BELIZE AND GUATEMALA

OAS Secretary General, José Miguel Insulza, meets with the President of Guatemala, Alvaro Colom (left), and with the Foreign Minister of Belize, Wilfred Elrington (right)

In March 2000, the governments of Belize and Guatemala restarted talks on their longstanding territorial differendum, under the auspices of the Secretary General of the Organization of American States. On November 8, 2000, Belize and Guatemala signed the first Agreement on Confidence Building Measures, through which the two parties agreed to respect an “Adjacency Line” between each country and an "Adjacency Zone" extending one kilometer east and west from this line. On February 7, 2003, the Foreign Ministers of Belize and Guatemala signed a second Agreement to Establish a Transition Process and Confidence-Building Measures, which was later amended in September 2005 through "Agreement on a Framework for Negotiations and Confidence-Building Measures between Belize and Guatemala”. Central to the second agreement was the establishment of the OAS Office in the Adjacency Zone for the purpose of fostering community-to-community contacts across the Adjacency Line and verifying any transgression of the established confidence-building measures and any incidents which may occur in that Zone. The Agreement also called for the establishment of a Group of Friends of the Belize-Guatemala Transition Process (the “Group of Friends”), consisting of OAS Member and Observer States, and others interested in supporting a peaceful resolution to the territorial differendum. The Group of Friends acts as an advisory body to the Secretary General and provides political and operational support for undertaking the various activities contemplated under the agreement on confidence-building measures in force.

Following signature of the 2005 Agreement, two ministerial meetings took place. At the second such meeting, in February 2006, the Secretary General proposed that the negotiation process concerning the territorial differendum begin with the maritime zone. For this aspect of the differendum, the Government of Honduras was invited to participate. A Negotiating Group was formed, which met on several occasions at both the ministerial and technical level, coordinated and facilitated by the Secretary General’s Special Representative. Unfortunately, after almost two years of negotiations, in which a certain degree of rapprochement was achieved, the Parties failed to reach an agreement. The Secretary General therefore recommended that the most appropriate venue for resolving the differendum would be the International Court of Justice. Both countries assented and on December 8, 2008, the Foreign Ministers of Belize and Guatemala signed, at OAS headquarters, the “Special Agreement between Guatemala and Belize to submit the territorial, insular and maritime claim of Guatemala to the International Court of Justice.”

On April 27, 2012, the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Belize and Guatemala met with the OAS Secretary General in Washington, D.C., and agreed that the simultaneous referenda to submit Guatemala’s claim to the International Court of Justice would be held on Sunday, October 6, 2013. On that occasion, both governments requested the support of the General Secretariat for the education and sensitization campaigns that will be launched to inform the people of both Belize and Guatemala about the up coming differendum process as well as the advantages of submitting the dispute to the ICJ and the disadvantage if it is not submitted.

The final decision to take the case to the ICJ must be confirmed through national referenda in both countries. Following a failed attempt at holding the referenda in 2013, the countries agreed to create the appropriate conditions so that a new date for holding the referenda could be fixed. To this end, on January 24th, 2014, the Foreign Ministers of Belize and Guatemala, together with the Secretary General of the OAS, signed the Roadmap Agreement for Strengthening Bilateral Relations and established the Belize- Guatemala Joint Commission to explore and develop projects and programs between the two countries, with the goal of strengthening the ties of friendship and cooperation between them. The objective of the Road Map was to disengage the issue of the differendum from the urgent need to consolidate the bilateral relationship for the sake of regional cooperation and integration. Under this framework, sixteen bilateral agreements (thirteen formal and three informal) were negotiated and dozens of bilateral meetings among different sectors of society took place. This was a historic step that was accomplished within less than 12 months, which culminated in December 2014. For the first time in history, Belize and Guatemala sat down to normalize their good neighborly relations by formalizing how they will work together in the future on a vast number of issues of common interest and concern. The success of these efforts was key to continue to move the process forward. As a result, on May 25, 2015 the Foreign Ministers of Belize and Guatemala signed the Protocol to the Special Agreement with the OAS Secretary General as witness. This Protocol enables Belize and Guatemala to hold the referenda either simultaneously or separately on the date that is more convenient to each of the Parties.

Thanks to the support of the OAS through the Peace Fund, Belize and Guatemala are closer than ever to finding a permanent solution to their centuries-old conflict.

• Heads of Agreement – Trilateral agreement between Belize, Guatemala and the UK (1981) Español
• Aycinena-Wyke Treaty (1859) Español
• Dallas-Clarendon Treaty (1856) English
• Clayton-Bulwer Treaty (1850) Español
• Treaty of Amiens (1801) Español
• London Convention (1786) Español
• Paris Peace Treaty (1783) English
• Treaty of Paris (1763) English

• Special Agreement to Submit Guatemala’s Territorial, Insular, and Maritime Claim to the International Court of Justice (December 2008) English | Español
• Agreement on a Framework for Negotiations and Confidence-Building Measures (September 2005) English | Español
• Agreement to Establish a Transition Process and Confidence Building Measures Between Belize and Guatemala (February 2003) English | Español
• Plan of Action to Implement the November 8, 2000 Agreement on Confidence-Building Measures (January 2001) English | Español
• Agreement on Confidence Building Measures between Belize and Guatemala (November 8, 2000) English | Español

• Letter from Guatemala to the OAS Secretary General (August 25th, 2003) Español
• Belize refutes Guatemala's claim (May 2001) English
• Guatemala’s response to Belize’s note of April 30th 2001 (May 15th 2001) Español
• Belize’s response to Guatemala’s statement of March 30th 2001 (April 30th 2001) Español
• Guatemala’s Territorial, Insular and Maritime Claim (March 30th 2001) Español
• Note from Guatemala to the Government of Belize and Belize’s response (October 18th 1999) Español

