War of the Pacific

This article is about the 19th century war between Bolivia, Chile and Peru. For the Pacific theatre of WW II, see Pacific War.

War of the Pacific
Map showing changes of territory due to the war
Date 1879-1883 Location Peru and Bolivia in Pacific coast of South America Result Chilean victory Territorial changes Litoral Department (Antofagasta) ceded by Bolivia to Chile in 1904. Tarapaca Department ceded by Peru to Chile in 1884. Puna de Atacama ceded by Bolivia/Chile to Argentina in 1889/1899 Tarata occupied by Chile in 1885, return to Peru in 1925. Arica province occupied by Chile in 1884, ceded by Peru in 1929. Tacna (Sama River) occupied by Chile in 1884, return to Peru in 1929.
Belligerents
Republic of Peru Republic of Bolivia	Republic of Chile
Commanders and leaders
President of Peru Mariano Ignacio Prado (1876-1879) Nicolás de Piérola (1879-1881) Francisco García C. (12.Mar.1881-28.Sep.1881) Lizardo Montero Flores (South Peru 1881-1882) Miguel Iglesias (North Peru 1882-1885) President of Bolivia Hilarion Daza (1876-1879) Narciso Campero (1879-1884)	President of Chile Anibal Pinto (1876-1881) Domingo Santa Maria (1881-1886)
Strength
1879 Bolivian Army: 2,300 soldiers Bolivian Navy: None Peruvian Army: 4,700 soldiers Remington and Minie rifles. Blakely cannon Peruvian Navy: 2 ironclad, 1 corvette, 1 gunboat December 1880 Peruvian Army: 25-32,000 soldiers Peruvian Navy: None	1879 Chilean Army: 4,000 soldiers Comblain rifle. Krupp cannon Chilean Navy: 2 battleships, 4 corvettes, 2 gunboats December 1880 Chilean Army: 41,000 soldiers Chilean Navy: 2 battleships, 3 ironclads, 4 corvettes, 2 gunboats
Casualties and losses
18,213 Killed in Action 7,896 Wounded 10,467 Killed/Wounded (9,103 POWs)	2,825 Killed in Action 7,347 Wounded

The War of the Pacific (Spanish: Guerra del Pacífico), occurring from 1879-1884, was a conflict between Chile and the alliance of Bolivia and Peru. Also known as the "Saltpeter War," the war arose from disputes over the control of territory that contained substantial mineral-rich deposits.

After Bolivian tax of 10 cents (There is a debate if it was illegal or legal) and later confiscation of Chilean company, Chile responded with the disembark of Antofagasta.

The war officially began in 1879, after the Bolivian declaration of war and the activation of the casus foederis of the treaty between Peru and Bolivia. The conclusion of the conflict ultimately led to the Chilean acquisition of the Peruvian territories of Tarapaca and Arica, as well as the disputed Bolivian department of Litoral, leaving Bolivia as a landlocked country.

Background

In 1879, Peru covered 1,5 to 1,6 million square kilometers and had a population of approximately 2,5 to 2,7 million. Peru's ally, Bolivia, probably had close to 2,3 million inhabitants in 1,3 million square kilometers. Chile, the smallest country of the three, had 2,25 million inhabitants in 0,36 million km2

The dry climate of the Peruvian and Bolivian coasts had permitted the accumulation and preservation of vast amounts of high-quality nitrate deposits such as guano and saltpeter over many thousands of years. In the 1840s, the discovery of the use of guano as a fertilizer and saltpeter as a key ingredient in explosives made the Atacama Desert strategically and economically valuable. Bolivia, Chile, and Peru suddenly found themselves sitting on the largest reserves of a resource that the world needed.

But at the beginning of the 1870s the Long Depression hit the three countries and pressed the governments to obtain more revenues from the nitrate: Peru nationalized the trade of nitrate, Bolivia increased the tax on nitrate in spite of the agreement in the Boundary treaty of 1874 and Chile was inflexible regarding the Bolivian tax increase

Boundary disputes in South America

After the wars of the independence, the new republics accepted the Uti possidetis doctrine in order to define the frontiers but the different maps versions were controversial because cartographers often had a vague idea of the unknown and unhabitated territories. In fact, in the 1870s there were boundary conflicts between Chile and Argentina, Chile and Bolivia, Argentina and Bolivia, Argentina and Brazil, Brazil and Peru, Brazil and Bolivia and between Brazil and Chile.

Boundary treaty of 1866 between Bolivia and Chile

See also: Boundary Treaty of 1866 between Chile and Bolivia

A conflicting situation between Bolivia and Chile developed because no permanent borders had been established between the nations. Claiming their borders according to the uti possidetis principle, Bolivia and Chile disagree on whether the territory of Charcas, originally part of the Viceroyalty of Peru and, later, part of the Viceroyalty of the Rio de la Plata, had access to the sea. Eventually, the two countries negotiated the Boundary Treaty of 1866 that established the 24°S parallel as their national boundaries and entitled Chile and Bolivia equal rights to share the tax revenue on mineral exports from the territory between the 23°S and 25°S parallels, which comprised a large part of the Atacama desert.

