125.199/60: Telegram
The Ambassador in Spain (Bowers), Then in France, to the Secretary of State
[Received November 23—11:05 a.m.]
400. Your B–384, November 22, 6 p.m., expresses my own views in 6th paragraph of my telegram No. 397, November 19, 1 p.m. I had suggested letting reopening at Bilbao rest for a time because confident that Sangroniz was seeking a contact to propose something we could not consider. Of course Sangroniz’s interference with our reopening [Page 456] is stupid since it would have been to their advantage and their own people in this quarter feel so. Am convinced that Franco’s foreign trade is dictated by Italian and German Ambassadors at his elbow.
I must make it clear that we have not seen Sangroniz; have received no proposition from him; have merely been warned by Yrujo of the proposition Sangroniz would make; and as yet we are merely where we have been for more than 2 months.
Some time ago I heard hints that our failure to accept Sangroniz’s proposition might be followed by an order from Franco to close all our consulates in his territory but such stupidity is so incredible that I cannot take it seriously.
As matters stand it is inadvisable to make another move in this quarter, but to test the extent to which Sangroniz plan meets Franco’s approval I suggest that Bay report lack of progress to Queipo de Llano and get his reaction.
I note you say that our plan to reopen is obviously to the interest of all and that you “assume no question will be raised about it”. It must be understood that no one can go from here to Bilbao without papers from the military commandant at Irun, and Chapman cannot open the consulate there if the military governor interferes as he did in the case of the British and the French. And I would call attention to the essential fact that most emphatically a “question has been raised about it” to the extent of a salvo conducto to Bilbao being thus far refused.