Chile and the Bicentennial of Peru

El Mostrador, July 29, 2021

The Peruvian perspective is interesting, as it does not greatly value what we did over 200 years ago. In Chile, we reaffirm that without us they would not be free, and we feel that they have been ungrateful and poorly educated for not recognizing this in clearer and more appropriate ways. The reasons may lie in the fact that the liberating expedition was not the only one aimed at Peru’s liberation. Bolívar and his troops from the north also played a significant role in that regard; Chile charged Peru for the expenses of the expedition, which was only fully paid off in 1856; and on two occasions we went to war with them and defeated them, one of the causes of the first being the non-payment of the debt for their liberation.

On July 28, 2021, Peru celebrated the bicentennial of its independence, and this date has prompted a review in that neighboring country of, among other things, the influence that Chile had in their achieving independence.

The Peruvian perspective is interesting, as it does not greatly value what we did over 200 years ago. In Chile, we reaffirm that without us they would not be free, and we feel that they have been ungrateful and poorly educated for not recognizing this in clearer and more appropriate ways.

The liberating expedition of Peru was basically organized by the government of Chile, financed by Argentine and Chilean merchants, with a Chilean squadron under the command of a British admiral hired by Chile, and an army of approximately 4,600 men, of which 4,000 were Chileans and the rest Argentines, led by the Argentine General San Martín, who was employed by us for that purpose.

At the time of the expedition, Argentina was preoccupied with its own internal problems, and this liberating initiative did not have the support of a trans-Andean government, as there was none. The Argentine soldiers who fought were the remnants of the Army of the Andes and did not fight under the Argentine flag.

The squadron under Thomas Cochrane liberated and maintained control of the Eastern South Pacific, allowing the movement of troops to the chosen location and time, which was key to the success of this military operation. Once the troops landed on September 8, 1820, San Martín faced no significant military problems, and less than a year later, on July 28, 1821, he declared Peru’s independence in the city of Lima.

Why might it be that Peruvians have a different impression of history than what we are accustomed to hearing in Chile, which is basically limited to what has just been mentioned?

The reasons may be as follows:

1) The liberating expedition was not the only one aimed at Peru’s liberation. Bolívar and his troops from the north also played a significant role in that regard.

2) Chile charged Peru for the expenses of the expedition, which was only fully paid off in 1856.

3) In Peru, it is known that Chile needed to eliminate the Spanish threat from the region to remove the possibility of a new reconquest, as had occurred in 1814. This does not suggest that the Chilean effort was selfless.

4) On two occasions we went to war with them and defeated them, one of the causes of the first being the non-payment of the debt for their liberation.

Given the reasons just presented, it may be that in Peru there continues to be a different valuation of the liberating expedition, despite the fact that in Chile we see things differently.

Richard Kouyoumdjian
Vice President of AthenaLab