Gran Lago de Nicaragua (Photo courtesy of Wikipedia)

The Nicaraguan Congress yesterday approved the construction of a canal that will link the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. A 50-year concession to build a rival to the famous Panama Canal was granted to a Hong Kong-based company ‘HK Nicaragua Canal Development Investment Co. Limited’ (HKND Group), which is run by Wang Jing, a Chinese telecommunications tycoon. “The canal could be finished within ten years,” stated Jing.

It is estimated that the waterway project, the largest in the history of Nicaragua and one of the largest in Latin America, will cost US$40 billion. In yesterday’s vote, 61 deputies were in favor of the project, 25 against, and there was one abstention.

The project has generated a heated debate in Nicaragua, as some do not trust Jing’s firm, which was established only a few months ago. The project’s opponents also raise concern that “behind all of this stands the Chinese government.”

Analysts believe the waterway could benefit China in the same way the Panama Canal did for the United States in early 20th century – at a time of aggressive commercial and political expansion, when the USA has emerged as a global superpower. Recently, Chinese president Xin Jinping paid a visit to the region, but did not visit Nicaragua. He travelled to Costa Rica, the only Central American country with which China maintains direct diplomatic ties.

The exact layout of the canal is still not defined, but it was confirmed that it will go through the Gran Lago de Nicaragua (or Cocibolca), the most important source of fresh water in the country, prompting criticism from environmental groups.

Even though the Nicaraguan government will get only a minority share of the profits generated by the canal, President Daniel Ortega insists the project will bring prosperity to the nation.

“One of Nicaragua’s great riches is its geographic position, that’s why this idea has always been around,” Sandinista government congressman Jacinto Suárez added.

If completed, the Nicaraguan canal would be three times the size of the existing one in Panama.

Nicaragua’s most famous revolutionary, Augusto Sandino, said that “sovereignty is not discussed, it’s defended with guns in hand.” This was also once the view of the Frente Sandinista de Liberación Nacional (FSLN), the left-wing political party currently in charge of the country; but discussion is exactly what Nicaragua is seeking to settle a current dispute with Colombia.

The ruling at the ICJ (UN photos)

A ruling last month by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) – which resides in The Hague, Netherlands – granted Nicaragua almost 100,000 square kilometres of maritime territory in Caribbean waters that were previously under the control of Colombia.

The dispute has been a long time in the making. Back in 2001, the Nicaraguan government brought the case to the ICJ, alleging that shipping vessels from their country were being harassed by the Colombian navy in a part of the Caribbean claimed by both countries.

In 1928 the ‘Esguerra-Bárcenas Treaty’ gave Colombia the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina; however Nicaragua argues that it did not establish maritime borders. According to the Central American nation, since that date Colombia has been intruding more and more on Nicaraguan waters and has almost halved its territory.

The Sandinistas of Nicaragua have argued for the past three decades that the entire treaty should be void because it was signed when the country was under military intervention and pen was put to paper due to of US pressure.

In 2007 the ICJ preliminarily ruled that the archipelago was Colombian territory, which quieted the calls for the Treaty to be void; however the ruling did not resolve the dispute over maritime borders.

That decision came last month, on 19th November, when the Court voted in favour of Nicaragua.

The response from Colombia was dismissive and aggressive. President Juan Manuel Santos stated: “Colombia emphatically rejects the ruling by the Court”.

Comments from Nicaragua on the ruling were celebratory. During a parade to commemorate the decision attended by leading political figures and leaders from the last two decades, President Daniel Ortega thanked the ICJ and put pressure on the Colombian government to accept the new maritime boundaries.

“I am certain that Colombia will recognise the ruling by the International Court of Justice, because there is no other way forward; there is only one path and that’s to comply with the ruling and respect Nicaragua’s historic right,” he said.

But direct dialogue between the two leaders was not forthcoming until 1st December, when both met for a 20-minute meeting during the inauguration of the new Mexican president.

Ortega commented after the meeting: “The two parties are totally discarding the use of force.”

He went on to give further assurances of peace, stating that Nicaraguan and Columbian vessels were in “permanent communication” and that his government would continue to respect the established fishing rights of those living on the Colombian archipelago, including the rights of the indigenous islanders.

His Colombian counterpart was also quick to dismiss the possibility of violence. “No one wants bellicose actions”, Santos said. But warned that he would continue to “defend, with total conviction, the rights of the islanders and all our compatriots.”

The boundaries in question (UN photos)

Could Shots be Fired?

Whilst there is the possibility for military conflict, especially as some Colombian navy vessels have failed to leave Nicaragua’s new territory; it appears that many of the comments from the Colombian government are nothing more than knee-jerk reactions and nationalistic rhetoric. But if violence did break out, it would not be an even fight.

According to an article that appeared in the Nicaraguan daily La Prensa, Nicaragua has a defence budget of US$67 million, as compared to the US$14 billion Colombia spends annually. Furthermore, the South American nation has a navy of 34,964 personnel; Nicaragua has just 800.