The 1866 treaty led to disagreement over the definition of "metal", over the administration of civil law in the zones, and over the question whether the boundary line ran from parallel 24°S, the shortest route to the Andes, or straight east to them.

Treaty of alliance between Bolivia and Peru of 1873

See also: Treaty of alliance between Peru and Bolivia of 1873

On February 6, 1873, Peru and Bolivia signed a Treaty of alliance which guaranteed the independence, sovereignty and the integrity of their territories, and obliged them to defend each other against all foreign aggression. An additional clause kept the treaty secret among the allies. Argentina had begun talks with Peru and Bolivia to join the alliance, and the Chamber of Deputies, in a secret session, approved the law, but the Argentine Senate postponed the matter to 1874. Chile was not directly mentioned in the text of the treaty and was not informed about its existence. Historians disagree about the nature of the treaty. Some historians call it a defensive pact but other historians see it as a offensive pact. The Chilean government regarded it as a menace and mentioned it as one of the reasons of the declaration of war.

Boundary treaty of 1874 between Bolivia and Chile

In 1874, Chile and Bolivia superseded the boundary treaty signed in 1866 with the same boundary, parallel 24°S, granting Bolivia the authority to collect full tax revenue between the 23°S and 24°S parallels, fixing the tax rates on Chilean companies for 25 years.

Rivalry between Chile and Peru

Historically, Peru had been the jewel of the Spanish Empire, while Chile was the subordinate, poor cousin.

During the War of the Confederation, (1836 - 1839) Chile participated in a Peruvian civil war and dissolved a Peru-Bolivia confederation that threatened the regional balance of power. On a deeper level, both countries were in a heated competition for the control of the commercial routes on the Pacific; and for the Chileans specially, whose relations with independent Peru had already been strained by economic problems centering on the rivalry between their ports of Callao and Valparaíso.

During and after the Chincha Islands War (1864-1866, against the Spanish Fleet), the Peruvian Navy with two ironclads outgunned the Chilean Navy that possessed only wooden ships.

In 1872, Peru began to get involved in the Chile-Bolivia dispute when it attempted to use its naval power in order to help Bolivia obtain a definite boundary.

But on December 26, 1874, the recently built Chilean ironclad Cochrane arrived in Valparaiso; it remained in Chile until the completion of the Blanco Encalada, throwing the balance of power in the south Pacific ocean towards Chile. Following this turn of events, Peru postponed the Argentine signing of the alliance treaty.

Economic interests

After the discovery of the profitable use of guano and saltpeter, the population of the Atacama became quickly populated by Chilean investors backed by Europeans. Due to the natural barrier that the Andes Mountains created between the Bolivian altiplano and the Pacific coast, Bolivians were not able to colonize the area with as great a quantity. Chilean and foreign enterprises in the region eventually extended all the way to the Peruvian saltpeter mines.

The US-American historian William F. Sater gives 4 possible and non-contradictory reasons for the begin of the war:

1. The holder of the Chilean nitrate companies "bulldozed" the Chilean president Aníbal Pinto into declaring war in order to protect the owner of the Compañia de Salitres y Ferrocarril and later to seize Bolivia's and Peru's salitreras.
2. The true causes of the conflict are not economic but geopolitical: a struggle for control of the southwestern portion of the Pacific ocean.
3. Peru desired to monopolize and appropriate the nitrate works to strengthen its nitrate monopoly and in order to achieve it, the Bolivian and Chilean salitreras had to be controlled by Peru.
4. The declarations of war between Chile and Peru were a product of popular domestic forces, that is, the president had to enter into war or to abandon and cede.

Crisis

The ten cents tax

A major crisis took place in 1878 when the National Congress of Bolivia and a National Constituent Assembly found an 1873 contract authorizing the Antofagasta Nitrate & Railway Company to extract saltpeter duty-free for 15 years to be incomplete due to a lack of ratification from the Bolivian Congress as required by the constitution of 1871. The Bolivian Congress proposed to approve the contract only if the company would pay a 10 cents tax per quintal of mineral extracted, but the company complained the increased payments were illegal and demanded an intervention from the Chilean government which, in response, claimed the border treaty of 1874 did not allow for such a tax hike. When the Antofagasta Nitrate & Railway Company refused to pay the tax, the Bolivian government under President Hilarion Daza threatened to confiscate its property and, in December 1878, Chile sent a warship to the area.

Occupation of Antofagasta and Peruvian Mediation

After the company refused to pay the tax, Bolivia announced the seizure and auction of the Antofagasta Nitrate & Railway Company on February 14, 1879. Chile announced that such an action would render the border treaty null.

On the day of the auction, 200 Chilean soldiers went ashore from the Chilean ships and occupied the Bolivian port city of Antofagasta, of a population of 6000 population were 5000 Chilean. According to Peruvian historian Jorge Basadre, not only did the Chilean troops occupy the city without any major resistance, but they also received widespread public support and encouragement. Bolivian soldiers and civilian residents made a futile attempt to oppose the Chilean troops at the Battle of Topáter, on March 23, 1879, whilst the Chileans were on their way to occupy Calama. This became the first battle of the war. Further land battles would not take place until the war at sea was resolved. A few days later the Chilean troops occupied all Bolivian towns and nitrate mines in the Atacama desert up to the border with Peru: Calama, Caracoles, Cobija and Tocopilla.

