500.CC/11–844

The Acting Secretary of State to Diplomatic Representatives in the American Republics

Sirs: With reference to the Department’s circular telegram of October 27, 1944, 3 p.m.,40 there is enclosed herewith for your information and for such discreet use as you may wish to make of them,

(1)
A list of the persons present at the second Blair House meeting on October 26, 1944;41
(2)
A summary of the discussion;
(3)
Draft of the proposed informal remarks to be made by the Acting Secretary in opening the meeting;42 and
(4)
An English translation of the remarks of the Uruguayan Ambassador at this meeting.42

You have doubtless already seen the press communiqué issued on October 26 with regard to this proposed meeting.43 A copy is transmitted herewith for your convenience.

Very truly yours,

E. R. Stettinius, Jr.
[Page 937]
[Enclosure]

Summary of Discussion With Representatives of the Other American Republics

Second Meeting at Blair House to Discuss International Organization, Thursday, October 26, 1944

The Acting Secretary began the meeting by giving a brief speech of welcome (see attached proposed draft).44 He then introduced the American Ambassadors45 present as well as Admiral Willson46 and General Strong.47 He asked Admiral Willson for his comment on our naval battle against the Japanese.48 Admiral Willson said that our success on the Pacific had been, according to the Navy’s radio reports, even greater than the newspaper accounts indicated. The Acting Secretary then introduced Ambassador Harriman,49 who sketched in the background of the communiqué issued following the Churchill-Stalin meeting50 and indicated the achievements of that meeting. He also commented on the important and useful work which the Ambassadors of the other American republics in Moscow had been doing in interpreting to the Soviet officials the principles underlying inter-American cooperation.

The Acting Secretary then remarked that he and his colleagues in the Department were eager to hear any expressions of views from the Ambassadors on the Dumbarton document, although he realized that they probably had not had time to receive any comments from their governments. Stating that he understood Ambassador of Uruguay wished to make some remarks, he then called upon Señor Blanco, who made the personal statement transcribed in the attached memorandum.51 Following this, the Acting Secretary asked Ambassador Castillo Nájera, as the senior among the Ambassadors present, whether he would like to make any comments.

[Page 938]

Señor Castillo Nájera inquired about the relation of the present World Court,52 which is linked by its statute to the League of Nations, to the proposal regarding a court of international justice. Mr. Hackworth53 in his reply said that of course it was recognized that the present court still legally existed. He said that we considered the present statute in general well thought out, and that moreover a body of law had already been built up using it as a basis. It was, therefore, our view that as few changes should be made in the statute as possible. The changes might be made either by amending the existing document or by using it as a basis for a new statute. He pointed out that the London committee54 had recommended cutting the Court to nine members, but that we did not like this idea. We believed that the Court could be cut up in three or five panels. Ambassador Castillo Nájera then asked about the proposed location of the Court, to which the Acting Secretary said that we felt that it should return to The Hague. Ambassador Castillo Nájera then raised the question whether it would be better to have just the one Court, possibly with special chambers, or whether it would not be wise to have regional courts at various appropriate bases which would be immediately available to consider all international questions and which would be able to decide international matters, subject to the right of appeal of either party to the international court as a supreme tribunal. Mr. Hackworth commented that in our view the disputants would have the right to bring any controversy before a panel of the Court, or the full Court, as the disputants might decide. He thought that the panels would be able to travel to the different regions to hold sessions when necessary. It was consequently our present view that one court with such chambers would be more satisfactory than a system of regional courts under the world court. The Acting Secretary said that the Ambassador had expressed a very interesting thought, and he believed that the Ambassador should discuss this matter further with Mr. Hackworth.

Ambassador Turbay then asked regarding voting on the proposed Court. Mr. Hackworth commented that the groups at Dumbarton Oaks had considered it to be presumptuous for representatives of four nations to propose specific changes in a statute which had been signed by so many more, and that therefore they had not undertaken to do [Page 939] so; in his opinion this should be done by representatives of the signatories.

