PERU SURPRISED BY CHILEAN REACTION ON DRAFT

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 LIMA 004662

SIPDIS

WHA FOR JMONSERRATE

E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/01/2014
TAGS: PGOV PINR PREL EC PE
SUBJECT: PERU SURPRISED BY CHILEAN REACTION ON DRAFT
MARITIME LIMITS LAW

REF: A. ACHRITTON E-MAIL

B. 10/28/05

Classified By: Ambassador J. Curtis Sruble. Reason: 1.4(b/d).

--------------
Summary:
--------------


1. (C) Embassy Santiago's reporting (Ref) has laid out the
Chilean perception of what the GOP is doing with its draft
"Law on the Bases of Maritime Control," which is now under
review by the Peruvian Congress. In our view the GOP impulse
behind the law is far more anodyne; it was part of an effort
by the Foreign Ministry to reassure Congress that
ratification of the law of the sea will not undercut Peru,s
maritime claims. The GOP appears to be surprised by the
strong Chilean reaction, which it failed to anticipate.
Unfortunately, the high profile Chilean response to the law
has likely guaranteed its swift passage. End Summary

--------------
Why Did Peru Submit this Legislation
--------------


2. (C) Embassy Santiago's reporting (Ref) has laid out the
Chilean perception of the GOP's draft "Law on the Bases of
Maritime Control," approved 10/24 by the Congressional
Commission of the Congress. (The draft law is now with the
Constitutional Commission with no date yet set for
presentation to the full Congress.) The Chileans fear that
the Peruvian draft law contravenes existing maritime
agreements with Chile, and may make it more difficult for
Bolivia to obtain an outlet to the sea. The GOC suspects it
may be intended to provoke a politically convenient
confrontation to bolster President Toledo (Ref).


3. (C) In our view, the reason behind the GOP action is
fairly pedestrian. The law's timing is related to a pending
proposal from the Foreign Ministry to have Peru join the Law
of the Sea. The Foreign Ministry would like to reassure
Congress that ratifying the Treaty would not weaken Peru's
long-standing claims to a bigger area of the Pacific than
Chile recognizes. While MFA believes that the odds are
against Congress taking action on the Law of the Sea Treaty
in an election year, the new Foreign Minister, who only
expects to stay in office until the new administration is
sworn in next July, is giving ratification a serious go
nonetheless. The draft law, which originated with the
Executive (signed by President Toledo and PPK),simply
re-states the GOP's long-standing interpretation of where
maritime borders and the baselines for a 200 mile exclusive
economic zone should be drawn. In this, the GOP is not
wavering from what it told the UN in 2001 when Peru expressed
reservations about Chile's maritime claims when the latter
deposited papers with the Secretary General on this issue.


4. (C) We don,t believe the law is intended either to
spike eventual Chilean-Bolivian negotiations on the latter,s
access to the sea, although Santiago is right to be concerned
about Peruvian complications. In August 2004, then Foreign
Minister Manuel Rodriguez initiated an hour-long conversation
with the Ambassador and visiting A/S Noriega on Bolivian
maritime access. Rodriguez exhaustively laid out Peru,s
claim to where the maritime boundary with Chile should be
drawn and spoke of how he hoped to leverage talks between
Chile and Bolivia to compel Santiago to discuss Peru,s
aspirations. At the same time, Rodriguez said that he had no
problem with Chile granting a land corridor to Bolivia in
what was Peruvian territory before the War of the Pacific and
Peru would cooperate with Bolivia and Chile to grant the
former a non-sovereign maritime corridor.


5. (C) The Chileans allege that the GOP draft law would
abrogate the 1952 and 1954 Chile/Peru/Ecuador treaties on
fisheries. The GOP maintains that these accords are not the
legal equivalent of a maritime treaty.

-------------- --------------
No/No Indication of GOP Desire to Enforce the Claim
-------------- --------------


6. (C) Peru has given no/no indication that it intends to
enforce its maritime claim. Should the GOP send a naval
vessel into the zone in question, that action could provoke a
genuine crisis. We will keep a weather eye on this aspect
and do all we can to discourage any such action, should such
a proposal surface.

-------------- --------------
Comment: GOC High Profile Response Put Law on Fast Track
-------------- --------------


7. (C) We do not see complex ulterior motives in the GOP's
proposal. The vociferous Chilean reaction, however, has
transformed what had been a low key piece of legislation into
a matter of national sovereignty. We suspect this will have
the perverse effect of greasing the skids for swift passage
of the law and has made it virtually impossible for any
Peruvian politician to waiver on this issue: i.e. on Peru's
right to state its maritime claim in its own legislation.

--------------
Action Request:
--------------

8. (C) Since the Chileans made reference to the 1929 Peace
Treaty, to which the US is guarantor, we recommend that the
Department take another look at that agreement and see what
US obligations are. We think it unlikely at this juncture
that Peru would join Chile in inviting our role as a
guarantor.
STRUBLE