Territorial Disputes and Their Resolution The Case of Ecuador and Per u Beth A. Simmons United States Institute of Pea c e Peaceworks No. 27. First published April 199 9 . The views expressed in this report are those of the author alone. They do not necessarily reflect views of the United States Institute of Peace UNI T E D STA T E S INS T I T U T EO F PEA C E 1200 17th Street NW, Suite 200 Washington, DC 20036-3011 Phone: 202-457-1700 Fax: 202-429-6063 E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.usip.org Co n t e n t s Key Points v Map vii Foreword ix 1. Introduction 1 2. Territorial Conflicts in Latin America 4 3. Ecuador and Peru: The Search for a Border Solution 10 ◗ Background ◗ The1995 Border War and Its Diplomatic Aftermath ◗ What Were the Remaining Impasses? ◗ Contributing Factors to a Solution 4. Conclusion 20 Appendix: The Rio Protocol 25 Notes 29 About the Author 35 About the Institute 37 Key Poi n t s ◗ The Peru- E c u ador case is the Wes t ern Hemi s ph ere’s only territorial dispute in whi ch dea dly conf l i ct has brok en out repea t edly since World War II. Most recent ly, in early 19 9 5 ,t he two nations fou ght an intense nineteen- d ay war along a forty- n i n e - m i l e un dem a rc a t ed section of th eir border. The October 1998 agreement between the two cou n tries that settles the remaining issues in their border dispute provides a sh a rp contras t to the persi s tent rival ry between two cou n trie s with a history of wa r and seemi n gly perpetual border skirmi s h e s . ◗ More than in other areas of the world ,b order disputes in the Wes tern Hemi s ph ere have been subj ect to formal legal and qua s i - l e gal proces s e s ,su ch as adju d i c a ti on and arbi tra ti on ,in whi ch the disputing cou n tries request a neutral third party to make an auth ori t a tive ruling res o l ving the territ orial que s ti on .Th ere have been twenty - two such cases of lega lly binding third- p a r ty rul i n gs on conte s ted territorial sover- eign ty in Latin Ameri c a .Com p a re these num bers to one small case in conti n en t a l Europe ;t wo among the independent states of Afri c a ;t wo in the Mid dle East; an d th r ee in Asi a ,the Far East, and the Paci f i c . ◗ The Ecuador-P eru border dispute has also included exten s i ve third- p a rty involve- m en t ,i n cluding that provid ed under the 1942 Rio Protoco l ,a trea ty fram ework that ende d the 1941 war between the two cou n tri e s . Soon therea f ter, however ,Ec u adora n le aders cla i m ed that geographical informa ti on that had come to their attenti on after the signing of the Rio Protocol rendered the agreement inval i d .T he 1995 border war led to some cha n ges that bol s tered the pros p ects for a res o luti on :E c u ador’s mil- it a ry made a strong showin g, while Peru’s leaders rea l i zed their cou n try ’s flaggin g economy could not sustain similar future enga gem en t s . ◗ The Rio Prot ocol repres ents a special meth od of th i rd - p a rty dispute sett l em en t . The trea ty ’s provis i ons were overseen by four “Gua ra n tor ”s t a tes (Argen ti n a ,Bra z i l , Chi l e ,a nd the Uni ted States — f our of the most powerful cou n trie s in the region ) . The Gua ra n tors are legally obli ga ted to medi a te—and pos s i bly arbitra te ,wh i ch th ey eventu a lly did for two major remaining impasses—all aspects of the Ecuador- Peru border dispute.As such , the Rio Protocol exemplifies not only the vari ety of in tern a ti onal dispute- s et t l em ent mecha n i s m s ,b ut the power of in tern a ti o nal law th ro u gh the obs erva n ce of trea ty obli ga ti on s . ◗ Several factors contri buted to favorab le pros pects for a sett l em en t of this border dis- pute :com m i tm ent by the pol i tical leadership in both Ecuador and Peru,a cha n ge in popular attitu des in both cou n tri e s , and the role played by the four Gua ra n tor na ti o ns under the Rio Protoco l . v vi Keypoints ◗ The Gua ra n tor states’ in terest in res o lv ing this conf l i ct ,a m ong other rea s on s ,was to help fos ter the region’s econo mic and trade integrati on . Both Ecuador and Peru ,a s well as the Gua ra n to r states ,re cogni zed the adverse effect s of the dispute on the developm ent of regional trade. ◗ The Ecuador-P eru dispute also illus tra tes how conf l i ct can lead to increa s ed pur- chases of advan ced wea pons and the corres po nding opportun i ty cost to econom i c developm ent for the parties to the dispute. Settling borders eli m i n a tes a key irrit a n t to rela ti on s ,t h o u gh it is not a guaran tee of pos i tive future rela ti on s .O n ce res o luti on has been reach ed ,t he portion of mi l i t a ry expen d i tu res that previo u s ly went towa rd defending the disputed territory can be used for econo mic developm ent or soci a l pu rpo s e s . ◗ Given that res o luti on of such conf l i cts often involves highly sens i tive issues wit h st rong conn ecti ons to notions of na ti onalism and national identi ty, the involvem en t of a third party does not guaran t ee res o luti on or comp l i a n ce .The Uni ted States and the other Gua ra n t or nation s had a stake in seeing the Peru- E c u ad or dispute res o lved to promo te regional pol i tical harmony and econom ic and trade integrati on , and to decrease the likeli h ood of a regional competi ti on for advan c ed wea pon s . Area of Detail Source: Gary S. Elbow, “Territorial Loss and National Image: The Case of Ecuador,” 1996 Yearbook, Conference of Latin Americanist Geographers. Vol. 22, pp. 93–105. Reprinted with permission. vi i Forewo rd fter nearly six decades of sporadic warfa re over a rela ti vely small stretch of di s- puted border, Ec u a dor and Peru signed an accord on October 26, 1 9 9 8 ,t h a t Aprovides a defi n i tive sett l em en t of the remaining issues in their ong oing border conf l i ct .T he accord may not spell the end to future territorial disputes in the region ,but it is historic in that it involv es many actors working over many decades to achi eve a set- tl em ent to a long-standing dispute.In this Pea ceworks , Beth Sim m ons expert ly sum m a- riz es not only the history of this dispute,b ut also the principal instituti onal mecha n i s m s in the interna ti onal realm that are avai l a ble to help res o lve such interst a te conf l i cts over di s p u ted territ ory. When natio ns cl a s h ,i n terna ti onal soci et y fortun a t ely provides them with a vari ety of al tern a tive ways to settle their disputes short of wa r. However, cou n tries are often less am en a b le to res o lving disputes with such pacific means when it comes to issues as frau gh t with national passions as territorial borders. Even as recent ly as four yea rs ago, Ec u ad or and Peru renew ed a war they origi n a lly fou ght in 1941 over a long - d i s p uted border. For nineteen days in Janu a ry 1995, these two La tin Amer ican nations waged an intense border war that involv ed five thousand troops and all bran ches of both cou n tri e s’ arm ed forces .M oreover, the rela t ively brief border conf l i ct gave both cou n tr ies new rea s o ns to repl en ish and upgrade their military arsen a l s , as both Ecuador and Peru announced plans to equip their air forces with sophi s ti c a t ed jet fi gh ters .