The Belize/Guatemala territorial dispute
Posted: 01/06/2009 - 06:36 PM
Author: Compton Fairweather
Little known facts regarding the “pollution” of the 1859 Treaty between the United Kingdom and Guatemala:
Since the April 30, 1859 boundary treaty between the United Kingdom and Guatemala must be considered the lynchpin for our success in any international legal tribunal regarding our case against any claim Guatemala may have against our territory, I have pondered for many decades the reason why Article VII of this treaty, “the sweetener” regarding the infamous cart road agreement, was inserted at the last moment, when most respected experts in international law will tell you that such a clause has no place in a boundary treaty. There were several questions in my mind. A few of them are:
The boundary treaty, exactly as claimed by the British from the early 1830’s, was agreed upon in the original draft of February 16, 1859, submitted by Minister Charles Lennox Wyke and approved by his boss, the third Earl of Malmesbury, Britain’s Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. Why did Wyke see it fit to insert this controversial clause without permission? Why did he decide to sign and ratify the document instead of doing so sub spe rati, which was an acceptable practice in those days? Why was he so excited when Pedro de Aycinena, on behalf of the Guatemalan government, also signed and ratified the document post haste? Why did he decide to leave Guatemala and take the signed document to London personally?
I had a hunch that perhaps Foggy Bottom was involved. I knew the U.S. Department of State had been involved in our affairs since 1823 with the Monroe Doctrine; 1850 with the Clayton/Bulwer Treaty; and since 1937 attempts at mediation which were concluded in 1968; 1969 to 1978 offers of monetary compensation, plus cession of part of our country to settle the dispute in Guatemala’s favour; the meeting in Bermuda, May of 1980, from which the Opposition was also barred; 1981 Heads of Agreement, also in Guatemala’s favour; the 2000-2002 Facilitation Process by the OAS in Washington; in 2005 the OAS Confidence Building, etc. etc., etc. Was the U.S. State Department also involved during the drafting of Article VII? I had to attempt to find out, so please bear with me while I try to condense my findings.
As expressed by Wyke, the hot topic of the day was communication between the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans. The United States acquired California from Mexico in 1848, and by 1850 passengers and millions of dollars in gold had to be shipped around the tip of South America to reach New York and Europe, a journey that would take from 60 to 80 days. (The 48-mile Panama Railway, which took 5 years to build at great loss of lives and money, was not completed until 1855.)
The U.S. dispatched its Charge d’Affaires, Elijah Hise, to Guatemala City in January of 1849. His instructions were to seek agreement with Nicaragua to build a canal (controlled by the U.S.) through their territory. When the British found out about the successful conclusion of the agreement and because of their occupation of the Mosquito Coast, they opposed this canal, and the “Mosquito Armed Forces” attacked and destroyed the fortification on the Pacific coast called the Port of Puntarenas. The U.S. in retaliation attacked and destroyed the Port of San Juan. There was likelihood of a war between the U.S. and Britain. Elijah Hise was pulled out of Guatemala and replaced by Ephraim George Squier as Charge’ d’ Affaires. Squier preferred to pursue the Atlantic/Pacific connection through Honduras, but he also ran into trouble with the British, who seized, by force, the Honduran Tigre Island in the Gulf of Fonseca, the Pacific outlet of the proposed canal.
Negotiations between Britain and the United States over these clashes led to the signing of the Clayton/Bulwer Treaty of 1850. Squier wanted a link as far north as possible; writing on behalf of his government he said:
“In fact, so far as the United States are concerned, the great desideratum is a route as far to the northward as possible and whether it be by water or railway, adequate ports on both seas are indispensable requisites. Without these, there can be neither facility nor security of communication; and every mile to the southward of the latitude of New Orleans where any route may lie, adds two miles to the aggregate distance between the Atlantic States and California, Oregon, the Sandwich Islands, and the great centres of Oriental trade which are now opening to our enterprise”.
