Alto Palena–Encuentro River dispute
The Alto Palena-Encuentro River border dispute was a territorial dispute between the Argentine Republic and the Republic of Chile over the demarcation of the boundary between landmarks XVI and XVII of their common border[1][2][3] in the valleys located north of General Vintter/Palena Lake (formerly General Paz Lake),[4][5] and was resolved on November 24, 1966, by the arbitral ruling of Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom.
Article 1 of this treaty states: The boundary between Chile and the Argentine Republic, from north to south, up to the parallel fifty-two degrees of latitude, will be the Andes mountain range.
On August 20, 1888, an agreement was signed to demarcate the boundaries in accordance with the 1881 treaty, with experts Diego Barros Arana from Chile and Octavio Pico Burgess from Argentina being appointed.
In 1892, Barros Arana presented his thesis, arguing that the 1881 Treaty had set the boundary along the continental divortium aquarum, which was rejected by the Argentine expert.
[11] In January 1894, the Chilean expert declared that he understood the main chain of the Andes to be the continuous line of peaks dividing the waters that form the separation of the Atlantic and Pacific watersheds.
As the experts Barros Arana and Francisco Pascasio Moreno (Pico's replacement) could not agree, it was decided in 1898 to invoke Article VI, paragraph 2, of the 1881 Treaty and request an arbitral ruling from Queen Victoria of the United Kingdom, who appointed three British judges.
Ascending this peak, it will then follow the local water divide southwards to the north bank of General Paz (...)In 1903, British demarcation officer Captain Bertram Dickson placed landmarks XVI and XVII at the confluence of the Palena and Encuentro rivers and on the shores of Lake General Paz, respectively, facing some difficulty locating the Encuentro River discovered in 1894 by Hans Steffen,[9][10] due to the lack of knowledge of the area.
On December 9, 1913, the Argentine government officially informed Chile that it considered landmark XVI to be incorrectly placed, as it was impossible for the border to reach Cerro de la Virgen from there following the instructions of the 1902 arbitral award.
The Chilean government rejected the claims regarding landmark XVI in a note dated December 26 and, on June 17, 1914, closed the discussion on the matter, arguing that the 1902 ruling was immutable.
Landmark XVI had been lost, so when an attempt was made to locate it in 1948, the Chilean commissioner informed his government about the difficulties in geographically pinpointing it according to the 1902 arbitral award.
In October of the following year, due to public pressure, Chile resumed its position regarding Cerro de la Virgen, leading the Argentine government to demand the legal validity of the 1955 Commission's decision on January 24, 1957.
[15] Following the Snipe islet incident in the Beagle Channel, the governments of Argentina and Chile sought approaches to resolve border issues.
Although Argentine authorities argued that the fence was located within their territory, President Arturo Illia (1963–1966) decided to remove it as a gesture of goodwill toward his Chilean counterpart.
According to Mario Valenzuela Lafourcade, Illia's willingness to resolve the conflict was influenced by a spirit of cooperation and neighborliness that he shared with Alessandri, which facilitated overcoming the tension caused by this incident.
However, progress was hampered by heightened nationalism (mainly from the Armed Forces of both countries), repeated violations of boundary agreements by ships in the Beagle coastlines, the Laguna del Desierto conflict, the overthrow of Arturo Umberto Illia in 1966, and the pending resolution of the Palena arbitration.
On November 6, 1964, following the inauguration of a new government in Chile, Foreign Ministers Gabriel Valdés Subercaseaux (Chile) and Miguel Ángel Zavala Ortiz (Argentina) issued a Joint Declaration committing to submit the dispute to the British Queen, attempting to resolve the issue "in accordance with the provisions of the 1902 General Arbitration Treaty, while preserving the positions taken by both parties on this matter."
The Chilean press launched a campaign to cancel President Eduardo Frei Montalva's visit to Argentina, which aimed to advance pending border delimitation tasks between the two countries.
During the meeting, the leaders agreed to conclude the activities of the joint commission within five years and signed a commitment to submit the Beagle Channel conflict to international arbitration, although this agreement was not implemented in practice.
