724.34119/1408: Telegram
The Ambassador in Argentina (Weddell) to the Secretary of State
[Received June 15—10 p.m.]
155. From Braden. My 154, June 13, 9 p.m. Bolivian Minister for Foreign Affairs and delegate have declared to me they will demand compliance with the protocol provisions that Conference do not dissolve until arbitral compromise concerted and if the Conference attempts to do so they will denounce not only Paraguayan intransigence but bad faith of mediators as having tricked Bolivia into signature of protocol. Incidentally Bolivian Minister for Foreign Affairs on June 11 rejected an informal suggestion of Paraguayan Minister for [Page 144] Foreign Affairs that their two countries renew diplomatic relations, get rid of the Conference, and reach an agreement directly.
Moreover, they declare in event of failure of direct negotiations Bolivia will insist Conference put April 23 regulations into effect and they will accept no substitute therefor. Since we know Paraguayans will not accept April 23 regulations another impasse will arise on that score. Furthermore, Bolivia will demand that Conference place blame for failure of direct negotiations on Paraguay and because of that country’s refusal to accept regulations declare it rebellious to the Conference.
The thought behind Bolivian plan is that that country has built up a clear record of acceptance of Conference decisions from the beginning through the whole history of the regulations and recent negotiations on fundamental questions and they do not intend to let the mediators evade their responsibility under the moral guarantee and their signature of the protocol. As Finot states the situation they have a clear case and can continue to make things so disagreeable for the mediatory nations that the latter will eventually put the requisite pressure on Paraguay to force an agreement.
Finot has shown me in confidence copy of letter dated June 4 from Paraguayan Minister for Foreign Affairs to the President of Paraguay reporting June 1 conversation with President of Argentina. Baez says latter expressed desire for peace settlement and for final treaty, affection for Paraguayan people and throughout was most cordial; the same could be said of the Argentine Minister for Foreign Affairs and the other mediators had not shown too great a hostility and that was shown only in an attempt to get sufficient witnesses wherewith to bring pressure on Bolivia. This letter is not likely to induce in the Paraguayans attitude more conciliatory than heretofore and shows that either the Paraguayan Minister for Foreign Affairs under the guidance of Zubizarreta does not wish to encourage his Government to compromise or that he does not understand the implications of the diplomatically phrased warnings given him by the Argentine President and Minister for Foreign Affairs. As I have reported previously these have not in my opinion been sufficiently firm in their statements to the Paraguayans. For instance the Argentine Minister for Foreign Affairs admits that in his last conversation with junior Paraguayan delegate he greatly cheered the latter by telling him that the Conference would merely publish a chronology of facts and would not place responsibility for failure on Paraguay. While this is probably the only course open to the Conference nevertheless it does not coincide with the assurances given Bolivians and it is bad tactics to ease the Paraguayan minds in this particular at this time. [Braden.]