L1SPÎJ Xhj I1< Jij-Ihi* Coloiïltil^
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
L-E^-ti-vUL Cl iLa/HOl'vS Communicated to the C . S7 36 .1953. VII. Council and Members of the League. Geneva, February 1st. 1933. L1SPÎJ xHj i1< jij-ihi* COLOiïLtil^ Pjjh.ü Letter from the Colombian Representative Note by the Secretary-General At the request of the Colombian Representative the Secretary-General has the honour to circulate to the Council and Members of the League the following letter dated January 31st, 1933. (Translation) Geneva, January 31st, 1933. To the Secretary-General. I have the honour to submit to you and through you to the Members of the Council and of the League a few brief observations on the Peruvian delegate’s Note d ^ dated January 23th, which I received today. It seems to me essential toclear up certain points to which I beg to call the attention of the Members of the League. I. Â careful perusal of the Peruvian delegate’s Note shows that, as regards what has so far happened in the matter of Brazilian mediation, this Note and the communications which I have had the honour to submit agree on all essential points. The Colombian Government accepted Brazilian mediation on the original conditions and bases namely: the Peruvian elements and forces of all kinds occupying Leticia were to withdraw peacefully therefrom; a Brazilian delegate was to occupy the locality of Leticia for the purpose of maintaining order on the withdrawal of the Peruvian invading forces and it was to be handed over within a very short period to the Colombian authorities, who would exercise full sovereignty there on behalf of Colombia ; after this, a conference consisting of representatives of the Governments directly concerned in the maintenance of peace and tranquility in the Amazon district wa~ to be held at Rio de Janeiro for the purpose of studying in a conciliatory atmosphere the whole of the problems outstanding and the best manner of reaching a solution which would be just, lasting and satisfactory to all parties. This was what Brazil proposed and the proposal was accepted by Colombia in a spirit of compromise and on humanitarian grounas, without prejudice to her inalienable rights. 'fhe Peruvian Government mod.itled this proposal radically and fundamentally and claimed that Brazil should retain possession of Leticia and the adjacent territory to be evacuated by the Peruvians for the whole duration of tile proposed conference at Rio de Janeiro, and that if no agreement was reached at the conference, Brazil should return Leticia not to the Colombian authorities, but to the Peruvian invaders. according to the Peruvian delegate "the Peruvian Government also agreed to the return of the Colombian authorities to Leticia in a private capacity.” This concession to the Colombian authorities who had T l ) See document C .89.M.33.1933.VII. been drivel; out by viol. -„c . , c.' t„Gy would be allowed to return to the terri tor;, ^ - t.. _ir jurisdiction às tourists or pilgrims, die i.ot m-Ao up i or txie cancel! ; tion or the Treaty and or Colombian soverei ;:nty provided for in the Peruvian counter-proposal to the original Brazilian formula. Consequently, as regards the presentation of the facts, the Peruvian and the Colombian notes completely coincide. The only difference is that Colombia maintains that, in radically modifying the Brazilian proposal, Peru actually rejected it. The Peruvian delegate states that he accepted it. I readily leave it to the Members of the Council to decide this point. II. The Peruvian delegate’s assertions regarding the geographical, economic arid moral unity of the Department of Loreto, in support of Peru’s claim to the exclusive ownership of both banks of the iimazon and the regions to the right and left of that river represent a purely arbitrary theory which is worthy of respect'in view of the personality by whom it is put forward, but v.hich is cased neither on the facts nor on any valid reason. Any impartial geograpzer or sociologist would naturally regard the river as tne proper frontier in the Upper amazon; Ecuador and Colombia should reach as far as the left bank, the right bank m_rking tne Peruvian frontier, since this is the main natural dividing line and the chief means of communication in this "empty”heurt of America, as S&nor Garcia Calderon himself stated, "where it is not possible to find :.ny general aspiration or common tradition". On the left bank of the amazon, between that rivei ana the Putumayo, there is not a single cultural centre, a single historical monument or road, a church or hospital, or even a village which is anything mere than a small, miserable, isolated and primitive settlement. Por more than a century Colombia and Ecuador have for reasons