• Proposals from the Facilitators (2002) English | Español
• Recommendations of the Panel of Facilitators regarding an incident in the Adjacency Zone (2001) Español
• Letter and recommendations of the Panel of Facilitators on the issue of settlements (2001) Español
• Proposal to the United Kingdom and Guatemala by mediator Webster (1965) Español

• AG/RES. 1787 (XXXI.O.01) Español
• AG/RES.1756 (XXX-O.00) Español
• AG/RES. 1077 (XV.E.91) Español
• AG/RES.501 (X-O.80) Español
• AG/RES.455 (IX-O.79) Español
• AG/RES.429 (IX-O.79) Español
• AG/RES.373 (VIII.O.78) Español
• AG/RES. 79 (II-O.72) Español

• CP.RES.836 (1353.03) (SPA) Español
• CP-RES. 780 (1257-00) Español
• CP.RES.565 (867.91) (SPA) Español

• 35/20 November 11th 1980 English
• 34/38 November 30th 1979 Español

• Report on the Situation of the Belize and Guatemala Territorial Dispute (January-October, 2011) English
• Report on the Fund for Peace, pursuant to Resolution CP/RES. 781 (January 1st, 2009, to February 28, 2011) English
• Report on the closing of the program Promoting a Culture of Peace (October 16th, 2009) English
• Second Report on the program Promoting a Culture of Peace (August, 2009) English
• First Report on the program Promoting a Culture of Peace (May 12th, 2009) English
• Activity Report of the Office of the OAS General Secretariat in the Belize-Guatemala Adjacency Zone (2008) English
• Report on the Project for Resettlement of the Santa Rosa Community (2008) English
• Graphic Report on the Resettlement Project – The New Santa Rosa Community, Poptun ( April 21st 2008) English
• Report on the Implementation of Confidence-Building Measures between Belize and Guatemala (2008) English
• Evaluation on the Implementation of Confidence-Building Measures between Guatemala and Belize (2008) English

• 16 Declarations (December 17, 2014) English | Español
• Meeting of the Joint Commission (November 16, 2014)
• Joint commission adopts key agreements (October 10, 2014) English | Español
• Joint press release of the governments of Belize and Guatemala (March 30, 2014) English | Español
• Roadmap for the strengthening of bilateral relations (January 24, 2014) English
• Joint Communique (January 9, 2014) English | Español
• Resultados del Ejercicio Precensal (09 of May, 2002) only available in Spanish Español
• Diagnostico de Poblacion 19 of Feb, 2001) only available in Spanish Español
• IPG – 06 of February 2001 English
• Report, the Pan American Institute of Geography and History (06 of February 2001) English

• Report on the Resettlement Project - The New Santa Rosa Community, Poptun. Apri 21, 2008 English
• Bulletin of Activities 2008: Office of the General Secretariat of the Organization of American States (OAS) in the Adjacency Zone, Belize-Guatemala English

• Speech by Molina and Barrow on 16 declarations (December 17, 2014) Español
• Speech by Elrington on Order of Distinction of Belize (December 17, 2014) English
• Speech of Jose Miguel Insulza, Secretary General of the OAS at the Permanent Council of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. Vienna, Austria (October 28th, 2010) English
• Address to the Permanent Council Inter-American Democratic Charter, Washington, DC (May 6, 2010) English
• Speech by the Secretary General of the OAS, Mr. José Miguel Insulza at the Inaugural Ceremony of the Thirty-Ninth Regular Session of the General Assembly. San Pedro Sula, Honduras (June 2, 2009) English
• OAS Secretary General, José Miguel Insulza, at the Signing of the Special Agreement (December 8th, 2008) English
• Speech of the Secretary General of the OAS, José Miguel Insulza at the Opening Session of the Thirty-Eighth Regular Session of the General Assembly, Medellín, Colombia (June 1, 2008) English
• César Gaviria Trujillo, OAS Secretary General at the Closing Ceremony of the Facilitation Process between Belize and Guatemala (September 30th 2002) Español
• Roberto Tovar Faja, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Costa Rica, representing the pro tempore presidency of the Central American Integration System (SICA) at the Closing Ceremony of the Facilitation Process between Belize and Guatemala (September 30th 2002) Español
• Jorge Castañeda, Secretary of Foreign Affairs of Mexico at the Closing Ceremony of the Facilitation Process between Belize and Guatemala (September 30th 2002) Español
• Guillermo Pérez Cadalzo Arias, Secretary of State of Honduras at the Closing Ceremony of the Facilitation Process between Belize and Guatemala (September 30th 2002) Español
• Gabriel Orellana Rojas, Foreign Minister of Guatemala at the Closing Ceremony of the Facilitation Process between Belize and Guatemala (September 30th 2002) Español
• Ulrik Federspiel, Permanent Observer to the OAS on behalf of the European Union at the Closing Ceremony of the Facilitation Process between Belize and Guatemala (September 30th 2002) English
• Enrique Iglesias, President of the Inter-American Development Bank at the Closing Ceremony of the Facilitation Process between Belize and Guatemala (September 30th 2002) Español
• Ambassador Eduardo Gutierrez, Permanent Observer of Spain to the OAS at the Closing Ceremony of the Facilitation Process between Belize and Guatemala (September 30th 2002) Español
• Ambassador Humberto de la Calle, Colombia, representing the pro tempore presidency of the Andean Community of Nations at the Closing Ceremony of the Facilitation Process between Belize and Guatemala (September 30th 2002) Español
• Denis MacShane, Parlamentary Under-Secretary of State of the United Kingdom at the Closing Ceremony of the Facilitation Process between Belize and Guatemala (September 30th 2002) English
• Colin L. Powell, US Secretary of State at the Closing Ceremony of the Facilitation Process between Belize and Guatemala (September 30th 2002) English
• María Eugenia Brizuela de Avila, Foreign Minister of El Salvador at the Closing Ceremony of the Facilitation Process between Belize and Guatemala (September 30th 2002) Español
• Assad Shoman, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation of Belize at the Closing Ceremony of the Facilitation Process between Belize and Guatemala (September 30th 2002) English
• Ambassador Paul Durand, Permanent Representative of Canada to the OAS at the Closing Ceremony of the Facilitation Process between Belize and Guatemala (September 30th 2002) English
• Ambassador Odeen Ishmael of Guyana, representing the presidency pro tempore of CARICOM at the Closing Ceremony of the Facilitation Process between Belize and Guatemala (September 30th 2002) English

