The Union Forever: A TL
- Thread starter Mac Gregor
- Start date
1949: Part 2
1949
Part 2: A Continent at War
The War Intensifies
Civilian victims of the Peruvian gas attack on Nauta
April 23, 1949
With Ecuador now in the war, and supplies pouring in from the United States and other Latin American countries to their opponents the Armenta and Serrano regimes of Peru and Bolivia began a desperate look for a way to break the stalemate. Already over extended, the Peruvian Army shocked the world when on April 23, 1949 it used chlorine gas during its attack on the Ecuadorian city of Nauta. The horrors of the chemical attack were recorded by American reporter Thomas Celestino of the National Broadcasting Service (NBS) who was imbedded with the Ecuadorian defenders. Lacking a gas mask, Celestino and his crew bravely kept the camera rolling until they succumbed to the fumes. Weeks later, when the film hit American television sets public opinion began to shift sharply towards intervention. During this time news of atrocities on the Chilean front also began to appear in American newspapers when Bolivian soldiers killed 100 unarmed men and women in the town of Chanaral in retaliation for their supposed “collaboration” with the Chilean army.
Neither of these two incidents however would have the same level of impact that the sinking of the American ship Compassion would. The USS Compassion was a hospital ship that was operating in the Gulf of Guayaquil tending to wounded Ecuadorian soldiers as part of the resent influx of American aid. During the predawn hours on June 30 the clearly marked Compassion was struck by two torpedoes from a Peruvian submarine the BAP Tiburon, previously the Japanese submarine I-403, resulting in 448 deaths, 87 of which were American. Although it would be revealed after the war that the captain of the Tiburon had wrongfully identified the Compassion as a supply freighter, at the time the story played out in the press as yet another cold blooded attack by the forces of a ruthless dictator.
Charter for a Free Americas
That year, the 4th of July celebrations in the United States were marked by memorials for victims of the Compassion and angry demonstrations against the dictatorial regimes of Armenta and Serrano. In response to the resent atrocities committed by Bolivia and Peru, President Conner convened a summit of Latin American leaders in Cuba on July 10 to address the ongoing crisis. After three days of debating the issues at hand, the leaders crafted what would become known as the Charter for a Free Americas. This short document outlined the general principles that would become the cornerstone for the Western Hemisphere during the second half of the twentieth century such as democratic elections, collective defense, mutual trust, and peaceful resolution of conflicts. The charter signatories also presented a united front against the Armenta and Serrano regimes demanding that if Bolivia and Peru did not agree to withdraw all their forces from Chilean and Ecuadorian territory by August 1 “the free nations of the Western Hemisphere would take concerted action” to force their departure. To the surprise of many pundits and foreign policy experts the August 1st deadline came and went without any word from the Bolivian or Peruvian governments. On August 3, 1949 President Conner addressed a joint session of Congress and reluctantly requested a declaration of war on the republics of Bolivia and Peru in order to “make the Americas safe for democracy”. The measure passed with a 56 -50 vote in the Senate and 253-137 in the House and the United States found itself for the first time since 1910 in a state of war.
A joint session of Congress hearing President Conner request for a declaration of War
August 3, 1949
Signatories of the Charter for a Free Americas
Haitian Republic
Oriental Republic of Uruguay
Republic of Chile
Republic of Costa Rica
Republic of Ecuador
Republic of El Salvador
Republic of Guatemala
Republic of Honduras
Republic of Nicaragua
United Mexican States
United States of America
United States of Colombia
Of the independent nations of Latin America only four chose not to sign the Charter for a Free Americas. The Republic of Venezuela who at the time of the Second Atacama War was ruled by an embattled military junta chose not to associate itself with charter largely out of fear of stirring pro-democratic elements in its own country. Despite being democracies and allies of the United States, the three other states, the Federal Republic of Brazil, the Argentine Republic, and the Democratic Republic of Paraguay also chose not to join in the war against Bolivia and Peru for a variety of reasons. Paraguay refused to join because it wished to acquire Bolivia's Chaco region, but the charter only authorized a return to prewar borders. Argentina had long standing territorial disputes with Chile and could not bring itself to openly come to rival Chile's aid. Brazil declined to send a delegate to the summit in Havana because it wished to promote its own offer of arbitration for the conflict. Many historians and political scientist have cited Brazil's inability to resolve the crisis as an important factor for the United States assuming the leadership role in not just hemispherical but in South American affairs as well. It is also worth noting that none of the nations that singed the charter, who weren’t already at war, shared a land border with either Peru or Bolivia. This might possibly have been out of fear of reprisals which events in Chile and Ecuador showed could be costly.
