715.1715/1166: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Minister in Costa Rica (Hornibrook)
22. For Dr. Corrigan. Your 60, March 23, 9 p.m.,48 and 61, March 30, 5 p.m. In order to have before it all of the information possible in considering your telegrams under reference the Department during the last few days has had conversations with the Ministers of Costa Rica, Honduras and Nicaragua. As a result of these conversations and of careful consideration of your reports, the Department firmly believes that it would be a mistake for the Commission to draw up a formal project for presentation to the two delegations. As a result of the Department’s experience in other efforts of a somewhat similar nature, it is convinced that a permanent and satisfactory solution of boundary difficulties must have the full support of the governments concerned. A solution not based upon mutually acceptable principles will meet with opposition and rejection by either one party or the other. In the extension of good offices which the Commission is conducting the objective should be the attainment of a satisfactory solution. If this is the objective the determination of the responsibility for an impasse has no place.
In securing the Agreement of December 10, the Commission accomplished the first objective of allaying existing tension, and it is believed that a final solution of the basic problem can be achieved with patience and continuous effort, even though that may take weeks or months.
It would seem to the Department that the best procedure that the Commission can follow is to call an immediate recess of the plenary sessions. The Honduran and Nicaraguan delegations could be informed that in view of the extensive nature of the replies which they have presented, the Commission will require considerable further time for the careful study that the matter deserves, which would permit the two delegations to return to their respective countries should they so desire. The recess would present opportunity for further careful examination of the replies and for the formulation by the Commission [Page 252] of a proposal or proposals which might serve as a basis for a settlement. Once the Commission’s views have become clarified it would then seem desirable that all of the members of the Commission proceed together to each of the capitals, there to engage in informal and oral discussions during which the views of the disputant countries would be ascertained with regard to the several formulas for settlement. One of the advantages of these informal discussions would be that the members of the Commission would have an opportunity to confer directly with the Presidents and the guiding statesmen in both countries. Experience has shown that the chiefs of state and those responsible for formulating policy are usually able to take a more flexible point of view than their delegations which necessarily must closely follow instructions. It is hoped that out of these discussions will emerge the framework of a definitive settlement.
Unless you see some reason to the contrary, of which you should inform the Department at once by cable, the Department desires you to proceed along the lines above indicated. You are also instructed to submit to the Department, with ample time for consideration prior to the suggested visits to the disputant countries, such tentative proposals as the Commission may draw up. After you have completed the visits it would be desirable for you to come to Washington in order to go over with the Department in detail the results thereof.
The Ministers of Costa Rica, Honduras, and Nicaragua in Washington are believed to be in general accord with the above procedure.
With regard to the question of possible objection by Honduras to further discussions at San José it is understood that the Honduran Minister is suggesting to his Government that, should it wish to express any views at this time, proper instructions should be sent to its delegation for conveyance to the Commission. However, it was pointed out that if the procedure above mentioned were adopted, this question might be left in abeyance until the conclusion of the conversations in the two capitals.
- Not printed.↩