Office of the Historian

186. Telegram From the Department of State to the Embassy in Argentina1

Washington, June 12, 1959—5:45 p.m.

1647. Embtels 19122 and 19493 indicate that informal memorandum or “shopping list” re additional financial assistance presented Rubottom and Mann by Barros Hurtado May 204 has been overtaken by shift to more limited and realistic Argentine aspirations following departure Frigerio and enhancement influence Del Carril and his group. However Barros during informal conversation with Rubottom June 115 referred directly to May 20 approach and stated disappointment over lack Dept response to date. Barros again stated direct Frondizi interest this matter.

As previously reported Barros also sponsored Aguirre Legarreta in June 1 discussions Department and Eximbank re YPF proposals SARGO pipeline and drilling program which contained May 20 memorandum.

Our judgment Barros attitude is that he continues to expect our counsel in selecting specific projects from May 20 memorandum for financing. Basis your reports we regard May 20 list as inappropriate starting point for Argentine as well as US Government but likely Barros would misunderstand or protest our presentation such views.

Your comments and if possible your action desired toward establishing means for harmonizing Barros attitude with current views of Frondizi and Del Carril. Most suitable development from Department viewpoint would be Barros overture toward disregarding May 20 shopping list, or simply shelving consideration. He could justify this on grounds present Del Carril effort establish orderly procedures and more precise evaluation Argentine economic needs.

Dillon
  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 835.00/6–1159. Confidential. Drafted by O’Connor and Boonstra and initialed by Rubottom.↩
  2. See footnote 4, Document 184.↩
  3. Telegram 1949 from Buenos Aires, June 11, contained a summary of Beaulac’s conversation with Frondizi on June 10 (see supra). (Department of State, Central Files, 835.10/6–1159)↩
  4. See footnote 7, Document 181.↩
  5. No record of this conversation has been found in Department of State files.↩