Foreign Relations of the United States Diplomatic Papers, 1937, General, Volume I

711.00 Statement July 16, 1937/287

Memorandum by the Portuguese Ministry for Foreign Affairs to the American Legation in Portugal⁴⁰

[Translation]

The Portuguese Government has given due consideration to the declaration of the Secretary of State dated July 16 and has examined carefully the reasons on which it is based and the spirit of the attitude taken by the United States as regards great international problems.

It seems to this Government that it could hardly discuss the notion of solidarity between nations from which arose for the conscience of the Secretary of State the duty of his declaration: the ties which bind together the various nations of the globe are becoming ever closer, so that no statesman can today maintain his country alien and aloof as to all the repercussions of the economic difficulties, of financial crises, of social disorder and of the breach of the peace. If this is so owing to the impossibility of localizing the evils, it is even much more so when the case is one of problems which by their very nature may be considered universal, and of difficulties afflicting all the peoples at the same time. The assertion which we are commenting upon will therefore elicit no surprise; surprising would be the mistaken egotism which would lead the great nations, on the one hand, to consider themselves immune and, on the other hand, to maintain themselves alien to all effective cooperation, truly useful in the international field.

On general grounds, it also seems that no objection can be raised against the assertions, advices or wishes as a whole, of the Secretary of State: everyone desires peace, everyone proclaims the sanctity of treaties and the faithful compliance therewith, everyone desires that there be less difficulties in international trade, and everyone wishes to have the burden of armaments removed or lightened. Difficulties begin only when it is sought to pass from the field of intentions into that of action, or, more concretely, what is to be done so that the events—in the development of which it is very difficult to establish individual or national responsibilities—will not contradict the good intentions.

2. The repeated affirmation, especially on the part of the great powers, of the principles advocated by the Secretary of State, the intellectual or sentimental adhesion of many to the said principles, their inclusion in many treaties between nations or in a document of greater scope aiming at defining the rules of life common to all states, will have, we believe, the effect of a certain moral pressure, but will produce rather limited practical action. We would be mistaken if we were to expect important results therefrom.

If there exists a danger or preoccupation of war, it is useless to attempt to have the States disarm or reduce the armaments; if there exist grave injustices in the solution of problems of international affairs and no peaceful method is seen to make them disappear, it is useless to dissuade the victims thereof to cause justice to be respected by force, if they have it; if the nations, by virtue of their own excesses or because they are exposed to the mistakes of others, must defend their economy and their financial balance, and deem it necessary to do so by raising tariffs, devaluating currency, or prohibiting the entry of workers or foreign goods, they will do so, even though they should not seek in that policy their true and ultimate interests and even though they should have taken at one time or another the solemn engagement to refrain from doing this.

3. Our assertions in this respect cannot be suspected, for our constitutional doctrine and the practice of the Portuguese Government and of its administration are entirely in harmony with the wishes of the Secretary of State. Portugal advocates arbitration as a means to solve international disputes (Constitution, sole proviso to article 4). The Portuguese nation constitutes an independent State of which the sovereignty recognizes solely as limits, in the internal order, morals and the law; and in the international order, those limits arising out of conventions or treaties freely entered into, or out of the freely accepted law founded on customs (“direito consuetudinário”); being committed to coöperate with other States in the preparation and adoption of solutions regarding peace among nations and the progress of humanity (Constitution, Article 4). Public opinion is the fundamental element of the policy and administration of the country (Constitution, Article 22). The State shall regulate the relations of the national economy with that of the other countries, in line with the principle of adequate coöperation (Constitution, Article 30). The economic systems of the colonies are established in harmony with the needs of their development, with just reciprocity between them and neighboring countries … (Colonial Act, Article 35).

