Do they pose a violation of the 1929 Treaty?

Report

Warning Sign-Herbert Mujica Rojas

26-4-2023

Tacna: do they raise a violation of the 1929 Treaty?

The governor of Tacna, Luis Torres, due to lack of information, without the slightest doubt, has suggested the donation of land to be used as a shelter for foreign citizens, predominantly Venezuelans, in that border city.

We refuse to believe that it is in the governor’s plans to create an international conflict of unimaginable consequences. Everything must be pure and frank ignorance.

In the Complementary Protocol of 1929, in its First Article, the following was established:

“The Governments of Peru and Chile may not, without prior agreement between them, cede to a third power all or part of the territories that, in accordance with the Treaty of this same date, remain under their respective sovereignties, nor may they without such requirement, to build, through them, new international railway lines”.

It is essential to remember that the 1929 Treaty, signed on June 3 of that year, defined the land borders between Peru and Chile, an unresolved issue to that date since the beginning of the invasion war raised by the country from the south to ours, in April of 1879.

The illustrious ambassador Félix C. Calderón wrote about the First Article of the Complementary Protocol, in his essential book El Tratado de 1929: La otra historia:

“How can it be appreciated, it consists of the self-limitation that both countries have imposed regarding the fate of Tacna and Arica, after the entry into force of the 1929 Treaty” (p.290).

Furthermore, Calderón specifies that “Of Chilean origin and included at the insistence of that country (Article 1 of the Protocol), what was pursued with that clause was to frustrate any eventual Peruvian-Bolivian settlement to the detriment of Arica. Stricto sensu, this limitation should have applied only to Chile, as a result of the territorial cession of Arica made by Peru. The curious thing about the case is that it would have been the free availability of Peru over Tacna, especially in what refers to the construction of a new railway to La Paz, what Chile would have wanted to restrict. And for this, nothing better occurred to the Chancellery of La Moneda than to resort to the text of the sixth article of the Bolivian-Chilean Treaty of August 10, 1866, as Culbertson remembered it” (p. 290, op. cit).

Giving away, assigning, renting land in Tacna to non-Peruvian or Chilean foreigners would represent a virtual violation of the First Article of the 1929 Complementary Protocol.

And if a country violates an international treaty, it authorizes the other or others to do the same, with the responsibility of those who perpetrate the disrespect, in this case, Peru.

Is not the accumulation of intricate political, economic, productive problems, of deep civil division, with a predominance of the most powerful and minority groups, over a dispossessed and very poor majority, enough to add an absurd and reckless contempt? And without bringing the slightest benefit to Peru?

I consulted with sources and colleagues in Tacna. And the consensus of disapproval of assignments or rentals or anything similar is unanimous.

Non-Peruvian citizens walk throughout Tacna, walk with their tents, rest where they can and there is already a record of assaults and troubles to the detriment of the locals who cannot move freely.

We are convinced that our Foreign Ministry will take into account this important variable of a Treaty that, like that of 1929, took almost 50 years to conclude with all its painful consequences that defined the end of the war (1879-1883).

Isn’t it time to suggest to the governor of Tacna that he read something else so that he doesn’t commit nonsense? Ignorance is no excuse to ruin and insult history, mother and teacher.

In Tacna there is a diplomatic official in charge of the Decentralized Office of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in that Region, who should instruct and warn the governor of his blunder and the negative consequences that his nonsense could cause.

But, if the one who is in Tacna from RREE, did not take notice, I am certain that the wise thinkers that the Chancellery has at its headquarters will show some concern about the matter. It is not for less.

In moments of social conflicts, and this is, to a great degree and involves non-Peruvians, the voice of politicians is missed. Not that they’re very smart, but the topic is downright scandalous.

And have the press men foreseen something? Or are they very busy in the banal gossip of occurrences without any significance?

Let’s repeat with González Prada: Let’s break the infamous and tacit pact of speaking in a low voice!