Ecuador

U.S. Relations With Ecuador

Note: The parenthetical citations are to the numbered documents in the text.

Except for a brief period in 1960, U.S. relations with Ecuador during the closing years of the Eisenhower presidency were normal and uncomplicated.

In April 1958, President Eisenhower in a letter to President Camillo Ponce Enriquez described Ecuador as “a nation enjoying political stability, freedom and steady economic development.” (EC–3) In the following month, Vice President Richard Nixon’s visit to Ecuador was described as an unqualified success, in contrast to his visits in Peru and Venezuela where violent anti-American protest broke out. Nixon said there were no great problems between the two countries. (EC–5) During his conversations with Ponce, the Vice President stressed the need to resolve the area’s economic problems as a prerequisite to curing the political problems. Ponce stated that stabilization of the Latin American economies would make all the countries better customers for American products. (EC–4, 5, 6, 7)

The United States did involve itself in loans to improve the Ecuadorean infrastructure and aid economic development, and was also ready to provide military assistance for internal security programs to combat communist subversion and disruption within the country. (EC–8, 11)

In June 1960, José Maria Velasco Ibarra was elected President by what Assistant Secretary of State Roy Rubottom termed a surprisingly large margin. (EC–15) Velasco had held the office on three previous occasions and was believed to be basically friendly to the United States; no insuperable problems were anticipated in dealing with the new administration. The President-elect indicated his willingness to cooperate in fighting communism and opposing Fidel Castro, and Ambassador Christian Ravndal emphasized that the United States would offer technical aid and assist the Ecuadorean economy, particularly with housing for the poor. (EC–16)

At the time of Velasco’s inauguration at the end of August 1960, however, evidence began to surface that Ecuador wished to [Facsimile Page 70] focus attention on its boundary dispute with Peru. The Rio Protocol of 1942, which dealt with that question, noted the new administration, was unfavorable and unfair to Ecuador. Velasco and his Foreign Minister José Ricardo Chiriboga Villagomez said they did not wish to push to a solution at once, but only to reiterate strongly the Ecuadorean position. [Typeset Page LXV] The United States, as it consistently had, stressed its desire for a mutually acceptable settlement. (EC–17) At the same time, Ecuador needed help quickly in terms of highway construction, electric power, housing, and medium industries. The United States stressed the need for careful planning, but noted it was anxious to assist. (EC–18)

Shortly thereafter, in September 1960, the Embassy in Quito reported that students, demonstrating over the boundary dispute, stoned the Consulate General in Guayaquil. (EC–19) The Guarantors of the 1942 Rio Protocol, the United States, Argentina, Brazil, and Chile, meeting informally, cautioned against unilateral action by Ecuador to denounce the Protocol, stating that most of the provisions of that agreement had already been implemented and unilateral denunciation was unacceptable. (EC–20, 21)

On October 23, however, Ecuador announced its repudiation of the 1942 Protocol. The United States, responding as a Guarantor on December 7, stated that such unilateral action was not allowable. The Guarantors stood ready to assist in a mutual resolution by Peru and Ecuador of a satisfactory demarcation of the remaining areas of the boundary line still at issue. At the same time, the United States assured Ecuador that aggression by the other party would raise the security guarantees of the inter-American system against any armed attack. (EC–22)

An Intelligence Note to Secretary of State Christian Herter on December 16 informed him that the December 7 statement had provoked attacks resulting in considerable damage to the Embassy and other U.S. buildings in Quito and Guayaquil. (EC–23) Since taking office, Velasco, rather than concentrating on economic problems, had focused on the boundary question. Ecuadorean overtures toward Cuba and the Soviet Union appeared designed to gain support on this issue. Meanwhile, leftist agitation was undoubtedly a factor in the assaults on U.S. property.

Within a few days, however, relations took a turn for the better, according to the Embassy in Quito. (EC–24) Velasco dismissed his Minister of Government, Manuel Araujo, characterized as rabidly leftist and pro-Castro in his views. This dismissal [Facsimile Page 71] brought to a close an unprecedented period of leftist agitation in the country. Just before the end of the year, Foreign Minister Chiriboga visited Washington. A joint statement issued on the occasion concentrated on economic development and indicated U.S. desire to provide loans for projects such as the establishment of savings and loan institutions, and construction of highways, municipal water systems, and electric power installations. The boundary dispute was not mentioned. (EC–25)