711.52/297: Telegram
The Ambassador in Spain (Hayes) to the Secretary of State
[Received November 11—10:20 a.m.]
3294. My 3268, November 8, 8 p.m.75 I saw the Foreign Minister today and requested that an embargo be placed on wolfram export to all countries. I also asked for prompt action on following pending matters: (1) Release of Italian warships in Balearics, (2) release of Italian merchant ships in Spain76 whenever they are free to depart, [Page 650] (3) landing rights for American commercial airlines,77 (4) recognition of right of American citizens to travel on Spanish ships, (5) direct radio telegraphic communication with United States.
With reference to wolfram the Minister said this was obviously a highly technical economic problem for Spain. It also involved Spain’s whole international position. He would receive our request sympathetically and would study it. He asked me for a memorandum embodying the request in general terms and also whatever justification for the request we might wish to present. I said I would supply him with such a memorandum.
He reminded me that all the matters he had mentioned required the consent of other government departments. Meanwhile his own position vis-à-vis his colleagues was greatly weakened by our reaction to the Laurel telegram78 which although doubtless a mistake was not ill-intentioned. He would be in an infinitely better position to arrange everything favorable to us if he could assure the Spanish Government that the Laurel incident was closed. He hoped therefore that the statement he had authorized Cárdenas79 to make [would?] be satisfactory to us and that we would consider the incident closed.
He felt that the matters involving Italian merchant ships, direct radio communication, travel of Americans on Spanish ships, landing rights for American commercial airlines were so far advanced that favorable decisions could be confidentially [confidently?] expected.
With reference to Italian merchant ships he had proposed to the British Ambassador that Spain be allowed to hold two of these ships in warranty for two Spanish ships sunk by Italian submarines. In return he would authorize the release of all the other Italian merchant ships. He said the British Ambassador had received this proposal favorably. (The British Ambassador informs me he has recommended it to his Government. I should like to recommend it also, particularly since, according to our Naval Attaché,80 both ships selected by the Spanish Government necessitates extensive repairs. The Italian Embassy is informing its Government that it considers proposal worthy of consideration.)
I pressed the Minister again for release of Italian warships in the Balearics. He replied that the British Ambassador had given the impression that it was much more important to devote attention to the merchant ships now than to the warships. I said I could not believe the British Ambassador deemed it less important than I that Spain release these warships and demonstrate that it adheres to principles of international law and is not giving aid to Germany. (My Naval [Page 651] Attaché informs me that the British do in fact consider it better strategy to concentrate on the release of the merchant ships at the present time. I personally consider we should press for release of both warships and merchant ships.) The Minister said he would go into this matter once more.
The Minister repeatedly expressed the hope that his explanation of the Laurel incident would be acceptable to our Government and said that if so the United States would find nobody in Spain more anxious to cooperate with it than he.
If the Department considers the Ministry’s statement satisfactory, I recommend that it so inform me promptly.
- Post, p. 732.↩
- For correspondence regarding representations against Spanish internment of Italian warships and merchant vessels, see pp. 711 ff.↩
- For correspondence on this subject, see pp. 668 ff.↩
- For correspondence regarding the Laurel incident, see pp. 722 ff.↩
- Juan Francisco de Cárdenas, Spanish Ambassador in the United States.↩
- Comdr. John C. Lusk.↩