THE TACNA AND ARICA QUESTION.
A few years later Peru became more prosperous through the development of her rich mineral resources and began pressing for a settlement of the question. To the arbitration proposition presented by Peru Chile maintained that there was nothing to arbitrate. In 1905 Peru presented her side of the question in the form of a written protest against certain proposed industrial improvements in the disputed territory. The reply of the Chilean government to the arguments offered in the protest was an able statement of the case, which left little doubt in the minds of those familiar with the subject that it was Chile’s intention to retain possession of the territory in question.
In June 1905 diplomatic relations between the two republics were resumed, and Peru sent Don Manuel Alvarez Calderon as Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary to Santiago, where he was warmly received by President Riesco and his Cabinet Ministers. In his address in presenting his credentials to the President of Chile, on November 4, 1905, Señor Calderon stated that he was charged with the task of settling outstanding questions in conformity with treaty stipulations, meaning, it was understood, the Tacna and Arica question. In February 1906 the Chilean government named Don Rafael Balmaceda as Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary to Peru.
The more amicable relations resulting from the appointment of diplomatic representatives continued until 1909 when Chile proposed the taking of the plebiscite on certain bases which were then considered unacceptable by Peru, and diplomatic relations were again broken off by the latter country. The main points at issue in this instance involved the questions of who were to constitute the voters, who should preside at the proceedings of the plebiscite, and at what date the election to secure an expression of the residents of the disputed territory should take place.
During the year 1912 an effort was made on the part of the respective governments to agree upon terms acceptable to both countries for the celebration of the plebiscite provided for in the treaty of Ancon, to determine the nationality of the provinces of Tacna and Arica, and the following general agreement was reached:
Peru agrees that all inhabitants, whether Chilean or Peruvian, shall have the right to vote, provided that they enjoy electoral rights under the constitutions of their respective governments. This is the proposition made by Chile in 1909, except that she was willing to include foreigners amongst the voters, while Peru insisted on their exclusion. Chile assuming that the plebiscite would then take place at once, proposed six months’ residence as a necessary condition for voters, and Peru demanded that the time be extended to three years. The plebiscite under the latest arrangement is to be postponed for twenty-one years, during which interval it is hoped and believed that the prejudices engendered by the war, and the ill-feeling existing on the part of the citizens of both republics living in the disputed territory will greatly change for the better, and lessen the chances of a conflict in the final settlement of a difficult question of long standing.
Peru is willing to accede the claim to preside at the taking of the plebiscite, and the president of the Supreme Court of Chile will preside. The rest of the board will be composed of two Chileans and two Peruvians, and final decision will be reached by the majority.
The most important feature of the arrangements, however, is the contemplated treaty of commerce and navigation, by which both countries hope to create such a powerful influence for peace that the question which for so many years has proven an insuperable difficulty to the best efforts of the statesmen of both countries will play a secondary and unimportant part in the relations between the two republics.
Chile is no longer disposed to treat with Peru in a conciliatory manner, or submit to arbitration a question in which she has the right of possession. Having settled peacefully the long standing boundary dispute with the Argentine Republic, which for a quarter of a century hung like a war cloud over the Cordilleras, and got possession of Bolivia “tregua” (tentatively), by means of a treaty of peace and amity, Chile is no longer afraid of a triple alliance with the Argentine, Bolivia and Peru, which once menaced her security and national life.
When the Spanish-American colonies united to secure their independence from Spain it was mutually agreed that there should be no “no man’s land.” To attain this end it was covenanted that the boundaries of the new Republics should be those assigned to each as a colony. In many instances those boundaries were ill defined, and in others conjectural or imaginary. As explorations proceeded these errors were discovered and naturally gave rise to territorial questions between neighboring nations.
