Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T18:12:19.522Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Chaco Dispute

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2017

Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Editorial Comment
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1934

References

1 See this Journal, October, 1932, Vol. 26, page 796.

2 Note of Commission of Neutrals to Argentina, Nov. 4, 1932.

3 See Supplement to this Journal, page 137.

4 This draft is similar in many respects to that proposed by the Washington commission, Dec. 16, 1932.

5 Of Feb. 22, 1933. See Supplement to this Journal, page 189.

6 Compare the arguments made in the note of the United States to Austria-Hungary of August, 1915, this Journal, Spl. Supp., Vol. 9 (1915), p. 166.

7 Article 22, paragraph 2, reads as follows: “Transit shall be permitted when, in the event of a war between two American nations, one of the belligerents is a mediterranean country, having no other means of supplying itself, provided the vital interests of the country through which transit is requested do not suffer by the granting thereof.” (This Journal, Supp., Vol. 22 [1928], p. 156.)

8 Japan declined to take part in the plan.

9 Joint Resolution and Proclamation of May 28, 1934. At that time Bolivia had in the United States partly completed contracts for war material totalling about $3,600,000.

10 Meanwhile, according to the press, Argentina suggested to the United States and Brazil that they attempt mediation. This was apparently undertaken during the summer but came to no result. The documents of this mediation are not yet available.

11 The official reports of meetings of the Council and Assembly in September are not available on going to press.