JL2tt*1
PA historical review program
k
Robertoodward
Deputy Assistant Secretary for
lrn^^uwrlonn Affairs
Department of State
and Seizure of Arms in Caribbean Traffic
1, Considering further the Information vc were discussinghought we might be able to cotablne logically the etatementa on the Legal basis for search with the broad mutual interests in the area. After the reference to the statutory authority Of the Coast Guard and the penalty provisions for false manifesting, the thought could proceed In this nannar.
Mot only would the presence of ana on board this ship unidentified as such and manifested as general merchandiseiolation of United States law, but also by its coaoealnent would indicate that its presence was inimical to the interests of peace and good order in an ares intimately bound with the national defense and security of the United States as well as with tho security interests of all those having similar Interests end responsibilities ln the area. Kven though such
natexial was not found in the cargo, it is believeJthat tho best Interest of Ber Majesty's Oovmaaant an well as that of the United States was served by taking the neeessary legal action on the basis of information received.
2. You would probably went to rephrase the above if used,ave written it out to indicate my thought that there ic nothing Incompatible in the two lines of argument. onder if In preparing an international convention on control of armed shipments In that area the same general thought could not behat concealed or clandestine shipments are per se when Inimical to the best interests of all partiesto the convention and sdbject to seizure under set
conditions. hould thins, this would be more acceptable than any attempt toeneral eabargo and would, if the convention were properly phrased, permit the United Statec Coast Guard toction on the high scab undera) of Title Ih,
LAUHSRCE Ii. HOUSTQIJ General Counsel
cc; conoaic Warfare
Original document.
Comment about this article, ask questions, or add new information about this topic: