363/3–1351
Memorandum by Mr. W. Tapley Bennett, Jr., of the
Office of Middle American Affairs to the Secretary of
State1
confidential
[Washington,] March 31,
1951.
Subject: Status Report on Committee Work at Meeting
of Foreign Ministers of the American Republics.
There are attached for your information, as background for the
Plenary Session scheduled for Monday afternoon, brief reports on the
status of work in the three technical committees of the Foreign
Ministers Meeting.
A script for the Monday afternoon meeting, with recommendations,2 will be submitted
Monday morning on the basis of week-end developments.
W. T [aplet] B[ennett, Jr.]
[Annex 1]
Status of Work of Committee I—Political and
Military Cooperation
Chairman: Restrepo Jaramillo (Colombia); Rapporteur: Sevilla Sacasa3 (Nicaragua)
The principal results in this Committee to date are:
- (1)
- General approval by the full Committee of a
“Declaration of Washington,” based upon drafts presented
by Brazil and Chile.4 Along with declarations of hemispheric
solidarity, this draft contains an emphatic affirmation
of support for action of the United Nations. Although
they did not refer to the UN aspect directly, the Foreign
[Page 962]
Ministers of
Argentina, Guatemala and Mexico,5 all of whom have given indication of
resisting any IAM action
in relation to the UN,
expressed their approval of the Declaration.
- (2)
- Preparation by a working group of a draft resolution
on hemispheric military cooperation combining most
aspects of that sponsored by the United States and other
countries with certain detailed amendments made by Peru
and Bolivia. This draft, which appears to raise no
serious problems for us, must be considered by
Subcommittee A of Committee I, before going to the full
Committee.
- (3)
- A tentative decision by a working group of sponsors to
separate the resolution on UN support jointly sponsored by the United
States and four other countries from a Bolivian
proposal6 directed specifically at support for
the Korean operation.
- (4)
- Approval by Subcommittee C (on which the United States
was not represented) of (a) the
joint U.S.-Mexican proposal on peaceful settlement in
the hemisphere; (b) a Venezuelan
proposal7 to
reaffirm certain principles contained in the 1940
Convention on Provisional Administration of European
Colonies and Possessions in the Americas,8 to which Guatemala has added a preamble
restating a Bogota Conference action expressing the
aspiration that colonialism in the hemisphere should be
brought to an end (the United States abstained at
Bogota); (c) a Venezuelan
proposal9 that the American Republics make
certain that their laws on military service do not
adversely affect students of other American countries.
This Subcommittee also approved referring a Haitian
proposal10
regarding individual responsibility for war to the
Inter-American Council of Jurists.
The principal potential problem stems from the point of view
expressed or implied early in the meetings of Committee I by
Argentina, Mexico and Guatemala—that the OAS should not in this Meeting concern itself with
extra hemispheric security actions or resolutions of the UN. In spite of approval of the
Declaration of Washington, containing an affirmation of the
importance of UN action to the
hemisphere, it is almost certain that those countries will
attempt to water down the recommendations of the Resolution on
UN support11which specify steps which the American Republics should
take as members of
[Page 963]
the
UN to place themselves in a
better position to contribute to its collective security
efforts.
The two Venezuelan proposals mentioned above (3b and 3c) are also likely to
create difficulties for us when they are considered by the full
Committee. An effort is being made, however, to work out with
the Venezuelans a draft of 3c which we could accept.
[Annex 2]
Status of Work of Committee II—Internal
Security
Chairman: Dr. Ernesto Dihigo12 (Cuba); Rapporteur: Dr. Alfonso Moscoso (Ecuador)
The Cuban draft resolution on the “Strengthening and Effective
Exercise of Democracy”13
was unanimously approved by the full committee on March 30. The
United States supported this resolution. The resolution suggests
that the X International Conference of American States at
Caracas in 195314 consider measures to
give full effect to Bogota Resolutions XXX (on the American
Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man) and XXXII (on “The
Preservation and Defense of Democracy in America”). As a
technical contribution to this end it entrusts the
Inter-American Juridical Committee with making preliminary
studies and the Inter-American Council of Jurists with drawing
up draft conventions or other instruments, to be presented for
discussion at the Caracas conference.
The Mexican draft resolution on the “Improvement of Social,
Economic and Cultural Level of the People of America”15 was likewise
unanimously approved by the Committee on March 30. The United
States Representative16 made a
statement in favor of the text as adopted, pointing out for the
record that since the resolution contains a
[Page 964]
reference to the Inter-American
Charter of Social Guarantees,17 the United States
reservation to that Charter should be noted. The resolution
recommends that the Inter-American Economic and Social Council
and the Inter-American Cultural Council18 prepare plans and programs for promoting
effective cooperation among the American Republics to raise the
economic, social and cultural levels of their peoples.
A subcommittee of nine representatives, including the United
States, is now considering the draft resolution on internal
security sponsored jointly by the United States, Uruguay,
Ecuador and Bolivia.
[Annex 3]
Status of Work of Committee
III—Economic19
Chairman: Neves Da Fontoura (Brazil)
Rapporteur: Dominguez Campora20 (Uruguay)
Economic Commission Committee III got off to a bad start, wasting
two full days in procedural discussions. However, after two
subcommittees had been appointed and these in turn had appointed
smaller working groups, progress has been fairly satisfactory
since Friday afternoon. The Subcommittees will begin substantive
discussions on Monday. The following subjects are now ready for
consideration by these committees: Allocations and Priorities,
Transportation, Prices and Consultation, International Commodity
Problems, Strategic Production and Economic Development.
There are three main problems facing the U.S. The first, and so
important that it could conceivably affect the successful
outcome of the meeting, is the difference in philosophy between
Brazil and the United States. The Brazilians take the position
that there are two emergencies, the internal communistic threat
faced by Latin America and the external communistic threat faced
by the United States. While agreeable to the idea that the
United States should build up its military defenses, the
Brazilians take the position that the defense role of Latin
America is to make itself economically strong through programs
of economic development. While our other Latin American friends
are far too realistic to give Brazil outspoken support, the
philosophy of the majority appears to be that perhaps Brazil
will win
[Page 965]
concessions
for them. Hence, they have so far adopted in public a somewhat
benevolent neutrality towards both sides, although there is much
agreement with the United States in private.
The other two problems concern prices and post-emergency
problems. The Latin American countries are almost unanimous in
desiring resolutions reiterating the principles of parity and
the fixing of ceiling prices in relation to the costs of
production, and the provision for prior consultation in
connection with the setting of prices and allocations. In the
field of postwar economic problems our Latin friends would like
to have assurances of the post-emergency purchasing power of
accumulated exchange holdings, the continued control of prices
of manufactured goods, and assurances affecting the liquidation
of stock piles and the marketing of surplus production. The
United States Delegation will attempt to funnel these problems
through a general study resolution on the grounds that some of
them appear unanswerable and others require investigation and
study before any general indication of measures can be
considered.
