Martin 1

Court Grants Peru Ocean Territory Claimed by Chile, New York Times, 1/27/14

This past January, a disputed patch of ocean off shore the border between Chile and
Peru was officially granted to Peru by the International Court of Justice. Originally Chile was
able to fish south of the 200 mile line that extended west of its border with Peru. Now 80 miles
off shore that line takes a sharp turn southwest, effectively reducing Chiles exclusive economic
zone (EEZ) by around 8,000 square miles. The handing over off this triangle shaped area of
ocean has rallied local fisherman from Chiles border town of Arica to take to the streets in
protest, though experts are quick to cite that most small-scale fishing operations occur within
12 miles of shore, so this shrinking of Chiles EEZ will likely only affect the activity of commercial
fishing fleets. Local fishing associations have stated that if the livelihoods of small-scale
fisherman from Northern Chile are impacted, they would pressure the Chilean government for
compensation. To make the transaction of ocean ownership smoother, Chilean president
Sebastian Piera has ensured that the hand over will be implemented gradually.
The dispute over the division between Chiles and Perus EEZs originated after the War
of the Pacific in 1879. Chile having won the war gained former Peruvian territory as well as the
power to exclude Bolivia from having access to the sea. After a few decades of contested
occupation a treaty was signed in 1929 between Chile and Peru that established a mutually
agreed upon border between the two nations. A maritime border, though, was not specified.
In 2008, Peru wanting to expand its EEZ into what Chile considered international waters,
brought Chile to the World Court. In protest, Chile claimed that the area had never officially
been allocated to any nation in the 1952 and 1954 fishing treaties between Chile, Peru, and
Ecuador. The World Court recognizing the ambiguity of past treaties and agreements came to a
compromise this past January that granted Peru a little over half the waters it initially wanted.
This article delves into the problems associated with rights to the sea, and shows how a
solution to contested waters is established. While it was always my understanding that 200 nm
off a countrys coast defines it EEZ, it never crossed my mind how the border between EEZs
were established. Although this article doesnt go into too much detail on what the
Martin 2

international accepted rules are on how bordering EEZs ought be divided I can assume from
this particular case that there must be some agreed upon angle that is either parallel to a
longitude/latitude line or reflective of the terrestrial borders angle. One of the major flaws of
this article is that it did not adequately explain the particular reasoning for why 80 nm offshore
saw a sharp turn of the EEZ border at an angle that was also not explained. Though in all
fairness it seems from the little that was said, the historic reasons behind such distances and
angles werent even fully understood by local officials who were simply following the patterns
prescribed by treaties past. While I wouldnt say the article was biased, I felt that it focused
more on the reduction of Chiles EEZ rather than the growth of Perus. Considering the article
made special note of the fact that the transfer of territory would affect primarily commercial
fisheries, it surprised me that it did not talk at all about the prospective growth of Perus
commercial fleet which now has access to an additional 8,000 square miles of water. I found
the process by which the dispute was settled with the involvement of the International Court of
Justice to be quite enlightening.