On March 1. 1879 Bolivian dictator Hilarión Daza declared war on Chile Bolivia then requested Peru to activate the secret treaty of 1873, officially titled defensive, as they felt that the Chilean invasion of Antofagasta constituted a casus foederis of the alliance. Two weeks later the Bolivian declaration of war came to Santiago de Chile.

Peru attempted to mediate the conflict by sending Jose Antonio Lavalle, a senior diplomat, to negotiate with the Chilean government in order to request for Chile to return Antofagasta to Bolivian authorities. Nonetheless, previous Peruvian demands favoring Bolivia and the Lavalle's denial of knowing about the existence of a secret treaty caused the Chilean government to stall negotiations under suspicion that Peru's mediation was not Bona fide, and that it was only trying to gain time while it hurried its war preparations.

Acknowledging awareness of the Bolivia-Peru alliance, Chile responded by breaking diplomatic ties and formally declaring war on both Bolivia and Peru on April 5, 1879. On April 6, Peru declared casus foederis of the defensive alliance treaty, stating that it had officially come into effect.

The Peruvian historian Jorge Basadre wrote about the Bolivian intentions with the declaration of war:

"The Chilean version saw that Bolivia ['s declaration of war] aimed to impede the purchase of weapons to Chile. In reality, Daza intended to eliminate Lavalle's mission. Once again the Peruvian legation in La Paz [Bolivia] failed because in accordance with the treaty such act [declaration of war] should have been done in agreement between both [Peru and Bolivia]. As long as no state of war existed between Chile and Bolivia , Chile couldn't require neutrality from Peru. Since Bolivia declared the war on Chile, the Chilean request of Peruvian neutrality was inevitable. The Bolivian declaration of war on Chile was (as stated by Chilean historian Bulnes) a traverse fault through the wheel of Lavalle's handcart."

The War

Naval campaign

Given the few roads and railroad lines, the nearly waterless and largely unpopulated Atacama Desert was a rough terrain to conquer and maintain occupied for long. From the beginning of the war it became clear that, in order to achieve control of the local nitrate industry in a difficult desert terrain, control of the sea would prove to be the deciding factor of the war.

Ironclads of Chile and Peru at the beginning of the War of the Pacific

Warship	tons (L.ton)	Horse- power	Speed (Knots)	Armour (Inch)	Main Artillery	Built Year
Cochrane	3,560	2,000	9-12,8	up to 9	6x9 Inch	1874
Blanco Encalada	3,560	3,000	9-12,8	up to 9	6x9 Inch	1874
Huascar	1.130	1,200	10-11	4½	2x300-pounders	1865
Independencia	2,004	1,500	12-13	4½	2x150-pounders	1865
Manco Cápac	1.034	320	6	10	2x500-pounders	1864
Atahualpa	1.034	320	6	10	2x500-pounders	1864

By 1879 Bolivia didn't possess ships, but on 26. March 1879 Daza formally offered letters of marque to combat for Bolivia. Bolivia hadn't signed the Paris Declaration Respecting Maritime Law but the USA, England and France refused the legality of Bolivia's act. Since Bolivia hadn't ports anymore because of the Chilean occupation and Peru discouraged the measure, the naval conflict was left to be resolved between the Chile and Perú.

The power of the Chilean navy was based on the twin central-battery ironclad frigates, Cochrane and Blanco Encalada. The rest of the fleet was formed by the corvettes Chacabuco, O'Higgins, and Esmeralda, the gunboat Magallanes, and the schooner Covadonga.

The Peruvian navy based its power on the broadside ironclad frigate Independencia and the monitor Huáscar. The rest of the fleet was completed by the corvette Unión, the gunboat Pilcomayo, and the coastal monitors Atahualpa and Manco Cápac. Although both the Chilean and Peruvian ironclads seemed evenly matched, the Chilean ironclads had twice the armor and held a greater range and hitting power.

In one of the first naval tactical moves of the war, the Peruvian port of Iquique was blocked by of the Chilean Navy. In the Battle of Iquique, which took place on May 21 of 1879, the Peruvian monitor Huáscar, sank the Chilean corvette Esmeralda. At around the same time, the Peruvian frigate Independencia, chases the Chilean schooner Covadonga through shallow coastal zones which eventually caused the heavier Independencia to crash at Punta Gruesa. The tactical results of the naval battles of Iquique and Punta Gruesa were the lift of the blockade of the port of Iquique, the Chilean wooden ship Esmeralda and the Peruvian ironclad Independencia sunk.

The outgunned Huáscar managed to avoid engagement with the superior battleships of the Chilean navy for six months. Among the actions of these "Excursions of the Huáscar" are the Battle of Antofagasta (May 26, 1879) and the Second Battle Antofagasta (August 28, 1879). The most successful of the excursions was the capture of the steamship Rímac on July 23, 1879. Not only is the ship captured, but the cavalry regiment Carabineros de Yungay which was on board is also captured, making this the largest loss the Chilean army had thus far had in the war. This causes a crisis in the Chilean government which causes the resignation of admiral Juan Williams Rebolledo commander of the Chilean fleet, who was replaced by commodore Galvarino Riveros Cárdenas, who devises a plan to catch the Huáscar.

