Foreign Relations of the United States: Diplomatic Papers, 1943, The American Republics, Volume V

835.00/1746

The Secretary of State to the Argentine Minister for Foreign Affairs (Storni)

Washington, August 30, 1943.

My Dear Mr. Minister: I have received your letter of August 5, in which you were good enough to inform me regarding the situation of the new Argentine Government established as the result of the military movement of June 4, particularly with reference to the international position of Argentina. I note that your letter has the full approval of the President of Argentina and I have been pleased to make the views expressed therein known to President Roosevelt.

It is profoundly satisfactory to note your statement that the people of your country feel themselves indissolubly linked with the other inhabitants of this continent of profoundly democratic origins. This statement will be most welcome to the citizens of the United States actively engaged at the cost of tremendous sacrifices in lives and materials in a war for the survival of the principles so eloquently described by you. I feel sure that in the same spirit it will be warmly greeted by the peoples of all of the other republics of the Hemisphere which have taken measures essential to the defense of our continent against a menace now happily being overcome by the joint efforts of the friends of freedom everywhere.

However, it is with regret that my Government and the people of the United States have been forced to the conclusion that the undoubted sentiments of the Argentine people have not been implemented by action called for by the commitments freely entered into by their Government in common with the governments of the other twenty American republics.

Your Excellency is, of course, fully familiar with those commitments. As they particularly affect the present world conflict, they are based upon Resolution XV adopted by the Foreign Ministers of the American Republics at Habana in July of 1940. That Resolution provides that any attempt on the part of a non-American state against the integrity or inviolability of the territory, the sovereignty or the political independence of an American state shall be considered as an act of aggression against the states which signed this declaration. The act of aggression contemplated in this Declaration took place on December 7, 1941. In January of 1942 the Foreign Ministers of the American Republics met at Rio de Janeiro to consider the measures which they should adopt for common defense. A Resolution recommending the break of diplomatic relations with Japan, Germany and Italy was adopted. The wording of that Resolution was the subject of prolonged discussion and the text finally agreed upon was fully responsive to the views expressed by the Argentine Government. I believe it desirable to quote the Resolution in full:

“Breaking of Diplomatic Relations

• “I The American Republics reaffirm their declaration to consider any act of aggression on the part of a non-American State against one of them as an act of aggression against all of them, constituting as it does an immediate threat to the liberty and independence of America.
• “II The American Republics reaffirm their complete solidarity and their determination to cooperate jointly for their mutual protection until the effects of the present aggression against the Continent have disappeared.
• “III The American Republics, in accordance with the procedures established by their own laws and in conformity with the position and circumstances obtaining in each country in the existing continental conflict, recommend the breaking of their diplomatic relations with Japan, Germany and Italy, since the first-mentioned State attacked and the other two declared war on an American country.
• “IV Finally, the American Republics declare that, prior to the reestablishment of the relations referred to in the preceding paragraph, they will consult among themselves in order that their action may have a solidary character.”

With the exception of Argentina, all of the American Republics have severed diplomatic relations with Japan, Germany and Italy and of these twenty republics thirteen are at war with the Axis powers.

Resolution V, adopted by the Consultative Meeting of Foreign Ministers at Rio de Janeiro, stipulated by unanimous agreement the immediate adoption of any additional measures necessary to cut off for the duration of the present Hemispheric emergency all commercial and financial intercourse, direct or indirect, between the Western Hemisphere and the nations signatory to the Tri-Partite Pact and the territories dominated by them. The Argentine representative at the Meeting adhered to this Resolution with the following reservation:

“The Argentine Delegation requests that it be recorded in the minutes, as well as at the end of this draft resolution, that the Argentine Republic agrees with the necessity of adopting economic and financial control measures with regard to all foreign and domestic activities of firms or enterprises which may, in one way or another, affect the welfare of the republics of America or the solidarity or defense of the Continent. It has adopted and is prepared to adopt further measures in this respect, in accordance with the present resolution, extending them, however, to firms or enterprises managed or controlled by aliens or from foreign belligerent countries not in the American Continent.”

The Argentine Government has failed to effect the severance of financial and commercial relations called for by Resolution V. Moreover, financial transactions of direct benefit to the enemies of the United Nations have been authorized by agencies of the Argentine Government.

Resolution XVII adopted at Rio provided for a concerted effort to discover and combat subversive activities. It is notorious that Axis agents in Argentina have been and are engaging in systematic espionage which has cost the United Nations ships and lives. Vicious propaganda aimed at the United Nations appears in publications which are supported by subsidies from Axis sources. These publications have benefited by a Government decree which enables them to receive supplies of newsprint at favorable prices through the intervention of the Argentine Ministry of Agriculture.

Resolution XL adopted at the Rio de Janeiro Meeting recommended that each American republic adopt the necessary and immediate measures to close all radiotelephone and radiotelegraph communications between the American Republics and the aggressor States and all territories subservient to them, except in so far as official communications of the American Governments are concerned. Argentina is the only one of the twenty-one American Republics now permitting radiotelephone and radiotelegraph communications with Japan, Germany and Italy.

The above summary of certain of the inter-American commitments freely entered into by Argentina, together with the twenty other American republics, furnishes a convincing expression of the reason why the situation of neutrality which Your Excellency states the Argentine Republic has had to observe up to now has not been understood.

It is, of course, a matter solely within the competence of the Argentine Government to judge the degree to which Argentine public opinion which you state is firmly opposed to totalitarian regimes will support a foreign policy designed at the very least to reduce the assistance which Argentina’s present position has rendered and is continuing to render those regimes. Nor can I pass upon the question of the nature of the motive which you believe would be necessary to enable the Argentine Government to fulfill the obligations it has contracted. I must, however, express my astonishment at your statement that for the Argentine Government to fulfill those obligations would afford grounds to believe that such action was taken under the pressure or threat of foreign agents. The obligations in question were freely entered into by all the American Republics, and have been carried out by all except Argentina.

