Treaty of defensive alliance between Peru and Bolivia of 1873

The Treaty of defensive alliance between Peru and Bolivia was a secret defensive alliance signed in Lima, Peru on February 6, 1873 by the representative of Peru, Jose de la Riva-Aguero and Bolivia, Juan de la Cruz Benavente. The treaty contains 11 articles in order to guarantee the integrity, independence, and sovereignty of the contracting parties. Formulated and signed in secrecy, the treaty essentially outlines a defensive alliance in which Peru and Bolivia agreed to protect each other from foreign attacks.

The treaty was understood by Chile as an offensive alliance specifically against it, which would lead to a formal declaration of war from Chile against Bolivia and Peru. Since war had been officially declared by Chile to Bolivia, Peru upheld the defensive alliance and joined the conflict that would be known as the War of the Pacific. In the months prior to the start of the War, Argentina (who was involved in border disputes with Chile) was invited to join the alliance and the Chamber of Deputies approved the law but the Argentine Senate postponed the matter to 1874. Argentina would go on to gain most of the territory it disputed with Chile in a more peaceful manner.

During the 19th century there was a lot of disputes about boundaries between South American countries but Chile was the only country involved in rivalry or boundary dispute with Bolivia and Peru.

In 1873 there were Argentine-Bolivian disputes about Tarija, Chilean-Bolivian disputes about the territories between the 23°S and 24°S latitude, Chilean-Peruvian rivalry about the control of the earnings from the Guano and Niter and Chilean-Argentine boundary dispute about Patagonia.

Object

The preamble of the treaty said that Bolivia and Peru, mutually guaranteeing certain rights, formulating a "Treaty of Defensive Alliance".

They guarantee their independence, their sovereignty and the integrity of their territories respectively, obliging themselves by the terms of the treaty to defend themselves against all foreign aggression.

Casus foederis

The casus foederis should emerge by:

1. the attempt to subject one of the contracting parties to any supremacy, right or predominance, which tends to lessen the full and complete exercise of its sovereignty.
2. the attempt to oblige one of the parties to vary the laws which it emits in the exercise of its sovereignty.

Right to decide to enter the war

The article III says that each party reserves to itself the right of deciding whether the offence received by the other is comprehended among the casus foederis. That is a very important clause as it affects the responsibilities of Peru in the War of the Pacific.

For the casus foederis, a protocol should enumerate the subsidies, military and naval elements, order of superior command, etc.

Restricted right to celebrating treaties

Furthermore the pact restricted the right of celebrating treaties affecting Boundaries, or other territorial arrangements, without previous knowledge of the ally. Boundary Treaties could only be celebrated between Bolivia and Chile, because they were the only countries bordering on one another. Consequently, this clause had for its object to introduce Peru into any convention or Treaty of this class that might be agreed upon.

Others

The treaty should remain secret. Other countries should be invited to enter the pact. Argentina would get an access to the Pacific Ocean between the latitude 24°S and 27°S of Chilean territories

Analysis

At that time, 1873, the relations of the contracting parties to Chile were troubled because of the overlapping demands of Chile and Bolivia over the rich Niter fields of Antofagasta.

The interpretation of the pact is still very controversial. Peruvians and Bolivians historians see the pact as defensive. In contrast, Chileans considerer that the pact as the preamble of the War of the Pacific and a wildcard for Bolivia to provoke Chile by violating agreed treaty conditions. As the pact was signed, 1873, the Peruvian navy was stronger than the Chilean navy and that would be deciding in any confrontation.

The Chilean historian Gonzalo Bulnes writes:

… it was convenient for Bolivia to take advantage of Chile's lack of maritime forces and of the fact that Peru was in condition to impede the mobilisation of troops in defence of the disputed territory. Moreover, she would have to move quickly because Chile was having two ironclads constructed in England.

…

Bolivia was to declare that she would not respect the [Boundary] treaty of 1866 [with Chile], then in force, and should occupy the territory over which she claimed to have rights, that is to say, the salitre zone. Chile, naturally, would not accept the outrage and would declare war. It was necessary that the initiative of the break should come from Chile. After requesting England to embargo the Chilean ships in construction in the name of neutrality, Peru and Argentina would come into action with their fleets. I mention Argentina because the co-operation of that country formed part of Pardo's plan.

Six years after the agreement, in 1879, the military balance had changed since Chile got the ironclads Cochrane and Blanco Encalada, superior in fire power and Iron armour to all Peruvian navy ships.

At the beginning of the War of the Pacific Peru argued that she preferred a peaceful solution, but Chilean popular desire and political motives promoted a declaration of war upon Peru.

Argentina never entered the pact.

See also

• Chile-Peru relations
• Bolivia-Chile relations

Bibliography

• Gonzalo Bulnes(1851–1936), "Chile and Peru : the causes of the war of 1879", Publisher Imprenta Universitaria, Santiago de Chile, in English Language (Download here). It includes the complete English version of the Pact in page 60 and ff.