvious that to bring together two masses of human beings. of such different characteristics as those of this continent is a gigantic and arduous undertaking, still unfinished. There are many ways of approaching this goal. But perhaps it is well not to forget that the effort is not to join in a single entity two forces that more than once have been antagonistic, and that any effort along those lines would provoke fatal resentment. The effort is rather for them to live together, to understand each other, and to cooperate, and for each to offer to the other its best, the fruit of its own nature and not what it has artificially assimilated from the other. For that reason, Pan Americanism does not, and should not, tend toward union, much less toward standardization, but rather toward cooperation and coordination.

In 1948 the Pan American juridical process will reach a peak. Until now it has been tentative. From now on it is going to be a law. The experimental nature that has hitherto characterized the Pan American movement can better be perceived by reviewing the treaties, conventions, and resolutions formulated at the regular and special inter-American conferences of the