710 Consultation 4/8–2747: Telegram

The Chairman of the United States Delegation (Marshall) to the Acting Secretary of State


83. Conference summary 8. Action Central Committee re Trujillo as delegate Ecuador reported our telegram 82.4 Committee I approved [Page 63] articles A, B, C, D as reported Conference summary 7 with following changes:

Article A, paragraph 1, no change. Paragraph 2. “On request state attacked and until decision security organ of system, parties may determine immediate measures they may individually adopt in fulfillment obligation paragraph 1 and in accordance principle, et cetera.”

Article A, paragraph 3 and article B approved provisionally as reported our telegram 81.5 USDel agreed these articles in view insistence several delegations, particularly Mexican, that otherwise obligation to assist would arouse public opposition on ground Latin American Republics would be called upon automatically to underwrite US world-wide commitments not of their making and in view our belief inclusion reference zone would make easier defeat attempts make further distinction between intraand extra-continental attacks.

Article C, no change.

Article D. “If inviolability or integrity of territory or sovereignty or political independence of American state affected by aggression not armed attack or by intra-continental or extra-continental conflict or by any other fact or situation that might endanger peace America, parties shall consult in order agree on measures which must be taken in case of aggression to assist injured state and in any case on measures which should be taken for common defense and maintenance peace and security continent.”

Guatemala proposed inclusion following words: Article D after “peace America” “or the democratic structure of American governments”. Immediately Argentina, Dominican Republic and Honduras opposed on plea unanimity, necessity for speed and contravention principle non-intervention. Uruguay supported general ideas in consonance with so-called “Uruguayan initiative” of last year.6 Vandenberg opposed Guatemalan language as outside proper scope treaty. Brazil supported US position but indicated willingness accept idea that violation human rights is aggression [since?] these rights are guaranteed by treaty or convention. Guatemalan proposal defeated receiving votes only Guatemala and Cuba.

Remaining articles our telegram 76 not yet approved full committee.

Following articles approved Committee III today:

“Article A. Consultations to which treaty refers shall be carried out by meetings FoMins of Republics which have ratified treaty, or in manner or by organ which may be established in future.

[Page 64]

Article B. PAU Governing Board may act provisionally as organ consultation until meeting takes place.

Article C. Consultations shall be initiated on request addressed to Governing Board by any party.

Article D. In voting referred to in treaty only representatives of parties may take part.

Article E. Governing Board shall act in all matters concerning this treaty as an organ of liaison among parties and between them and UN.

Article F. Decisions of Governing Board referred to in Articles C and B shall be adopted by an absolute majority of members entitled to vote.

Article G. Organ of consultation shall adopt its decisions by vote of two-thirds of parties.

Article H. In determining quorum and in voting referred to two preceding articles, votes of parties directly interested in situation or dispute between American states which gave rise to consultation shall be excepted.

Article I. To constitute quorum in meetings referred to previous articles it shall be necessary that number of states represented equal number of valid votes necessary for adoption decision.”

  1. Not printed.
  2. Not printed.
  3. Presumably the Uruguayan proposal for multilateral intervention in the affairs of states in cases of flagrant violation of human rights or nonfulfillment of freely contracted obligations; see Foreign Relations, 1945, vol. ix, pp. 185 ff.