Chile had but two neighbors and she had boundary disputes with both. The dispute with the Argentine led to the erection of a fort and the founding of a settlement in the Strait of Magellan by Chile in 1843. From that time until the boundary award by King Edward in 1903, the two republics were in a continual controversy over territorial limits, which on more than one occasion led them to the brink of war. With her other neighbor, Bolivia, Chile had a boundary dispute which has had far-reaching consequences. A modus vivendi which seemed to promise lasting peace was agreed upon. Contrary to expectation, however, the agreement produced war, procuring for Chile another neighbor and still another territorial dispute. Previous to the war of the Pacific, the province of Antofagasta, which was Bolivian territory, separated Chile and Peru, but as a result of that war Chile came into possession of the province of Antofagasta and consequently became a neighbor to Peru. Surrounded as she was then with three Republics individually and collectively maintaining a hostile attitude to her independent and aggressive policy, Chile was placed in a peculiarly delicate and dangerous political position. If one of her three neighbors made a move in its boundary question the other two pressed for a settlement of similar claims.
During the civil conflict in Chile her three neighbors took advantage of the internal disturbance to urge settlement of their boundary questions. And when the relations between Argentina and Chile became so strained as to make war imminent, Bolivia and Peru assumed a most aggressive attitude in demanding a settlement of the questions growing out of the war of ’79. Chile has not forgotten these acts of her neighbors, but her attitude is not one of resentment. Her desire is for peace, as has been demonstrated by her generous and amicable adjustment of differences with Bolivia and Argentina; peace at home and abroad, but peace with honor. She governs her sword in accordance with the motto of the Castilian Hidalgo: “No me desenvainas sin causa; no me envainas sin honor.” (I do not unsheath my sword without cause; I do not sheath it without honor.)
The territorial questions of Chile with Argentina and Bolivia have been definitely settled, and the three countries have been greatly benefited thereby. Chile and the Argentine have been relieved of the enormous drain upon their resources in the purchase of ships and preparations for war, and under treaty arrangements capital is seeking investment in Bolivia in the development of its natural resources. The only outstanding territorial question that Chile now has to deal with is that relating to Tacna and Arica.
Bolivia’s loss in the war with Chile was irreparable, depriving it of all coast territory and an outlet to the sea. It now occupies the unique position of being one of two inland countries in the sisterhood of South American Republics. After the war Chile took possession of the long strip of desert bordering on the Pacific, which furnished Bolivia access to the ocean and direct communication with the outside world. The territory is a rainless region, devoid of vegetation, but beneath its surface are nitrate deposits sufficient to supply the world, and its acquisition made Chile the richest country on the globe, in proportion to its population. It derives from that source about 90,000,000 pesos, equal to $30,000,000 United States currency, or $8.50 per capita, annually. The source of this enormous revenue has become the permanent possession of Chile. Bolivia has apparently abandoned the idea of pressing further claims for readjustment of questions growing out of the war, and is endeavoring to make the best of a bad situation by developing the resources of her remaining territory and promoting her industrial interests. In 1905 she celebrated a treaty of commerce and amity with Chile, which provides among other things for the building of a system of railroads through the provinces of Tacna and Arica, thereby giving to Bolivia access to Pacific ports, providing means of communication and facilities for transporting her products to the coast, as well as to ports of entry.
Bolivia also has a large scheme of railway-building of her own, some of the more important branches of which will connect with the lines built by Chile, extending from the coast across the pampa. It was the announcement of this treaty agreement that caused the last vigorous protest by Peru against Chile’s course in the Tacna and Arica question.
During the administration of the phlegmatic but conscientious Domingo Santa Maria, who was president from 1881 to 1886, Chile passed through an important epoch, the pivotal point in her national history. It includes the war with Peru and Bolivia, and an international complication with the Argentine Republic in which war was averted only by a diplomatic handling of the question.
