Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
05SANJOSE2265
2005-09-29 23:21:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy San Jose
Cable title:  

FOREIGN MINISTER TOVAR BRIEFS DIPLOMATIC CORPS ON

Tags:  PBTS PREL PINR ETRD CS NU 
pdf how-to read a cable
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 SAN JOSE 002265 

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/29/2015
TAGS: PBTS PREL PINR ETRD CS NU
SUBJECT: FOREIGN MINISTER TOVAR BRIEFS DIPLOMATIC CORPS ON
COSTA RICA-NICARAGUA BORDER DISPUTE

REF: A. SAN JOSE 2249


B. SAN JOSE 2131

C. SAN JOSE 1746

D. MANAGUA 2639

Classified By: Charge Russell Frisbie for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d)

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 SAN JOSE 002265

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/29/2015
TAGS: PBTS PREL PINR ETRD CS NU
SUBJECT: FOREIGN MINISTER TOVAR BRIEFS DIPLOMATIC CORPS ON
COSTA RICA-NICARAGUA BORDER DISPUTE

REF: A. SAN JOSE 2249


B. SAN JOSE 2131

C. SAN JOSE 1746

D. MANAGUA 2639

Classified By: Charge Russell Frisbie for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d)


1. (C) Summary: Foreign Minsiter Tovar told diplomats in San
Jose that Costa Rica had no alternative to filing a case in
the ICJ to vindicate its rights to free navigation on the San
Juan River. He said that going to the court was not a
hostile or unfriendly act and that retaliation on the part of
Nicaragua was unjustified. He said that a 35 percent tariff
being considered by Nicaragua would, if adopted, cripple the
economies of both countries, set back economic integration in
the region, violate CAFTA-DR, and undermine prospects for a
free trade agreement with the European Union. End summary.


2. (SBU) On September 29, Foreign Minister Tovar convoked the
entire diplomatic corps in San Jose to explain why the GOCR
decided to bring a case before the International Court of
Justice (ICJ) to vindicate Costa Rica's claim to rights of
free navigation on the San Juan River. With 30 to 35 chiefs
of mission in attendance, Tovar said that negotiations with
Nicaragua had failed and that Nicaragua had rejected Costa
Rica's proposal for arbitration. He added that Costa Rica
could not extend the existing "truce" (during which Costa
Rica cannot exercise its rights of free navigation) because,
according to legal experts in this matter, passive assent to
the status quo could constitute a forfeiture of Costa Rica's
rights. Tovar stressed that in any event Costa Rica's
availing itself of the court cannot be construed as an
unfriendly act, but rather is the way civilized nations
resolve disputes that they are unable to resolve by other
means.


3. (SBU) Tovar said that the GOCR is extremely concerned that
President Bolanos has ordered the Nicaraguan Army to send
reinforcements to the border and that the Nicaraguan Assembly
is considering a 35 percent tariff on Costa Rican goods
entering Nicaraguan territory. With respect to the latter,
he noted that Nicaraguans refer to such a tariff as a

"patriotic tax" to pay for legal fees. Costa Rica's exports
to Nicaragua, he pointed out, are approximately USD 200
million a year, and at least another USD 500 million in
exports pass through Nicaragua to points north. Tovar
believes the ICJ case will take four years to decide. The
economic cost of a Nicaraguan tariff, he said, would be
enormous, bankrupting companies and exacerbating poverty in
both countries. Such an action on the part of Nicaragua, he
claimed, would also violate the U.S.-Central
American-Dominican Republic Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA-DR),
signed by both countries. Further, Central American economic
integration would suffer a serious setback, probably
scuttling plans for a free trade agreement with the European
Union, the region's biggest market after the United States.
Tovar said that he was going to the Legislative Assembly that
very afternoon to urge that Costa Rican legislators take no
reciprocal action against Nicaragua.


4. (SBU) Tovar told the assembled diplomats that he did not
expect or want them to take any position on the merits of the
border dispute. Rather, he asked for their understanding why
Costa Rica took the route of the ICJ and why Costa Rica
believed that retaliation by Nicaragua was unjustified. He
hoped that the countries represented in the room would use
their influence to persuade Nicaragua not to effect punitive
tariffs.


