837.30/90: Airgram
The Ambassador in Cuba ( Braden ) to the Secretary of State
[Received November 2—1 p.m.]
No. A–2193. Reference Department’s airgram no. 2382, October 18, 7:10 p.m., file no. 837.30/89. The Embassy does not share the opinion that the abrogation of Article 12 of the Agreement for Military Cooperation of June 19, 1942 is imperative. Apparently a Commission can be set up under the Act of January 2, 1942 to consider Cuban claims in general, despite the existence of Article 12. Should a claim arise to which Article 12 is applicable and an amicable settlement not be obtainable, I am of the opinion that the subject might then be reviewed. Possibly this contingency may never arise. By initiating action, I fear that it may invite from the Cuban Government requests for other modifications.
The Ministry of State has shown no disposition to consider favorably the article on claims contained in the Department’s undated instruction no. 1875;42 therefore only Cuban claims freely submitted to it may be considered by a Commission set up under the Act of January 2, 1942.
It is hoped therefore that the Department will reconsider the position set forth in airgram no. A–2382 and agree to dropping for the time being the project of negotiating a supplementary agreement. [Page 150] Settlement has been reached on almost all other matters which it was originally planned to cover in a supplementary agreement.
Should the Department desire additional information in the premises, it is suggested that Ackerson45 now on leave in New Jersey might be directed to consult on the subject prior to his return to Habana. He is very well informed on the details of this problem and has my entire confidence.