Who 'wins' in Peru-Chile maritime border ruling?

A new maritime border drawn by the International Court of Justice ended decades of debate about how to carve up 38,000 square kilometers of fish-rich waters off the coasts of Chile and Peru.

Enrique Castro-Mendivil/Reuters
People demonstrate while holding a Peruvian flag during the final ruling court session of a decades-old maritime dispute between Peru and Chile, in front of the Government Palace in Lima January 27, 2014. The United Nations' highest court on Monday, awarded Peru parts of the Pacific Ocean but keeping rich coastal fishing grounds in Chilean hands.

The United Nations' highest court drew a new maritime boundary between Peru and Chile on Monday, awarding Peru parts of the Pacific Ocean but keeping rich coastal fishing grounds in Chilean hands.

The line drawn by the International Court of Justice ended decades of debate about how to carve up some 38,000 square kilometers (14,670 square miles) of fish-rich waters off the coasts of the Latin American neighbors. Peru's fishing industry estimates the annual catch in the region to be worth some US$200 million.

Peru wanted a maritime border heading roughly southwest, perpendicular to the point where the two countries' land border meets the ocean. Chile insisted the border should extend from the coast parallel to the equator.

The court found a compromise by saying a border already existed parallel to the equator extending 80 nautical miles from the coast and then drawing a line southwest to a point where the countries' 200-mile territorial waters end.

In Lima, President Ollanta Humala had no immediate reaction.

Outside the presidential palace, scores of people who had watched the verdict being read on two giant TV screens shouted "Long Live Peru" afterward, though there was some confusion as to whether their country had won or lost.

In the Peruvian border city of Tacna, a few hundred people from a patriotic society who had gathered in a movie theater to watch the ruling sang the national anthem. Dozens of police guarded the Chilean consulate but there were no incidents.

A professor of international relations at Lima's Catholic University, Farid Kahhat, said Peru had won a bit more than half the territory it sought.

But the leader of the Peruvian fishermen in the region, David Patino, told The Associated Press that the decision was a loss.

"We haven't won anything. We are in the same situation as the past," he said.

After Peru, Chile is the world's No. 2 exporter of fish meal.

Peruvian historian and columnist Nelson Manrique called the decision an "intelligent verdict" that is "not going to please anyone but it's also not going to bring anyone to fits."

Patricia Majluf, a leading Peruvian fisheries scientist, said the area up to 80 miles (128 kilometers) that remains in Chilean hands "is where the Chilean boats fish the most" and she doesn't expect the verdict will cost the job of any Chilean fisherman.

"All the anchoveta is fished in that zone," she said. The anchovy species is converted into fish meal for an insatiable global market that uses it in animal feed and fertilizer.

Majluf, a professor at Cayetano Heredia University in Lima, said about 1 million tons of anchoveta are harvested annually off the northern Chile coast. That's about the same amount as off the southern Peruvian coast, she added.

For many, the case launched in 2008 by Peru is a matter of national pride. Chile seized its three northernmost provinces during the 1879-83 War of the Pacific from Peru and Bolivia, which lost its only coast in the conflict.

The actual border area has long been a model of coexistence. Citizens of both countries travel freely between Arica and its Peruvian sister city of Tacna, both of which depend on the fishing industry and on each other.

Chileans crowd into Tacna's hospitals and clinics for the cheaper health care, while Peruvians work construction and other day jobs on the Chilean side of the border. Arica's mayor, Salvador Urrutia, says some 5,000 people cross the border in both directions each day.

Rulings by the court are final and binding on both countries. The presidents of Peru and Chile each pledged to adhere to whatever decision the court made. The countries are partners in a number of important regional and Pacific economic alliances and have seen annual bilateral trade grow from $500 million in 2006 to $4.3 billion today and each had significant investments in the other in sectors as diverse as tourism, retail and gastronomy.

Chilean government figures put Peruvian investment in Chile at $11 billion last year with Chile investing $13.5 billion in Peru.


Eva Vergara in Santiago, Chile, and Franklin Briceno and Frank Bajak in Lima, Peru, contributed to this report.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Who 'wins' in Peru-Chile maritime border ruling?
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today