740.00111A.R.–N.C./42
The Chargé in Argentina (Tuck) to the Secretary of State
[Received February 9.]
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of the Department’s circular telegram of January 27, 3 p.m. referring to the resolution recently adopted by the Neutrality Committee, now in session at Rio de Janeiro, which contains an inquiry as to the competence of that Committee to deal with problems arising from the Declaration of Panama. This resolution is being submitted by the Pan American Union to the Governments of the American Republics, and, in making clear the Department’s views as to the competence of the Committee, the Embassy is requested in its discretion to convey these views informally to the Argentine Government.
At an Embassy luncheon given in honor of His Eminence Cardinal Dougherty on January 31, Ambassador Armour took occasion to bring this matter informally to the attention of the Argentine Minister for Foreign Affairs. Dr. Cantilo was of the opinion that the Neutrality Committee, according to the Declaration of Panama, was only competent to hand down advisory recommendations and not executive resolutions. He also referred to the limited composition of the Neutrality Committee, which, in his opinion, could not represent the views of all the South American republics.
In a conversation which I had on February 1 with the Brazilian Ambassador, Dr. Rodrigues Alves, he informed me that, at the request of his Government, he had taken this matter up with the Minister of Foreign Affairs on the previous day, and that Dr. Cantilo had on that occasion expressed much the same views as those which he offered to Ambassador Armour. He has told Dr. Rodrigues Alves that the very fact that the Inter-American Neutrality Committee was composed of experts in international law (jurisconsultes) limited perforce any recommendations it might deliver to an advisory or consultative character and precluded the possibility of executive resolutions. Nor could the limited composition of the Committee entitle it to speak for all the South American republics. Furthermore, according to Dr. Rodrigues Alves, the Argentine delegate to the Neutrality Committee, Dr. Podestá Costa, had been instructed to this effect. Dr. Cantilo had also informed Dr. Rodrigues Alves—somewhat to the latter’s surprise—that on the occasion of Dr. Aranha’s visit to Buenos Aires (Embassy’s despatch no. 426 of January 2336), he had made known his views as to the competence of the Committee to the Brazilian Minister for Foreign Affairs and the latter had expressed [Page 281] agreement with him. Dr. Rodrigues Alves could only explain this by saying that due to Dr. Aranha’s absence from Rio, he could not have been familiar with his Government’s views in the matter. Dr. Rodrigues Alves, however, had immediately reported Dr. Cantilo’s opinions by telegraph to his Government.
In a conversation I have just had with Dr. Santos Muñoz, Secretary General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, he confirmed to me this Government’s views as to the character of the recommendations which the Neutrality Committee could make.
With regard to the work of the Neutrality Committee, I am enclosing herewith an article, with translation, which appeared in La Prensa of February 1, 1940,37 dealing with the internment of belligerents.
Respectfully yours,