724.3415/3491

The Ambassador in Argentina (Weddell) to the Acting Secretary of State

No. 132

Sir: I have the honor to transmit to the Department herewith copy of a memorandum of the conversation which took place between the Secretary of State2 and the President3 and Minister for Foreign Affairs4 of the Argentine Republic on December 29, 1933, in Buenos Aires, on the subject of the Chaco conflict. To this is attached copy of a memorandum which was prepared by the League of Nations Commission on the Chaco and handed to the Secretary by Dr. Saavedra Lamas.

These memoranda are sent in duplicate only, as copies have already been furnished the Secretary in Santiago.

Respectfully yours,

Alexander W. Weddell
[Enclosure]

Memorandum by the Ambassador in Argentina (Weddell)

During the course of a formal call made on the President and the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Argentina on December 28, the latter named official handed to the Secretary of State a memorandum, copy of which is attached, containing suggestions from the Commission of the League of Nations looking to a settlement of the Chaco problem. At this time it was arranged that the Secretary of State should call on the President and the Minister for Foreign Affairs the following morning, primarily to discuss this matter. The Secretary was accompanied by Ambassador Weddell and the Commercial Attaché, [Page 33] Dr. Dye. The interview took place in the Casa Rosada and lasted about one hour and a quarter; the conversations were carried on in an atmosphere of unusual warmth and cordiality.

The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Dr. Saavedra Lamas, stated that Mr. Buero, Uruguayan representative on the League of Nations, was then in his office and that President Terra of Uruguay hoped Secretary Hull and President Justo would support the League efforts to secure an extension of the existing armistice. The President remarked that he and his Government had already done everything in their power to promote peace but that he felt embarrassed at attempting to exert further pressure on the Paraguayan authorities for fear he would rather weaken his own influence with them. He added that it was not true that the war party was in control in Paraguay or that President Ayalá does not wish to grant an extension of the armistice.

The Secretary inquired if the Bolivians were not in accord with the views set forth in the attached memorandum and if they would not send troops back to the mines or to farms except 6,500 to be left for police purposes. The President appeared to assent to this.

The Secretary remarked that both Governments were saying to United States representatives the same thing, that the other Government is taking advantage of the armistice with the idea of continuing the warfare. He added that after “running over” the Bolivians at President Terra’s house, the Bolivians seemed to have been entirely agreeable to the suggestions then made.

The Secretary stated that in his opinion the only point in the League proposal to which the Paraguayans could reasonably object was the reference to a port. He stated that he thought that to send a military representative from each Government into the country of the other as representative of the League Commission would assure the good faith of both parties; that any variation thereafter would tend to outlaw the offending nation.

Dr. Saavedra Lamas then stated various points in the controversy as he understood them:

(1):
General Estigarribía is not in opposition to his chief or to his President in his attitude concerning the armistice.
(2):
President Ayalá wants peace.
(3):
Public opinion in Paraguay is bringing pressure on the President, and the people desiring security for the future.
(4):
The League Commission understands what is the position in Paraguay of the President.
(5):
President Ayalá prefers that the economic question be recognized and considered in a conference to be called by the Pan American Union.
(6):
In this way the population of the two countries will be satisfied.
(7):
A meeting of boundary experts under the auspices of the Pan American Union: the important question is when can boundary experts get together. In his opinion such an arrangement would meet the situation.

This was the main point; concerning the other matter—an international loan—he had not made up his mind. President Justo interrupted here to say: “We would be favorable.”

Saavedra Lamas continued that there was the matter of the appointment of financial experts for the handling of a loan and looking to the development of certain natural sources of wealth.

The Secretary remarked here that a time beyond any armistice period would be necessary. Saavedra Lamas appreciated that.

Saavedra Lamas remarked that arbitration must come and also security. The Secretary suggested why not put into the project the idea in general of an economic conference and leave out the matter of ports. To this the Minister replied, “That is the best way.”

The Secretary continued that now is a time which may not occur over long years in which to end the conflict. In view of the character of the territory, he continued, neither country could bring the war to a final end in years. To this the President said: “We both agree.”

The Secretary then said that Generals flushed with victory make military sentiment look like public opinion, and added that if Paraguay can be made satisfied with the suggestion of the League Commission to send military experts there, that would meet the situation for the moment. There would then be no cause for not agreeing to arbitration and sending back the armies to be disbanded. Then would come agreement in principle on arbitration which has been suggested and would work out future relations. He continued, “I think we should all insist to them that they accept this idea.”

Dr. Saavedra Lamas here remarked that take out the port matter and put in the question of economic security and Paraguay would accept.