of all kinds consistently _spired to an amazon frontier. In her desire to arrive at a cordial and pacific solution, Colombia reduced this aspiration to the acceptance of a mere strip between the Putumayo and the Amazon adjacent to Brazil, which can never cause any prejudice to Peruvian interests or rights at any time. Vve have not attempted, as the Peruvian delegate states, "to become at all costs an amazon Power", we have only desired to maintain intact the title justified by history and nature, confirmed by definite century-old claims based on clear rights and, above all, by a solemn public treaty which has been executed in full, to be a riparian country of the Amazon, a joint owner of that river and, as such, entitled to free navigation thereon. <«e wish to maintain intact the public treaties relating to frontiers and navigation with Peru and Brazil which, in addition to fining Colombian territory, grant Colombia essential rights, now such treaties could "make Colombian river communications with Brazil and Peru more difficult" is not explained. The exact opposite is the CCL30 • - 3- 17I. As regards the popula tion in the pl'ces in question, the Peruvian delegate f dis into what is doubtless an involunvry £IT 0V nay possibly oe referring to the .vhole region of the Putumayo !-nc --mason; but ,vnat we are concerned with a x, present is iiiorc.ly tne -re,. known us the trapezium or Leticia that is fco say, the Colombian territory between the Putumayo ’ and the Amazon which the Peruvian imperialists now appear to covet, s area or.ere aie not, -nd never nave been, 17,000 inhabitants According to the most accurate dot,. (which are approximate since tn^re are no censuses or statistics - nor are tnev ’ possible ii these parts, but only calculations) the population m t_is trapezium does not reach 2,000 and was fixed in 1930 by persons familiar v.ith the district at barely 1 700. It 3 s divided in to two distinct groups : some 40o or 500 inhabitants who are natives or Lrazli, Peru, Colombia, with a few Spaniards ,nd bolmans, 7,hose religion, customs and language are those ca, tne countries from which they came. The remainder, r our lily l,o0u or possibly slightly more, are Indians living iA the" Cti>'tho oi the forests, belonging to the ïicuna and So coma tribes and other clearly native elements wao have no contact with civilisation, suosist by hunting and fishing, in a primitive state, go about naked ana are illiterate, none of these'poor aocile Indians have ever heard cr legal theories or the problems involved m the change oi nationality. wu Colombians could never advance_as an argument the fact that these Indians are Colombian citizens in order to claim that they are in favour of t^ s or that boundary line ; such an argument would be devoid 0x foundation and would assume on the part oi these tribes tne possession oi a minimum cl culture and instruction which they still unfortunately lack. nevertheless, Colombia could put lorward assertions of this kind on the same grounds -•= p-ru although with better theoretical rights, since in the trapezium ox -ueticia these tribes are today under our protection and flaw end it is our intention to make them true Colombian citizens by attracting them to a civilized and Christian life by u,ans of kindness and education. Much has already been done in this direction and large sums are being spent and considerable effort- are being made by Colombie , appreci ..ble results having already ueen obtained in various regions; but it will be a long time before any American Government is justly able to apply the j-ifeht of the self-determinàtion of peoples to the tribes who are vegetating in the depths of the forests in the almost unexplored regions of the Putumayo and the upper -amazon and who at the present time have no idea whatever"of the legal theories of which they are now the innocent pretext. - 4 - With regard to the nationality of the genuine Peruvians living in the Leticia trapezium, it will suffice to point out that the frontier treaty of 1922 between Colombia and Peru pro- viaesj in Article 10, that "Colombians or Peruvians who, as a result of the fixing of the boundary-line, are transferred from one jurisdiction to another, shall retain their former nationality, unless they opt for the new one by means of a declaration drawn up and signed before the competent authority within six months =fter the ratification of the present treaty". Consequently the Peruvian citizens were not required to change their nationality, nor can the tribes provide any excuse for irridentist movements. Hence there is no other explanation for what is now taking place at Leticia than an imperialistic aspiration on the part of Peru to dominate the whole of the Upper Amazon.