290. Editorial Note

On February 17, Herbert Matthews, correspondent and editor of the New York Mmes, interviewed Fidel Castro in the Sierra Maestra Mountains. Matthews described the Cuban leader as an idealistic reformer intent on restoring the democratic Cuban constitution of 1940 and as the symbol of resistance to Batista's regime. He contended that the Cuban Government was following unsound and dangerous financial policies, that the opposition to Batista was anti-United States, and that United States sales of arms to the government were interpreted as support for Batista. Matthews' interviews were described in a series of articles which appeared in the New York Times, February 24, 25, and 26, 1957.

In despatch 531 from Habana, February 28, Ambassador Gardner noted that many of Matthews' statements and conclusions were accurate and that he agreed with the reporter that the Batista administration was faced by the most determined opposition it had yet experienced. But he asserted that Matthews presented a one-sided picture and that the Batista government had the situation "fairly well under control." He stated Matthews had emphasized the negative features of the situation and had exaggerated the size and importance of the Castro movement.

Gardner also declared that the opposition to the Batista regime actually consisted of several groups with different objectives and conflicting ambitions. In the first category were those desiring a "new deal" in Cuba. Gardner listed Castro and his followers as the most aggressive element bent on direct and violent action in the category, along with the Federation of University Students, the dissatisfied military officers, and a loosely defined group of professional businessmen. His second category included those who desired to replace the present administration, such as Prio and other leaders of the old-line political parties. (Department of State, Central Files, 737.00/2-2857)