611.2331/114: Telegram
The Chargé in Peru (Dreyfus) to the Secretary of State
[Received 2 p.m.]
70. Referring to Department’s instruction No. 164, of September 7 concerning the proposed trade agreement.
The Foreign Office has replied to the Embassy’s note, proposing that the exception to the most-favored-nation clause read as follows:
“The advantages already accorded or which in the future may be accorded by the Republic of Peru to contiguous countries shall be excepted from the operation of this convention”.
In support of this position Peru alleges that neighboring countries are united by special ties, citing our special treatment of Cuba26 and our approval of Central American preferences in the Costa Rican agreement.27 The note also mentions the unfavorable trade balances of Bolivia and Chile with Peru and their insistence on receiving advantages tending to equalize the interchange, and remarks that to concede special treatment to these two and not to other bordering countries would create jealousy and perhaps have undesirable political repercussions. The Colombian treaty28 covering what is really only frontier traffic in the Amazon basin is also cited.
As reported in my despatch No. 712, of October 22, already en route to the Department by airmail, the Foreign Minister a few days ago gave me an indication of the probable nature of this reply. When I expressed my disappointment at the wide scope of the proposed exception, he said naively that he believed in asking for the maximum and receding as necessary.
Note with translation and comment will be forwarded by the next airmail.
- Reciprocal trade agreement signed August 24, 1934, Executive Agreement Series No. 67, or 49 Stat. 3559; see also Foreign Relations, 1934, vol. v., pp. 108 ff.↩
- Signed November 28, 1936, Executive Agreement Series No. 102, or 50 Stat. 1582; see also Foreign Relations, 1936, vol. v, pp. 373 ff.↩
- May 10, 1938, Peru, Memoria del Ministro de Relaciones Exteriores, 20 de Noviembre de 1937 a 20 de Abril de 1939 (Lima, 1939), p. 113.↩