5. (U) Tovar distributed the following communique, which the
MFA released on September 28:

Begin Text:

Costa Rica announces the presentation of the case regarding
its rights of navigation on the San Juan River to the
International Court of Justice

The Government of Costa Rica announced today that shortly it
would present the case of its navigation rights on the San
Juan River, granted by the respective legal instruments, to
the International Court of Justice, which sits at The Hague.

The announcement of the decision taken by President Dr. Abel
Pacheco de la Espriella and the Minister of Foreign Affairs,
Roberto Tovar Faja, during the press conference which took
place today at the Presidential Office at 16:00 on Wednesday,
September 28, 2005.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs explained today that he has
instructed the Costa Rican Ambassador, Edgar Ugalde, to
present the case to the headquarters of the International
Court of Justice in The Hague.

The Costa Rican measure will be communicated in a few hours
to the Government of Nicaragua through a note that the
Minister of Foreign Affairs of Costa Rica, Roberto Tovar
Faja, will send to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of
Nicaragua, Norman Caldera.

The President of Costa Rica, Dr. Abel Pacheco de la
Espriella, said that despite these approaches and
opportunities, derived from the Agreement signed on September
26th, 2002 by the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Costa Rica
and Nicaragua, "remaining as the only source of disagreement
between our two countries is the matter of the rights of
Costa Rica on the San Juan River."

He noted that the mechanisms of mediation and arbitration
proposed by Costa Rica were not accepted by Nicaragua. "As a
consequence, according to the peaceful coexistence principle
between nations and the faithful adherence to the Costa Rican
tradition of respect for International Law, we have decided
to present the case to the International Court of Justice."

"We hope for authentic national unity at this historical
moment," said President Dr. Abel Pacheco, and he added that
"Costa Rica and its rights are a priority over any private
interest."

The Costa Rican Foreign Minister, for his part, affirmed that
Costa Rica is calling upon "the highest international legal
instance in order to resolve, for good, the only cause of
disagreement with Nicaragua."

He reaffirmed that his country "is not asking for more rights
or less rights than accorded to Costa Rica by the pertinent
juridical instruments."

He said that "to call upon the International Court of Justice
could never interpreted as a break in the friendship between
the two countries. Both Costa Rica and Nicaragua have
accepted the Court as a means to ensure the peaceful
coexistence and mutual respect between nations."

"We sincerely call on the International Court of Justice to
make a decision that contributes to Costa Rica and Nicaragua
never again having a reason for discord," added the Minister
of Foreign Affairs.

"I hope that through this means we will leave future
generations with a relationship of fraternity and friendship
between our two countries, without disputes. It is our
historic responsibility," the Minister of Foreign Affairs,
Roberto Tovar Faja, declared.

End Text.


6. (SBU) After the meeting with diplomats ended, MFA adviser
Arnoldo Brenes told acting DCM that a 35 percent tariff would
violate CAFTA-DR. He said that the legal principle of "pacta
sunt servanda" in the Vienna convention on the Law of
Treaties requires that a country that signs a treaty, whether
it has ratified or not, not take any action contrary to the
letter and spirit of the treaty.


7. (C) In a meeting with Charge on September 28, former
president Oscar Arias, frontrunner in the February 2006
presidential election, said that the GOCR made an "error" in
not extending the three-year truce on the San Juan River
dispute. He said that Nicaraguan Ambassador to Costa Rica
Francisco Fiallos told him that he had urged the GON to agree
to arbitration but that Foreign Minister Caldera refused.
Arias said that it was "lamentable" that relations have been
damaged because of intransigence on both sides.


8. (C) Comment: A settlement at this point appears to be
highly unlikely. The problem now is to ensure that the
dispute stays in the court and does not escalate and affect
trade, immigration, law enforcement, and the need for Costa
Rica and Nicaragua to cooperate on a host of issues. Until
now we have not heard anyone in the GOCR talk about
retaliation if Nicaragua enacts a 35 percent tariff, but that
discussion will surely come.
FRISBIE