724.3415/2012: Telegram
The Ambassador in Chile (Culbertson) to the Secretary of State
[Received August 10—2 a.m.]
162. The Minister for Foreign Affairs is very apprehensive concerning developments in the Chaco negotiations and emphasizes the effect on Chile in case the situation develops to the point where material pressure must be exerted to maintain peace. He considers that Chile will with the other neighboring countries be called upon to exert actual physical pressure and that Chile must now consider the consequences of such action. He believes that the insistence upon the cessation of hostilities on the basis of occupations as of June 1st is merely a detail compared with the major issue of a possible war. He pointed out that Chile has in the treaty of 1924 [1904?]37 an obligation with Bolivia which guarantees freedom of transit through Arica and Antofagasta and since pressure would probably take the form of a suspension of this guarantee, it would amount to a violation of its treaty obligation, and that such action, since this treaty is a general treaty of peace, would open up all the old controversy with Bolivia. Therefore, he believes that a peaceful solution of the problem must be sought at all costs and that material pressure should not be exerted except as a last resort when it is definitely established that war is inevitable. In that case Chile would be disposed to exert material pressure but only after having discussed and agreed with Argentina, Brazil and Peru the measures to be taken.
[Page 170]Dávila38 asked me to see him this evening and talked almost all the time on the Chaco. Like Foreign Minister he wishes to contribute something constructive to the peaceful solution of the problem. He observed that Paraguay regards the declaration in the telegram of the nineteen American Republics as a declaration of her position and added that Bolivia finds it difficult to accept it in view of Paraguay’s attitude. He said that if the present Bolivian Government falls he does not know what might follow in the way of war and social disorder. For the Chilean Government the situation is very real. Both Dávila and the Minister for Foreign Affairs believe that the presence of Zalles here offers a special opportunity for negotiations. They wish to see attempted some form of direct negotiations, naturally in cooperation with the neutrals. They both emphasized the point that if peaceful measures fail it is upon the neighboring states that the responsibility for forcing the maintenance of peace will fall and that in the case of Chile the danger of extensive complications, domestic as well as international, makes the responsibility very grave.
With reference to Zalles, the Minister for Foreign Affairs stated that he is here in his capacity as Minister for Foreign Affairs of Bolivia; that he desires to avoid a war; that Bolivia is disposed to discuss the question in a friendly manner and directly with Paraguay, but that the Paraguayan Minister has not yet been instructed to discuss the question with him. He added that Zalles is not conducting an active campaign against the proposal of the neutrals but that he has merely pointed out the objections which Bolivia has made to the date of June 1st.
- Treaty of Peace and Friendship between Chile and Bolivia, and Convention for the Construction and Operation of a Railroad from Arica to La Paz, signed at Santiago, October 20, 1904, Foreign Relations, 1905, p. 104.↩
- Carlos Dávila, Chief of the Administration then functioning in Chile. See section entitled “Revolutions in Chile,” pp. 430 ff.↩