• Secretario General de la OEA visitará Belice tras viajar a Guatemala (22 de octubre, 2012) Español
• Encabeza Insulza reuniones por diferendo territorial Guatemala-Belice (22 de Octubre) Español
• Secretario General de la OEA dialogará con primer ministro beliceño (October 23, 2012) Español
• Insulza y cancilleres de Guatemala y Belice inician reunión sobre referendo (22 de octubre) Español
• Cancilleres de Belice y Guatemala analizarán con Insulza referendo Español
• Foreign Ministers of Belize and Guatemala Meet to Refine Details of Referendum (Oct 22, 2012) English
• Foreign Minister & Insulza In Guatemala (October 22, 2012) English
• Guatemala y Belice piden apoyo para referendo de 2013 (23 de octubre, 2012) Español
• Guatemala y Belice piden apoyo a la comunidad internacional para referendo (23 de octubre) Español
• Países promoverán consulta popular para diferendo (23 de octubre) Español
• Guatemala y Belice piden apoyo externo para superar conflicto territorial (23 de octubre) Español
• Exponen ventajas de solucionar diferendo Guatemala-Belice Español
• OAS Secretary General Insulza In Belize (October 23, 2012) English
• Belize Prime Minister Dean Barrow Holds Talks With OAS’ Jose Miguel Insulza (October 23, 2012) English
• Belize’s awareness campaign for ICJ referendum will be in 2013 (Oct 23, 2012) English
• OAS Secretary General Speaks With Belize's Foreign Minister (October 24, 2012) English
• Guatemala y Belice acuerdan referéndum (10/24/2012) Español
• Is Diplomacy Turning the BDF Into Toy Soldiers? (October 25, 2012) English
• What About Boco? (October 25, 2012) English
  “Government has said it is putting ten thousand US dollars to the OAS Peace Fund for disbursement to his family. Foreign Minister Elrington told us that the consequence of not giving a grant to Boco-T's family is far less grave than not giving the Guatemalan family.”
• The Opposition On Important Issues (October 30, 2012) English
• Cancilleres de Guatemala y Belice inician reunión sobre referendo con Insulza (+VIDEO) (31 de octubre) Español
• Guatemala y Belice piden apoyo a comunidad internacional para referendo sobre litigio territorial Español
• Statement by the Office of the General Secretariat of the OAS in the Belize-Guatemala Adjacency Zone (July 27, 2012) English | Español
• Consulta popular por diferendo de Belice será en octubre de 2013. Guatemala, (April 28, 2012) Only Available in SpanishEspañol
• Ministros de Relaciones Exteriores de Guatemala y Belice acuerdan fecha para consultas populares (April 27, 2012)English
• October 6, 2013 is Referendum Day in Belize and Guatemala (April 27, 2012)English
• Habrá Consulta. Busca solucionar diferendo con Belice (April 27, 2012) Español
• Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Belize and Guatemala Agree on Date for Simultaneous Referenda (April 27, 2012) English
• Belize and Guatemala Foreign Ministers Meet with OAS Secretary General (November 28, 2011) English | Español
• Peaceful Settlement of Territorial Disputes (June 2011) English
• First Meeting of the High Level Working Group (March 9th 2010) English
• New measures bringing closer Belize And Guatemala taken at the OAS (December 17th 2009) English
• Culture of Peace Program (June 8th 2009) Español
• Belize and Guatemala highlight the OAS Role in the Adjacency Zone and urge collaboration from donor countries (February 25th 2009) Español
• Removal of Facilities in the Adjacency Zone (February 19th 2009) Español
• Guatemala and Belize sign historic agreement on territorial differendum (December 8th 2008) English
• Belize and Guatemala agree to OAS Secretary General’s proposal to begin negotiation process with maritime issues (February 10th 2006) English
• Belize and Guatemala sign agreement on negotiation framework and confidence-building measures (September 7th 2005) English
• Belize-Guatemala discussions continue (May 10th 2004) English
• Foreign Ministers of Belize and Guatemala (May 3rd 2004) English | Español
• Belize-Guatemala territorial differendum (August 29th 2003) English | Español
• OAS Permanent Council renews support for peaceful settlement of Belize-Guatemala dispute (February 12th 2003) English | Español
• Belize and Guatemala sign agreement at OAS (February 7th 2003) English | Español
• Belize-Guatemala process (November 5th 2002) English | Español
• Death of Guatemalan citizen not related to territorial differendum (October 11th 2002) English | Español
• Proposals for resolving Belize-Guatemala territorial dispute win broad international support (October 1st 2002) English | Español
• Belize-Guatemala facilitation process (September 30th 2002) English | Español
• Belize-Guatemala territorial differendum: Secretary General presents completed proposals (September 17th 2002) English | Español
• Belize-Guatemala facilitation process (August 30th 2002) English
• Belize and Guatemala delegations meet (February 7th 2001) Español
• Joint communiqué of Belize and Guatemala (August 31st 2000) Español
• Panel of Facilitators installed (August 31st 2000) Español
• Panel of Facilitators for Belize-Guatemala dispute to be installed at OAS (August 30th 2000) English | Español
• Belize and Guatemala to sign agreement (July 20th 2000) English

• Promoting a Culture of Peace in the Adjacency Zone - The Reporter of Belize (October 25th 2009) English
• Belize and Guatemala security forces discuss border crime - LoveFM (December 5th 2008) English
• Belize and Guatemala to sign compromis in Washington next Monday – Amandala (December 3rd 2008) English

HONDURAS AND NICARAGUA

In December 1999, at the request of the governments of Honduras and Nicaragua, the OAS Permanent Council convened a special session to address tensions that had arisen due to a maritime boundary dispute. The Permanent Council called on the Secretary General to name a special representative to “evaluate the situation, facilitate dialogue, and formulate recommendations aimed at easing tension and preventing acts that could affect peace in the hemisphere” (see the Resolution).