Argentina had an unsigned alliance with Peru and Bolivia, and advantage was taken of Chile’s war engagement to press the question of boundary limits, and also that of the possession of Patagonia and the Straits of Magellan. To meet this emergency and to avoid if possible another war, the government commissioned Jose Manuel Balmaceda, who was then serving as Minister of Foreign Affairs, to go to the Argentine capital and save Chile from impending difficulties. Although coldly received in Buenos Aires, Señor Balmaceda entered upon the task with zeal and determination, unraveled the tangle of international questions, and tied the hands of Argentina by withdrawing Chile’s claim to that portion of Patagonia lying east of the Cordilleras. Previous to that time all of Patagonia was Chilean territory. It was included in the Spanish Vice-royalty inherited by the Republic. This concession precipitated other boundary disputes which were the cause of many years of international contention, almost resulting in war between the two nations on several occasions. It was finally settled by arbitration in May, 1903, when a boundary line, established by a commission appointed by King Edward VII, was accepted and approved by a treaty agreement between the two countries.
On his return from the Argentine, Balmaceda was made Prime Minister and became a most potent political factor and powerful incentive to material progress and development. From armed conflicts and international complications Chile emerged triumphant and successful. Her territorial limits had been extended to include some of the richest mineral deposits on the continent, her national prestige greatly increased, her credit unimpaired and her wealth producing resources multiplied.
From that time Chile made rapid advancement along lines of industrial development and intellectual progress. For the first time in her national existence the exports exceeded her imports; the balance of trade was favorable to her commerce, and the surplus in the national treasury reached 100,000,000 pesos. A remarkable thing about this surplus is that it was accumulated while the government was engaged in building railroads, bridges, public schools and colleges, penal and correctional institutions, constructing highways and providing better means of communication throughout the country. The Congress of that period, 1882-5, was notable in the history of the Republic for its progressive policies, unity of purpose and patriotic support of the government.
The administration party, led by Balmaceda, with the encouragement of President Santa Maria, was marshaling its forces for some radical departures from former governmental policies. The president issued a message in which it was declared the intention of the administration to enact a law providing for the civil registry of births, deaths and marriages. In the National Congress, September 26, 1885, Balmaceda, representing the administration, declared the following to be the government program:
“Reciprocate and counterpoise every arm of public power; sacredly maintain the independence of constitutional and judicial powers; protect from abuse the electoral power and liberty of suffrage; formally reorganize municipalities for honest, harmonious legislation; separate the church from the state and protect the liberty of thought; foment progressive public instruction, examine proofs of character and competency in the exercise of public functions; realize national administration in the most correct, upright and economical manner.”
Little attention was given to these patriotic sentiments at the time, but later when Balmaceda became minister of the interior, he declared in congress that “the Catholic religion marches contrary to the current of the century, restrains the liberty of State, refuses modern progress, denies freedom of thought and destroys liberal ideas; the church condemns culture and fosters ignorance. With the creed of Catholicism it is difficult to unite the politics of modern State, as the Catholic religion is an exclusive compulsory factor and beneficiary in Chilean administrations.”
After a bitter congressional campaign, in which the measure was opposed by the church element, the civil registry act became a law. History credits President Santa Maria with giving his country this beneficent law, but it was the aggressive Balmaceda who led the fight against all the fortified conservative forces, religious and traditional prejudices of Chile, inculcating into the minds of the people new and advanced ideas, and making the passage of the law possible. Inspired by patriotic motives, and with excessive confidence in others, including his enemies, Balmaceda committed the common mistake of politicians in believing the cause he advocated would prevail because it was right. The war with Peru and Bolivia had left multiform internal and external questions for settlement. While these international problems were pressing for solution, requiring the attention of the administration, the opposition party made a fierce fight in the elections of 1886, securing a majority in the Congress. Then followed the greatest political struggle in the history of Chile. The elements opposing the civil registry law, and other political measures advanced by the administration, employed every means within their power to arrest the liberal advance, which had made such rapid progress in the few years immediately preceding, to embarrass the administration of Santa Maria and destroy the influence of Balmaceda, who had become a political power in the Republic.