710 Consultation (4)/11–2344: Telegram
The Acting Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Uruguay (Dawson)
678. Reurtel 1106, November 23, 5 p.m. The Government of the United States notes with interest the views expressed by the Government of Uruguay with respect to the proposed meeting of Foreign Ministers to discuss urgent war and post-war problems. The agenda suggested for that meeting by the Uruguayan Government is a most helpful contribution and we are confident will be so viewed by other American Republics.
We deeply regret, however, that there appears to be a fundamental difference of opinion between this Government and the Government of Uruguay with respect to the Farrell regime.
The memorandum of the Uruguayan Government, which we understand has been transmitted to the other American Republics, seems to make it clear that in the judgment of the Uruguayan Government the Farrell regime should be invited to participate in a meeting for the discussion of urgent war and post-war problems on the basis of “effective commitments and efficacious measures” which would presumably be given and adopted by that regime during the next few weeks and before a Meeting of Ministers.
It had been our understanding that the Government of Uruguay had agreed with the view of this Government that the Farrell regime constitutes a threat not only to effective realization of the war objective [Page 63] of complete liquidation of Nazi power in the Americas, but also to the future peace and security to the Hemisphere. We believed that Uruguay’s appreciation of the character of this threat had been strikingly demonstrated when the President54 and Foreign Minister,55 requested and promptly received unqualified assurances that the Government of the United States would immediately render both economic and military assistance in the event of reprisals against Uruguay by the Fascist-military regime of Argentina.56
The change of policy by Uruguay on the Argentine problem as expressed in the memorandum is in our judgment particularly to be deplored because of the position of leadership which Uruguay has occupied during the war years, both in the fight against Nazism and also in the struggle against all forces working for the destruction of democratic principles.
In order that we may be entirely clear as to the position of the Uruguayan Government, you are instructed to convey the foregoing thoughts to the President and Foreign Minister at the earliest possible opportunity and submit to them the following inquiries:
- 1.
- Are we correct in our interpretation that Uruguay would be prepared to base recognition of the Farrell regime, at least in part, on “commitments” in the sense of promises or assurances by that regime?
- 2.
- What types of “effective commitments and efficacious measures” of the Farrell regime would suffice, in the judgment of the Uruguayan Government, to justify recognition?
- 3.
- Are we correct in our understanding that Uruguay recommends that the hearing requested by the Farrell government be made the first item on an agenda of a consultative meeting to consider war and post-war problems?
- 4.
- In the event that a majority of American Republics conclude, after such a hearing, that Argentina has not complied with its commitments, is it the view of the Government of Uruguay that the Farrell regime should not be permitted to participate in the subsequent discussion of urgent war and post-war problems, and that the Foreign Ministers would formally exclude Argentina from such participation?
In submitting the foregoing questions you should emphasize the urgency of the matter and our hope that it will be possible for the Uruguayan Government to assist us with the requested supplementary information on its position at an early date.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .