1. Telegram From the Embassy in Cuba to the Department of State0

2674. Reference: Embassy telegram 2667.1 Note received from Ministry of Foreign Relations at 1:20 a.m. January 3 reading in translation as follows:

Havana, January 2, 1961, Year of Education

Mr. Charge dʼAffaires:

I have the honor to inform you that the Revolutionary Government has decided that under present circumstances the personnel of the Embassy and Consulate of Cuba in the City of Washington, whether diplomatic, consular, or of other character, whatever their nationality, should not exceed eleven persons. Likewise it has decided that the personnel of the Embassy and Consulate of the United States in the city of Habana, whether diplomatic, consular or of other character, whatever their nationality, should likewise be limited to eleven persons.

For the purpose of facilitating the departure of the persons who for this reason must abandon the national territory, a period of 48 hours has been fixed from the time of receipt of this note.

I take the opportunity, Mr. Charge dʼAffaires, to reiterate to you the assurance of my reciprocity of your considerations.2

Signed Carlos Olivares.

  1. Source: Eisenhower Library, Project Clean Up, Cuba. Official Use Only; Niact.
  2. In telegram 2667 from Havana, January 2, Charge Daniel M. Braddock reported that Castro had just announced that his government had decided that the United States would not be allowed to have a greater number of diplomatic personnel in Cuba than Cuba maintained in the United States. Castro indicated that if all the U.S. officials remaining in Cuba decided to leave that would be “perfectly all right with us.” He added that “90 percent of functionaries are spies anyway.” (Ibid.)
  3. Braddock assessed the Cuban note and its impact in telegram 2675 from Havana, January 3. His conclusion was that it would be impossible to maintain a useful operation at the level authorized by the Cuban Government. Braddock recommended that the United States respond by breaking relations immediately. (Ibid.) The note is also printed in Department of State Bulletin, January 23, 1961, p. 104.