The Acting Secretary asked whether anybody had any questions to ask or suggestions to offer. Ambassador Escalante said that he hoped to have his instructions by the end of next week. After some discussion the Acting Secretary suggested that another meeting be held week after next, November 9, and at the suggestion of the Mexican Ambassador it was agreed that the meeting should be held at 3:00 p.m. in the Department of State. Ambassador Escalante suggested that an agenda be prepared. Ambassador Blanco then suggested, and Ambassador Castillo Nájera concurred, that the Dumbarton Oaks draft might be considered point by point. The Acting Secretary remarked that he thought that an excellent proposal, and said that an agenda would be prepared for each forthcoming meeting.

The Acting Secretary then called upon Admiral Willson and General Strong to express their views regarding security problems. Admiral Willson said that security ultimately depended on force. He said that in our view there should be no international police force but that the Dumbarton Oaks proposals provided that the members of the organization should each furnish quotas which should be immediately available. He pointed out that the Soviet delegates had wanted an international air force, but had been impressed by our arguments regarding the practical difficulty of such a scheme. With respect to the regional aspects of security, he said that, personally, he thought it possible that the maintenance of practical security in certain regions, as for example the Western Hemisphere, could be accomplished by action within the region.

General Strong then said that he had additional comments to offer. He said that with regard to hemisphere security, four major questions were to be borne in mind:

(1)
The quotas which were to be furnished by the members to the organization.
(2)
Regulation of armaments.
(3)
The manufacture of and trade in arms.
(4)
Regional arrangements.

With regard to the first-named point, he said that this involved not only the forces but also the facilities to be furnished. In regard to the second and third points, he emphasized that they were not to be faced in the forthcoming conference. With regard to the fourth point, he pointed out that it involved such questions as the future of the Pan American Union and Inter-American Defense Board,55 but [Page 940] added that since this was political in character he would not comment further.

  1. Not printed.
  2. List of persons present not printed.

    The first of a series of meetings with the Diplomatic Representatives of the other American Republics had taken place on October 12, 1944. No records of the first meeting have been found in Department files. For the text of a speech made by President Roosevelt on the occasion of the first meeting, see Department of State Bulletin, October 15, 1944, p. 397. For the remarks of the Under Secretary of State (Stettinius), see ibid., p. 399.

  3. Not printed.
  4. Not printed.
  5. For text of press release, see Department of State Bulletin, October 29, 1944, p. 525.
  6. Not printed.
  7. Those present included the Chiefs of Mission of all the American Republics except Argentina, El Salvador, and Guatemala.
  8. Vice Adm. Russell Willson, a member of the Joint Strategic Survey Committee, United States Joint Chiefs of Staff; member of U.S. delegation at the Dumbarton Oaks Conversations.
  9. Maj. Gen. George Strong, a member of the Joint Post-War Committee, United States Joint Chiefs of Staff; member of the U.S. delegation at the Dumbarton Oaks Conversations.
  10. Reference here is to the Battle of Leyte Gulf, October 22–27, 1944.
  11. W. Averell Harriman, Ambassador to the Soviet Union.
  12. British Prime Minister Churchill met in Moscow with Soviet Peopled Commissar for Foreign Affairs Molotov and Marshal Josef V. Stalin, Chairman of the Council of People’s Commissars of the Soviet Union, from October 9 to 18, 1944. See Winston S. Churchill, The Second World War: Triumph and Tragedy (Boston, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1953), pp. 226–243.
  13. Not printed.
  14. For text of the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice, as amended by the Protocol of September 14, 1929, see Department of State, The International Court of Justice: Selected Documents Relating to the Drafting of the Statute (Washington, Government Printing Office, 1946), p. 1.
  15. Green H. Hackworth, Legal Adviser, and a member of the U.S. delegation at the Dumbarton Oaks Conversations.
  16. See British Cmd. 6531, Misc. No. 2 (1944): Report of the Inter-Allied Committee on the Future of the Permanent Court of International Justice, 10 February 1944.
  17. The decision to set up the Inter-American Defense Board was contained in Resolution XXXIX of the Third Meeting of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the American Republics, held at Rio de Janeiro, January 15–28, 1942. For correspondence, see Foreign Relations, 1942, vol. v, pp. 6 ff. The Board was established on March 30, 1942, in Washington.