The decisive battle of the sea campaign took place in Punta Angamos, on October 8, 1879. In this battle, the monitor Huáscar was finally captured by the Chilean Navy, despite the attempts of its crew to sink the ship. Finally the Peruvian Navy was completely defeated during the blockade of Callao, where the Peruvian fleet was set on fire and the coastal defenses of Callao were destroyed or taken to Chile.

Campaign of Tarapaca

Once the naval superiority was achieved, the troops of the Chilean army began the occcupation of the Peruvian province of Tarapacá.

On 2 November 1879 at 7:15 began the naval bombardment and disembarkment at the small port of Pisagua and the Junin Cove, –some 500 km North of Antofagasta. At Pisagua, several landing waves Chilean troops attacked beach defenses held by Allies, and took the town. By the end of the day, the Chilean army were ashore and moving inland

From Pisagua the Chileans marched south towards the city of Iquique with 6,000 troops and defeated on 19 November 1879 the 7,400 troops allies gathered in Agua Santa in Battle of San Francisco/Dolores. Bolivians forces retreated to Oruro and Peruvians to Tiliviche. Four days later, the Chilean army captured Iquique without resistance.

Chileans operations in the war.

A detachment of 3,600 Chilean soldiers, cavalry and artillery, was sent to face the Peruvian forces in the small town of Tarapaca. Peruvian forces started a march towards Arica in order to find Bolivian troops led by Hilarion Daza coming from Arica southwards, but in Camarones Daza decided to return towards Arica.

Chileans and Allies met on 27. November 1879 in the Battle of Tarapaca, where the Chilean forces were defeated but the Peruvian forces, unable to mantain the territory, retreated further north to Arica by 18 December 1879.

About the importance of the campaign Bruce W. Farcau wrote:

"The province of Tarapaca was lost along with a population of 200,000, nearly one tenth of the Peruvian total, and an annual gross income of ₤ 28 million in nitrate production, virtually all of the country's export earnings."

giving Santiago not only a economic bonanza but also a diplomatic asset

Downfall of President Prado in Peru and Daza in Bolivia

The Peruvian government was confronted with widespread rioting in Lima because of the disastrous handling of the war to date.

On 18 December 1879 the Peruvian President Mariano Ignacio Prado suddenly took a ship from Callao to Panama with allegedly six million pesos in gold to oversee the purchase of new arms and warships for the nation. In a statement in the newspaper El Comercio he turned over the command of the country to Vice President La Puerta. After a putsch and more than 300 dead Nicolás de Piérola overthrew La Puerta and took power in Peru on 23 December 1879.

Back to Arica from the aborted expedition to Iquique, on 27 December 1879 Daza received a telegram from La Paz informing him the army had overthrown him. He departed to Europe with $500,000. In Bolivia General Narciso Campero became president.

Bolivia's president Campero remained in office until the end of the war, but Pierola was recognized as president only by the occupation of Lima.

Election of Domingo Santa Maria in Chile

During the Bolivian tax crisis, 1879, Chile voted a new congress on schedule and in 1881 Domingo Santa Maria was elected as president of the republic, who assumed the office on 18. September 1881. A new congress was elected in 1882.

Campaign of Tacna and Arica

After the failure of the peace talks the Chilean forces began to prepare the occupation of South Peru. On 28 November 1879 declared the formal blockade of Arica. Later also the port Callao was put under blockade.

A Chilean force of 600 men carried out an amphibious raid at Ilo as a reconnaissance in force, to the north of Tacna, on December 31 1879, and withdrew the same day.

On 24 February 1880 approximately 11,000 men in nineteen ships protected by the warships Blanco Encalada, Toro and the Magallanes as two torpedo boats sailed from Pisagua and arrived off Punta Coles, near Pacocha, Ilo on 26 February 1880. The landing took several days and occurred without resistance and the Peruvian commander, Lizardo Montero, refused to try to drive the Chileans from the beachhead, as the Chileans expected.

On 22 March 1880 3,642 Chilean troops defeated 1,300 Peruvian troops in the Battle of Los Ángeles cutting any direct Peruvian supply from Lima to Arica or Tacna (Supply was possible only through the long way over Bolivia).

After the Battle of Los Ángeles there were three allied positions in South Peru; at Arequipa was General Leyva's 2th Army (some survivors of Los Angeles included), at Arica was Bolognesi's 7th and 8th Division and at Tacna was the 1st Army, all under the command of the Bolivian president Campero. But they were unable to concentrate troops or at least to move from their places.

After crossing Template:Mi to km of desert, on 26 May 1880 the Chilean army (14,147 men) destroyed the allied army of 5,150 Bolivians and 8,500 Peruvians in the Battle of the Halt of the Alliance.

The need of a port near to the location of the army, in order to supply and reinforce the troops and the evacuation of the wounded, made the Chilean command to put its attention on the remaining Peruvian stronghold of Arica. On June 7, 1880 after the Battle of Arica fell the last Peruvian bastion in the Tacna Department.

