[Enclosure]
Memorandum by the Ambassador in Peru (Dearing)
Lima, September 19, 1933.
I spoke to Dr. Polo25 about the Leticia
negotiations in Rio de Janeiro this afternoon, remarking that I had
noticed with interest the character of the speeches made by the
departing Peruvian delegates (See Embassy’s despatches Nos. 3037 of
September 19th26 and
3042 of September 20th), and saying that all the information I had
from Colombia was to the effect that the Colombian delegates were
inspired with an equal desire to find a friendly and satisfactory
solution for the difficulties. Dr. Polo said he was glad to hear
that. I asked whether he would take up the boundary negotiations
with Ecuador on October 20th, the date the Conference convenes, to
which he replied that he had told the Ecuadorian Minister that he
was ready to take up the boundary negotiations whenever Ecuador
desired, thus leaving the initiative with Ecuador. He noted the
fact, however, that Ecuador’s action might be somewhat paralysed by
the present situation in Quito between the President and the
Congress.
Dr. Polo said the Ecuadorian Minister had requested that an
Ecuadorian observer should sit in at the real conference but that he
had found this a very awkward and embarrassing matter and had
frankly said so to the Minister. He said he had told the Minister he
could well understand Ecuador’s interest and that it was immediate
and direct but that he felt it would make matters difficult and be a
cause of misunderstanding for an Ecuadorian observer to sit in. He
wished, however, he said to reassure Ecuador in any way possible and
stated he was prepared, if the Ecuadorian Government wished, to give
Ecuador a written statement that Ecuadorian interests would not be
touched on at all during the conference which would concern itself
solely with the Salomon-Lozano Treaty and the Leticia Trapeze. I
reminded Dr. Polo that a great deal had been made in the Peruvian
arguments
[Page 579]
regarding
Colombia’s alleged failure to comply with the terms of the Treaty
and to turn over the Sucumbios or San Miguel territory. Dr. Polo
replied at once that if Ecuador had any concern on that account,
Peru would be willing to turn the whole district back to Colombia so
that Colombia could arrange the question with Ecuador as if in the
first place implying that thereafter Peru and Colombia would settle
all other questions directly between themselves and that it was the
intention not to involve Ecuador in any way, but to leave all
Ecuadorian matters for settlement in the direct negotiations with
Ecuador in case Ecuador acts and initiates the negotiations here in
Lima.
I asked Dr. Polo whether he thought the Leticia negotiations would
extend through the time of the Seventh Pan American Conference at
Montevideo.27 Dr. Polo said he
imagined the Leticia Conference at Rio de Janeiro would require some
six months at least to reach final agreements, and I judge both from
what he has told me and from a brief conversation I have just had
with Dr. Belaunde, that Peru intends to make an exhaustive effort to
secure a revision of the Salomon-Lozano Treaty and some change of
the boundary lines in the vicinity of the Leticia Trapeze, with the
idea of again incorporating the northern bank of the Amazon in
Peruvian territory. This aspiration and the certainty that Colombia
will not be favorable to it as well as the certainty that Colombia
will demand an indemnity which Peru will be unwilling to pay, make
me feel that we should not be too optimistic regarding the Rio de
Janeiro conference, and that the political situations in Colombia
and Peru will have to be carefully watched in the meantime, as they
will also contain somewhat disturbing implications for the future
relations between the two countries. The best reliance for success
is the evident fair-mindedness of the Presidents in both countries
and the repugnance of the two peoples to go to war, now that they
have some direct realization of what it really means, in addition to
the terrible object lesson of the Chaco.