In the ensuing months, the Secretary General´s Special Representative held four rounds of talks with Honduran Foreign Minister Roberto Flores Bermúdez and his Nicaraguan counterpart, Eduardo Montealegre Rivas. Working with the OAS envoy, Honduras and Nicaragua signed a series of agreements to ensure peaceful relations while the substance of their boundary dispute was sent to the International Court of Justice in The Hague. In March 2000, the two Foreign Ministers signed a memorandum of understanding detailing specific measures that covered such matters as maintaining communications between the two countries’ armed forces, restricting military activities along the border and conducting combined patrols in the Caribbean Sea.

Roberto Flores Bermudez and Eduardo Montealegre, Foreign Ministers of Honduras and Nicaragua after signing a confidence-building agreement brokered by the OAS Assistant Secretary General in 2001.

On the basis of the Technical Verification Agreement, the General Secretariat, working with the parties, devised a concrete plan to verify two of the points contained in the letter from the vice ministers. These two points centered around verifying the location and composition of the military and police posts along the land frontier, and in the Caribbean Sea (the number and composition of the military and police posts along the land border and in the Caribbean Sea had been frozen at their September 1, 1999 levels by the San Salvador and Washington Agreements of 1999, and 2000, respectively).

An Agreement for an OAS International Verification Mission was signed by the parties and the General Secretariat on June 7, 2001, which provided the OAS Mission with two objectives: the first was to “verify the number and location of military and police posts along the land border, and the number of personnel assigned to each post”, and the second was to “verify that the military and police posts in the Caribbean Sea were being kept at the same level as on September 1, 1999.”

OAS Verification Mission of all military and police posts along the Honduras-Nicaragua border 2001

At a ceremony at OAS Headquarters on December 19, 2001, the Secretary General and Assistant Secretary General presented the Report of the OAS Mission to Foreign Ministers Roberto Flores Bermúdez and Francisco Aguirre Sacasa, of Honduras and Nicaragua, respectively. The report stated that at all of the posts visited along the land border, the personnel, armaments, and communications equipment, were in keeping with the functions and responsibilities of surveillance and patrol which are part of the work of all police or military border posts. The report further concluded that the military and police posts on both sides of the border did not represent a threat to peace or an indication of increased military presence in the border area.

In addition to receiving the report from the General Secretariat, the two Foreign Ministers also signed an Agreement for a Bi-national Border Development Plan, and an Agreement on Police Cooperation and Military Movement Notification. These two agreements, along with the results of the Verification Mission, were key elements in the Organization’s efforts to improve relations between Honduras and Nicaragua.

On October 8, 2007, the International Court of Justice made a ruling in this case, which was accepted by both countries, putting an end to this long-time dispute.

OAS Verification Mission Honduras-Nicaragua border 2001

• CÉSAR GAVIRIA TRUJILLO, SECRETARIO GENERAL DE LA ORGANIZACION DE LOS ESTADOS AMERICANOS DURANTE LA PRESENTACION DEL INFORME FINAL DE LA OEA EN LA CONTROVERSIA FRONTERIZA ENTRE HONDURAS Y NICARAGUA Spanish

• Technical Report of the OAS International Verification Mission to Honduras and Nicaragua, (Report presented to the Permanent Council on January 16, 2002) English
• Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary General in Compliance with Resolution CP/RES.757 (1216/99) "SUPPORT FOR THE GOVERNMENTS OF HONDURAS AND NICARAGUA", (Report presented January 19, 2000) English

• Honduras-Nicaragua Border Cooperation and Development Agreement, December 19, 2001 (Spanish only). Spanish
• Honduras-Nicaragua Police Cooperation and Military Movement Notification Agreement, December 19, 2001 (Spanish only). Spanish
• Technical Agreement on Verification, March 16, 2001 Spanish
• Letter from the Vice-Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Honduras and Nicaragua to the Secretary General of the OAS, March 16, 2001 Spanish

• Memorandum of Understanding of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Honduras and Nicaragua and of the OAS Special Representative, March 7, 2000 Spanish
• Communiqué of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Honduras and Nicaragua and of the OAS Special Representative, February 7, 2000 English
• Communiqué of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Honduras and Nicaragua and of the OAS Special Representative, December 30, 1999 English

• Presidential Declaration of Pochomil, March 30, 2001 Spanish

• OAS Permanent Council Resolution CP/RES.757 (1216/99), "Support for the Governments of Honduras and Nicaragua", December 7, 1999. English
• Minutes of the Special Session of the Permanent Council, held December 7, 1999 Spanish
• Minutes of the Special Session of the Permanent Council, held December 6, 1999 Spanish

• Gaviria destaca "trascendencia" del acuerdo entre Honduras y Nicaragua, 8 de marzo de 2000 Spanish
• Honduras y Nicaragua Firman Acuerdo, 7 de marzo de 2000 Spanish
• Cancilleres de Honduras y Nicaragua se Reunirán en la OEA, 3 de marzo de 2000 Spanish
• COMUNICADO DE PRENSA DEL SECRETARIO GENERAL DE LA ORGANIZACION DE LOS ESTADOS AMERICANOS, CESAR GAVIRIA, 29 de febrero de 2000 Spanish
• Honduras y Nicaragua Establecen Régimen de Exclusión Militar, 7 de febrero de 2000 Spanish
• REPRESENTANTE ESPECIAL DE LA OEA INFORMA SOBRE AVANCES EN LAS CONVERSACIONES ENTRE HONDURAS Y NICARAGUA, 19 de enero de 2000 Spanish
• Representante Especial de la OEA Sostiene Segunda Ronda de Conversaciones con Honduras y Nicaragua, 12 de enero de 2000 Spanish
• Representante Especial de la OEA se reúne con Cancilleres de Honduras y Nicaragua, 30 de diciembre de 1999 Spanish
• CANCILLERES DE HONDURAS Y NICARAGUA SE REUNIARAN CON EL REPRESENTANTE ESPECIAL DE LA OEA, 20 de diciembre de 1999 Spanish
• LUIGI EINAUDI SOSTIENE REUNIONES CON REPRESENTANTES DE HONDURAS Y NICARAGUA, 10 de diciembre de 1999 Spanish
• OEA Designa Representante Especial para Honduras y Nicaragua, 9 de diciembre de 1999 Spanish