In concluding the discussion of this subject, I believe it fitting to recall that the public and private statements made by the President of the Nation and by Your Excellency during the first few weeks of the tenure of office of the new Argentine Government gave my Government positive ground for the belief that Argentine sentiments of continental solidarity and of adherence to inter-American commitments would be translated into effective action within a specific and brief period.

It is no doubt true as indicated by Your Excellency that the products of Argentine agriculture and mining have been of the greatest value to the cause of the United Nations. Those products, however, have found markets at equitable prices in the determination of which the United Nations have consistently refused to take advantage of the fact that they are, thanks to the efficiency of their military and naval operations, the only major markets open to Argentina. A glance at Argentine economic statistics will show that Argentina’s economic transactions with the United Nations have been highly beneficial to Argentina. I am, of course, not fully informed regarding the degree to which these transactions may have resulted in the sacrifice of materials essential to the defense of Argentina as mentioned in Your Excellency’s letter. In this connection, however, it may be noted that neither the present Argentine Government nor its predecessor has at any time evidenced a disposition to strengthen the security of Argentina by having Argentine military and naval forces take part in measures designed for the defense of the hemisphere.

With respect to Your Excellency’s statement to the effect that Argentina is being denied materials which she requires to increase her production of commodities essential to the United Nations, you are, of course, aware that the conditions of the war have imposed upon the United States and the other United Nations the necessity for a very careful allocation of available materials of a critical and strategic nature in order that these materials may be used to the best advantage in furtherance of the war effort. Notwithstanding these circumstances, Argentine essential civilian requirements, particularly those related to public health and the maintenance of essential services, have received fair treatment.

With regard to the petroleum negotiations, it may be pointed out that Argentina, thanks to its natural resources, the production of which has increased during the war period, and to its ability to import, has enjoyed during the past year and a half far greater oil supplies for the consumption of its civilian population than have the neighboring republics. Those republics have received extremely limited supplies made possible through cooperative action in which the Government of the United States and of the producing republics other than Argentina have participated. Considerable hardship and sacrifice has resulted owing to the serious shortage of ocean-going tankers. Thus, while the Argentine people were enjoying gasoline supplies equivalent to about seventy percent of their normal civilian requirements, the peoples of Uruguay, Brazil, Paraguay, Chile and, in general, other republics were receiving only approximately forty per cent of normal civilian requirements. Argentine assistance would have been of great value during this very difficult period.

The negotiations to which your letter refers have been concerned with the provision of materials and supplies to enable the future production of the Argentine oil fields to be maintained and even be increased. The lack of these materials has not in any way affected the ability of Argentina to cooperate with the neighboring republics during the past eighteen months if Argentina had desired to cooperate.

With regard to the matter of arms and munitions, your letter states that the evolution of Argentine public opinion would be more rapid and effective in favor of the American countries if President Roosevelt were to make an open and friendly gesture toward the Argentine people such as would be the immediate supply of airplanes, replacement parts, armaments and machinery, in order to restore Argentina to the position of equilibrium which corresponds to her [status?] with respect to other South American countries. In reply, I must point out emphatically that questions of military and naval equilibrium as between American republics are surely inconsistent with the inter-American doctrine of the peaceful settlement of international disputes to which so many practical contributions have been made by Argentine statesmen. In fact, one of the most specific expressions of that doctrine, known as the Treaty of Non-Aggression and Conciliation,⁴⁸ was the work of a distinguished Argentine Minister for Foreign Affairs.⁴⁹ To furnish arms and munitions for the purpose indicated by Your Excellency would appear to this Government to be clearly inconsistent with the juridical and moral foundations upon which existing inter-American understanding and agreements are based.

I must also recall that it has been frequently indicated to representatives of your Government, including the military and naval officers who visited Washington more than a year ago, that the supply of arms and munitions by the United States to the other American republics is exclusively for the purpose of contributing to the defense of the Hemisphere against possible aggression. In the determination of the contribution which the Government of the United States could make to the preparations for defense of the other nineteen American Republics which jointly determined upon the need for such defense, the Government of the United States has been guided exclusively by considerations of hemispheric security. Since Argentina, both by its words and its actions, has indicated clearly that the Argentine armed forces will not under present conditions be used in a manner designed to forward the cause of the security of the New World, and, thereby, the vital war interests of the United States, it would be impossible for the President of the United States to enter into an agreement to furnish arms and munitions to Argentina under the Lend-Lease Act.

I have written Your Excellency in this detail since I am sure from the frank and friendly terms in which your letter to me is couched, that you would desire an equally frank and friendly exposition of the views of this Government. I feel that I should be lacking in such frankness, however, were I to leave you under the impression that the Government and the people of the United States have not viewed with deep regret the course followed by the Argentine Government in so far as concerns hemispheric defense since the Conference of Foreign Ministers in Rio de Janeiro. I am in entire agreement with your statement that defeat is inexorably drawing closer to the countries of the Axis. In recognition of that fact the United Nations and those associated with them are devoting their attention in a wide variety of practical and constructive ways to the problems of postwar organization. Thus the failure of the Argentine Government to comply with its inter-American commitments has not only resulted in the non-participation of Argentina in the defense of the continent in a most critical period, it is also depriving Argentina of participation in the studies, discussions, meetings and arrangements designed to solve the post-war problems mentioned above.

I am pleased to take this opportunity [etc.]

Cordell Hull

48. Signed at Rio de Janeiro, October 10, 1933; Foreign Relations, 1933, vol. iv, p. 234.
49. Carlos Saavedra Lamas.