The Minister then asked when the Secretary would be in Washington, to which Mr. Hull replied that he expected to be there January 23. Saavedra Lamas then asked if it would be possible to call the Economic Conference in two months.

Saavedra Lamas stated that the first matter to be solved is the question of financial security and added that he had told President Terra nothing could be done for the moment in the matter in advance of the matter of financial arrangements. He continued that in Argentina it is not a matter of needing money, but the question would have to be taken up with construction experts here to carry out the plan.

[Page 35]

The Secretary remarked that the President of the League Commission should bring pressure on Paraguay, adding that public opinion would be against a country that did not meet this; that he had told this to Bolivia, in fact had told both sides. That he felt sure the Argentine Government would not overlook anything, but if a solution is not found now, it never will be found.

Dr. Saavedra Lamas then proceeded to outline the situation as he saw it, as follows:

(1):
Arbitration is feasible.
(2):
The nature of the security Paraguay is to receive, and that is feasible.
(3):
In order that arbitration may be feasible, there must be this Economic Conference.
(4):
Paraguay and Bolivia ought to ask the boundary countries if they are agreeable to this economic plan.
(5):
?
(6):
Nothing in this for the United States to do save that a financial expert will be needed.

The Secretary then expressed his admiration of and thanks to the President and Minister for Foreign Affairs for the interest they have taken in this matter, and added, “The moral effect of stopping this war would be immense in this hemisphere and in Europe.”

Dr. Saavedra Lamas then stated that he wished to take up a second chapter. He expressed his pleasure in the Secretary’s visit, said that he regretted taking up material things at a time like this; that he was sorry the Secretary could not see more of Argentina.

The Secretary said that he was making a careful study of Argentina and of its resources and stressed the opinion that there should be a bilateral treaty between the two countries;5 that from the standpoint of the United States in these matters, it was necessary to act very slowly.

Dr. Saavedra Lamas remarked that if they could make a treaty with only a few and relatively unimportant articles in it, that would help a great deal. It would mark a beginning.

The Secretary remarked again that it was necessary to go slowly but that with great leadership at this end and leadership at the other end, working in harmony the future should be bright.

The interview closed in an even added atmosphere of warmth and harmony over that which marked its beginning.

A[lexander] W. W[eddell]
[Page 36]
[Subenclosure]

Memorandum Prepared by the League of Nations Commission on the Chaco

The President of the League Commission suggests that the cooperation which has been so happily begun in Montevideo between the Commission and the Pan American Conference might be continued in the following form:

The League Commission would propose to both parties to sign an agreement consisting of three parts:

1)
They would recognize that in order to reach a solution of their conflict likely to suppress bitter feelings they must agree on a procedure enabling them to submit all their claims relating to the Chaco conflict to an impartial tribunal. That tribunal would be the Permanent Court of Justice of the Hague, Paraguay having already adhered unconditionally to the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court and Bolivia declaring that she is ready to accept that jurisdiction for this special case;
2)
The two parties would recognize the necessity of eliminating all fear of military aggression while the Court would be dealing with the question and of hastening the re-establishment of normal relations and mutual confidence. They would consequently agree on adequate security measures consisting of:
a)
Withdrawal of their troops from the Chaco under the supervision of neutral officers;
b)
Limitation of their troops stationed on the outskirts of the Chaco under the supervision of neutral officers;
c)
Reduction of their effectives to a definite peace-time level (possibly 4,000 men for Paraguay; 6,500 for Bolivia) such amounts not to be exceeded during five years, except with the authorization of the Council of the League.
3)
The two countries would recognize the necessity of fostering between them better economic relations and of dealing apart from any territorial consideration, with such economic problems as that of Bolivia’s access to the Atlantic Ocean. To this effect the League Commission would avail itself of the resolution adopted by the Pan American Conference on December 24th6 on the proposal of the Argentine Delegation and insert in the document to be signed by both parties a recommendation that the Pan American Union should convene in [Page 37] Buenos Aires the proposed economic conference. The results of such a conference might be such as to make the decision of the Court more acceptable to the parties when that decision is given.

  1. Cordell Hull, then returning from Montevideo where he had served as Chairman of the American delegation to the Seventh International Conference of American States. See ibid., pp. 1 ff.
  2. Agustín P. Justo.
  3. Carlos Saavedra Lamas.
  4. See section entitled “Preliminary Discussions Respecting a Trade Agreement Between the United States and Argentina” pp. 510 ff.
  5. Resolution on Commercial Conference at Buenos Aires, approved December 23, 1933, Report of the Delegates of the United States of America to the Seventh International Conference of American States, p. 260.