771.00/1–2953: Airgram

The Secretary of State to the Legation at Tangier

confidential

A–66. Reference Legation’s Despatch 279 of January 27, 1953 regarding U.S. reservations to the Tangier Protocol of November 10, 1952.1

The Legation reports that the minutes of the 174th meeting of the Tangier Committee of Control at which the Protocol of November 10, 1952 was signed do not indicate that this Government abstained in the vote on the re-establishment of the Mixed Bureau of Information, or that the signature of the U.S. to the Protocol was made with the reservation that it did not imply U.S. adherence to the Tangier Statute of 1923 (as amended in 1928). It is further reported that the record does not show any statement indicating that our signature to the Protocol was subject to the reservations that it did not modify or abridge in any manner (1) the position of the United States, (2) the status of the United States Representative, (3) the establishment, authority and power of the United States’ extraterritorial jurisdiction, or (4) any rights accruing to the United States and its nationals and ressortissants from treaty, custom and usage. The Legation states that the Portuguese Minister has already stated that it is his opinion that the signature of this Government to the Protocol of November 10 implies U.S. acceptance of the 1923 Statute. The Legation recommends that the U.S. position should be clarified by transmission of a letter to the President of the Committee of Control.

The Department questions whether transmission of the proposed letter to the President of the Committee of Control enclosed with the Legation’s despatch under reference would fully accomplish the purpose for which it is intended. It is not clear to the Department how this letter would become a matter of record in the Committee of Control or how the mere transmission of such a letter would preclude other members of the Committee from challenging the U.S. position at some future date. The Department is of the opinion that the desired clarification can best be achieved if the actual minutes of a meeting of the Committee of Control contain a statement by the U.S. Representative setting forth the U.S. position. Accordingly, there are listed below in the order of their preference the procedures which the Department believes should be taken to clarify this matter:

(1)
The U.S. Representative should seek to have the minutes of the 174th meeting of the Committee of Control amended to show that the [Page 206] U.S. abstained in the vote on the re-establishment of the Mixed Bureau of Information, and that the signature of this Government to the Protocol of November 10 was subject to the reservations set forth in paragraph two above.
(2)
The U.S. Representative should read into the minutes of the next meeting of the Committee the text of the proposed letter to Mr. de Panafieu enclosed with the Legation’s despatch under reference. This should be done regardless of whether the Protocol of November 10, 1952 is scheduled for discussion at the next meeting of the Committee.
(3)
If the procedures under (1) and (2) above are not feasible, the Legation should transmit the proposed letter to the President of the Committee of Control.

As a further means of assuring that the U.S. position on this matter is clarified, the Department proposes to include a statement in its adherence to the Convention providing for the re-organization of the International Courts of Tangier setting forth the reservations contained in the second paragraph of this communication.2

Please report action taken.

Dulles
  1. Not printed; it included a memorandum from the legal adviser of the American Legation, Edwin L. Smith, to the Chargé, William Witman II, setting forth possible U.S. reservations to the Tangier Protocol and, in addition, the draft of a letter to the President of the Committee of Control, François de Panafieu of France. (771.00/1–2953)
  2. This was done on July 8, 1953; for text of the statement, see telegram 16, July 7, p. 222.