724.3415/764
Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State (White)
The Bolivian Minister called on the Secretary on Wednesday, October 2, at the latter’s request. The Secretary stated that he had asked him to come in as he had very much on his mind and heart the situation in South America and, while the five neutral Governments represented on the Commission of Inquiry and Conciliation had yesterday made representations at La Paz and Asunción to the Bolivian and Paraguayan Governments, his personal interest in the matter was so great that he wanted to emphasize the matter by expressing very frankly and fully to the Minister his views which he hoped he would transmit to his Government.
The Secretary then read to the Minister an Aide Memoire, a copy of which is attached hereto,79a and then handed it to him. The Secretary stated that he had taken the matter up with the Minister because he knew of his friendly and sympathetic feeling toward a settlement. The Minister replied that he fully concurred with what the Secretary had just read to him and that he felt that the whole matter should be settled. At the time of signing the Protocol of January 3, last, he had said to his Government that while the wording of that Protocol limited the scope of the Commission of Inquiry and Conciliation to a determination of the responsibility for the happenings of last December, he felt that the Commission should not be limited in practice in that way but that it should study and resolve the fundamental question at issue.
[Page 912]The Minister then said that while it is possible that direct negotiations may result in a settlement, he felt that there is much more chance for the success of an arbitration. Arbitration, he said, has much more support behind it and will of course be accepted by both countries, whereas a direct settlement is subject to the weakness that those opposed to it may stir up popular opinion to such an extent that a weak Government, such as he said existed in Paraguay, might be overthrown should it attempt to ratify the agreement or be forced to abandon it. For this reason he was in favor of arbitration.
The Minister then stated that he wanted to give the Secretary some of the background regarding the Commission which would explain some of the resistance on the part of Bolivia to accepting the proposal of August 31. Messrs. Marquez Sterling and Rivas were the neutral members of the Commission who were most in contact with the Bolivian representatives and these gentlemen had led the latter to believe that no proposal would be made without first submitting it to them and discussing it informally in order to get their views. They were very much astonished, therefore, when suddenly the proposal of arbitration was sprung on them. Had the matter been submitted to them first, they would have been able to point out certain objections to it which they thought could have been removed and thus make it acceptable to Bolivia.
He pointed out that the proposal for arbitration limited the scope of the arbitration in the southern part of the Chaco territory by eliminating from consideration by the Arbitrator the territory adjudicated to Paraguay in the Arbitral Award of President Hayes. Bolivia would reconcile itself to this limitation had there been a corresponding limitation in the north in favor of Bolivia but this was not done. The Bolivian delegates had become alarmed when they saw this and had cabled to the Bolivian Government which, in turn, had become alarmed, and hence the opposition to the project.
The Secretary pointed out that while there was no territory in the north excluded from the arbitration the agreement did provide that Bolivia should have a port on the Paraguay River with the necessary hinterland. The Minister stated that this was true but as the Arbitrator was not limited to the north in the boundary he might fix, he might accede to the very exaggerated claims of Paraguay and hence isolate this port. The Secretary stated that in his conversations with the Commissioners, while he was not thoroughly familiar with the geography of the Chaco, he nevertheless had very definitely understood that in giving a port definitely to Bolivia and the necessary land thereto, a zone had as a practical matter been set aside in the north which would have to be excluded in any event.
The Bolivian Minister said that his Government now understood that this was the intention of the Commissioners but it had not been [Page 913] definitely stated and Paraguay’s pretensions went very far to the north. When the matter was under consideration in Buenos Aires, the Argentine representative had suggested drawing a line somewhat midway between the maximum pretensions of both Parties, but this line had never been drawn and Paraguay had fallen back on an earlier protocol which Bolivia felt was void and in which there was no limit placed on Paraguayan pretensions to the North, and the Bolivian Government had therefore felt that they would have to take measures to protect their interests.
The Secretary replied that he did not think that Bolivia need fear that an Arbitrator would accede to the maximum pretensions of either Party. As a matter of fact, these pretensions are very old and have, as a practical matter, been considerably limited by subsequent developments such as the establishment of centers of population from both countries and that therefore any Arbitrator must draw a medium line and not one along the maximum pretensions of either country, and he felt sure that Bolivia was perfectly safeguarded in going to arbitration.
The Bolivian Minister said that that also was his view and, such being the case, it would be a very great pleasure to him to transmit to his Government the text of the Aide Memoire and to support it and, as sufficient time has now elapsed since the matter first came up, he thought that public opinion had calmed down and that it would be easier for his Government to accept. He did not know, of course, what their decision would be but if it should be the Secretary’s desire he would urge a prompt reply. The Secretary said he thought it very important to have a prompt reply as further outbreaks are apt to occur while there is uncertainty and delay.
- Infra.↩