After the campaign of Tacna and Arica the Peruvian and Bolivian regular armies ceased to exist. Bolivia effectively dropped out of the war.

Lackawanna Conference

Prior to the United States becoming formally involved into the matter, the united proposal of France, England, and Italy was to provide Chile with Tarapaca while they retreated their troops to the Camarones River; Chile found this solution to be acceptable.

On October 22, 1880, delegates of Peru, Chile, Bolivia, and the Minister Plenipotentiary of the Unites States of America in Chile held a 5-day conference aboard the USS Lackawanna in Arica. The Lackawanna Conference, also called the Arica conference, attempted to develop a peace settlement for the war. Chile demanded the Peruvian Tarapaca province and the Bolivian Atacama, an indemnity of $20,000,000 gold Pesos, restoration of property taken from Chilean citizens, the return to Chile of the transport vessel Rimac, the abrogation of the secret alliance treaty between Peru and Bolivia, the formal commitment on the part of Peru not to mount artillery batteries in Arica's harbor once returned by Chile and to limit that port to commercial use only. and the retention by Chile of the territories of Moquegua, Tacna, and Arica until all previous conditions were satisfied. Although willing to accept the negotiated settlement, Peru and Bolivia insisted that Chile withdraw its forces from all occupied lands as a precondition for discussing peace. Having captured this territory at great expense, Chile refused to accept these terms and the negotiations failed.

Lynch's Expedition

To show Peru the futility of further resistance against Chilean forces, on 4 September 1880 the Chilean government dispatched an expedition of 2,200 men to northern Peru under the command of Captain Patricio Lynch in order to collect taxes. Lynch's Expedition arrived on 10 September to Chimbote levied taxes of $100,000 in Chimbote, $10,000 in Piata, $20,000 in Chiclayo, and $4,000 in Lambayeque in local currencies; those who did not comply had their property impounded or destroyed. On September 11, 1880, the Peruvian government made a decree that made the payment of these taxes an act of treason, but most land owners still paid the Chileans under the belief that denizens of occupied areas had to comply with the occupying army.

Campaign of Lima

After the campaign of Tacna and Arica, the southern departments of Peru was in Chilean hands, and the allies armies were smashed, so for chilean government there was no reason to continue the war, but public pressure as well as expansionist ambitions pushed the war farther north. Also the defeated allies not only didn't realize their situation but also even more controversially in Bolivia, despite the empty Bolivian treasury, on 16 June 1880 the national assembly voted in favour of a continuation of the war and on 11 June 1880 was signed in Peru a document declaring the creation of the United States of Peru-Bolivia.

This forced both the Chilean government and its high command to plan a new campaign with the objective to obtain an unconditional capitulation at the Peruvian capital city,

The Chilean forces would have to confront virtually the entire male population of Lima defending prepared positions and supported by a formidable collection of coastal guns of Lima within a few miles of the capital's arsenal and supply depots. Pierola ordered the construction of two parallel lines of defenses at Chorrillos and Miraflores a few kilometers south of Lima. The line of Chorrillos had Template:Mi to km long, lying from Marcavilca hill to La Chira, passing through the acclivities of San Juan and Santa Teresa. The Peruvian forces were approximately 26,000 men strong between Arequipa and Lima

A small Chilean force went ashore near Pisco, approximately Template:Mi to km South of Lima, and the gross of the army disembarked in Chilca only Template:Km to mi from Lima.

On January 13, 1881 the 20,000 Chilean troops charged 14,000 Peruvian defenders in Chorrillos. During the Battle of Chorrillos, the Chileans inflicted a harsh defeat to the Peruvian army and eliminated the first defensive line guarding Lima. Two days later, on January 15, 1881, after the triumph in the Battle of Miraflores the Chilean army entered Lima.

After the battle there were fires and sackings in the towns of Chorrillos and Barranco, but over the wrongdoers there are one-sided information. Chilean authors incriminate demoralized Peruvian soldiers but Peruvian authors accuse drunken Chilean soldiers of the damages and crimes. Both versions must not be contradictory.

Occupation of Peru

Chileans troops entered Lima on 17 January 1881.. The Peruvian dictator Nicolás de Piérola retreated from the capital in order to try to continue governing from the rear area and he still refused to accept Chile's demand for territory and indemnity.

In absence of a Peruvian president who was willing to accept their peace terms, on February 22, 1881, the Chileans allowed a convention of Peruvian "notables" outside of Lima that elected Francisco García Calderón as president. Garcia Calderón was allowed to raise and arm two infantry battalions (400 men each) and two small cavalry squadrons in order to give more legitimacy to the provisional government.

The commander of the Chilean occupation, Vice-admiral Patricio Lynch, set down his military headquarters in the Government Palace of Peru in Lima. After the confrontations in San Juan and Miraflores, the then Peruvian Colonel Andrés Avelino Cáceres decided to escape to the central Andes to organize and reinitiate the Peruvian resistance to the Chilean occupation army in the mountain range, which would come to be known as the Campaign of the Breña or Sierra, facing abundant acts of rebellion in Lima and, later, a clearly organized Peruvian resistance.

