Page images
PDF
EPUB

(6) 36 German agents ordered interned at Caldas and 3 ordered interned at other unspecified places about which we propose to get specific data;

(c) 750 German customs guards and officials transferred to Sobrón from Miranda concentration camp, the remaining 500 others at Miranda, names of whom are promised. Reourtel 3807, November 21, 3 p. m. Despatch follows.84

Following oral representations to the Under Secretary the Foreign Office includes written undertaking that orders have been given prohibiting interned foreigners from using the interurban telephone.. Repeated to Tangier by courier.

HAYES

INTEREST OF THE UNITED STATES IN THE TERMINATION OF THE SPANISH OCCUPATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL ZONE OF TANGIER 85

852.01/10–1944: Telegram

The Chargé at Tangier (Elbrick) to the Secretary of State

TANGIER, October 19, 1944–5 p.m.

[Received 5:10. p. m.] 312. Circular note of October 16 86 received this a. m. from Orgaz 87 announces appointment of Suner, Spanish Consul General here, as delegate on High Commission in Tangier to succeed General Uriarte who left for Madrid October 13 to take advance course at Army War College. Although Uriarte announced by note to heads of foreign representations that he would be absent only a month, Orgaz note confirms his definitive departure. As pointed out in our A-244 October 17 88 Spaniards have apparently chosen this face-saving method of removing Uriarte who has acted as its delegate since November 1942 and as Commander of Spanish 52d Provisional Division and Military Governor.

Transfer of Uriarte's power to a civilian diplomatic officer possibly signifies beginning or [of] withdrawal of Spanish Armed Forces from International Zone. This move, together with withdrawal of 13th Infantry Regiment (Legtel 306, October 9 8') and rumored retirement in near future of regiments of 52d Provisional Division would indicate adoption of more realistic policy by Spanish in regard to their unpopular occupation of International Zone. There is no indication, however, that they intend to withdraw from Tangier entirely; there is reason to believe [apparent omission] stress the civilian rather than the military aspect of the occupation in the hope that this will placate the interested powers to a point where they may be willing to acknowledge Spain's claim to a dominant position here in any future revision of Tangier's status. Repeated to Madrid.

64 Despatch 3583, not printed.

86 For correspondence relating to the Spanish occupation and control of the Tangier Zone, and reservation of American rights therein, see Foreign Relations, 1940, vol. III, pp. 783 ff., and ibid., 1941, vol. II, pp. 586 ff.

86 Not printed.
87 Gen. Luís Orgaz, Spanish High Commissioner in Morocco.
88 Airgram not printed.
88 Telegram not printed.

554–1844-65—_-36

ELBRICK

-881.01/10-2144 : Telegram

The Chargé at Tangier (Elbrick) to the Secretary of State

TANGIER, October 21, 1941—noon.

[Received 2:46 p. m.] 313. In an interview of over an hour late yesterday Suner substantially confirmed interpretation of recent events as outlined in Legation telegram 312 October 19. He was most friendly and appeared to be very frank and sincere. He gave me to understand Uriarte's removal had been prompted by Spain's desire to eliminate discordant note in connection with its occupation of the Zone and that Orgaz (presumably after consulting Madrid) had chosen Uriarte's departure to attend War College as propitious moment to effect the change. Suner assured me that his efforts would be directed toward maintaining harmonious relationship with all elements in Tangier and we could always count on his friendly and complete cooperation in our dealings with the Spanish authorities. In reply to my question Suner stated his new appointment implied no present change in Spanish administrative organization here.

He said he looked forward to the day when the interested powers would gather round a table to discuss Tangier and related problems and at that time he expected Spain would be accorded the recognition she deserved. He dwelt at length upon the many benefits accruing to Tangier from Spanish occupation. When I remarked Spanish administration left much to be desired he agreed but argued that Spain had saved the Zone from a worse fate by its timely intervention. This is the line which the Spanish may be expected to take henceforth. They seem to have abandoned hope of annexing the Zone and for the moment at least are reduced to appealing for a large measure of recognition as participants in any regime which may be set up in future.

ELBRICK

a

881:01/10-2644 Memorandum of Conversation, by the Assistant Chief of the Division

of African Affairs (Lewis)

[WASHINGTON,] October 26, 1944. Participants: Mr. Michael Wright, Counselor, British Embassy;

Messrs. Villard,90 Lewis, Wasson,91 AF. Mr. Wright came in to follow up a recent conversation between Sir Ronald Campbell 92 and Mr. Villard in regard to the future of Tangier. Mr. Villard had made the suggestion that with the end of the war in sight, consideration might appropriately be given as to the Spanish position in the International Zone and the steps which might be regarded as desirable there by members of the United Nations at the end of hostilities. In Sir Ronald's absence, Mr. Wright had been asked to discuss the matter in the Department.

Mr. Villard reviewed recent developments in Tangier as reported to the Department by the Legation, indicating that the Spanish might be preparing to abandon their military occupation in favor of a substantial civilian interest in the administration. He then referred to the conversations which Mr. Murray 93 had had in London with Mr. Frank Roberts of the Foreign Office, on the subject of the International Zone, at which time it was agreed that a further exchange of views on the future status of Tangier would in due course be desirable. Mr. Villard said that recent events at Tangier, as well as the present course of the war, seemed to indicate that the time had arrived for a discussion between the British and ourselves on the subject for the purpose of concerting our thoughts.

