835.51/1525: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Argentina (Armour)
1772. Your 2099, October 27, 11 p.m.; Department’s despatch no. 3388, October 28, 1942.27 Unless you perceive some objection, please address a communication to the Foreign Office protesting against the authorization of remittances to the head office of the Banco Hipotecario in France and point out the following:
Shortly after the collapse of France in June 1940, there was an accumulation of three or four hundred million francs in the account of the Central Bank under the Argentine-French Payments Agreement. Subsequently this Government was informed that when this fund became exhausted, Argentina would not authorize further transfers of payments to occupied or unoccupied France for the duration of the war. On April 9, 1942 it was learned that authorization had been granted for two substantial financial remittances to occupied France and that these remittances were entirely outside the Argentine-French Payment Agreement. The Foreign Office was informed that this Government considered these remittances a violation of Rio Resolution V. The Foreign Office, under date of May 8, 1942, submitted a memorandum to the effect that the remittances in question did not constitute a violation of Resolution V. This Government, after giving careful consideration to this memorandum, presented the reasons which, in its judgment, made it necessary for it to continue to consider the transactions involved inconsistent with Resolution V.
This Government has recently learned that the Argentine authorities have authorized further remittances of substantial amounts by the Banco Hipotecario Franco-Argentina to its head office in France and that these remittances are to be effected outside the French-Argentine Payments Agreement. For the reasons which this Government has previously presented remittances made by the Banco Hipotecario in the past have afforded facilities in France which might benefit the aggressor nations. Accordingly, even before the recent developments in France, it was the carefully considered view of this Government, that the authorizations in question were inconsistent not only with Resolution V adopted in Rio but also with resolutions adopted by [Page 506] the Washington Conference. As a result of recent developments in France, it is now even clearer to this Government that such remittances in the future would benefit the aggressor nations. Indeed such remittances can no longer, in their practical effect, be distinguished from remittances direct to Germany. Accordingly, their authorization would be viewed with the greatest concern by this Government. It is hoped that the renewed expression of this Government’s views, together with new developments in France, will result in denial of authorizations for such transactions in the future.
- Neither printed.↩