On its side, the activities of the Government have been entirely in keeping with the constitutional principles of balance, morals, cooperation, just freedom and competition. Most favored nation treatment is still today the main principle of our conventional system of trade, and the generalization thereof leads practically to the equality of all countries in the national market. Our tariffs are justly noted as to the modesty of customs duties and their clearness. We have no internal duties, nor quotas (“contingentes”) nor import permits harmful for external trade. Our currency has been stabilized years ago, and there are no restrictions on the purchase of money, nor regulations hampering its exchange. Certain limitations regarding foreign labor in Portugal were introduced in the laws solely after they had been generalized elsewhere, and even so they are very moderate and do not hamper anyone’s business—neither that of individuals nor that of companies. We fulfil loyally international agreements. Under the circumstances, we do not constitute a perturbing element and we consider ourselves to be a constructive factor as to peace and international order.

4. If there is, thus, a concordance or at least a great similarity of principles which, on our part, have not in practice been denied or ignored, why are reservations expressed above as regards those principles when they are presented as an efficient system to solve the present problems of international affairs and capable of avoiding a breach of the peace between the powers?

We believe that one should not forget the difference between the juridical and political field and the sociological field, because one thing is what is, and another thing is what it is ordered to be, or what it is wished to be. International society has endeavored to solve its difficulties (as many states have done in their internal activity) by means of abstract formulae, declarations of principles, solemn assertions, many texts and treaties, and the uselessness, and at times even the grave inconvenience, of everything, or almost everything, has been seen. At least, everyone is entitled to believe that things would not have happened in a different or worse manner if there had been less law-making.

Although much responsibility seems to lie with the abstract and generalizing tendency of jurists, the causes for the failure must be found, in our opinion, in the following facts:

(a) in the inexistent or insufficient study of the causes of world unrest;

(b) in the excessive ambition to find a sole formula for the solution of grave international problems, applicable urbi et orbi and covering a whole which is manifestly superior to the intelligence of men and to their capacity of execution.

After determining the causes and limiting the field of the questions, and after examining the problems one by one, or the groups of kindred subjects, we believe that it would be easier to define the attitude or line of conduct of each nation, and the great powers having a greater weight of authority, wealth and strength in the international concert would certainly find their participation more efficient.

5. The study and determination of the causes of the universal unrest or preoccupation to which the Secretary of State refers are indispensable, whether the case is one of intentional acts for which states are responsible and from which they should therefore abstain, or of phenomena of which the genesis or development is beyond the will and power of men who, in the latter case, would not be the authors but the victims thereof.

Among the first named, one stands foremost: The declaration of the Secretary of State did not omit it and endeavors to eliminate it, advising the abstention of interference in the internal affairs of the other countries. This interference is conducted principally in the form of revolutionary agitation, since an historical tragedy elevated an entire nation, poor and unhappy, to the high position of forerunner of the new social era and messiah of the highest and most sacred doctrine.

Unfortunately, as the soviet mysticism is followed also by an economy and political value, which many have deemed it convenient to have on their side, it happens that here and there the natural reactions against the invasion have disappeared and that the victims are today helping their executioners in their anxiety to demonstrate their innocence, as though the evil were a common and fatal epidemic disease, already entirely detached from its center of infection and from the technical, material and moral assistance which continues to be provided in spite of promises or assurances given. Foreign intervention, although it is maintained effective, thus tends to lose its character in some countries, being merged in international aspirations against which strong nationalisms alone can triumph. Although we consider fatal for the purposes of peace the poisoning of relations among peoples owing to ideological differences and the formation of international groups by affinities of political thought, we find that the need for defense against alien interference and revolutionary elements organized in groups may lead to the formation of other groups (“blocos”). Such a state of things will constitute another reason for anxiety.

6. When it is sought to discover the causes, independent or outside of the will of the peoples and governments, which are at the bottom of today’s problems, we find that all, or almost all, the evils from which nations suffer are attributed to the economic crisis of 1929.

Intervention to attenuate or eliminate the effects of the crisis was strong in the national as well as in the international field—it was intense and useless. Remedies and disillusions, conventions, congresses, conferences, and laws came in succession, and finally the passing of time cured the crisis, for outside the general lines of the policy followed as regards gold by Great Britain and the United States, it may be said that, internationally, nothing was accomplished which improved the situation, and in the national sphere, many measures were taken capable of producing adverse results. In the face of the crisis, national egotisms became insensible or hostile, and each one had to take care of himself, merely wishing that the measures taken by others would not constitute too great a burden for each one.

