710. Consultation 4/9–1247
The Ambassador in Peru (Cooper) to the Secretary of State
No. 2003
Sir: I have the honor to report that the Peruvian Minister for Foreign Affairs, Dr. Enrique García Sayán, returned to Lima yesterday morning, September 11, from the Rio de Janeiro Conference on the Maintenance of Continental Peace and Security, which he attended as head of the Peruvian delegation.
In a press conference held yesterday evening Dr. García Sayán expressed his satisfaction with the results of the Conference, noting that they were accomplished in a short time and in an atmosphere of complete harmony. He stated that there were no “hegemonic” intentions on the part of any country and that at no time did the delegations adopt irreconcilable positions. According to one press account, the Minister then remarked that the United States desired unanimity.
Referring to the Peruvian delegation, the Foreign Minister declared that the delegates worked as a team and with a spirit of understanding. He praised Dr. Victor Andrés Belaunde for his work in the Second Commission and Dr. Manuel C. Gallagher, who participated in the discussions of the Third Commission and presided over one of the sub-commissions. He declared that the Peruvian proposal which Dr. Belaunde defended in the Second Commission contributed to the success of the Conference. This proposal, he disclosed, called for peaceful consultation before the use of coercive measures.
[Page 84]In speaking of the address delivered by President Truman34 at the closing session, Dr. García Sayán characterized it as an expression of interest in the economic problems confronting the continent. He made mention of the President’s statement that after the economic reconstruction of Europe, efforts will be made to achieve Inter-American collaboration in the solution of the economic problems of the Western Hemisphere.
When questioned concerning the affair with Ecuador, the Foreign Minister quickly replied that there was no boundary question pending between Ecuador and Peru. He went on to say that he had issued a statement in Rio de Janeiro clarifying this matter, explaining that what had happened was that Ecuador had simply made an observation with respect to the decision of the Brazilian arbiter. (A gist of this statement was reported in the Embassy’s despatch No. 1953 of August 27.35) He explained that no pronouncement with respect to this matter had been made during the course of the Conference at Quitandinha.
. . . . . . .
Respectfully yours,