740.00111 A.R./888½
The Ambassador in Chile (Bowers) to the Under Secretary of State (Welles)
[Received January 5, 1940.]
Dear Mr. Welles: It occurs to me that you may be interested in reactions here toward the Panama Declaration and particularly toward the fixing of the security zone and the protests against its violation. This especially since I have thought it proper to telegraph the Department concerning the attitude of the Government here. That the agreement at Panama was accepted in good faith by the authorities here I have no doubt. At the time I put the matter up to Ortega he gave clear indications of the importance he attached to the provision whereby problems growing out of the neutrality stand would be submitted to the Committee of Experts on Neutrality representing the various American nations. When the press associations sent from Washington to Chilean papers the latest proposition regarding the protest over the violation of Uruguayan waters, and unintentionally perhaps gave the impression that this was decided upon in conferences between the United States, Brazil and Argentina, I found some puzzlement here and a perceptible cooling of the atmosphere. The fact that this article appeared to find no violation worth mentioning in the capture of the Dusseldorf by a British cruiser off the [Page 124] coast of Chile, and especially after Ortega had submitted to Washington the propriety of including this along with the affair off Uruguay in the protest, was taken, I am afraid, as a slight. The further fact that no comment has come from Washington on Ortega’s assumption, officially conveyed, that all such matters would be considered by the Committee of Experts has not failed of notice.
These matters perhaps are not of great importance, but the Chileans are very sensitive where they feel their dignity involved, and especially sensitive when however unintentionally the impression is given that Argentina and Brazil are accepted as the spokesmen of South American policy, with Chile left out. My own belief is that Argentina was the red rag in this instance.
I am sure it is just as well that especial pains should be taken, in view of this jealousy, not to permit the impression to get out that Chile is taken for granted.
The political opposition, acting through El Mercurio and its publisher Agustín Edwards, is rather bitterly attacking the extent of the security zone fixed at Panama, and several editorial leaders, not at all friendly to us, have appeared on successive days and especially since the decision about the protest. While not openly attacking the Government here for its adhesion at Panama and its agreement on the protest the attacks nevertheless are calculated to convey the notion that the rights and dignity of Chile are not in very safe keeping in the hands of the Government. Since it is the Government which has made common cause with us on the neutrality policy I am persuaded that the utmost tact should be exercised in dealing with Chile on these matters. It has occurred to me as quite possible that the Department has been in touch with Bianchi, if not the Chilean Ambassador, on all these things but it is evident, in that event, that they have not taken the trouble to inform the Government here.
El Mercurio was distinctly neutral on the war until the return of Agustín Edwards, for some years Chilean Ambassador in London. Since his return the paper has become most militantly pro-Ally, or rather pro-English. I have a feeling that Britain now has two Ambassadors in Santiago, Edwards and Bentinck, and that the former is by odds the more aggressive. He is notoriously an idolator of England and he remains, as during the Spanish war, pro-Chamberlain. I am enclosing an extract from an El Mercurio editorial,41 believed to have been written by him, in which he is a bit nasty toward the United States. This grows out of our attitude on the safety zone, and this reflects the bitter opposition to it of the British Embassy here, members of which openly say they will ignore it.
[Page 125]Last night I dined at Cruchaga’s in honor of the retiring Peruvian Ambassador and all the guests were outstanding leaders, Senators, of the Conservative Party except Ortega, Minister of Foreign Affairs, who was given a most friendly and considerate reception. The definite news of the ministerial crisis and the resignation of Wachholtz came during the evening and I had the opportunity under the most favorable circumstances to discuss the significance of the change with the opposition leaders of the Right. Both Cruchaga and Senator Walker, leader of the Conservative Party, talked frankly and I think objectively. It was their opinion that the political situation is not changed in the least. Cruchaga thinks that a more serious change may come in about a year. He added that he did not mean to imply that he thought the Rights would comeback, and he gave the impression that he thought it quite possible that by then the President will break with the Socialists and try to create a center basis for his government.
I was particularly interested in Walker’s estimate of Schnake, the Socialist leader, now Minister of Fomento, after having been the Socialist leader in the Senate. Walker describes him as a man of real ability, of fine political judgment, and not nearly so radical as his talk. He says that Grove, the extremist among the Socialists, has lost greatly in prestige and that Schnake is now the power in the Socialist Party.
Cruchaga spoke with affection of Washington, of Roosevelt, Hull and yourself and I noticed prominently displayed autographed and inscribed photographs of Roosevelt, Hughes and Kellogg.
I got a pleasant impression, after Spain, of the very fine and considerate reception given Ortega who was a guest among his political foes. Such a thing would have been utterly impossible in Spain during my time there before the war. I was also impressed with the sanity and objectivity of the Rightist leaders. In other words, despite the fundamental differences of the parties here, there is an absence in political circles of the fanaticism and hate which made social life in Madrid so trying.
There are rumors today that Wachholtz may be made Ambassador to Washington. I hope it is true. I am sure he would greatly like that post and honor. He has a great admiration for the United States because of its organization in business life. He would be most sympathetic in his dealings with us. I greatly regret his resignation which unquestionably is not good.
Sincerely,
- Not reprinted.↩