HONDURAS AND EL SALVADOR

In September 2002, the President of El Salvador, Francisco Flores, and the President of Honduras, Ricardo Maduro, undertook to complete the demarcation of the border between their two countries within 18 months. All pending areas of the border had been established by a 1992 ruling of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), but certain technical difficulties encountered when applying the ruling prevented the full execution of the demarcation process. As a result of these difficulties, and of the decision to expedite the demarcation of the border, the two governments requested technical assistance from the General Secretariat of the OAS and from the Pan American Institute of Geography and History (PAIGH). The General Peace Treaty signed in 1980 by the two countries contained provisions assigning specific responsibilities to the PAIGH for naming a third-party expert charged with settling technical differences between the Parties with respect to the demarcation of the border.

Between July 2003 and August 2004, the OAS and the Institute carried out a series of on-site observations, based on the text of the 1992 Court judgment, on documents provided by the Special Honduras-El Salvador Demarcation Commission, on satellite imagery, and on other technical tools, and a definitive solution respected by both countries was reached and the full demarcation of the border completed.

• Note from the Permanent Mission of El Salvador forwarding a copy of the speech addressed to the nation by the President of the Republic on september 10, 2002 English

• OEA analiza aspectos técnicos. May 6, 2003 Spanish
• OAS appoints technical expert to assist in demarcation of El Salvador-Honduras border, April 30, 2003 Spanish

COLOMBIA AND ECUADOR

MIB - OAS Good Offices Mission in Ecuador and Colombia

The incursion of Colombian military forces into Ecuadorian territory on March 1, 2008, led to the immediate activation of the Inter-American system. A special meeting of the OAS Permanent Council was convened, followed by the 25th Meeting of Consultation of Ministers of Foreign Affairs.

With the aim of seeking the reestablishment of diplomatic relations between Colombia and Ecuador, the 25th Meeting of Consultation of Ministers of Foreign Affairs resolved "to instruct the Secretary General to use his good offices to implement a mechanism for observing compliance with this resolution and the restoration of an atmosphere of trust between the two Parties" [RC.25/Res. 1/08 Rev. 1, resolutive paragraph 7]. These guidelines set by the member states serve as parameters for the duties and actions carried out by the OAS Good Offices Mission in Ecuador and Colombia (MIB/OEA, by its acronym in Spanish).

The specific objectives of the mission's mandate are as follows:
To use its good offices to restore an atmosphere of trust between the two parties and to implement a mechanism to observe the fulfillment of the commitments made under Resolution RC.25/Res. 1/08 Rev 1.
To propose, promote, and coordinate with the states involved the establishment of specific confidence-building measures.
To verify the fulfillment of the commitments made by the states involved, both in the framework of Resolution RC.25/Res. 1/08 Rev 1 and those arising from the confidence-building measures that the parties undertake to implement.

• RESOLUTION OF THE TWENTY-FIFTH MEETING OF CONSULTATION OF MINISTERS OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS English
• Report of the OAS Commission that visited Ecuador and Colombia English

Binational Meeting of Water Experts
June 8-9th 2010
Esmeraldas River Basin

As part of the confidence-builiding measures, the OAS Peace Fund facilitated the first technical binational meeting of water experts from Colombia and Ecuador, who gathered in Quito, Ecuador on June 8 and 9, 2010 to identify project development opportunities and priorities in the area of integrated water resources management in the Esmeraldas River Basin. This was a collaborative effort between the Peace Fund, the Department of Sustainable Development and the Colombia-Ecuador Good Offices Mission (MIB-OAS).

COSTA RICA AND NICARAGUA

Following a border issue between Costa Rica and Nicaragua over Calero Island in the San Juan River, the Permanent Council of the Organization of American States met in an emergency session on November 3, 2010 at the request of the Government of Costa Rica. Both countries expressed their desire to resolve the dispute swiftly and pacifically and invited the Secretary General to lead a Mission to the disputed area and report back to the Permanent Council on November 9, 2010 with its findings.

During his trip from November 5-8, 2010, OAS Secretary General, José Miguel Insulza met with the President of Costa Rica, Laura Chinchilla, and Nicaragua, Daniel Ortega, as well as with their respective Foreign Ministers, René Castro and Samuel Santos, and other authorities. Secretary Insulza also flew over both sides of the area involved.

On November 9, Secretary Insulza presented before the Permanent Council of the Organization his report on the visit conducted, which includes four recommendations on possible points of agreement between the two parties: to hold a meeting of the Binational Committee foreseen for November 27; to immediately renew conversations on the demarcation of the border; to avoid the presence of the armed or security forces in the area; and to instruct the pertinent authorities to review the mechanisms of bilateral cooperation to combat drug trafficking, organized crime and arms trafficking in the border area.

On November 12, a Special Meeting of the Permanent Council was convened to discuss the adoption of a Resolution based on the four recommendations made by the Secretary General to the Permanent Council. Following an extended debate, CP/RES. 978 (1777/10) was put to vote, and passed with 21 votes for the Resolution, 1 against and 3 abstentions.

On November 18, the Permanent Council met again to discuss a Resolution which would refer the border issue to a Meeting of Consultation of Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the Organization of American States. Costa Rica was exercising its right as stipulated in the Charter of the Organization of American States (1948), Chapter X, Articles 61-65. Following debate in the Permanent Council, a vote was taken in which 22 countries voted in favor of Costa Rica’s Resolution, 1 against whilst 7 abstained.