Meanwhile, in Chile the new administration under the command of Domingo Santa Maria pushed for an end to the costly war.

Letelier's expedition

In February 1881, the Chilean forces started under the command of Lt. Col. Ambrosio Letelier the first Expedition, 700 men, to defeat the last guerrilla bands from Huanuco (30 April) to Junin, but after many loses the expedition achieved very little and came back to Lima in early July, where Letelier and his officers were court-martialed because they illegally diverted money into their own pocket.

First campaign of La Sierra

To annihilate the guerrilla, Lynch started in January 1882 a new offensive with 5,000 men first in direction Tarma and then southeast: Huancayo, until Izcuchaca. The Chilean troops suffered enormous hardships: cold, snow, mountain sickness (more than 5,000m). On 9 July 1882 was fought the epic Battle of La Concepción. The Chileans had to pull back with a lost of 534 soldiers: 154 died in combat, 277 died to disease and 103 deserted.

Rise of Miguel Iglesias

During the administration of James A. Garfield (Mar. 4, 1881 – Sep. 19, 1881) in the USA, the anglophobic secretary of state James G. Blaine wanted to advance America's presence in Latin America and believed that England had prodded Chile into war on Peru in order to secure England's stake. Blaine made a proposal that called for Chile to accept monetary indemnity and renounce to Antofagasta and Tarapaca. These American attempts reinforced Garcia Calderon's refuse to discuss the matter of territorial cession. When it became known that Blaine's man by Garcia Calderon, Stephen Hurlburt, would personally profit from the business trade-off, was clear that Hurlburt was complicating the peace process.

Because of president Calderon's refusal to relinquish Peruvian control over Tarapacá, he was placed under arrest. Before Garcia Calderon left Peru to Chile, he named Admiral Lizardo Montero as successor. At the same time Pierola stepped back and supported Avelino Caceres. Caceres refused and also supported Lizardo Montero, who moved to Arequipa. In this way Garcia Calderon's arrest achieved the union of the forces of Pierola and Caceres.

Frederick Theodore Frelinghuysen, successor of Blaine as secretary of state after the unexpected death of President Garfield, publicly disavowed Blaine's policy while abandoning any notion of intervening militarily in the dispute and recognizing Chile's right to annex Tarapaca.

On 1 April 1882 Miguel Iglesias, former Defence minister of Pierola, became convinced that the war had to be brought to an end if Peru was not to be completely devastated. He issued a manifesto, "Grito de Montan", calling for peace and in December 1882 called a convention of representatives of the seven departments of northern Peru where he was elected "Regenerating President"

Second campaign of La Sierra

In order to protect and support Iglesias against Montero, on 6 April 1883, Patricio Lynch started a new offensive to drive the montoneros from central Peru and destroy Caceres' little army. Unlike in previous plans, The Chileans troops pursued Caceres to northwest through narrow mountain passes until 10 July 1883 as the definitive Battle of Huamachuco was fought. It was the last battle of the war.

End of Occupation

After the signing of the peace on 20 October 1883 with the government of Iglesias, Lizardo Montero tried to resist in Arequipa, but fortunately for Chile, the only arrival of the its men stampeded Montero's troops and Montero went for a Bolivian asylum.

On 29 October 1883 ended the Chilean occupation of Lima.

Peace

Peace treaty with Peru

On October 20, 1883 hostilities between Chile and Peru formally came to an end with the signing of the Treaty of Ancón. Under the terms of the treaty Chile was to occupy the provinces of Tacna and Arica for 10 years, after which a plebiscite was to be held to determine nationality. The two countries failed for decades to agree on the terms of the plebiscite. Finally in 1929, through the mediation of the United States under President Herbert Hoover, an accord was reached by which Chile kept Arica. Peru reacquired Tacna and received some concessions in Arica.

Peace treaty with Bolivia

In 1884, Bolivia signed a truce that gave control to Chile of the entire Bolivian coast, the province of Antofagasta, and its valuable nitrate, copper, and other mineral deposits, and a further treaty in 1904 made this arrangement permanent. In return, Chile agreed to build a railroad connecting the capital city of La Paz, Bolivia with the port of Arica, and Chile guaranteed freedom of transit for Bolivian commerce through Chilean ports and territory.

International Law of War

The three nations involved in war adhered to the Geneva Red Cross Convention to protect the war wounded, prisoners, refugees, civilians, and other non-combatants.

At that time there was no other binding international law between both countries about this issue. The Chilean government under President Aníbal Pinto Garmendia published El derecho de la guerra según los últimos progresos de la civilización with the following laws:

• the International Declaration concerning the Laws and Customs of War. Brussels, 27 August 1874
• St. Petersburg Declaration of 1868 or full Declaration Renouncing the Use, in Time of War, of Explosive Projectiles Under 400 Grammes Weight
• International Red Cross founded 1863
• Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the Field, General Order Nr 100

and instructed the officers of the army and the navy to comply with.

Nevertheless there are accusations of atrocities committed during the war.

As war booty, Chile confiscated the contents of the National Library of Peru in Lima and transported thousands of books (including many centuries-old original Spanish, Peruvian, and Colonial volumes) to Santiago de Chile, along with much capital stock. However, in November 2007 3,778 books were returned to the National Library of Peru.

