Why did Guatemala recognize the Nationalists before Germany?

[Sid Guttridge]

Germany and Italy formally recognized Franco's Nationalist Government on 18 November 1936.

However, despite being his main backers, they were not the first.

Over the previous ten days Guatemala and El Slavador had already recognized the Nationalist Government.

Did Guatemala and El Salvador do so independently, or were they encouraged by Germany and Italy to do so in order to provide diplomatic cover for their own recognition?

Cheers,

Sid

[Sid Guttridge]

To answer my own question - it appears that they believed premature press reports that Franco had already entered Madrid in triumph.

Cheers,

Sid.

[Alsaceone]

OK, that's why they jumped the gun, but why were Guatemala and El Salvador in such a hurry? Were they trying to make points with the Spanish Nationalists? The Church? Germany? All of the above?

Alsaceone

[Ironmachine]

Both countries were military dictatorships at the time, Guatemala under Jorge Ubico and El Salvador under Maximiliano Hernández.
So perhaps they just wanted to show support for "one of their own".

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi Ironmachine,

I think you are right. Any Latin American government with the military in control, that was supported by the Roman Catholic Church and a residual hispanic land owning class had important interests in common with the Spanish Nationalists. As a result of the damage the great depression did to democratic credibility in the region in the early 1930s, there were a large number of such Catholic/military/landowner regimes in Latin America that were inclined towards the Nationalists.

However, they mostly maintained de jure relations with the Spanish Republic until February-March 1939, as it was the legitimate government in law. Only about five opened de facto relations with the Nationalists before then.

The US leaned heavily on El Salvador, Guatemala and Nicaragua, to prevent them sending diplomatic representatives to the Nationalists after their recognitions in November 1936, and dissuaded any other circum-Caribbean countries from following their example.

In no cases were ideological Fascists in control of Latin American governments. Indeed, major countries such as Brasil, Chile and Argentina legislated against such organizations in the late 1930s after real or perceived coup threats from them.

Cheers,

Sid.

[Sturmabteilungsmann]

The US leaned heavily on El Salvador, Guatemala and Nicaragua, to prevent them sending diplomatic representatives to the Nationalists...

More non-interventionism from the "neutral" USA.

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi Sturmabteilungsmann,

In fairness, this was only a minor part of "non-interventionism from the "neutral" USA" in the Spanish Civil War.

The main loser as a result of US policy in this regard were the Republicans, not the Nationalists.

As the internationally recognized, legitimate government, the Republicans had the right under international law to buy arms abroad. This right was not shared by the Nationalists, who were rebels. However, the USA declined to sell any weaponry to both sides from January 1937. Furthermore, the USA leant heavily on Latin American governments not act as conduits for arms sales to either side. (The only Latin American Government to defy the US on this was Mexico.)

So "non-interventionism from the "neutral" USA", by pursuing an even-handed embargo on arms sales to both sides, cut across across a right possessed only by the legitimate Republican Government. The rebel Nationalists didn't suffer from this decision because they had no such right in the first place.

Cheers,

Sid.

[Sturmabteilungsmann]

Thanks Sid. That's interesting, but it sounds like a separate issue if USA cut arms to either side anyway. I suppose we are cutting hairs. It's always interesting how foreign policies can have opposite than the intended effect.