Mr. Wright said that while he was personally unfamiliar with the situation in Tangier and with his Government's thinking on the future status of the International Zone, he would be glad to bring Mr. Villard's suggestion to the attention of the Foreign Office and would ask for documentation on the present British attitude toward the Spanish occupation and other matters related to this problem.

881.01/10-2144: Airgram The Acting Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Spain (Hayes)

WASHINGTON, October 30, 1944–4 p. m. A-585. The Department would like to receive from the Embassy such information as may be available concerning the present Spanish attitude toward Spain's future position in Tangier. In this connec

91

" Henry S. Villard, Chief, Division of African Affairs. Thomas C. Wasson of the Division of African Affairs.

Sir Ronald I. Campbell, British Minister. * Wallace Murray, Director, Office of Near Eastern and African Affairs.

92

tion reference is made to telegrams no. 312 of October 19 and 313 of October 21 from the Legation at Tangier. Since the latter telegram appears not to have been repeated to Madrid the Embassy will doubtless wish to ask Tangier for the text. Is it the opinion of the Embassy that the withdrawal of Spanish regiments has any association with this question, as suggested by the Legation? Copy to Tangier.

STETTINIUS

881.01/11-944 Memorandum of Telephone Conversation, by the Chief of the Division

of African Affairs (Villard)

[WASHINGTON,] November 9, 1944. Participants: Mr. Michael Wright, British Embassy,

Mr. Henry S. Villard, AF. Mr. Wright telephoned to say that in response to our recent suggestion for a discussion of the future of Tangier, the British Embassy had received a telegram from London to the effect that this subject was being considered simultaneously in the Foreign Office. The British were very grateful that we had indicated a desire to open conversations on the matter, and they were preparing material which would shortly be transmitted to Washington to be presented to us.

Mr. Wright said that we could look forward to receiving the British views within a week or two and that he would then suggest a date for a conference,

881.01/11-2044 : Telegram

The Ambassador in Spain (Hayes) to the Secretary of State

MADRID, November 20, 1944-8 p. m.

[Received November 22—12:04 p. m.] 3802. Department's airgram 585, October 30. The question of the future Spanish position in Tangier has not been brought up in conversation or otherwise between Embassy and Spanish Government officials both parties having studiously avoided this subject as have officials of the British Emb[assy].

It is my view that initiative in approaching subject appropriately should come from Statutory Powers of acting in concert, not from the

94 United States. My reasons are:

"i.e., Great Britain, France, Spain, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, Portugal, and Sweden. Great Britain, France, and Spain signed the “Statute of Tangier" (Convention regarding the organization of the Statute of the Tangier Zone) at Paris, December 18, 1923; for text, see League of Nations Treaty Series, vol. XXVIII, p. 541. These three countries, together with Italy, signed the Agreement revising this Convention at Paris July 25, 1928 (ibid., vol. LXXXVII, p. 211). Belgium, the Netherlands, Portugal, and Sweden later adhered to the Statute.

(1) We are not a Statutory Power and have not participated in the international administration : 95

(2) We made no protest against Spanish occupation in June, 1940, and when the international administration was substantially ousted in November, 1940, we by implication gave credence to the unilateral undertaking given by Spain as to the temporary character of the occupation when we merely expressed the presumption that this further Spanish action would not conflict with the assurances given to the Statutory Powers in June;

(3) Following the Spanish announcement on December 1, 1940, of the incorporation of Tangier into the Spanish Zone, we limited ourselves to claiming most favored nation rights under the British modus vivendi of December 31 as confirmed by Spain on February 21, 1941;

(4) Our sole direct approach was in the Spartel Lighthouse Case in July, 1941,96 when we reserved our rights but under the Convention of May 31, 1865.97

Regarding last sentence of reference airgram, I believe that replacement of General Uriarte by a civil official as delegate of the High Commissioner at Tangier has more significance than the noted transfer of troops away from Tangier and Spanish North Africa. These two divisions (41st and 52d) were both provisional and had been sent to North Africa for protection of Spanish holdings during the supposed international emergency. Having long overstayed that emergency and become surplus they were transferred to the Pyrenees provinces where reinforcements were needed in view of the threats of incursion of Spanish irregulars from southwestern France. Repeated to Tangier as 152.

HAYES

881.01/11-2544 : Telegram

The Chargé at Tangier (Childs) to the Secretary of State

TANGIER, November 25, 1944–6 p. m.

[Received November 27—12:20 p. m.] 345. Madrid's 152, November 20.98 1. Our nonparticipation in the international administration was due fundamentally to a foreign policy of isolation which time has presumably rendered invalid. It is difficult to believe we would continue to maintain a position of non

* For correspondence on the reservation of American treaty rights with respect to the Statute of Tangier, see Foreign Relations, 1928, vol. III, pp. 367 ff.

** For the protest by the United States regarding the Spanish seizure of the Cape Spartel Lighthouse, see ibid., 1941, vol. III, pp. 581 ff.

si Convention as to Cape Spartel Lighthouse, signed at Tangier, May 31, 1865, William M. Malloy (ed.), Treaties, Conventions, etc., Between the United States of America and Other Powers, 1776–1909 (Washington, Government Printing Office, 1910), vol. I, p. 1217. For correspondence relating to American participation in the Convention, see Foreign Relations, 1864, vol. iv, pp. 412 ff., passim, and ibid., 1865, vol. II, pp. 350 ff, passim.

See last paragraph of the telegram supra.

98

« PreviousContinue »