Strategy and technology

It was clear from the beginning that strategic control of the sea would be the key to an inevitably difficult desert war: supply by sea, including water, food, ammunition, horses, fodder and reinforcements, was quicker and easier than marching supplies through the desert or across the Bolivian high plateau. While the Chilean Navy started an economic and military blockade of the Allies' ports, Peru took the initiative and utilized its smaller but effective navy as a raiding force. Chile was forced to delay the ground invasion for six months, and to shift its fleet from blockading to hunting the Peruvian ship Huascar until it was captured. After achieving naval supremacy, sea mobile forces proved to be an advantage for desert warfare on a long coastline. Peruvian and Bolivian defenders found themselves hundreds of kilometers away from home while Chilean invading forces were usually a few kilometers away from the sea.

Chilean ground strategy focused on mobility: landing ground forces in enemy territory in order to raid Allied ground assets; landing in strength to split and drive out defenders and leaving garrisons to guard territory as the war moved north. Peru and Bolivia fought a defensive war: maneuvering along long overland distances; relying where possible on land or coastal fortifications with gun batteries and minefields; coastal railways were available to central Peru, and telegraph lines provided a direct line to the government in Lima. When retreating, Allied forces made sure that little if any assets remained to be used by the enemy. According to "Chinese Migration into Latin America – Diaspora or Sojourns in Peru?" some Chinese coolies supported the Chilean army against their plantation owners in Peru. Massive raids from demoralized Peruvian soldiers and invading Chilean forces destroyed several Peruvian towns and cities across the coastline.

The occupation of Peru between 1881 and 1884 was a different story altogether. The war theatre was the Peruvian Sierra, where Peruvian resistance had easy access to population, resource and supply centres further from the sea; it could carry out a war of attrition indefinitely. The Chilean army (now turned into an occupation force) was split into small garrisons across the theatre and could devote only part of its strength to hunting down rebels without a central authority. After a costly occupation and prolonged anti-insurgency campaign, Chile sought to achieve an exit through a political strategy. Rifts within Peruvian society and the Peruvian defeat in the Battle of Huamachuco resulted in the peace treaty that ended the occupation.

The war saw the use by both sides of new, or recently introduced, late 19th century military technology such as breech-loading rifles & cannons, remote-controlled land mines, armor-piercing shells, naval torpedoes, torpedo boats, and purpose-built landing craft. The second-generation of ironclads (i.e. designed after the Battle of Hampton Roads) were employed in battle for the first time. That was significant for a conflict where a major power was not involved, and it drew the attention of British, French, and U.S. observers of the war. During the war, Peru developed the Toro Submarino ("Submarine Bull"). Though completely operational, she never saw action, and she was scuttled at the end of the war to prevent her capture by Chilean forces.

The U.S.S. Wachusett with Alfred Thayer Mahan in command, was stationed at Callao, Peru, protecting American interests during the final stages of the War of the Pacific. He formulated his concept of sea power while reading a history book in an English gentleman’s club in Lima, Peru. This concept became the foundation for his celebrated The Influence of Sea Power upon History.

World perspectives

The war remained largely relatively unregarded outside South America because neither the USA nor any mayor European power had a stake in the dispute. After the beginning of the war, the government of Great Britain declared its neutrality and refused to allow Peru, Bolivia, and Chile to take delivery of military or naval material on English soil.

A different matter was the case of persons or companies having some kind of investment in the countries involved in war.

In the 1870s Peru's president Manuel Pardo established a government monopoly to control the sale of nitrate and in 1875 expropriated the salitreras. The Peruvian Government issued interest bearing certificates for the former owners and promised to redeem in two years.

Other group was the "Credit Industrial" and the "Peruvian Company", representing European and American creditor of Peru. They offered to lend the money that Peru required to pay reparations to Chile (to avoid Chilean annexation of Tarapaca). In return Peru would have to grant mining concessions in Tarapaca.

Since the nitrate traders and the holders of debts were all aware that they would receive payment only if the war ended, they influenced for a quick settlement to the conflict. These groups, and of course others on the Chilean side, acted more other less to obtain a convenient solution for its interests.

Consequences of the war

See also: Treaty of Peace and Friendship of 1904 between Chile and Bolivia

The War of the Pacific left traumatic scars on all societies involved in the conflict.

Bolivia

For Bolivians, the loss of the territory which they refer to as the Litoral (the coast) remains a deeply emotional issue and a practical one, as was particularly evident during the internal natural gas riots of 2003. Popular belief attributes much of the country's problems to its landlocked condition; accordingly, recovering the seacoast is seen as the solution to most of these difficulties. In 1932, this was a contributing factor in the failed Chaco War with Paraguay, over territory controlling access to the Atlantic Ocean through the Paraguay River. In recent decades, all Bolivian Presidents have made it their policy to pressure Chile for sovereign access to the sea. Diplomatic relations with Chile have been severed since 17 March 1978, in spite of considerable commercial ties. Currently, the leading Bolivian newspaper "El Diario" ([6]) still features at least a weekly editorial on the subject, and the Bolivian people annually celebrate a patriotic "Dia del Mar" (Day of the Sea) to remember the crippling loss.

