Peru confident it will win maritime dispute against Chile

Living in Peru
Israel Ruiz

If the world court at The Hague is fair, then we (Peru) will be right, said Ambassador Javier Pérez de Cuéllar when speaking on the maritime border dispute between Peru and Chile.

Pérez de Cuéllar, former Secretary General for the United Nations, explained that his prediction was based on rulings the world court had made in cases similar to Peru's.

The Peruvian ambassador stated that while the world court had clear guidelines, both countries would have to wait a couple of years for a final ruling, explaining the matter was complex.

Peru is to present its case at The Hague on March 20, giving historic, geographic and legal support as to why certain maritime limits needed to be respected.

Chile will not present its case until 2010.

Peru's Foreign Affairs minister Jose Antonio Garcia Belaunde explained while on a trip to Chile that Peru's position was that maritime borders had not been established.

Speaking on behalf of Chileans, he stated that they believed limits had been set in agreements signed in 1952 and 1954.

Have other topics you'd like to see in our news section? If you or someone you know would like to contribute a news article to Living in Peru, whether it's translated or based on a personal investigation, send it to editor@livinginperu.com.

 | | | |

• Economy : September trade had a surplus of US$ 566 millions
• Business : Microsoft Peru will invest US $500,000 in its expansion
• Travel and Tourism : Prom-Peru to promote Southern Peru tourist destinations in Chilean fair
• Food : US gastronomic website praises Peru's food
• Mining/Energy : Peru: More natural gas found in Camisea

# c. schmidt says :
25 February, 2009 [ 17:04 ]

This dispute is quit a while a topic- more it is brought up be some newspapers which don’t forget about  to remember that to by new arms is very important.I cant judge about military issues but ive got quit the impression that especially this year when international economy is on a brink of deep recession which was not seen since 60 decades (Roubini, Krugmann,  Max Faber , Gerald Celeste and other int. neutral analysts) and will last at least this year public opinion gets distracted with other topics.  I am in favor for Peruvian interests-but what makes me think is – that in times in which almost all internacional newspapers reflects about economical and financial issues and problems here in many medias important topics get treated like they wont influence the country- speaking endless about old wars with Chile or disputes wont help to fix when effects of int. economic crisis reach Peru. Politicians should be right now think about down turn in GDP (in December it was around 4.5- ) , down of export, down of remesas, down turn in tourism this year, and upraising of Dollar against Sol and possible int. inflation which will affect Peruvian import somehow- One today LIP headline article remembered about worrieness about rising desnutricion in mountain areas and one thing I can reassure-. They poor mammies don’t worry about the frontier with Chile- but they do worry about how to feed and educate their kids. Ive got recently the impression that there seems to be a gap from some media reports who like story tellers give the impression that everything is funky and nice- it seems to exist a gap between very often bitter or disappointed over abridge public opinion and that what some journalists tell- Are some of them paid to do so or follow special orders?    

# Oliver says :
25 February, 2009 [ 19:02 ]

Hi Scmidt, would you mind using paragraphs, makes ur posts much easier to read. Thanks. Oliver.

# Oliver says :
25 February, 2009 [ 19:05 ]

As for this issue, I have a problem that the title says Peru confident. Since it is the oppinion of just one man. But then again I understand that this is journalism. Additionally I believe that everyone should just put their heads down and get the job done and then celebrate.

But lets not get too carried away. This could really get messy, for example if the chileans dont want to leave.

# Rene says :
26 February, 2009 [ 04:46 ]

What makes the opinion of this man even more interesting is that he can compare this case with prior cases, while later in the article it is mentioned that the case is very complex. Wouldn't that make it very complex to compare with other cases as well? It is just wishful thinking.

And then with the statement "If the world court at The Hague is fair" he makes it even easier. If it doesn't come his way, then it is the court that isn't fair. It is always someone else who's wrong...

# gonzs says :
26 February, 2009 [ 11:42 ]

Limits were not established, only fishing treaties for men on both sides, nor any of the Parliaments ever aproved or discussed about limits, Chile has used fishing agreements as treaties and that is wrong.Peru has historic and legal reasons on there aproach.

# CapitanDan says :
1 March, 2009 [ 00:58 ]

Hola Amigos, why can't we have this disputed area under joint juristiction . It is an area that one country would have trouble enforcing it's laws. Lets  try a co-operative enforcement force like the EEUU great lakes. with Cananda ..Both countries benenfit... Gracias Amigos... Chau..

# CapitanDan says :
1 March, 2009 [ 00:58 ]

Hola Amigos, why can't we have this disputed area under joint juristiction . It is an area that one country would have trouble enforcing it's laws. Lets  try a co-operative enforcement force like the EEUU great lakes. with Cananda ..Both countries benenfit... Gracias Amigos... Chau..

# mericorps says :
1 March, 2009 [ 12:10 ]

The issue is fishing rights, and it is some of the best fishing in the area and therefore means a lot of money.  Neither country wants to give it up and they will not share it.