Last edited:
So Suriname/Guyana are still under European control, same with Belize, what is Venezuela's position on the Charter? Likewise what about Paraguay and Honduras? And are there any independent nations in the Caribbean at this time? And are Canada's foreign affairs still ruled by the UK?
And finally, are you saving Argentina/Brazil's positions for the next update (or would that give too much away)?
Great update, liking how this shapes up.
And finally, are you saving Argentina/Brazil's positions for the next update (or would that give too much away)?
Great update, liking how this shapes up.
Hmm. Odd order for the signatories, neither Alphabetical in English or Spanish nor by any other order I can come up with...
Neither Argentina nor Brazil is in the list, which means the south can get uglier, but Columbia *is*, so there is an easy base to jump off of to influence the northern end of the fight.
Great questions.
Indeed Suriname, Belize (British Honduras), Guyana, and all the Caribbean besides the American states of Cuba, Santo Domingo, and Puerto Rico and the Haitian Republic are still under European control.
I forgot about Honduras it is part of the Charter for a Free Americas.
Canada's foreign policy is not so much "controlled" by the UK as "tied" to it. Although sympathetic to Chile and Ecuador, the Dominion of Canada will not be taking part in this war.
I will go back and add the following to elaborate on the reasons why some Latin American nations did not sign the charter.
Of the independent nations of Latin America only four chose not to sign the Charter for a Free Americas. The Republic of Venezuela who at the time of the Second Atacama War was ruled by an embattled military junta chose not to associate itself with charter largely out of fear of stirring pro-democratic elements in its own country. Despite being democracies and allies of the United States, the three other states, the Federal Republic of Brazil, the Argentine Republic, and the Democratic Republic of Paraguay also chose not to join in the war against Bolivia and Peru for a variety of reasons. Paraguay refused to join because it wished to acquire Bolivia's Chaco region, but the charter only authorized a return to prewar borders. Argentina had long standing territorial disputes with Chile and could not bring itself to openly come to rival Chile's aid. Brazil declined to send a delegate to the summit in Havana because it wished to promote its own offer of arbitration for the conflict. Many historians and political scientist have cited Brazil's inability to resolve the crisis as an important factor for the United States assuming the leadership role in not just hemispherical but in South American affairs as well. It is also worth noting that none of the nations that singed the charter, who weren’t already at war, shared a land border with either Peru or Bolivia. This might possibly have been out of fear of reprisals which events in Chile and Ecuador showed could be costly.
That's some foreshadowing I see with regards to Paraguay? 
Seems like Bolivia would be overextended to fight another front as it is, but I suppose they might not see it that way while the war is still going their way in Chile, and Paraguay seems to be looking to draw first blood anyway. Can't wait to see how borders look after this regional great war.
Also, wanted to mention that that's a nice touch (if a little brutal), having the NBC crew film to their dying breath. Seems like just the kind of thing that would boil the US public's blood, especially on top of the sinking of the ship.
Seems like Bolivia would be overextended to fight another front as it is, but I suppose they might not see it that way while the war is still going their way in Chile, and Paraguay seems to be looking to draw first blood anyway. Can't wait to see how borders look after this regional great war.
Also, wanted to mention that that's a nice touch (if a little brutal), having the NBC crew film to their dying breath. Seems like just the kind of thing that would boil the US public's blood, especially on top of the sinking of the ship.
Good! A little grit to this TL is a very good thing IMO, something to make up for the lack of a WWII in a karmic kind of way.
Anyway, very nice updates MacGregor, it's interesting (and new) to see South America at the forefront of the world's headlines....and over a major war to boot! Now that the war's escalated, what kind of strategy do you think the US and Allies will take in taking down Peru and Bolivia? A kind of Anaconda Plan, opening up multiple land fronts around them, "bomb 'em into the stone age"...?
What about Columbia? ITTL, do Peru and Columbia share a border between Brazil and Ecuador or the other way around?
Okay, bear with me. I made a map!
Gray countries are non-signatories of the Charter for a Free Americas
Dotted borders indicate desire for territorial expansion
Argentina claiming Falkland islands as part of territory, not necessarily acting to expand, therefore left it solid claim outline as it was.
