812.114 Narcotics/12–1847
The Ambassador in Mexico (Thurston) to the Secretary of State
No. 5226
Sir: I took up yesterday with the Minister for Foreign Affairs the general subject of the Department’s confidential airmail instruction Number 1610 dated December 5, 194767 with respect to the illicit traffic in narcotic drugs in Mexico. I stated that my Government had learned with pleasure from Mr. DeLagrave of the program outlined to him by the Mexican Attorney General for an energetic campaign in 1948 to prevent the cultivation of opium poppies in this country, and I inquired whether the Foreign Minister was in a position to assure me that such a program would actually be undertaken and prosecuted.
Señor Torres Bodet stated in reply that he knew of the Attorney General’s program and that it was his understanding that it was already in operation and that it would be continued throughout the coming year. He then called the Attorney General by telephone and informed him of my statements and of my request for assurances of the nature just described. At the termination of this conversation, Señor Torres Bodet stated that the Attorney General had authorized him to assure me most formally that the campaign described by him to Mr. DeLagrave was in progress, and that it would be vigorously continued through the next year. I expressed appreciation of these assurances.
The Foreign Minister then stated that the Mexican Government had been offended and embarrassed by the statements made by Mr. Anslinger during the Second Session of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs at Lake Success some months ago. He implied that the Mexican Government was considering the advisability of attempting at the forthcoming session of the Economic and Social Council (which he said begins February 2, 1948—not in January) to bring about the retraction of some of Mr. Anslinger’s accusations and remarks with [Page 840] respect to Mexico’s laxity in enforcing control over the traffic in illicit narcotics. When, however, I asked him specifically if this was the intention of the Mexican Government, he replied that no decision had been reached although since the subject of the charges made by Mr. Anslinger would of necessity be discussed at that session, Mexico would of course present its own views. There are some, he said, who are angry over Mr. Anslinger’s remarks and who wish it to be pointed out that Mexico is virtually the victim of this traffic, which is financed in Mexico and in the United States by American capital, and to call upon us to put our own house in order. He gave me to understand, however, that no intemperate action along these lines would be taken.
In view of the Mexican attitude as just described and in view of the assurances given to me by the Minister and the Attorney General with respect to the 1948 campaign, I considered it to be inadvisable to say to the Mexican Foreign Minister, as directed in the last paragraph of the Department’s instruction under reference, that the United States Government intends to urge the Economic and Social Council to recommend that the Government of Mexico take measures to suppress the illicit cultivation of opium poppies in Mexico. It seemed to me that by obtaining the assurances mentioned, I had gone far enough for the present. I venture to suggest to the Department that it likewise give consideration to the broader aspects of this situation: If the United States Government officially endorses Mr. Anslinger’s remarks and assumes a critical attitude of the Mexican Government for permitting the production of poppies and opium, it is quite apparent that this attitude will provoke resentment and very likely hostile remarks with respect to conditions in the United States and the connivance of American capital and gangster organizations, which we seem no more able to control than do the Mexicans seem able to control the production and shipment of narcotics.
Respectfully yours,
- Not printed.↩