710.H/163
The Ambassador in Argentina (Weddell) to the Secretary of
State
No. 2266
Buenos Aires, October 27,
1938.
[Received November 4.]
Sir: I have the honor to transmit the
original text, and translation, of an exposé, prepared by the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which embodies the views of the
Argentine Government with respect to the forthcoming Conference
at Lima.
In my despatch No. 2257 of October 21, 1938 I reported that
Doctor Cantilo had promised me such an expression of views and
had, at the same time, outlined a project which his delegation
intended to support at the Conference, and which is in
amplification of Article 2 of the Convention for the
Maintenance, Preservation and Reestablishment of Peace signed at
Buenos Aires in December, 1936. It will be seen that the
Argentine Government considers that the system of mutual
consultation agreed upon in Buenos Aires might be extended to
apply not only to the case of war, or menace of war, but to
specific cases of a different order. In my conversation with
Doctor Cantilo he stated that such specific cases might, in his
opinion, cover questions such as customs, frontier police,
immigration, etc. He added that in order to insure prompt
consultation, the Governments interested might, if they so
desired, delegate their diplomatic representatives to attend the
meetings whenever necessary.
The exposé further stresses the necessity for the Conference to
abide strictly by the agenda and to avoid the unexpected
inclusion of projects which might create divergencies or
confusion among the delegations. The Argentine Government
expresses itself as contrary to the Inter–American Court of
Justice50 and the League of American
Nations;51 and refers, in addition to
the Briand–Kellogg Pact,52 to
certain specific treaties which might be taken into
consideration with a view to perfecting and coordinating
inter-American instruments
[Page 33]
of peace. Reference is also made to the peace code53 to be submitted at the Lima Conference
and to the unduly slow procedure of the proposed Commission of
Conciliation54 which, in the opinion of
the Argentine Government, is a defect already attributable to
the Gondra Pact.55
The Argentine Government will furthermore insist on its
reservation in connection with Article 6 of the Convention to
Coordinate, Extend and Assure the Fulfillment of the Existing
Treaties Between the American States,56 and furnishes its interpretation of this
Article. It also favors postponing consideration of the
definition of the aggressor. As to sanctions, the opinion is
expressed that those of a moral or juridical character are more
practicable, for as long as the application of material
sanctions is not general it cannot be effective.
Other points in the exposé refer to the codification of
international law, financial claims, women’s political and civil
rights and to the recognition of belligerency.
It is of some interest to note that in matters of immigration the
Argentine Government will claim that no system of quotas should
be established among American republics and that it is necessary
to stress the right to regulate and select immigration in
accordance with national requirements.
Respectfully yours,
[Enclosure—Translation]
Memorandum Prepared by the Argentine
Ministry for Foreign Affairs
VIII Pan American
Conference at Lima
The Argentine Delegation to the VIII Pan American Conference
at Lima has no purpose other than that of frankly
cooperating in the study and settlement of matters which
appear on the agenda and which concern all the countries
represented. In this respect, the Argentine Government
considers that the Conference, particularly at the present
moment, should reflect the unity and solidarity of the
American countries and therefore avoid all topics which
might divide them.
[Page 34]
In this respect, the Argentine Delegation will uphold the
desirability of following strictly the pre-established
agenda, in order to avoid the unexpected inclusion of
projects which might create divergencies or confusion among
the delegations.
There are two topics on this agenda which may give rise to
differences and violent debates: the Inter-American Court of
Justice and the League of American Nations. The Argentine
Republic has already expressed, at the Conference for the
Consolidation of Peace, its adverse opinion on these
projects. It is also opposed to anything that may tend to
confer political powers upon the Pan American Union or to
create any political organization of a permanent
character.
But the Argentine Government intends to help to bring about
closer relations among the American nations and governments
and, in this sense, it believes that the system of mutual
consultation, agreed upon in Buenos Aires, might be extended
and applied, not only in case of war or menace of war, but
in special cases of a different kind when the common
interests of the American countries should make it
advisable.
The Argentine Delegation will define its ideas on this
subject in a concrete project.
Without going into a detailed analysis of the agenda but
rather as a general consideration of its principal headings,
this Chancellery expresses as follows its opinion concerning
other topics to be discussed.
With respect to the improvement and coordination of
inter-American instruments of peace, it believes that it
will be necessary also to take into account the
Briand–Kellogg Pact57
since it has been ratified by most of the American
Republics, as well as the following: The Treaty to Avoid or
Prevent Conflicts Between American Nations;58 The
General Convention of [Inter-]American Conciliation,59 and
Additional Protocol;60 The General Treaty
of Pan [Inter-]American Arbitration,61 and the Protocol on
[of] Progressive
Arbitration;62 The
South American Anti-War Treaty.63 In cases of
recourse to arbitration, it considers it necessary to
exclude pending matters of political character affecting
national defense, and it also considers that in matters of
conciliation it would be preferable given the nature of the
matter, not to stipulate exceptions.
[Page 35]
With reference to the Peace Code which will again be
presented at the Lima Conference, this Chancellery points
out that the proposed Commission of Conciliation is of slow
procedure, especially insofar as taking up its duties is
concerned, this being a defect already inherent in the
Gondra Pact.
The Argentina Delegation is instructed to insist on the
Argentine reservation made in connection with Article VI of
the Convention to Coordinate, Extend and Assure the
Fulfilment of the Existing Treaties Between the American
States. That is to say, it considers that foodstuffs
destined for civil populations should not be defined as
contraband of war and that the authorization of credits to
finance the acquisition of said foodstuffs is not an act
contrary to neutrality.
With reference to determination of the aggressor, this
Chancellery believes it would be better to leave this topic
until another opportunity presents itself, bearing in mind
the difficulties encountered by writers in establishing a
clear and well defined concept thereof, as well as the
difficulties which have risen within the League of Nations
itself.
On the subject of sanctions, experience has demonstrated that
those of moral character are more practicable and also
perhaps a few of purely juridical character, because, as
long as the application of material sanctions is not
general, it has no effect. With regard to sanctions of
juridical character, the Argentine Delegation will
eventually support anything that tends to define concretely
certain measures (to be taken), and to establish whether
they shall be compulsory or merely recommended.
The Argentine Chancellery likewise considers that the
mechanism established in various American conferences for
the Codification of International Law is perhaps somewhat
complicated and for this reason it believes it advisable to
modify the permanent committees and to suppress the
Committee of Experts.
With respect to financial claims, the Argentine Delegation
will submit a project on diplomatic protection; and with
regard to nationality it will reaffirm its opinion on “jus soli” as a fundamental system,
without admitting double nationality in any form. All this
provided that circumstances and the atmosphere of the
Conference do not make it advisable to lay these projects
aside.
Likewise the Argentine Delegation is instructed to maintain
the affirmation of the principle that juridical persons have
no nationality; it will also maintain the classic principles
relative to the recognition of belligerency.
In matters of immigration this Chancellery believes that no
system of quotas should be established among the American
Republics, and that it is necessary, however, clearly to
establish the right to regulate and select immigration in
accordance with national requirements.
[Page 36]
With regard to Chapter IV which refers to women’s political
and civil rights, it considers that this is a subject of
purely internal character.
Lastly, it will support all that tends to promote
intellectual cooperation and moral disarmament.