Green bordering of Chili and Ecuador indicates the nations being attacked
Maroon bordering Peru and Bolivia indicate aggressor nations.
Lime green indicate signatories of Charter for Free Americas not engaged in war.
I left Suriname/Guyana as what I believe are their European owners, Guiana and Panama w/ the US color.
I was going to do something to speculate what countries I think may become involved, but I don't want to assume too much. So far I've already assumed conquest desires from Peru/Bolivia and Paraguay.
Sides/My predictions:
Chile
Ecuador
USA
Possible:
Paraguay (as co-belligerent)
vs
Peru
Bolivia
Possible:
Argentina
Venezuela
I was thinking this has the potential to get really nasty, and could even draw in Brazil on either side. I figure Colombia and Uruguay are probably going to be on Chile/Ecuador's side if anything. Perhaps Venezuela wants to take the opportunity, as it is apparently a "flawed democracy" and probably less subject to the will of the people. It would also be a hell of a job trying to attack Colombia over the Andes, so probably just me looking at a political map and bsing.
Thoughts, anyone?
Feel free to tear my speculations up. I was just bored and wanted to visualize everything, this is by no means canon.
Mac, hopefully this helps. And let me know if I need to change anything, and it'll be done.
Gray countries are non-signatories of the Charter for a Free Americas
Dotted borders indicate desire for territorial expansion
Argentina claiming Falkland islands as part of territory, not necessarily acting to expand, therefore left it solid claim outline as it was.
Green bordering of Chili and Ecuador indicates the nations being attacked
Maroon bordering Peru and Bolivia indicate aggressor nations.
Lime green indicate signatories of Charter for Free Americas not engaged in war.
I left Suriname/Guyana as what I believe are their European owners, Guiana and Panama w/ the US color.
I was going to do something to speculate what countries I think may become involved, but I don't want to assume too much. So far I've already assumed conquest desires from Peru/Bolivia and Paraguay.
Sides/My predictions:
Chile
Ecuador
USA
Possible:
Paraguay (as co-belligerent)
vs
Peru
Bolivia
Possible:
Argentina
Venezuela
I was thinking this has the potential to get really nasty, and could even draw in Brazil on either side. I figure Colombia and Uruguay are probably going to be on Chile/Ecuador's side if anything. Perhaps Venezuela wants to take the opportunity, as it is apparently a "flawed democracy" and probably less subject to the will of the people. It would also be a hell of a job trying to attack Colombia over the Andes, so probably just me looking at a political map and bsing.
Thoughts, anyone?
Feel free to tear my speculations up. I was just bored and wanted to visualize everything, this is by no means canon.
Mac, hopefully this helps. And let me know if I need to change anything, and it'll be done.
Great map! It is spot on. And yes Colombia and Uruguay are on the side of Chile and Ecuador.
Thanks! Was hoping I was doing it right.
So are Colombia and Uruguay on their side militarily, or simply like the US was on UK's side prior to 1942 WW2 IOTL? Sending aid and denouncing the aggressors and whatnot?
I could see Paraguay and Argentina being opportunistic on opposing sides, and I could see the aggressors trying to bring Venezuela onto their side. Not sure where Brazil would stand other than trying to keep the peace; they could be a major game changer, but you seem to indicate they are opposed to stepping in.
Don't feel pressured to answer too much, I can always wait for the updates (although it's hard!)
All the singnatories of the Charter are militarily on the side of Ecuador and Peru whether or not they officialy declared war like the United States. However, of the nations currently involved i only see Ecuador, Chile, Colombia, (due to thier proximity) Mexico, and the USA (due to thier size) being able to send any significant numbers of troops. Thoughts?
While I'm not a fan of unnecessarily bumping a thread, I'd just like to say how much I like this timeline. I found this TL yesterday and have been catching up ravenously. A very simple POD and a few butterflies have really turned into something fun and interesting, and I must commend how much your writing skills have grown over time. That being said, I can hardly wait to see how this latest war is going to go down. I'm subscribed.
Art: South American War Propoganda
Thanks for the support!
An update should be coming soon but here is a little something to tide you over. I would also love to see some of y'all's ideas for some propaganda posters. Cheers!
RamscoopRaider
Donor
It actually makes a lot of sense to someone who never fought using tanks, a 75mm Low Velocity for destroying bunkers and machine gun nests and a 37mm High velocity for killing armored vehicles, this would be a decent and realistic early design for a country to figure out