724.3415/2824 5/16
Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals (White)
The Argentine Ambassador called and left with me a note29 addressed to me as Chairman of the Neutral Commission giving the reply of the Minister of Foreign Affairs to our cable of December 31.
He also showed me, strictly confidentially, a copy of a cable that he had received from his Government which showed that there is a grave disagreement between Saavedra Lamas and Cruchaga. Each [Page 253] one is trying to bring about a settlement and get credit for it and is resentful of what the other is doing.
The telegram instructed Espil to inquire of the Neutrals whether the Chilean proposal had been accepted by the two contending parties and to try to get the answer in as formal a manner as possible. If we should tell Espil that the two countries had accepted, Espil was then to tell us that Paraguay had formally told Argentina that it had not been consulted by Chile.
The telegram further stated that Saavedra Lamas on January 2 had sent a note to Cruchaga which Cruchaga had admitted to the Argentine Ambassador in Santiago that he had received on January 8, advising him that as the result of sounding out the Bolivian Government Argentina was sending a special representative to Paraguay to see if a settlement could not be arrived at and promising to let the Chilean Government know the results. Saavedra thought that the present Chilean action was designed to forestall this action on the part of Argentina.
I told Mr. Espil that we had received Mr. Cruchaga’s proposal,30 a copy of which he said had been submitted to the Argentine, Brazilian and Peruvian Governments, and which I therefore felt authorized to show him and gave him a copy of the Chilean proposal. I said that we had not answered the note nor had the Neutrals had a meeting as yet to consider it because there did not yet seem to be an accord between the four neighboring countries. I also advised Mr. Espil of the Brazilian reply.
After talking the matter over a while, during which Mr. Espil said he thought that the Neutral proposal of December 1531 offered the best basis of a settlement that could be found and agreed with me that the Chilean proposal does not advance matters any, I asked Mr. Espil if he would suggest to his Government that Argentina, which has not yet made a definite proposal, propose that the four neighboring countries tell Bolivia and Paraguay that the time has come to stop fighting; that they will not let any further military supplies reach them; that they must stop fighting and accept the Neutral proposal of December 15 as the basis for discussion, and that while the negotiations are going on and the arbitration is in progress the territory southeast of the Ballivián-Vitriones line will be patrolled and policed by forces of Argentina and Brazil, or of Argentina, Brazil and Chile, as his Government might prefer. I said that Argentina and Brazil are the two countries that border on the Chaco and that they would be the logical ones or, in view of the great interest of Chile in the matter, it [Page 254] would of course be equally satisfactory, so far as this Government is concerned, to have Chile included. I said I thought Peru would hardly be likely to cooperate in this matter on account of its internal difficulties and the Leticia question.32 Mr. Espil thought that the question of policing was an excellent one. He did not seem so sure that the four Governments would stop supplies going in but thought that the other offered a real progress and said that he would take it up with his Government at once. I urged him to do so by cable and not by airmail and said that we would hold up action in the meantime.