812.00/16988
The Secretary of State to President Wilson
My Dear Mr. President: I enclose the reply of Carranza to the communication of the Conference of diplomats.22
The position taken by Carranza is not unreasonable though it seems to me to be unwise since he fails to seize an opportunity which would give him exceptional advantage, and especially so in view of the desperate situation of the Villistas, who seem to be entirely disorganized and incapable of offering united resistance to the advancing Carranzista army.
Of course his invitation to meet in conference on the border to discuss Mexican affairs from the international standpoint with the sole object of determining whether the government, of which he is the head, is entitled to recognition as a de facto government cannot be accepted. The place of a meeting for such purpose could not in any event be Mexican territory. If Carranza had named Washington it might be at least worthy of consideration.
[Page 551]The proposal, however, shows a better disposition, it seems to me, than any previous action by Carranza. He says that he is willing to discuss the facts on which must be determined whether or not his government should be recognized. That necessarily involves the questions of its ability to restore peace, its stability, and its international responsibility. As a result such a conference would in fact review the entire domestic state of Mexico including the power of the factions and their complaints against one another.
The Carranzistas are undoubtedly stronger and more cohesive than they have ever been. In fact I have almost reached the conclusion that they are so dominant that they are entitled to recognition. If they are not recognized, I cannot see what will be gained by recognizing any other government, since the present war would continue and be prolonged by strengthening the opposition to Carranza, who, I feel certain, would win in the end.
The situation has changed materially since the communication was sent to the Mexican chiefs. Villa’s power has rapidly waned, his forces have disintegrated, and many of his ablest lieutenants have abandoned him or are quarreling with him. As long as the Villista faction was capable of offering stubborn resistance to the Constitutionalists the desirable thing was to stay the strife by harmonizing the factional differences. That was the purpose of the proposed conference of leaders. Now, it seems to me, the problem is whether or not peace in Mexico will not be more quickly restored by giving moral support to the triumphing faction of Carranza.
The difficulty we are in is that we proposed a conference of Mexicans to determine a course of action. The weaker factions other than the Carranzistas have accepted the invitation. Can we consistently or honorably refuse to call such a conference? If we do call it, what will be the practical value of its deliberations? With the utter demoralization of the enemies of Carranza it would be absurd to assert that any government, which they could set up, represented the sovereignty of the Mexican people.
The conference might meet, however, to formulate the grievances, which the participants have against Carranza and which could be laid before him. Of course such a course would entirely change the purpose of the conference, but then conditions have materially changed in favor of Carranza.
I think, in any event, it is necessary to call the Ambassadors and Ministers together and lay before them the replies of the Mexican chiefs and also the present state of affairs in Mexico and the continuing successes of the Carranzista arms. But before doing this I would like to be prepared to present a course of action for consideration which would be practical and expedient in the circumstances.
[Page 552]As this involves the whole general Mexican policy I think that I should be advised as to your wishes in the matter.
Faithfully yours,
- For this reply, see Foreign Relations, 1915, p. 746.↩