Foreign Relations of the United States Diplomatic Papers, 1937, The American Republics, Volume V
810.34 Leasing/113
The Ambassador in Argentina (Weddell) to the Secretary of State
[Received August 30.]
Sir: With reference to my telegram No. 145 of August 20, 5 p.m., I have the honor to enclose herewith a translation of a pro-memoria handed me on August 19 by the Argentine Minister for Foreign Affairs on the destroyer question. As careful a translation as possible has been made of a rather vague and disconnected document.
Respectfully yours,
The Argentine Minister for Foreign Affairs (Saavedra Lamas) to the American Ambassador (Weddell)
Pro-Memoria
The Argentine Government learned the news of the proposed lease of destroyers through the telegrams which were published by La Nación and La Prensa on the 8th instant. If it had been only a matter of a lease to Brazil, no one would have taken the liberty to discuss or consider it. But to the bilateral operation there was added an individual offer made to all the countries, as was done to Argentina. However, in view of its special sentiment with regard to Brazil which was placed only in the position of initiator of a question to which the United States had given a continental character, the Argentine Chancellery wished to abstain from expressing an opinion or from adopting an attitude in spite of the comments of the press which among us is absolutely free from any censorship and control.
In Washington on August 12 Mr. Hull stated to press correspondents that “no expression of disapproval of the projected lease of destroyers had been received from Argentina or any other nation” (see telegram from Washington in La Prensa August 13.)
On that same date August 12 Ambassador Espil stated in Washington that he did not even have instructions from his Government, and [Page 166] that he was awaiting events in spite of numerous press reports and comment throughout the continent. Neither were instructions sent to Ambassador Cárcano in Rio de Janeiro to take steps to make inquiries which might in any way appear as an observation or protest.
The Chancellery was waiting for Brazil to publish information as it deemed suitable. On the 11th instant, the Brazilian Minister for Foreign Affairs, Pímentel Brandao, as reported in newspaper cable reports from Rio de Janeiro, summoned national and foreign press representatives to give them an explanation concerning the lease of destroyers. The Argentine press that same day (see La Nación August 12) stated that the Argentine Government would address a statement to Washington according to information and as a simple project. The newspaper version said textually: “Despite the silence observed as to the decision of the Executive Power, we were informed through reliable sources, that the Chancellery was ready to address a statement to the Department of State at Washington.”
At the same time several Argentine legislators requested information from the press, and one of them, Senator José Heriberto Martinez, informed the Government that he was planning an interpellation which was agreed upon at a meeting of senators of various sectors. The Minister for Foreign Affairs requested and obtained the postponement of this interpellation, and this was also done by the President of the Republic who summoned the above-mentioned senator to his office because he wished to wait until the Brazilian and United States foreign offices should make whatever statements they might deem appropriate in view of press comments published throughout the continent.
The Argentine Government had to consider a Memorandum which had been delivered directly by the Ambassador of the United States in Buenos Aires, informing it of the proposed joint resolution which had been submitted to the United States Senate on August 7 stating “that as could be seen from the text of this pending resolution, the Government of the United States, should the powers requested be granted by the Congress to the President, would make available on equal terms to all of the American Republics possessing naval forces the facilities referred to in this resolution, should they desire to avail themselves of them”; the above-mentioned memorandum also referred to the terms under which the proposed operation would be effected. This memorandum was presented on August 10 and some of the above mentioned legislators were acquainted with it.
Under the circumstances, and for the sole purpose of replying to the offer conveyed in the communication from the United States, in considering the question in its continental aspect, the Chancellery sent instructions to the Ambassador at Washington on August 12.
