Foreign Relations of the United States Diplomatic Papers, 1936, The American Republics, Volume V

722.2315/1014

The Second Secretary of Legation in Ecuador (Sparks) to the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs (Duggan)

Quito, December 12, 1936.
[Received December 28.]

Dear Larry: In my conversation yesterday with the Foreign Minister relative to the proposed trade agreement, the boundary question came up. The Minister indicated that he had communicated with Albornoz¹⁸ at Buenos Aires and that the latter had had discussions with Mr. Welles¹⁹ concerning the expediency of the appointment of an observer at the negotiations in Washington. He intimated that while Mr. Welles was opposed to any participation in such capacity by the United States, he looked with favor upon another country’s acting as an observer, and the name of Brazil was apparently mentioned.

He also referred to the actual negotiations in Washington and reiterated reactions already expressed with regard to Mr. Garcia.²⁰ This time he went further in stating that his Government is almost convinced that Peru is deliberately delaying the matter until after the Buenos Aires Conference. In support thereof he cited the fact that Señor Belaunde²¹ had absented himself from Washington and is now in Cuba where his wife is ill because of which he cannot proceed to Washington. Also, the Ecuadoreans attempted to get down to business but García is reported to have declared that the Peruvian Delegation is not there to discuss principles, lines or rights, but rather to establish the Peruvian frontier. According to General Chiriboga,²² he then proceeded to outline that Peru’s idea of a frontier was to follow the general lines of the territory, or better said the outposts, now occupied by both countries.

The Foreign Minister has obviously changed his entire outlook with regard to a possible de jure arbitration. You will recall that several months ago I reported that Doctor José Gabriel Navarro, now at Buenos Aires, had been able to convince the Government of the advantages to Ecuador of a de jure arbitration. General Chiriboga is now so convinced thereof and of the insecurity of the Peruvian thesis, that he feels that this is the reason why they wish to prevent the matter coming to arbitration.

While the foregoing would appear to indicate that the Ecuadoreans are very dissatisfied with the progress being made in Washington, the Foreign Minister gave me the impression that the situation is compensated by the apparent progress being made at Buenos Aires. He, in fact, indicated that Ecuador does not now feel that it would be in a difficult situation if nothing should be accomplished in Washington before the close of the Peace Conference. He intimated that the progress of the negotiations in Washington is being communicated to the different delegates at Buenos Aires and that any resolution or action taken there for the consolidation of peace will contemplate the points involved in the boundary dispute. In fact, he seemed to be most optimistic concerning the ultimate outcome of the Washington negotiations and the Buenos Aires Conference.

Sincerely,

Eddie

18. Humberto Albornoz, Chairman of the Ecuadoran delegation to the Inter-American Conference for the Maintenance of Peace.
19. Sumner Welles, Assistant Secretary of State, then at Buenos Aires as American delegate to the Inter-American Conference for the Maintenance of Peace.
20. Arturo García Salazar, Peruvian delegate to the Washington Conference.
21. Victor Andres Belaunde, Peruvian delegate to the Washington Conference.
22. Angel Isaac Chiriboga, Ecuadoran Minister for Foreign Affairs.