Office of the Historian

852.00/8305: Telegram

The Counselor of Embassy in Spain (Thurston) to the Secretary of State

Barcelona, July 28, 1938—10 a.m.
[Received 2:50 p.m.]

1015. Embassy’s 1003, July 14, 9 a.m. The reply of the Spanish Government to the British note conveying the plan of the Non-intervention Committee for the withdrawal of foreign volunteers from Spain is published in today’s newspapers. The following are its salient points:

1.
The Spanish Government considers that it may construe the plan to be designed primarily to assure the withdrawal of foreigners directly or indirectly participating in the Spanish conflict. The provisions applying to this point are contained in part 4 of the annex to the proposed resolution of the Non-intervention Committee, and the Government declares that it accepts these provisions at once and when the occasion arises will collaborate faithfully in their execution. Nevertheless it feels obliged to make the following observations:
2.
Concerns system of estimating number of foreign volunteers, which Government believes should be effected by direct investigation.
3.
Concerns zones of evacuation.
4.
Concerns “time table” for withdrawal which it analyzes in detail and finds in some respects entirely impracticable and prejudicial to the Government.
5.
Concerns definitions of “foreign volunteers” and suggests withdrawal in first place of technicians, aviators, artillerymen, general staff, et cetera (see section 3, Embassy’s telegram 1004, July 14 [15], 10 [5] a.m.).
6.
Concerns “nationality” and reaffirms Government’s contention that [apparent omission] are to be considered foreigners and therefore should be withdrawn.
7.
Concerns exemption of foreigners who enlisted in the Spanish Foreign Legion prior to July 18th, 1936, whose withdrawal also is urged.
8.
Concerns failure to provide for withdrawal of foreign material and prevention of its continued arrival.
9.
Concerns maritime control which since rebels receive supplies by sea it considers should be made as effective as land control. Criticises selection of controlled parts which omits Ceuta, Coruna, the islands, et al. Calls for fuller information in general.
10.
Concerns air control, omission of which is criticised, and expresses astonishment that after a full year this nonintervention has not been studied.
11.
Concerns belligerent rights. Repeats opposition to granting such rights to rebels.

Thurston