Office of the Historian

724.34119/1383: Telegram

The Ambassador in Argentina (Weddell) to the Secretary of State

Buenos Aires, June 4, 1938—5 p.m.
[Received 7:20 p.m.]

142. From Braden. My 139, June 3, 4 p.m., second paragraph. Statement was made in weak fashion by Argentine Minister. Therefore, I repeated practically as worded in telegram under reference. Paraguayan Minister for Foreign Affairs made an entirely satisfactory reply that his Government would respect protocols and discuss all subjects thereunder. Zubizarreta stood on what he said Thursday. I expressed my inability to comprehend utterly divergent declarations by Paraguayan Minister for Foreign Affairs and Chairman of delegation but agreed with motion of Argentine Minister for Foreign Affairs we should pass on to consideration of balance of line without prejudice to returning to debate on Litoral. Paraguayans made no reply.

Regarding lines in the west and north, Paraguayan objections are: (1) line is unfair to Paraguay; (2) no security given, and (3) economic considerations require qualitative compensation. Regarding the first, Ruiz Moreno made excellent expose showing Conference proposal gives Paraguay three-quarters of Chaco, which according to publications of Baez, Arbo and other Paraguayan authorities is bounded by Paraguay, Pilcomayo, Parapiti and Otuquis Rivers. Paraguayan delegation claimed there is no security at all in this line and presented six-point memorandum of their military adviser which was labored and frequently fallacious in argument. Junior Paraguayan delegate again had to be called to order for statement mediators only considered Bolivian security; with the hearty endorsements of Zubizarreta he declared Paraguay had no faith in treaties (specifically mentioning Pact of Paris43) international law or morality where Bolivia is concerned; an instance in point was that last war was not prevented by the Argentine guarantee of Pinilla Soler modus [Page 135] vivendi.44 Uruguayan delegate made excellent defense of the neutral moral guarantee as having a practical and material use. Argentine Minister for Foreign Affairs closed the meeting by stating that apparently the spirit in which the Paraguayan delegation was considering the Conference proposal was quite different from the one which prompted it and that it must change before agreement is possible.

Throughout session Zubizarreta continued intransigent and displayed hostile attitude towards Conference. My colleagues and I feel it is impossible with Zubizarreta in charge of delegation in his present frame of mind. He has requested from the Peruvian Ambassador, who agreed with me, he will tell Zubizarreta that unless Paraguayan attitude changes Peru will move on Monday or Tuesday that negotiations be terminated. If Zubizarreta argues against this course it will be an indication that he is willing to yield.

Next meeting is Monday morning with Paraguayans.

My 140, June 3, 7 p.m. Add to third paragraph “and above all urging redoubled efforts for peace”. [Braden.]

Weddell
  1. Treaty between the United States and other powers, signed at Paris, August 27, 1928, Foreign Relations, 1928, vol. i, p. 153.↩
  2. Signed at Buenos Aires, January 12, 1907, Foreign Relations, 1907, pt. 1, p. 87.↩