The crisis, or at least, the greater part of its outward signs, has passed, but the universal unrest has continued with the same acuteness, we believe. In the economic and social field, the lack of balance, disorder, and anxiety of the peoples are, thus, not issued from the economic crisis; they come from deeper regions; we feel inclined to assign them to the crisis of economic thought, that is, to the pollution of the fundamental principles of economic affairs.

For those reasons the teachings of that recent past command us to be more modest, if we do not wish to be too daring. At the bottom humanity reacts against an anti-human economy in relation to the essence of which known remedies have proved to be clearly insufficient.

7. Besides the economic crisis, the war of 1914 has been for many the great cause of the present evils. The extension of the fact cannot be denied, its repercussions are considerable, and its consequences are still strong in the spirit and the flesh of the peoples, for not only have the moral sufferings of the war been prolonged over many years, but it seems that the task of peace was not conducted so as to permit forgetfulness and reparation. However, many peoples took no part in the strife; others suffered but the attenuated reactions thereof; and others yet progressed and enriched themselves due to the catastrophe. In spite of this the agitation, the preoccupations, the unrest are suffered by all, and even strongly by some of the peoples of the latter category. If the cause is still the war, it can only be through aspirations, ideas, and the collapse of moral factors originating therein and contaminating the entire humanity.

There is clearly a lack of control in the ambitions of men; there is clearly a lack of proportion between them and the means now existing or which, under present circumstances, might be created for their fulfilment. If this lack of balance is not cured by a return to sentiments of modesty and economy or by a greater capacity of production and greater possibilities of consumption, what will happen to poor mankind?

[8.] Now, at the same time that men desire a greater part of an already insufficient wealth, or threaten improvidently to consume treasures accumulated by centuries of work and economy, the uncertainty and nervousness of the international situation cause an ever increasing portion of property to be withdrawn from the consumption of men for the benefit of armaments, deviating into that channel the natural flow of national riches, and causing by this and other means the exhaustion of international credit through which rich countries, more progressive or better endowed, might assist in the economic development of others. Contrary to this, some accumulate useless gold the weight of which depresses still further their own economy.

We are placed in a vicious circle which it is necessary to break for the good of mankind; to find the point where such breaking is easiest is decidedly the problem of problems of our times.

9. We dare but timidly advance on this path, full of obscurity, but some points are clear: Not all of the problems which face today the generality of the nations offer the same probabilities or risks of being converted into proximate or remote causes of war. Political motives are always more to be feared than others, except when economic difficulties are brought to such a degree of acuteness that nations are condemned to live in misery because the possibilities of work and life are denied them in the world. On the other hand, it is certain that, in present circumstances, violent internal convulsions may bring about conflagrations difficult to localize.

Now, in the political field, it is pertinent to ask whether the internationalism of our days is a factor of peace or of war. It seems to us that internationalism, covering as it does pronounced leanings toward national imperialisms, is a source of complications and dangers. The idea of the supernational organization and the tendency toward “world citizenship” are either essentially erroneous and humanly impossible or are so far removed from present conditions that they can only act—even if the fact noted above did not exist—as perturbing elements.

Furthermore, this would be creating new problems under the pretext of solving those existing, and although at times relief is found in a change of worries, the safest path is that of the closest cooperation between the peoples, on the basis of the national organizations, if, as proposed in the declaration of the Secretary of State, the nations are endowed with the spirit of “mutual assistance” and of absolute respect for the rights of others.

10. In commenting at length on the note of the Secretary of State, the Portuguese Government did not intend to indicate solutions or the best way to find them. This would be an excessive presumption. However, the nations are attached to false ideas and have taken the habit of entrusting the solution of grave external problems to vague formulae and inconsistent combinations; and to acknowledge by means of an impartial examination the inanity of the efforts made in that direction appears to this Government to be the first step and the indispensable preparation of the ground for any constructive work.

Lisbon , August 20, 1937.

40. Copy transmitted to the Department by the Minister in Portugal in his despatch No. 23, August 24; received September 10.