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.

 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.

IV.

Some Peruvian writers have asserted that the state of disturbance in the Department of Loreto is justified because Colombia may convert Leticia - now a poverty-stricken place - into a great economic and commercial centre which will rival Iquitos and may prejudice Peruvian interests. The assertions made by the Peruvian delegate himself in the note to which I refer, based upon the impartial views of circles in Lima, completely dispel that fear, and demonstrate the absence of any foundation for apprehen­ sion Oil this point on the part of industrial or commercial interests in the Iquitos area. I mention this purely incidentally ; for it is in any case obvious that the discussion of questions of this kind would be out of place, inasmuch as these problems have been finally settled by the treaty of 1922.

V.

It is not, I think, necessary to comment at length on the explanations offered by the Peruvian delegate for the support and endorsement that the Peruvian military authorities and the Peruvian Government itself seek to give to those who have invaded the Colombian territory of Leticia. The “defensive protection of her nationals who are giving forcible but very genuine expression to their patriotism11 by invading the territory of a neighbouring country and violating an established treaty is a principle that would justify any coup ae main and any attack in defiance of frontier treaties. The only proper line of conduct for a Government whose nationals commit invasions of this kind is to withdraw - 11 support from them, to use every means in its power to bring the movement to an end, and - if the offended country is sufficiently friendly and calm to allow the invaders to withdraw without being attached, and thus to escape due chastisement for the illegal set they have committed - to co-operate with the Government of that country and afford it every facility to restore order and preserve public treaties intact.

As the Peruvian delegate suggests, such '"defensive protection may prevent a collision. But how? By leaving the invaders in possession of the territory they have seized, by upholding the - 5 -

denial of the legitimate sovereignty in that territory, by the offended country’s submitting to all this, agreeing to negotiate the revision of treaties thr t have already been forcibly violated, and refraining from any sovereign action in a territory that incontestably belongs to it. This theory, which allows of the protection of the invaders and their diplomatic and military support fey the Government to which they arc subordinate, is a formidable innovation in international l-,w. On this basis there would not remain a quiet frontier or a safe people in the world. The Republic of Colombia confines itself to asking the Members of the League of Nations t i make a careful examination of these Peruvian theories.

VI.

In conclusion, I would point out that the Colombian Government has never for a moment modified its consistent attitude on this problem. It has been and remains prepared to consider the questions which may exist at Leticia and in its hinterland "within the framework of the Treaty" ana of the clear and inalienable rights which it confers on Colombia, it is ready to study with the Peruvian Government all measures likely to establish peace, cordiality and sincere cooperation between peoples and Governments in the Amazon districts in order that a little progress and tranquility may be brought to these regions, which are so distant, poverty-stricken and hostile to civilisa­ tion „ But this study and the" examination of the questions which any exist will not be possible while foreign bands '>ccupy Colombian soil. Ko discussion md, a fortiori, no agreement will be admissibZ ■ until the rule of the Col imbian laws and authorities and the reality of unconditional Colombian sovereignty have been restored in Leticia the adjacent territory on the same footing as in the rest ">f Colombia. To proceed in any other wny would be to pl-ce n premium on aggression; it would place public treaties the mercy of coups de main and establish a precedent which "nuld have deplorable effects on the peace if the world and the supremacy of law. Colombia will not consent thereto «md is fully Q.ware that in upholding this doctrine, which is essential to the maintenance of international order, she has the approval of the League of Nations, which provides her with powerful encouragement and rightful cause for satisfaction.

(Signed) Eduardo SANTOS

Acting H~a,d of the permanent Colombia* Delegation to the League, and Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Flenipotenti rt of Colombia, on special mission to Europe.