Or to put it another way; Colombia’s annual defence expenditure is greater than Nicaragua’s whole GDP.

Indeed, this disparity led one Colombian columnist for El Tiempo to write: “If Colombia doesn’t want to remove its warships from the zone, Nicaragua will not be able to force them out.”

But days after the ICJ ruling was made, the Nicaraguan National Assembly passed a motion to allow the armed forces of the United States, Russia, and Cuba to enter their new maritime territory for six months in order to participate in joint activities against drug trafficking.

Furthermore, reactions from the US were acquiescent, a positive sign for Nicaragua since Colombia is a key ally of the US in Latin America. Phyllis Powers, the US Ambassador to Nicaragua, said, “Really, this is an issue between Nicaragua and Colombia and my government is confident that they will resolve it between them.”

Meanwhile, senior White House national security advisor for the Western Hemisphere, Ricardo Zuñiga, echoed the view of Powers: “The ruling and the dispute are bilateral issues between Colombia and Nicaragua on which we do not take a position.”

Pan-American Pains

Even if violence does not break out, the dispute will still have rattled Latin America.

In response to the ruling by the ICJ, Colombia’s president announced that his country is pulling out of the Bogotá Pact, which was signed by most American nations in 1948 with the intention of settling disputes peacefully by bringing cases to international institutions (such as placing jurisdiction within the ICJ).

According to Santos, “The borders between nations cannot be in the hands of a court of law. They must be drawn by agreement between the countries involved.”

However, Secretary General of the Organisation of American States (OAS), Jose Miguel Insulza, views the decision to leave the Pact as troubling for the Pan-American system. “What I have always tried to achieve is that the great part of the Latin American and Caribbean nations and also those of North America subscribe to and ratify the treaties of the OAS, and for that reason an exit is always prejudicial; certainly there is always damage,” he said.

Indeed, several Latin American countries have come out and expressed their disapproval of Colombia’s response. The presidents of both Peru and Chile have been vocal in the stance that the ICJ’s ruling must be followed.

This dispute could have a further destabilising effect on the region since many Latin American nations have their own cases currently being presided over by the ICJ. Should other countries leave the Bogotá Pact if the court rules against them, then this could greatly endanger future conflict resolution mechanisms.

A Pyrrhic Victory?

But this dispute is not just about sovereignty and nationalistic chest-beating.

Providence Island in the San Andrés Archipelago (photo by Luis Barreto)

Thanks to the ICJ ruling, Nicaragua has seen its exclusive economic zone in the Caribbean double in size. This means that it will be able to extend its fishing activities further afield. There is also rumored to be sizeable, untapped oil reserves in the new territory.

However, the victory for Nicaragua might turn out to be pyrrhic, since with more power comes more responsibility.

Even with the assistance of international navies, Nicaragua is now in charge of Caribbean waters used to traffic drugs northwards from South America. This changing of the guard might see traffickers rubbing their hands with glee as responsibility has passed from Latin America’s largest navy to one of its smallest.

Roberto Cajina, an expert on Nicaraguan defence, said: “Our victory in The Hague was a bitter fruit because Nicaragua does not have the capacity to guarantee permanent security of its newly acquired maritime zone.”

Indeed, the decision could see Nicaragua forced into the escalating the ‘drug war’ that plagues other Central American nations, but which it has remained relatively distant from. Nicaraguan officials have boasted about their country being a ‘firewall’ in this problem.

But now it will have to go on the offensive instead of the defensive, and considerably change its military planning, that according to Cajina lacks “strategy” and “vision”. He draws attention to the recent decision by the government to spend US$244 million of a limited budget on a satellite from China and Russian-made assault vehicles that can only patrol rivers, not seas.

Most commentators expect Colombia to calm down in the coming weeks and seek a proper resolution to the dispute. Nicaragua will also be hoping for a speedy resolution, especially a peaceful one to remove the Colombian vessels that are still in the country’s lost territory.

Not one of the main subjects approached in this weekend’s regional meeting ended with agreement. The Summit of the Americas, held in Cartagena, Colombia, this last weekend is the annual meeting of all leaders from the Western hemisphere.

Cuba, drugs and the Falkland Islands/Malvinas dominated the meeting as expected, but the leaders disagreed on each of these topics. Although, as Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos pointed out, “Who thought that an agreement would be reached here about the Falklands and Cuba?”

“The fact there is no declaration is not a failure — just the opposite,” President Santos told reporters after the summit. “The fact that these topics were discussed is a success… hopefully within three years we will have Cuba as part of the summit.”

Cristina Fernández de Kirchner reacted badly to Colombian President Santos omission of the Falklands in his opening speech, allegedly whispering, “You forgot about the Malvinas.” She left the summit early, reportedly due to diplomatic tension over the issue.

The Cuban Elephant in the Room

Before the meeting, a few Latin American Presidents took issue with the exclusion of Cuba. Ecuadoran President Rafael Correa boycotted the Summit in protest of this decision, and Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega did not attend partly due to the same reason.