On December 7, 2010, at the Meeting of Consultation of Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the Organization of American States (OAS), the delegations of the Member States approved Resolution RC.26/RES. 1/10 on the situation between Costa Rica and Nicaragua with 24 votes in favor, two votes against and five abstentions, whereby they called upon the parties to implement, simultaneously and without delay, the recommendations adopted through resolution CP/RES. 978 (1777/10), “Situation in the Border Area between Costa Rica and Nicaragua,” of November 12, 2010.

• NOTE FROM THE PERMANENT MISSION OF COSTA RICA REQUESTING THE CONVOCATION OF A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE PERMANENT COUNCIL FOR WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2010 English
• APPOINTMENT OF A FACT-FINDING COMMISSION FOR THE SITUATION ON THE BORDER BETWEEN COSTA RICA AND NICARAGUA English
• NOTA DE LA MISION PERMANENTE DE COSTA RICA Spanish

• RESOLUTION ON THE SITUATION BETWEEN COSTA RICA AND NICARAGUA (Approved at the meeting held on December 7, 2010) English
• PROCEDURE OF THE TWENTY-SIXTH MEETING OF CONSULTATION OF MINISTERS OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Adopted at the first plenary session, held on December 7, 2010) English
• Participants List (Provisional Version) English
• ORDER OF BUSINESS English

PANAMA-UNITED STATES SITUATION (1964)

On January 10, 1964, the representatives of Panama and the United States simultaneously requested the services of the IAPC to address the “flag riots” controversy that had arisen between the two countries when US high school students in the Canal Zone refused to allow the flying of the Panamanian flag, which had been agreed to by the two governments. The clashes led to fatalities, sniping and the destruction of property. Panama accused the United States of an unprovoked attack on its sovereignty and severed its diplomatic ties with the United States. Panama called a meeting of the Organ of Consultation under the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance (Rio Treaty) and requested a meeting of the UN Security Council. The IAPC left for Panama and stayed there until January 15. Panama held off its request for invoking the Rio Treaty to give the IAPC a chance to find a solution. The UN Security Council also deferred action and negotiated the appointment of a Mixed Committee on Cooperation, composed of one member of the IAPC as chair and one civilian and one military representative of each of the parties. The mixed Committee negotiated a solution to the problems of the simultaneous raining of the flags of Panama and the United States in the Canal Zone and of the free transit of people and vehicles. There was disagreement regarding the canal. Panama wanted negotiations while the United States wanted discussions but would not commit to negotiation. These discussions were held until January 29 with no positive results and on that date the Representative of Panama informed the Committee that he would bring the matter to the OAS Security Council and invoke the Rio Treaty. As a result, the IAPC considered its action terminated and on January 30 issued a press release to that effect.

CUBA-PERU SITUATION (1961-1962)

On October 16, 1961, at a special meeting of the OAS Council, Peru made charges against the Cuba and requested that the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance be invoked. Peru accused Cuba of committing executions, imprisonment, deportations and other grave violations against its own citizens and foreigners. It also charged that Cuba was serving as an agent of international communism in other American states and that it was using it diplomatic officers and official missions to provoke subversion and revolution against legitimately constituted governments and institutions. The Council decided that the IAPC should deal with the matter. The IAPC invited Cuba to present its case but Cuba refused. The IAPC asked Cuba if it would allow the Committee to visit Cuba and investigate the charges; Cuba declined. Further charges were brought against Cuba. Columbia requested convocation of a Meeting of Consultation, with strong support from the United States. The Eighth Meeting of Consultation of Foreign Affairs met at Punta del Este, Uruguay in January 1962, where the IAPC presented its report to the foreign ministers.

GUATEMALA-MEXICO SITUATION (1961)

On July 21, 1961, the Representative to the OAS Council addressed a note to the Chairman of the IAPC, in which he transcribed a note received from the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Mexico, in which he made reference to a message which the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Guatemala had addressed to the Secretary General of the OAS, informing him that Communist troops located in Mexican territory adjacent to the Guatemalan border, were being trained for an invasion into Guatemalan territory. The Government of Guatemala was worried about impending disorders that might occur and cause it to invoke the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance. The Mexican Foreign Minister requested the services of the IAPC to act immediately and visit the Mexican territory to investigate. The Committee met to hear Mexico’s request and decided to take action on the matter pursuant to Resolution IV. The Committee informed the Representative of Guatemala of this decision and requested any information necessary to carry out the investigation. The Guatemalan representative replied that his government’s position with regards to this said matter had been clearly established in the special meeting of the Council and therefore, there was no need to report any specifics. In the Eighth Meeting of Consultation, the Committee stated that given the positions of the Government of Guatemala and the declarations of the Representative of Mexico, there was no need for the Committee to visit the Mexican territory and make the investigation.

HONDURAS-NICARAGUA SITUATION (1961-1962)

The conflict stemmed from continuing boundary dispute between Honduras and Nicaragua that had its origins in an award of a remote area by the King of Spain on December 23, 1906, which corresponded to Honduras’s claim. Nicaragua refused to accept the decision. When Honduras concluded that oil was found in the area, Nicaragua sent troops to the area, which clashed with the Honduran units. Each accused the other of violating its territory. In 1957, at the request of both states, the Council of the Organization of American States constituted itself to act provisionally as the Organ of Consultation under the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance (Rio Treaty) and appointed an investigating committee which immediately went to the area. After negotiating a ceasefire, the committee put into effect a troop withdrawal plan.

