721.23/1211: Telegram
The Peruvian Minister for Foreign Affairs (Manzanilla) to the Secretary of State
[Received 10:20 a.m.]
Excellency: The singular gravity which the events on our eastern frontier are acquiring on account of the aggressive attitude of Colombia obliges me to occupy Your Excellency’s attention in order to communicate to your Government some antecedents, which are still not sufficiently known, relative to the said events. On March 24, 1922, a treaty was signed between the Governments of Peru and Colombia to fix by direct agreement between the respective countries the boundary line which up to that time remained undetermined in spite of the century-old controversy which had not (sic) been carried on. In that treaty territories were adjudicated to Colombia which were inhabited by Peruvians, which it had never possessed, situated between the Putumayo and Amazon Rivers, and over which her lawful titles were absolutely unrecognized, and in exchange for them Peru was to receive a small portion of territory on the upper part of the Putumayo. By this delimitation the international status on the Amazon was changed, dominion over which was shared only between Peru and Brazil and for this reason the Brazilian Government presented some observations which were only withdrawn 3 years afterwards due to the intervention of the Government of the United States of America. The 1922 treaty was perfected only on March 19, 1928 and the work of demarcation terminated in August, 1930, on which date were transferred to Colombia the territories which belonged to Peru by ownership and possession between the Rivers Putumayo, Yaguas, Atacuari and Amazon and the imaginary line Tabatinga-Apaporis which since 1851 had constituted part of the boundary between Peru and Brazil. The Peruvian inhabitants of those territories, whose will had not [Page 486] been consulted, protested against being separated from their country of origin and annexed to Colombia and the representatives of those compatriots in Congress, the senators and deputies for Loreto, voted unanimously against the treaty which without justification dismembered Peru in general and the Department of Loreto in particular. Furthermore the small portion of territory which Peru was to receive as petty compensation for what she ceded was never delivered by Colombia because in 1916 she had recognized it as Ecuadorean property in a formal treaty which she then signed with that country. From July 4, 1919, to August 22, 1930, Peru had lived under a political regime which prevented any manifestation of the popular will. Only the armed national movement which occurred on this latter date restored to Peruvians the exercise of their public liberties. After this event restoring the constitutionality of the country which had been eclipsed during 11 years there began to be manifested in Loreto and throughout the Republic the first symptoms of resistance to the Peruvian-Colombian treaty of 1922, which manifestations continued to grow in intensity until they took form in the popular movement of September 1, 1932, which resulted in the occupation of Leticia by a group of armed civilians without the participation and even without the knowledge of the Peruvian Government. There was no clash whatever and the authorities as well as the few policemen that were there, the only Colombian elements, were expelled peacefully and embarked for their country. To the Leticia occupation succeeded, under the same circumstances, that of Tarapacá, a small port on the right bank of the Putumayo near the mouth of the Río Cotuhe. Then arose for Peru the delicate problem which has brought us to the present grave situation due only to the intransigence of the Colombian Government and despite the extreme efforts that we have made to arrive at a friendly solution. The Government of Peru has not failed to recognize the validity of the treaty of March 24, 1922, notwithstanding the grave defects thereof and the causes of nullity which it contains (a garbled word follows) such as the failure to consult with the inhabitants whose territory was transferred and the non-delivery of the zone which was to be given in compensation. But neither had it been able to disregard the clamor of a numerous group of Peruvian settlers who demanded to be returned to their country of origin and demanded, for that purpose, the revision of the treaty which had sacrificed them so inconsiderately and so while Colombia was attempting to solve the difficulty by resorting solely to forcible measures, the Peruvian Government was actively making use of all the resources afforded by the treaties in effect in order to seek a peaceful and friendly solution. Its first step was to appeal to the Conciliation Commission which, in accordance with the convention signed at the American Fifth [Page 487] International Conference at Santiago, Chile,30 was supposed* to function at Washington. Unfortunately the peace-making powers of that Commission were disregarded by Colombia, which completely negatived its beneficial action. A generous interest for concord on the continent then led the neighboring and friendly Government of Brazil to offer its mediation on the bases of immediate delivery of the territory of Leticia to the provisional administration of one or more Brazilian delegates, the restoration to their posts of the deposed Colombian functionaries and the assembling at Rio de Janeiro of a conference of plenipotentiaries of Peru and Colombia to contemplate the modification of the treaty of 1922. Peru accepted those bases, asking only that the territory of Leticia be administered by Brazil until the conclusion of the Rio de Janeiro negotiations, in order to avoid the dangerous situation that would undoubtedly be created by the return of the Colombian authorities to Leticia, where the wholly Peruvian population, as already stated, had manifested in fact its determination not to submit to such authorities. To soothe the amour propre of Colombia and even though an administration that was to last only a few weeks was concerned, we proposed that the entrustment to Brazil be made both by Peru and Colombia, so that in that way the will of the latter country might likewise concur in the creation of the transitory status that was to be established at Leticia and, to eliminate any suspicion on the duration of the entrustment, my Government declared itself disposed to reach an agreement on a peremptory period for the negotiations of not more than 60 days and to establish in advance recourse to general arbitration in case it should not be possible to arrive at a direct settlement so that the success of the Rio de Janeiro negotiations should thus be definitively assured and my Government persisted in its purpose of seeking peace at whatever† previous‡. The Colombian Government showed itself intransigent in respect to its immediate occupation of Leticia and while my Government was making efforts to find a fraternal settlement, dedicated itself to inflaming the mind of its people against Peru and to equipping a numerous fleet which from the 16th of December of last year, and manned by adventurers of many nationalities, began [Page 488] to be concentrated at Belém on the Para and which, going up the Amazon with warlike attitude against the Peruvian occupants of the Putumayo and of Leticia, constituted the beginning of pending aggression even (before) the reply to the last proposal which my Government made through the intermediary of the Brazilian Government for the settlement of the question and before the declarations of the Colombian Government were known bringing to an end mediation. A Colombian fluvial and aerial flotilla opened hostilities on the 25th of the present month from Brazilian waters against the port of Tarapacá which a group of Peruvians was occupying on the River Putumayo, at the edge of the boundary line Tabatinga-Apaporis, and on being repulsed, sought refuge in those same waters until the next day, on which, after being sufficiently reinforced, it returned to undertake a formal attack. The aggression thus committed by Colombia and compromising the neutrality so jealously guarded by Brazil opens a dangerous and menacing perspective in its relations with Peru and in order to decline all responsibility in it, my Government has believed it necessary to bring the foregoing to the knowledge of friendly governments, and I therefore have the honor to do so in the case of Your Excellency’s Government, to which we are bound by such old ties of friendship. Please accept [etc.].
- Treaty to Avoid or Prevent Conflicts Between the American States, signed May 3, 1923. For text, see Foreign Relations, 1923, vol. i, p. 308; for correspondence concerning the establishment of permanent commissions, see ibid., 1928, vol. i, pp. 644 ff. This treaty was supplemented by the General Convention of Inter-American Conciliation, signed at Washington, January 5, 1929, ibid., 1929, vol. i, p. 653.↩
- Spanish desia, thought by the translators to be a garbling of the words ‘se decía’. [Translator’s note.]↩
- Apparently a word has been dropped out here. [Translator’s note.]↩
- This does not make sense, probably because of the omission referred to. [Translator’s note.]↩