Quintus makes the point that the significance of 1954 is still not widely enough understood in Guatemala in its true historical context. If you take a book like 'Breve Historia Contemporánea de Guatemala' by Jorge Luján Muñoz, part of the academic establishment in Guatemala you can see Quintus's point. Luján Muñoz only refers to the CIA involvement in a footnote in his chapter on the downfall of Arbenz. And finishes the piece implying that the Arbenz government failed due to internal factors:
"En ese poco tiempo [1951-54] el temor de la amenaza comunista, la imprudencia de muchos miembros en el gobierno y la falta de contacto con la realidad los llevó a caer tan poco gloriosamente."
Interesting to see Stephen Schlesinger interviewed in the documentary. Schlesinger co-wrote with Stephen Kinzer one of the widely considered classics on the CIA intervention in Guatemala in 1954 - Bitter Fruit - The Story of the American Coup in Guatemala. You can see Stephen Kinzer talking about Guatemala in 1954 and his latest book "Overthrow: America's Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq." on Democracy Now! (May 2006).
"In other words, the Arbenz regime was not a Guatemalan government, it was a foreign government controlled by foreigners."
Those words from Vice President Richard Nixon to Carlos Castillo Armas, then President of Guatemala, are still striking for their duplicity and hypocrisy. What happened in Guatemala over 50 years ago, still resonates with students of U.S. foreign policy in the interceding years. This example of the U.S. government deposing a democratically elected government for straight-forward economic self-interest finds echoes in many, many other parts of the world since -right up to the present day. The big difference with the US role in Guatemala in 1954 is that the 'American coup' is a matter of public record and can no longer be spun in any other way.
Yes, it's official: the US does not always promote democracy and liberty beyond its borders.
