710 Consultation 3A/658: Telegram
The Ambassador in Uruguay (Damson) to the Secretary of State
[Received 4:45 p.m.]
244. For Spaeth from Sanders. Pursuant to Department’s 128 March 4,33 Acting Secretary’s statement34 was read in translation to Dr. Guani.
Dr. Guani stated he was deeply concerned but not surprised by Chilean attitude35 which he considers as serious in its implications as is the Argentine situation. In his opinion present move by Fernández36 confirms once again that break of relations by Chile has never had more that [than] purely formal significance and that Government is still essentially neutral. Guani also considers that Chilean decision is a violation of the spirit if not the letter of Resolution XXII.
He also stated that he had been studying the Chilean statement in relation to Resolution XXII to determine what action the Committee could take and that perhaps it might be opportune for Committee itself to point out that Resolution envisages there shall be no unilateral decisions until the exchange of information and consultations among Governments have been completed. He is also considering whether the Committee might not point out by way of an interpretive statement or resolution and without specific reference to the Argentine case, that basic issue under Resolution XXII is not whether there has been a technical change of Government in a given instance but whether the new group in control of governmental power is complying and will continue to comply with Inter-American defense commitments. In his view this would place desired emphasis on international aspect of the problem as issue of recognition or non-recognition would be raised not by whether there is true delegation of power, use of force or any other internal question but by continental security considerations of collective concern to all the republics. [Sanders.]