Equador was asked to mediate the dispute and at that very moment, Chile decided to give a donation of several navy ships to Equador. 

International law is NOT on the side of Chile, but it boils down to the interpretation of the border treaty.  If it is unclear, Peru should win, but if Peru signed their rights away, then Peru will not prevail.

# Ekeko says :
21 March, 2009 [ 13:05 ]

The issue is sovereignty. I never knew that Chile had control over that part of our ocean.

I am relatively well informed fellow and it came to me as a total surprise the fact that Chile had actual, and de facto, control over Peruvian territorial waters. The notion that the thief southern nation had actual control over the coast of Tacna and Moquegua just made my stomach turn. I wonder why this issue wasn't properly disseminated in the press or TV prior to all of this. Are there other surprises hidden in the secret coffer? 

We have to be cautiously optimistic when saying that we will win the dispute. The Hague can rule that the maritime area belongs to Peru but that Peru has to respect the fishing rights of Chile...We should be able to rescind Chilean rights at our will at a moment's time. 
chile is a hostile nation and Peruvians seem to ignore it. This is nothing else but another egregious proof that chile keeps on pursuing a policy of dominance against Peru and we, Peruvians, are allowing it. We have to have a total shift of attitude and policy and change our strategy as to how to deal with this hostile nation. 

chileans have a much defined way to behave in regards to Peru and Peruvians. They have a demeaning way to speak about us  and also have a consistent policy to pursue national-private objectives. For instance, it was the government that changed the name of the city of La Union, to Pisco Elqui, to make the foundations for their claim for the name of Pisco as their national liquor DECADES later. So they have clear defined long-term plans and Peru is key component. For them we are prey and we seem not to have noticed yet?

Enemies are a great thing to have if you are smart, because they make it very easy to see what our shortcomings are. Have you tried to imagine what their master plan is. Lan Chile controls the international and national flights of Peru. They are profiting from our strategic geographic location and even using Macchu Picchu, or gem, to further their business. Doesn't that make you sick? That in itself is an outrage.
Everytime we purchase a ticket in LAN we contribute to their war logistics. At who's dispossal will the LAN fleet be in case of war? We have to enter a phase of national awakening and turn the tide. What is their ultimate plan? Well, I don't really know but I wouldn't worry much about that, because I can't do a thing about it.

What we CAN, and MUST do, is to have our own plan and buy time. We are doing many things right. OUR GROWTH IS OUR BEST NATIONAL SECURITY. We have no choice but to continue or growth and revamp our military significantly. Severing economic ties with Chile should be just the beginning. We need to recover control as to whom operates in our air space and controls key infrastruture. That is just plain common sense.

# noname says :
21 March, 2009 [ 14:16 ]

To all,

Wait a few days and look on youtube for the recorded Prensa Libre show from 3/20. They had these two international law experts and they have explained very clear what this is all about, at some point was even boring cause they read a lot from the books... so that was a very good learning experience. The only way Chile can win this issue is by using force.

# Rachel in Peru says :
21 March, 2009 [ 19:22 ]

Peru sign its rights away? No way! Why would they do that? (*sarcasm of course*)

More rights are being waived away with each TLC that they sign.

BTW, I may be wrong on this, but aren't they (Peru) practically giving away the fish in their waters to the Asians?

Chile is greedy IMO. They may not be militarily invading Peru anymore, but they are still invading and controlling the country through their corporations.

*INVASORES LOS CHILENOS*

# Rodrigo says :
14 April, 2009 [ 05:44 ]

FERNANDO PEÑA un uruguayo habla de chile
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDxs4LWlROc&feature=related

# Rodrigo says :
7 May, 2009 [ 06:22 ]

Politicians in Peru against chile:

Ollanta Humala inicia su campaña contra TLC con Chile
http://multimedia.larepublica.pe/main.php?g2_itemId=4196

Ollanta Humala acusó a Alan García de tenerle "miedo" a Chile
http://www.cooperativa.cl/ollanta-humala-acuso-a-alan-garcia-de-tenerle-miedo-a-chile/prontus_nots/2009-03-08/185015.html


NO AL TLC CON CHILE 13 RAZONES
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DQxVOldFfo



Chile la Proxima provincia del PERU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCXHBX0N5PI&feature=related


Ollanta Humala cuestiona TLC con Chile en mitin en Moquegua
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DyaB1JNfPI

JAIME DEL CASTILLO REPUDIA EL TLC CON CHILE Y DEFIENDE MEMORIA DE MIGUEL GRAU: CRITICA CARETAS 2068
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9xcbhSjFPw

TLC con Chile no nos beneficia y se firmó en contexto inconveniente, sostiene Pedro Francke

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zArnl3Ed81s

NO VENDER GAS A CHILE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqtsw2ZOA_A

Name

Email

Notify me via e-mail of new comments to this entry

Code :

Comment

• These comments are the property of their respective authors.
• Currently we only allow english comments.
• Por ahora solo se permiten comentarios en ingles.