710 Consultation 4/5–2947
The Assistant Secretary of State for American Republic Affairs (Braden) to the Under Secretary of State (Acheson)
Subject: Status of Preparations on Substantive Matters for Rio Conference.
. . . . . . .
Three main subjects have been considered in connection with the Rio Conference: the text of a treaty based upon the Act of Chapultepec;2 a resolution establishing a permanent inter-American military agency; and the question of a possible treaty of pacific settlement. The status of work is indicated below with respect to each of these items.
Text of Treaty
The United States draft for the proposed treaty of Rio was approved by the President and by the Congressional leaders at the end of 1945 and was distributed to the other American governments, except Argentina, on December 21, 1945. A copy of this draft is attached.3
In addition to the United States, the following governments also have submitted draft texts for the treaty: Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, Mexico, Panama and Uruguay. All texts, including the United States draft, were analyzed by a committee of the Governing Board of the Pan American Union in which the United States representative took a leading part. A copy of the report issued by the Governing Board of the Union containing the analysis of main problems presented [Page 2] by the various drafts, and the text of all drafts, is also attached.
The working group in the Department has started to make comments on every provision of every draft with a view to determining exactly how much language the United States might accept from the drafts of other countries, but this work has not been completed.
The main problems in concluding the treaty may be expected to arise in connection with the following: (1) Obtaining a firm commitment from all countries (as provided for in the United States draft) to “assist” any American republic on which an armed attack is made. The Act of Chapultepec, and practically all of the Latin American draft treaties, contain the legal obligation merely to “consult” in case of such an attack, although a moral commitment to assist is implied. (The troublesome problem created by attempts to define “armed attack” and “act of aggression” may be anticipated.) (2) Providing adequately for steps to be taken in connection with acts of aggression other than armed attack. (It is believed that the United States draft treaty should be reviewed in this respect.) (3) Specifying satisfactory procedures for reaching majority decisions in the consultations called for under the treaty that will not bind the United States without its consent. (4) Concluding provisions which will adequately cover acts or threats of aggression executed through subversive activities, but which will not take the form of an alliance directed against the Soviet Union nor provide grounds for repression of democratic political opposition by dictatorial governments. (5) Insuring concordance of the treaty with the spirit and letter of the Charter of the United Nations.4
Military Agency
Some representatives of the War Department wished to have the draft treaty include provisions for the establishment of an Inter-American Military Staff Organization and for granting of military rights, facilities, etc. whenever military enforcement action was necessary. It was finally decided, however, not to include such matters in the treaty but to cover the establishment of a military agency in a separate resolution.
General agreement on a working level was reached with the War and Navy Departments on a draft resolution for the establishment of an inter-American military agency, but this document never received the approval of the respective Secretaries, nor was it discussed with the Congressional leaders. A copy of this draft resolution is attached.5
[Page 3]In the meantime, the Inter-American Defense Board has also produced a draft resolution for the establishment of an inter-American military council which follows in general, but differs in detail from, the paper drafted in the three Departments.
The Resolution will therefore have to be reviewed by the three Departments and be finally approved as representative of the United States position on this subject.
. . . . . . .
Pacific Settlement Procedures
There is some question whether the subject of pacific settlement of inter-American disputes should be taken up at the Rio Conference. The Mexico City Conference suggested an Inter-American Conference of Jurists be called to conclude a consolidated treaty of pacific settlement procedures,6 and a draft treaty has already been prepared by the Inter-American Juridical Committee. However, some Latin American countries, notably Mexico, have recommended, in their draft treaties for Rio de Janeiro, provisions for pacific settlement of disputes. The Department was considering a year ago, when work on the Rio Conference ceased, whether or not to recommend that the Rio Conference undertake the conclusion of a treaty of pacific settlement as a companion document to the treaty based on the Act of Chapultepec. No final decision on this point was reached, although the Brazilian Government had indicated it was not favorable to such an idea. It will therefore have to be decided whether the United States will press for such a treaty at Rio, bearing in mind such factors as: (a) the desirability of complementing the military assistance treaty with a treaty for pacific settlement which is in the tradition of inter-American efforts to prevent war, and mitigating such undesirable psychological reactions as the exclusive emphasis on a military assistance treaty might produce; (b) the attitude of other participating states as to whether a peaceful settlement treaty should be concluded at Rio de Janeiro or at another conference; and (c) the time available for perfecting a draft treaty, already under consideration, to make it satisfactory to the United States.
General
In addition to the decisions called for above, and the necessity for reviewing and giving final approval to the actual draft documents to be presented to the Conference, there remains the task of preparing more detailed instructions for the American delegation outlining the policies and decisions expressed in the draft treaty and resolution.
- Approved March 8, 1945, at Mexico City; for text, see Department of State, Treaties and Other International Acts Series No. 1543, or 60 Stat. (pt. 2) 1831.↩
- Enclosures mentioned in this document not printed.↩
- Treaties and Other International Acts Series No. 993, or 59 Stat. (pt. 2) 1031.↩
- Not printed. In letters to the Secretary of War and the Secretary of the Navy, July 21, 1947, the Secretary of State indicated that the three Departments were in agreement that the United States should favor the creation of an Inter-American military agency but that discussions toward that end should be carried on not at Rio de Janeiro but at the forthcoming conference at Bogotá. (710 Consultation 4/7–1747)↩
- For resolutions of the Conference, see Pan American Union, Final Act of the Inter-American Conference on Problems of War and Peace, Mexico City, February–March, 1945 (Washington, 1945).↩