835.00/8–1546: Telegram
The Acting Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Argentina (Messersmith)
1095. Dept is gratified to have your opinion that the Arg Govt will comply with agreements relating to repatriation of inimical persons and elimination of undesirable ownership in Axis spearhead enterprises. This morning’s press account of Senate ratification of Mexico City agreements is encouraging indication of Arg Govt’s intention to comply.
We agree that we shd not expect perfect performance. As regards property the level of performance by the other American republics—particularly those such as Brazil, Chile and Mexico which were faced with problems comparable to the one in Arg wd be a factor. In respect of persons the measure of performance by other American republics is pertinent but regard must be paid to the fact that few, if any, counterparts to worst Nazis in Arg were found in other American republics.
While our attitude and position must be reasonable we think you will agree that regard must be paid to the quality as well as quantity of persons and firms which are to be dealt with as well as the point of progress actually reached by Arg in accomplishing the objectives of both programs.
It is most difficult to determine now on a hypothetical basis whether there wd be substantial, over-all compliance if no measures were taken against certain prominent individuals (such as Freude) or enterprises. These questions can better be decided in the light of current circumstances and performance in other respects. Our feeling is therefore that we shd not at this stage attempt to blue print the precise point of progress which we wd regard as constituting deeds rather than promises.
Foregoing is a very gen. statement of some of the considerations which we had in mind in suggesting in Deptel 1082 Aug 156 that clearance with the Pres and Secy is indicated. We are in process of further defining our views on these points and upon receipt of your despatches 561, 5657 and 583 we will airmail instr which we believe will show little if any disagreements between Dept and Emb on these important points. Every effort will continue to be made to assure that Pres and Secy have direct knowledge of your views, which as always will have careful consideration.
We also agree that it is not in our province to lay before Arg a blue print of what must be done. Precise names of persons and individuals [Page 306] have already been so often discussed that Arg Govt already has a gen knowledge of what we consider to be adequate performance. At same time our Govt cannot escape responsibility of deciding for itself whether there has been compliance with an agreement to which it is party particularly since our decision will determine whether we will enter into a military pact with Arg. That is essence of Secy’s statement of Apr 8 and of Pres’s directive.
We also agree that Dept shd continue, as it has since your arrival in Baires, to refrain from making any statement impugning the good faith or motives of Arg Govt since this wd only make your task more difficult. There have been instances where in response to direct inquiries from press—in almost all cases re stories emanating from Baires—it has been necessary to say that there has been no change in our Apr 8 policy. An example was the recent UP and Kluckhohn despatches from Baires alleging that a composition had already been reached under the terms of which the US agreed to deliver arms to Arg. N.Y. Times editorial (we have no record of N.Y. Daily Post editorial) referred to in your 2030 Aug 179 and other editorials to same effect were spontaneous reactions to statements attributed by Baires press to the Arg official Peralta aggravated by quotations published here of alleged Perón speech of same day to leaders of his NR Party. We cannot give you our comment on these newspaper accounts until we have received a full report from the Emb.