Office of the Historian

710 Consultation (3)A/485: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Colombia (Lane)

Washington, January 1, 1944—7 p.m.

4. While the Department understands the desire of the Colombian Government to give careful study to the Montevideo resolution,2 it appears from your 2413 of December 31, 4 p.m.,3 that Colombia may be reading into the resolution more than it actually implies.

While the resolution recommends consultation in the case of any new government instituted by force during the emergency period, the fact that the consultation and exchange of information are to be directed exclusively to the question whether the change in government involved a threat to the defense of the Republics concerned, makes it clear that the consultation would be a mere formality, speedily executed through the usual diplomatic channels, where there was no significant evidence that such influences or connections existed. Furthermore, the resolution does not require a joint decision with regard to whether recognition is to be accorded; that decision remains one for the exclusive determination of each government.4

The foregoing, and the further fact that all countries other than Brazil and Haiti, have sent or are sending fully favorable responses, is for your information and such use as you think appropriate. Brazil has sent an interim reply that she is studying the resolution carefully and advocates consultation whenever continental interests need protection.

Hull
  1. Resolution XXII of the Emergency Advisory Committee for Political Defense of December 24, 1943. For text of the Resolution, see telegram from the Chairman of the Committee, December 24, 1943, ibid., p. 34; also printed in Emergency Advisory Committee for Political Defense, Second Annual Report, July 15, 1943–October 15, 1944 (Montevideo, 1944), p. 79.↩
  2. Not printed.↩
  3. For correspondence on the United States recognition of the new Bolivian regime, see pp. 427 ff.↩