[Page 167]Simultaneously with the postponement of the proposed interpellation which at a secret or public session might have caused a deeper stirring of opinion as already reflected in press comment in the various countries of the continent, and in order to clear the matter in Congress, the Chancellery resolved to summon press correspondents, just as the Brazilian Minister for Foreign Affairs had done on August 11. The object of the summons was not to issue an official communiqué or document, but to give explanations to newspaper representatives in accordance with their insistent request, in view of the requirements of public opinion and of the proposed interpellation, for not a word had so far been uttered by the Ministry for Foreign Affairs as was forthwith pointed out, i. e., that “these were the first statements made by the Argentine Chancellery in order that no one should suppose even for a minute that any feeling had prevailed other than deep friendship and sincerity concerning the Brazilian problem connected with the case.” It was added further, “I consider that one of the achievements of our Government is the rapprochement, the better understanding and the sincere and loyal friendship which we have carried to the highest degree ever attained by diplomacy in the relations between Argentina and Brazil.”
“The numerous treaties concluded”, the Minister added, “within a short period which in other cases have been obtained after long years and which were negotiated almost simultaneously with the visits of Presidents Justo and Vargas, the firm support which we have given each other in our reciprocal initiatives; the deep rooted custom which has become a social rule, of having periodical visits of prominent men and groups of families, visits, which had never been exchanged as now, all this has contributed to establish between both countries a sentiment of true kinship. These very days when all this comment is circulating, both Chancelleries were preparing the ceremonies during which the two Presidents are shortly to inaugurate the monoliths to be the cornerstone of the international bridge planned some time ago and which will doubtless be a symbolical expression of reciprocal currents of every kind flowing from one country to the other in the future.”
To this was added the following statement which was also published in the newspapers: “The fact that Brazil should increase its naval power availing itself of a legitimate right in order to meet an equally legitimate need, cannot but awaken in us the desire to lend our cooperation which, were it useful, we gladly would have offered. In any case we would have wished to rival with the nations which might have anticipated such an offer or lent such cooperation. There has undoubtedly been exaggeration in this respect and even distortion—in [Page 168] the midst of the confusion which is so easily created—of our point of view concerning the acquisition of destroyers which does not imply an increase of naval power that could cause concern among us, for we would support such an increase with all our will if it were necessary.”
What is more, in order to prove his respect for the question insofar as it regards Brazil and to separate it from the necessary consideration of the continental phase of the matter, besides the direct offer received as conveyed in the statement of the United States, the Minister went on to say: “It is therefore well to make this clear. What caused and is causing our concern is the appearance of an unprecedented rule in our American relations which requires thorough consideration of its application to all the American Republics. I refer to the offer to lease warships to the twenty republics, an offer which was doubtless prompted by a noble purpose but which requires special study. Any regional problem must be entirely laid aside in order to concentrate attention solely on the point of interest to us: The pacifist continental phase of our collective relations with regard to this completely new method of developing the naval power of the countries of America, its scope, its consequences and its general application in the future.”
Before going on to consider the problem in its continental aspect and from a juridical point of view, the Minister ends this part of his statement, by insisting on definitely waiving all points relative to the agreement between the United States and Brazil, in order to avoid erroneous interpretations. He says therefore: “This public statement which, I repeat, is the first and only one I make on the subject, is intended to explain the views, the sentiment and the concern which prompt the attitude of the Argentine Government.”
“Let it then be understood that our Government has duly appreciated the reason given by the Government of the United States and Brazil to justify the projected lease of warships. It does not question the defensive needs mentioned, nor the peaceful training purpose for which the destroyers would be used. Its only point of view consists in permitting itself to consider the disadvantages which might result from the method of leasing warships if it were generally applied as a means of acquiring war material intended to strengthen the power of each country.”
As was reported in the newspapers, the legislators abandoned the idea of an interpellation when explanations were given to press correspondents and published in the respective newspapers.
On the 14th instant La Nación stated “Senators Palacios, Martinez and Gonzalez Iramain, who last Thursday had started conversations relative to the lease of a few warships to Brazil by the United States, with the purpose of considering whether or not the Senate should [Page 169] take the initiative in order to know the opinion of the Executive Power on the subject, held another meeting in the red hall of the Senate, and resumed their comments.
“The first exchange of impressions indicated that the above-mentioned senators coincided in their favorable appreciation of the statements issued by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, and after this brief exchange of ideas it was tacitly agreed that it is not necessary, for the time being, for the Senate to take any action in this matter.”
This resolution was made publicly known by the President of the Foreign Affairs Commission of the Chamber of Deputies.