Belize, at that time, had the largest trading volume (more than £5,000,000 annually) with Europe, larger than any other port in Central America. According to Wyke, a route through Belize and Guatemala would be the easiest and cheapest route (also shorter). Also according to Wyke, he had great difficulty in dealing with President General Rafael Carrera, who insisted on this road, saying that he was a difficult negotiator. Now you have to understand that President Carrera was a great warrior, but he was not a statesman. In fact, he was an illiterate, not even able to sign his name. He was, however, an amazing little man, extremely popular. Today he would be classified as a “rock star” type of president, admired all over Europe. The Pope in Rome sent him his highest honour. England’s Queen Victoria praised him, sending a gift of a sword embellished with precious stones which, according to Carrera’s critics, was in exchange for the “Guatemalan territory of Belice”. The United States emissary to Central America, John L. Stephens, was lavish in his praise of Carrera. Carrera was the first president of an independent Guatemala. He was also its first black president – like Obama, who is part white and part African. Carrera was part Indian and part African. He is credited with doing for his people in Central America what Marcus Garvey did for his people in North America and the Caribbean. For those whom these historical facts are of great importance they may pursue them further at www.Marcus Garvey – Rafael Carrera – Great People of Color.com.
E.G. Squier continued his relentless search for an East/West passage across Central America, even one as far north as Vera Cruz in Mexico. He also visited Belize, saying how good our location was because we had no hurricanes, nor earthquakes. We had good workers and people here lived to be 100 years old or more because the climate was so good. He was a prolific writer and there are more than 4,000 letters in the U.S. Congress which he wrote in addition to many books on Central America.
In the Peten area of Guatemala, there was a colony or community of British “subjects”, citizens from England who called their town Vera Paz. They were mostly entrepreneurs, and formed a company called “The Eastern Coast of Central America Co.,” specifically to do agriculture and to carry on trade with Europe through Belize. They were also competing with Belize in the export of mahogany. When they petitioned the British Government for the exemption of duties and taxes for passing through Belize because they were a British company, the request was flatly refused, and they were told, in effect, “You are in a foreign country and you will pay all duties and taxes”. The Eastern Coast Company also accused the “Belizeans” of felling mahogany in their territory near the Sarstoon River, causing them great economic loss. So, the company’s secretary, Leonard S. Coxe, wrote to the Secretary of State in London, The Rt. Hon. Lord Glenelge, requesting a clarification of what was Belizean territory. Lord Glenelge responded on 23rd November 1836, as follows:
Sir George Grey to the Secretary, L.S. Coxe, Esq.
Downing Street
23rd November, 1836
Sir,
I am directed by the Secretary of State to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 17th ultimo on behalf of the Eastern Coast of Central America Company, inquiring, “What are the boundaries claimed by His Majesty’s Government for British Honduras (or Belise)?” I am to acquaint you, in answer, that the territory, claimed by the British Crown as belonging to the British settlements in the Bay of Honduras, extends from the River Hondo on the north to the River Sarstoon on the south, and as far west as Garbutt’s Falls on the River Belize, and a line on the same parallel to strike on the River Hondo on the north and the River Sarstoon on the south, and as far west as Garbutt’s Falls on the River Belize, and a line on the same parallel to strike on the River Hondo on the north and the River Sarstoon on the south. The British Crown claims, also, the Waters, Islands, and Keys, lying between the coast, above defined, and the meridian of the easternmost point of Light-house Reef.
I am, at the same time, to warn you, that the greater part of the territory in question has never been the subject of actual survey, and that parties, who should assume the topography of the remoter tracts, and especially the course of the rivers, upon the authority of maps, would, in all probability, be led into error.
I have the honour to be, Sir,
Your obedient servant,
(Signed) George Grey
A British member of Parliament once said that as far as he was aware, there was not a single shot fired in anger as a matter of government policy between the two countries (Britain and Guatemala) during the more than 150 years of this dispute; I am unable to prove him wrong. Of course there were isolated incidents, but considering the history of the countries around us I believe this is a remarkable achievement. Is it because of the might of the British Empire? Or is it because of some ancient or more recent blood ties? Oh, the irony of history! We have the granddaughter (Queen Victoria) of the second black Queen of England (Sophia Charlotte) sending the first black president of Guatemala (whose father could very well have been a runaway Belizean slave) a very precious gift of a jeweled sword which can still be seen today in the National Museum in Guatemala City.
(Sub spe rati is a technical diplomatic term that can be used when an ambassador negotiating a treaty is normally provided with explicit instructions identifying the maximum and minimum terms he should demand and can accept. He is generally authorized to sign the treaty that meets the minimum terms. Because of the delays in communications in those days, however, ambassadors were sometimes forced to accept terms that were not authorized by their instructions. In such a case, they generally did so sub spe rati – in the hope that the government would accept the terms. A sovereign’s repudiation of a treaty condition submitted sub spe rati was considered less serious than repudiation of a treaty that his ambassador signed in accord with his instructions and with no such stipulation.)
Next: Is the ICJ the last resort?
|