Chile

Economically, Chile fared better, gaining a lucrative territory with major sources of income, including nitrates, saltpeter and copper. The national treasury grew by 900% between 1879 and 1902 due to taxes coming from the newly acquired Bolivian and Peruvian lands.. British involvement and control of the nitrate industry rose significantly after the war. High nitrate profits lasted for only a few decades and fell sharply once synthetic nitrates were developed during World War I.

Territorially, during the war Chile waived most of its claim over the Patagonia in the Boundary treaty of 1881 between Chile and Argentina, in order to ensure Argentina's neutrality during the conflict; After the war, the Puna de Atacama dispute grew until it was solved in 1899, since both Chile and Argentina claimed former Bolivian territories. On 28 August 1929, Chile returned the province of Tacna to Peru. In 1999, Chile and Peru at last agreed to complete the implementation of the last parts of the Treaty of Lima, providing Peru with a port in Arica.

Peru

According to Bruce W. Farcau "in Peru, the wounds run less deep, than in neighboring Bolivia. The defeat was certainly humiliating, and Peru also lost a substantial chunk of potentially valuable real estate".

On the other hand, George J. Mills argues that after Peru's defeat, "Peruvian resentment, born of the loss of her nitrate territories, is still smoldering" , to this day. It has also been argued that the behavior of local politicians and their honest desire to maintain neighborly relations is questionable. According to a report from the University for Peace, an independent subsidiary of the United Nations; "The unaccounted variable in this equation is the consolidating predisposition of Peruvians to quickly direct themselves against Chile should problems arise". The same report also claims that "instead of fomenting a political culture that questions and checks its government, Peru is diverting for a fundamentalist nationalism incapable of seeing beyond the hatred."

The defeat engendered a deep revenge desire among the ruling classes, which also led to a skewed view of the role of the armed forces; this attitude dominated society throughout the 20th century.

Bibliography

Primary sources

• Barros Arana, Diego (1881), Historia de la guerra del Pacífico (1879-1880) English: History of the War of the Pacific (1879-1880)[[Category:Articles containing explicitly cited English-language text]], vol. 1, Santiago, Chile: Librería Central de Servat i C", Esquina de Huerfanos i Ahumada {{citation}}: URL–wikilink conflict (help) in Spanish language
• Barros Arana, Diego (1881), Historia de la guerra del Pacífico (1879-1880) English: History of the War of the Pacific (1879-1880)[[Category:Articles containing explicitly cited English-language text]], vol. 2, Santiago, Chile: Librería Central de Servat i C", Esquina de Huerfanos i Ahumada {{citation}}: URL–wikilink conflict (help) in Spanish language
• Chilean government (1879–1881), Boletin de la Guerra del Pacifico English: Bulletin of the War of the Pacific[[Category:Articles containing explicitly cited English-language text]], Santiago, Chile: Editorial Andres Bello {{citation}}: URL–wikilink conflict (help)CS1 maint: date format (link) in Spanish language
• De Varigny, Charles (1922), La Guerra del Pacifico English: The War of the Pacific[[Category:Articles containing explicitly cited English-language text]], vol. 1, Santiago de Chile: Imprenta Cervantes {{citation}}: URL–wikilink conflict (help) in Spanish language (published first time 1881-1882 in Revue des deux mondes)
• Jefferson Dennis, William (1927), Documentary history of the Tacna-Arica dispute from University of Iowa studies in the social sciences, vol. 8, Iowa: University Iowa City
• Paz Soldan, Mariano Felipe (1884), Narracion Historica de la Guerra de Chile contra Peru y Bolivia English: Historical narration of the Chile's War against Peru and Bolivia[[Category:Articles containing explicitly cited English-language text]], Buenos Aires, Argentina: Imprenta y Libreria de Mayo, calle Peru 115 {{citation}}: URL–wikilink conflict (help) in Spanish language

Secondary sources

• Basadre, Jorge, Historia de la Republica del Peru, La guerra con Chile English: History of Peru, The War on Chile[[Category:Articles containing explicitly cited English-language text]] {{citation}}: URL–wikilink conflict (help) in Spanish Language

• Bulnes, Gonzalo (1920), Chile and Peru: the causes of the war of 1879, Santiago, Chile: Imprenta Universitaria
• Farcau, Bruce W. (2000), The Ten Cents War, Chile, Peru and Bolivia in the War of the Pacific, 1879-1884, Westport, Connecticut, London: Praeger Publishers, ISBN 0-275-96925-8
• Sater, William F. (2007), Andean Tragedy: Fighting the War of the Pacific, 1879-1884, Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press, ISBN 978-0-8032-4334-7
• Sater, William F. (1986), Chile and the War of the Pacific, Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press, ISBN 0-8032-4155-0

See also

• Treaty of Peace and Friendship of 1904 between Chile and Bolivia
• Atacama border dispute
• Chincha Islands War
• Chilean-Peruvian Maritime Dispute of 2006--2007
• Chile-Peru relations
• Puna de Atacama Lawsuit
• War of the Confederation
• Guano Islands Act