Progressive Chile

by Robert E. Mansfield

The treaty between Chile and Peru, which was signed at Ancon, on October 20, 1883, contained provisions that led to complications which still leave the question of final settlement in dispute; complications that resulted in a discontinuance of diplomatic relations, which at times became so strained that another conflict at arms seemed imminent. Peru ceded to Chile the province of Tarapaca, forever and unconditionally. In lieu of $10,000,000 cash indemnity, and as security for payment of same, the territory constituting the provinces of Tacna and Arica passed into the possession of Chile for a period of ten years, at the end of which time the ownership of the territory was to be determined by a vote of the legal residents of those provinces. Whatever the result of the election, the country to which the provinces should be annexed, engaged to pay the other $10,000,000 in cash. The time limit for this provision of the treaty expired in 1894, and Peru not being prepared to comply with its requirements, Chile continued in possession of the territory, and the question of Tacna and Arica remained a disputed one.

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.