This volume is a rewritten version of a political science dissertation, constructed entirely within dependency theory and written for the true believer. It is based principally on secondary works. The only documents are drawn from published sources, with items from the Foreign Relations series unfortunately cited by page number, but without volume year, making them appear as if they all came from a single volume.
The main emphasis is upon theory, with the author seeking to generalize all events into sweeping principles that are universally applicable. Since this is done solely from the events in Guatemala, it is scarcely surprising that the “case study” cited fits the theory perfectly.
Although the narration of the “case study” does provide description of the Guatemalan revolutionaries’ view of events, particularly of the agrarian reform, it is clearly pro-Arbenz. While there are numerous references to Arana’s “death,” the fact that he was assassinated is mentioned only twice with discussion of the circumstances avoided. Unfortunately the narration is plagued by problems such as footnotes to citations which support only part of the statement and are unrelated to the interpretation involved. There are also a considerable number of inaccuracies. For example, the author contends that Guatemala shifted from dependence on Germany to the United States, citing the Reciprocal Trade Agreement of the 1930s as the turning point because it granted duty-free admission to Guatemalan coffee and bananas (pp. 83 and 92). In fact, coffee and bananas were being admitted duty-free for decades prior to the accord. To contend that Guatemala was in the German orbit requires considerable exaggeration, for at best Germany was one of several major trading partners providing limited alternatives to the United States, which assumed the primary position in Guatemalan trade during the late nineteenth century and has never relinquished it. The difference was one of degree, rather than of primary focus.
The author also contends that the agrarian reform of the 1950s led to a substantial increase in production of com and beans, enabling self-sufficiency without imports (p. 211). Yet his own tables (pp. 212-213) indicate only modest increases in production, far below those of earlier years under the dictatorship. Most historians will undoubtedly be astounded to learn that the 1954 U.S. intervention “politicized the military” in Guatemala and that as a result of this event “a legacy of military rule was established” (p. 286). To find the Guatemalan president conferring with the “German Foreign Minister to Guatemala” (p. 94) is even more shocking.
