Latin America
Related: About this forumEvo Morales' demand for "access to the sea", Chilean coast denied by the ICJ
Bolivia sea dispute: UN rules in Chile's favourThe International Court of Justice (ICJ) has ruled against Bolivia in its dispute with neighbouring Chile over access to the Pacific Ocean- a feud dating back to the late 19th Century.
Landlocked Bolivia lost access to the sea in 1884 after a war with Chile and has tried to regain it ever since.
The court said Chile was not obliged to negotiate granting Bolivia access.
The ruling, which comes after five years of deliberations, is final and binding.
Judges at the United Nations' top court did not rule on whether Chile or Bolivia had the rights to the disputed coastal stretch, it only ruled on whether Chile had an obligation to negotiate with Bolivia.
The borders between the two neighbours date back to the 1904 Treaty of Peace and Friendship, signed after Bolivia lost 400km (250 miles) of coastline to Chile during the War of the Pacific (1879-1884).
Chile insisted that the disputed coastal stretch was sovereign Chilean territory and as such "would not be a part in anyone's negotiations".
Bolivian President Evo Morales traveled to The Hague to attend the announcement of the ruling in person. Before boarding the plane, he said: "Our return to the sea is not only possible, it is inevitable."
-snip-
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-45708671
Background to the dispute:
After its defeat by Chile in the War of the Pacific, Bolivia lost 120,000 sq km of land and became a landlocked country
Bolivia said that Chile had an obligation to "negotiate a sovereign access to the sea for Bolivia"
It brought the territorial dispute in 2013 to the International Court of Justice in The Hague
Chile and Bolivia have not had full diplomatic relations since 1978
Source: BBC Monitoring
...Bolivarian Socialist temper tantrum to ensue...
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)lsewpershad
(2,620 posts)negociate with the Chilean govt.... and work out a win win deal.
GatoGordo
(2,412 posts)Morales, like Chavez in Venezuela, decided to put bluster and "Bolivarian (not Bolivian) nationalism" ahead of pragmatism. He wanted to rally the populace with his rhetoric of "lost greatness" to El Imperio (USA, Chile, the Illuminati, little green men from Mars, etc) and decided the best way to do that was demand that Chile cede 400 km of coastline back to Bolivia that they lost over 100 years ago.
Backstory: The deal that Bolivia had was open access to the ports at Arica, Chile via roads and rail from Charaña, Bolivia. Only Bolivia didn't want to pay the costs of running a port, (PAYING the dockworkers their negotiated wages and benefits, and a very modest/fair fee.) Morales wanted to dictate the terms of the Chilean dockworkers who were offloading Bolivian ships, etc. (Bolivarian Revolutionaries have this tendency to believe to know what is "fair" wages for everyone.) Bolivia refused to pay, so the Bolivian ships weren't off loaded or loaded.
Morales got in a snit and cut off a river that fed into Chile. Chile countered by closing the border with Bolivia/Morales. (Morales considers himself Bolivia, and Bolivia is Morales... a very God complex guy). Thus the demand by Morales that Chile renegotiate the land lost by Bolivia during the War of the Pacific.
So, Morales lost and stands there looking like someone hit him in the face with a shaving cream pie, but insisting STILL that Bolivia is the "moral" winner.