637.39/10–1750
The Director of the Office of Middle American Affairs (Mann) to the Ambassador in the Dominican Republic (Ackerman)
Dear Mr. Ambassador: Thank you for your letter of October 11.1
You may or may not have heard of the most recent developments in the Dominican-Cuban controversy. As you know, the OAS Caribbean Committee recently talked in New York with the Foreign Ministers of both countries and, as I understand, they indicated their preliminary agreement—subject, of course, to the approval of their Governments—to a final report of the Committee which in effect would state that there are no pending problems between the two countries requiring further attention by the Committee. It would be a fine thing if both Governments were to approve this draft since it would dispose of the two current headaches of the Dominicans’ desire for “moral satisfaction” on the Cayo Confites affair and the Dominican contentions concerning press criticism in Cuba.2
We have given a great deal of thought to the problem of the continuation of the Committee and have concurred with Paul Daniels’ recommendation that the Committee cease to exist as soon as the interested Governments agree that the problems with which it is concerned no longer exist. The Committee’s power to act is limited to the old controversy. It would not be able, without further authority from the OAS, to deal with a new situation. We therefore concluded that it would be better to give the present committee a decent burial and to rely on its successful functioning as a precedent for the constitution of a new committee if the need should arise.
If the Committee is dissolved I think it is important that the Dominican Government understand that this is merely a procedural matter and that it does not indicate any lack of will on our part to [Page 666] support the constitution of a new committee if future circumstances should require it. In short, whatever happens to the existing Committee we have at hand the means for dealing with new disturbances to the peace in the Caribbean and there is no reason why the Caribbean states should not continue to look to the OAS as their first line of defense.3 If we can get this idea across maybe we can also encourage all the interested states to spend less on armaments for possible use against an American state and divert more of their expenditures to economic development and the defense of the Western Hemisphere against possible aggression by a non-American power.
With best wishes,
Sincerely yours,
- Not printed.↩
- A copy of the first draft of this report is attached to Mr. Daniels’ memorandum of October 3, 1950, not printed, reporting on that day’s meeting of the Special Committee for the Caribbean. (637.39/10–1750)↩
-
In telegram 97, October 23, 1950, from Ciudad Trujillo, Ambassador Ackerman said in part that he felt discontinuance of the Special Committee for the Caribbean inadvisable because discord had continued to exist between Cuba and the Dominican Republic and the Committee had been a factor in the more tranquil political situation then existing. (739.00/10–2350)
In his memorandum of a telephone conversation with Ambassador Ackerman on October 26, 1950, Mr. Mann reported in part: “I said that in my opinion the essential task of the Special Committee and the Investigating Committee was to deal with the threat of military aggression and that it would be unfortunate if the Committees were to become involved in questions which were essentially political, such as the question of the moral satisfaction for Cayo Confites statements in the Cuban press, etc. I said that this matter impaired the prestige of the Committee and the use of its work as a precedent in case future threats of aggression should occur and it should be necessary to reconstitute a committee to deal with the situation.” (739.00/10–2650)
↩