The Council recommended that the two governments maintain the troop withdrawal plan until the legal dispute could be resolved. In addition, the Council would form an ad hoc committee to help broker an agreement on the judicial procedures to be taken. If the parties chose not to have recourse to the American Treaty on Pacific Settlement or the Inter-American Peace Treaty, then they would have to go before the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The parties chose to bring their case before the ICJ and agreed that the Court’s decision would be final and binding without right of appeal. The disputants signed the agreement on July 21, 1957. The parties brought their case before the ICJ which determined that the King’s award was binding and that Nicaragua was under obligation to comply with it. On February 16, 1961, Nicaragua requested the services of the Inter-American Peace Committee to provide third party good offices to help resolve any questions about executing the ICJ’s ruling. Honduras agreed to IAPC involvement.

In early March, the Committee presented a plan which both parties accepted. It provided that Nicaragua immediately withdraw from the territory and for the creation of a Honduras-Nicaragua Mixed Commission to deal with Nicaraguan settlers in the area and to demarcate the border in question. In March 1961, the IAPC visited both countries, met with the Presidents and installed the mixed commission. In January 1962, the IAPC reported to the Eighth Meeting of Consultation of Foreign Affairs. The report confirmed that the transfer of all people who wished to go to Nicaragua had been completed and the commission had fixed the territorial boundaries and declared the dispute settled.

DOMINICAN REPUBLIC-ECUADOR SITUATION (1960)

On February 24, 1960, Ecuador requested the urgent action of the IAPC to help resolve the situation which had arisen between Ecuador and the Dominican Republic. Ecuador charged that the Dominican Republic had refused to grant the Ecuadorian Embassy in Ciudad Trujillo the facilities it required and of “carrying out repudiable acts to impede the performance of those duties”. Ecuador had granted political asylum to a number of Dominican citizens. On March 8, after two weeks of talks with the IAPC, the Dominican Republic agreed to accept the Committees’ services regarding the embassy but not the asylees, citing the fact that it had previously renounced the conventions on political asylum. The IAPC countered that the two issues could not be separated. The Dominican Republic called for direct negotiation between the two sides, rather than third party mediation. Ecuador disagreed since direct negotiations with the Dominican Republic had failed thus far and instead urged the IAPC to act to settle the dispute. On March 30, the IAPC presented the two parties with a plan under which the asylees could leave the Ecuadorean embassy and exit the Dominican Republic and talks would begin to resolve the embassy’s situation. The Dominican Republic rejected the plan and the IAPC took no further action.

CARIBBEAN SITUATION (1959-1960)

The Fifth Meeting of Consultation was convoked under the Charter of the Organization of American States to seek solutions to the increasing tensions and extensive revolutionary activities in the Caribbean region. In June 1959, the Dominican Republic charged that invading forces destined for the Dominican Republic had been organized on Cuban territory with the help of Venezuela. Haiti and Ecuador proposed a Meeting of Consultation to address the matter. Brazil, Chile, Peru and the United States were worried about the series of conflicts of which the Dominican claim was a part and proposed a meeting to address the deteriorating situation in the Caribbean region. The Fifth Meeting of Consultation worked to find a balance between the inter-American commitment to non-intervention and the promotion of democratic progress and social change. The Fifth Meeting adopted Resolution IV which conferred new powers and functions on the Inter-American Peace Committee. The IAPC was directed to study three questions: a. Methods to prevent external activities to overthrow established governments without compromising the rights and liberties of political exiles. b. The relationship between the human rights violations or non-exercise of representative democracy and the political tensions that affect the peace of the hemisphere, and c. The relationship between economic under-development and political instability. Resolution IV authorized the IAPC to act at the request of governments or on its own initiative.

DOMINICAN REPUBLIC-VENEZUELA SITUATION (1959-1960)

On November 25, 1959, the Venezuelan representative to the OAS requested the services of the IAPC to investigate an event that occurred on the night of November 19, 1959. A United States registered aircraft, piloted by two Cuban citizens, had mistakenly dropped leaflets over the Island of Curacao, inciting the army of Venezuela to rebel against the legally constituted authorities of that country. The leaflets were supposed to be dropped over a Venezuelan city. After completing the operation, the aircraft made a forced landing on the island of Aruba where they were arrested by the Dutch authorities. The plane had departed from Miami, stopping in Nassau and Ciudad Trujillo (now Santo Domingo). The IAPC investigated and prepared a report in which it confirmed the facts and concluded that the flight from Ciudad Trujillo, as well as the loading of the leaflets in Ciudad Trujillo, could not have been carried out without the collusion of the Dominican authorities. On February 16, 1960, Venezuela again requested the IAPC to investigate what it charged were the “flagrant violations of human rights by the Government of the Dominican Republic”. The Trujillo regime refused the IAPC’s request to visit the Dominican Republic with the aim of investigating the charges. The Committee decided that it had gathered enough information, and on June 6 it transmitted a report to the OAS Council. In it, the Committee concluded that the Dominican Republic was committing flagrant human rights violations and in so doing, further aggravating the international tensions in the Caribbean region.

CUBA-HAITI SITUATION (1959)

On August 15, 1959, at the Fifth Meeting of Consultation of Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Haiti lodged a complaint that Cuba had invaded two days before. On August 19, Haiti added that the invading forces had sailed from a Cuban port and that Cuban authorities said they had been unable to stop their departure. Haiti requested that the IAPC investigate the events. The Committee sent a subcommittee to visit Haiti in October 1959. While Haiti did not formally accuse Cuba, it expressed serious concern that Cuba had not taken the necessary measures to stop the departure and mentioned what it considered to be inappropriate acts of intervention by Cuban diplomats in the past. During its visit to Haiti, the subcommittee interviewed five prisoners of Cuban nationality, sole survivors of the invasion force, who stated that they had sailed from the Cuban port but did not know their destination. At the Seventh Meeting of Consultation a year later, the Committee pointed out that although Haiti had expressed serious concern over the possibility of a similar invasion, this had not happened, in great part because of the failure of the 1959 invasion and due to the interest shown by the OAS in the Haitian appeal.

