A Case Study Of The Maritime Disputes Between Peru And Chile:Review And Reflection

This study aims to approach the maritime delimitation issue between two sovereign states-Peru and Chile that both claim their legal rights over it. The dispute has been an international issue since the year of1948but its origin could be traced back to the mid-19th century in the wake of their independence from the former colonial lordship. The case was presented to the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) at The Hague in2008, in which it was filed by Peru against Chile with its legal base on the Pact of Bogota of1948. The fact that Peru and Chile decided to appeal to the international society clearly indicates that international relations are intertwined with public law by which international issues should be settled through peace and law rather than war and coerce. Yet, given that both Peru and Chile agreed to appeal to the ICJ to determine the course of the boundary between the maritime zones of the two sides in accordance with international law, how could the both states claim to possess exclusive sovereign rights in the maritime area situated within the limit of200nautical miles from its coast but outside other’s exclusive economic zone or continental shelf?. The case right now remains for the final decision of the Court.The reason why this issue was selected to be addressed as the core question of the thesis is primarily due to the fact that the maritime dispute under discussion approves the feasibility of the theory of international relations, like the globalization and constructivism. Given this, this study argues at the beginning for the necessity of an interdisciplinary approach to the subject concerned. As we know it very well, in practice, international law as a branch of social science aims to regulate the conduct of sovereign states in a so-called anarchic world system while the relations between states are closely connected. War and violence recur but peoples never give up their efforts to create world peace and order. For sure, the world order of today is more western’s dominance rather than full justice and equality. Yet, we should not deny the common value and universal norms which have been accepted by the countries all over the world. To certain extent, they are the core bases of our social relations and rules of human behavior in society inspired by principles of justice.The thesis is the interdisciplinary study of a theoretical framework of international relations where legal positivism, economic interdependence and constructivism were used to finalize and explain three chapters and conclusion of the study itself. Chapter one begins with a concise historical review of the European colonial legacy, with a view of the territorial disputes, both land and maritime, inheriting from the colonial order. It argues the origins of the maritime dispute between Peru and Chile and development of negotiation between the two sides since the1980s’. In so doing, it opens the discussion for the legal issue to be addressed in terms of international relations.Chapter two establishes the conceptual framework of the thesis in order to answer the central question:in this anarchic world order, how Peru and Chile deal with each other through diplomacy? It is here that legal positivism and economic interdependence are used in line with the theory of constructivism. As a matter of fact, both Peru and Chile have agreed to settle their maritime disputes by peace in view of three considerations such as international pressure, the Washington’s influence and mutual economic bonds. These elements confirm that a conflict between the two sides is not expected given the dire consequence.For sure, to understand why Peru and Chile have decided to put in the hands of the ICJ the issue of their maritime dispute, it is necessary to make an introduction of international organizations and to put an emphasis upon the importance of institutions and respect for the laws through using the ideas of Hedley Bull and Manuel Orozco gave some thoughts on Latin America. It concludes that Latin Americans, as pioneers in the construction of democratic ideas and the respect for institutions, have helped reduce conflicts between two countries. In this sense, Latin Americans have issued rules that have served as an example and guide the international system. All this is due to a mood to live in peace with neighboring countries. By doing so, the study explains the convenience for Peru and Chile to resolve their disputes in the scopes of diplomacy, respect for international law, norms and institutions. To this end, Chapter three has developed legal positions of Peru and Chile, starting with general concepts relating to the Maritime Delimitation; then followed by a vast explanation on the casuistry of the International Court of Justice. At the conclusion, there is a profound legal explanation of the maritime dispute in which it present the legal and factual position of Peru and Chile supported by an interdisciplinary analysis. It argues that the identity, norms, historical experience and institutional development in Latin America have made possible the construction of a democratic culture and respect for the rules and institutions that have allowed Peru and Chile to peacefully try to resolve a maritime legal dispute, in the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in The Hague.