CUBA-DOMINICAN REPUBLIC SITUATION (1956)

On February 27, 1956, Cuba requested the services of the IAPC to investigate what it charged were threatening activities being carried out by the Dominican Republic against the Government of Cuba and interference in its internal affairs. The Committee informed the Dominican Republic of this request and on March 7, the Dominican Republic representative replied that there was no such conflict and that the Cuban Government had not exhausted the resources of diplomatic channels in order to clear up the situation between itself and the Dominican Government. After deliberations with representatives of both disputants, the Committee met on April 20 and approved a declaration which stated that, after considering all the facts and within the spirit of Article 7 of the Statutes, the Committee hoped that the two countries could take advantage of their diplomatic channels to resolve the matter.

GUATEMALA SITUATION (1954)

On June 19, 1954 Guatemala delivered a note to the Chairman of the Committee. The note appealed to the Committee to convoke on an emergency basis so that it could take the necessary measures to resolve the controversy and avert escalation of the dispute. The note cited events that had occurred which, in the opinion of the Guatemalan government constituted acts of aggression against Guatemala by the Honduras and Nicaragua. The Committee met on June 19 and transmitted a copy of the Guatemalan note to the Representatives of Honduras and Nicaragua. Guatemala asked the IAPC to visit Guatemala and investigate. The IAPC organized a subcommittee to be sent to Guatemala on the next day, June 20. However, Guatemala then suspended its request, since it had simultaneously submitted its complaint to the UN Security Council, and the Security Council had acknowledged the request. On June 21, the IAPC dropped its consideration of the situation but on June 22, Honduras and Nicaragua asked the Committee to continue its action in order to clear up the Guatemalan accusations. The Committee met again on June 23 and created a subcommittee of confrontation, to visit the three countries and obtain all information possible to investigate the situation. While the subcommittee was on its way to Guatemala, Colonel Carlos Castillo Armas took over the government and sent Jacobo Arbenz Guzman, then President of Guatemala into exile. Due to these changes, the new government asked the subcommittee to abort their trip. On June 30th, and with the approval of the three countries, the Committee issued a press release saying that the three countries considered the controversy to be over.

COLOMBIA-PERU SITUATION (1953-1954)

On November 18, 1953, the Committee’s services were requested by the Government of Colombia to find a solution to the dispute between it and the Government of Peru, which had arisen as a consequence of the asylum granted to Mr. Victor Raul Haya de la Torre in the Colombian embassy in Lima. The Committee informed the Peruvian Government and offered its services, which Peru declined. The Committee made a study of the case and approved some conclusions which it submitted to the parties. In its conclusions, the IAPC suggested bilateral negotiations and that the disputants inform the Committee of the results of the procedure.

CUBA-DOMINICAN REPUBLIC SITUATION (1951)

On November 26, 1951, the Government of Cuba again requested the services of the Committee to help solve the situation that had arisen between it and the Government of the Dominican Republic in connection with the seizure by Dominican authorities of five Cuban sailors. The committee informed the Dominican Republic which in turn, requested the services of the Committee for assistance in resolving the controversy referred to in the minutes of the Committee’s meeting on September 9, 1948 and Resolution II.4, approved by the Council of the Organization acting provisionally as Organ of Consultation on April 8, 1950. After holding several meetings, the Committee ended its activities in this case on December 25, 1951, when the parties signed the Declaration that appears in the minutes of that meeting.

CUBA-DOMINICAN REPUBLIC SITUATION (1949)

News reports emanating from official agencies in the Dominican Republic, alleged that preparations to launch an attack against the Dominican regime were being made on Cuban territory. On December 6, 1949, the Cuban representative sent a note to the Chairman of the Committee, inviting the Committee to visit the country to see for itself that there were no such movements taking place. After weighing all the factors, the Committee decided not to visit Cuba. In the same month, the Committee expressed serious concern with respect to the granting of special powers for the declaration of war, requested by the President of the Dominican Republic and later authorized by the country’s congress. The Committee voiced its concern to the Dominican Government.

CARIBBEAN SITUATION (1949)

On August 3, 1949, the Committee met at the request of the representative of the United States to consider the general political situation in the Caribbean. The Caribbean situation had its roots in the conflicts that began in 1948 involving the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Cuba and Guatemala and their disaffected revolutionary exiles. The IAPC addressed a note to the Council of the Organization to inform of the situation and request their respective governments for information and suggestions. In response, the Governments of the United States, Venezuela, Costa Rica, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Nicaragua, Guatemala and Haiti sent the Committee observations and information. The Committee prepared a set of conclusions that were sent to the Security Council and approved on September 14, 1949. The IAPC’s conclusions received the express support of the OAS Council, acting provisionally as Organ of Consultation. On April 8, 1950, it declared that it supported the conclusions with the understanding that they were applicable not only in the situation in the Caribbean region but also to all the American states without exception.

DOMINICAN REPUBLIC-HAITI CONFLICT (1949-1950)

On March 24, 1949, the IAPC met to address a request by the Government of Haiti relative to a dispute between it and the Government of the Dominican Republic caused by the activities of Haitian exiles from the Dominican Republic. After the IAPC informed the Dominican government of the request and held several meetings with the disputants, it decided to send a delegation to visit both countries. On returning to Washington, the Committee presented the text of a joint declaration that had been approved by both parties. On June 9, an act was signed by representatives of both parties and members of the Committee in which both governments declared that they would not tolerate any activities directed at disturbing the peace of either of the republics, and that in the future they would have recourse to direct negotiation and, when necessary, to the procedures of pacific settlement.

CUBA-DOMINICAN REPUBLIC SITUATION (1948)

On August 13, 1948 the Dominican Republic requested the services of the IAPC to help find a solution to the situation between it and the Government of Cuba. The Dominican Republic accused Cuba of assisting Dominican exiles to organize a revolutionary force against Dominican dictator Rafael Trujillo. The IAPC led an investigation and held several meetings with the representatives of the parties. The IAPC report strongly criticized Cuban action and recommended direct negotiations between the disputants. This was outlined in the document signed on September 9, 1948 by the representatives of the parties and the members of the Committee.