It was discussed during the summit whether Cuba should be allowed to attend next time in Panama, 2015, but a consensus was not reached. Host President Santos called for this issue to be resolved by 2015, saying it was “unthinkable” not to invite Cuba to Panama.

Canada and United States strongly opposed the communist nation’s inclusion, with President Obama adding that Cuba “has not yet moved to democracy, has not yet observed basic human rights.”

Drug Issues

Drug trafficking was high on the agenda, with Guatemalan President Otto Pérez Molina calling for a discussion on the legalisation of drugs prior to the summit. Most of the leaders agreed that something needs to be done, and that the War on Drugs has not been successful.

A decision was made to direct the Organisation of American States (OAS) to conduct an independent investigation into the most effective way to prevent drug trafficking and related crime. President Obama reiterated that the United States would not support the legalisation of drugs.

Not All Bad

Although there was no consensus on the more controversial, the summit produced promising agreements as well. A regional commitment was decided to tackle poverty, close the inequality and technology gap, combat crime organisations, and promote commercial integration to name a few.

A free trade agreement was reached by the host nation and the United States, bolstering an already booming Colombian economy. The deal, starting 15^th May to see 80% of US consumer and industrial products imports become duty free. President Santos declared the pact was a dream come true.

First held in 2009, the conference addresses issues that concern the region from drug trafficking to trade and energy.

Salvadorian President Mauricio Funes and Nicaragua’s Daniel Ortega have refused to give their support to the cause of drug decriminalisation currently debated in many Latin American countries.

The two were notably absent during the recent summit of the Central American Integration System (SICA) held in Antigua, Guatemala , where the issue was a key point of the agenda.

Mauricio Funes and Daniel Ortega only sent diplomats to represent them at the conference. Some days before, pressured by the Catholic sector, the former Nicaraguan Sandinista guerrillero publicly opposed the legalisation of drug commerce.

“In Nicaragua there are no conditions to decriminalise drugs. If we decriminalise it, it would be like saying that we are drug addicted and we are legalising crime,” said the president three days before the beginning of Antigua’s SICA summit.

Few days before, the Archbishop of Managua, Leopoldo Brenes, dismissed the possibility of decriminalising drug trafficking, calling it “a threat” for the region.

The president of the Episcopal Conference, René Sandigo, has previously expressed similar opinions.

Guatemala’s President Otto Perez Molina, host of the SICA summit, announced that the main agreement of the summit was to deepen the debate on drug decriminalisation during a new meeting in Honduras. This was on the eve of the Summit of the Americas in Colombia (scheduled to take place on the 12th, 13th and 14th of April in Cartagena).

A common document outlining the regional position on the issue will be then presented. Costa Rica and Panama presidents Laura Chincilla and Ricardo Martinelli, are strong supporters of the initiative. Otto Perez Molina is, however, the principal driving force behind the legalisation strategies currently debated.

The strategy is intended to weaken the influence of drug barons in Central America.

“We realise that decriminalisation is one way we could do it. It does not mean it is the only way, but is at the table of debate and discussion,” he said at the opening of the SICA Summit.

The host outlined a four-point strategy. The first contemplates a crackdown on drug trafficking. A second point is to create a regional Criminal Court with a cross-country jurisdiction, a flexible and effective judicial structure to prosecute offenders involved in the narcotic business.

The last two lines of discussion are the biggest bets. One is to decriminalise the drug traffic flow by creating a border corridor where the substance commerce could be tracked down more easily, while the other intends to create a form of compensation for Latin American countries actively involved in the fight against drug trafficking. This last point involves reaching an agreement with the United States, one of the main countries where drug is consumed most in the world.

The government of Nicaragua announced that it will respect the opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague at the public hearings on Tuesday on precautionary measures filed by Costa Rica.

The hearing will take place in the context of litigation between the two Central American nations by a border zone.

Nicaraguan president, Daniel Ortega, stressed that his country has always respected the judgments of the international tribunal.

He also recalled that in 2009 “the same court ruled that Nicaragua had the right to dredge the river San Juan.”

The president said that Nicaragua has not occupied the island Calero, a territory located between the mouth of San Juan and Colorado rivers.

And he reiterated that they had not installed a Nicaraguan military base in that area either, as it was claimed by Costa Rica.

He said his country only carries out patrols in the area to combat drug trafficking.

The conflict between Costa Rica and Nicaragua began in mid-July 2010. The Nicaraguan government began dredging the river San Juan, which was considered by Costa Rica to be a violation of their space.

Last August, Costa Rica denounced Nicaragua to the Organization of American States (OAS). During the first weeks of 2011, the border dispute was brought to the international court.

The Hague tribunal in 2009 ruled the sovereignty of Nicaragua over the San Juan river and the right to regulate navigation.

The court also determined that Costa Rica can navigate the affluent for commercial fees.

Story courtesy of Agencia Pulsar, a news agency run by AMARC-ALC network of community radios.

The president of Nicaragua, Daniel Ortega, expressed his willingness to talk peacefully with Costa Rica to solve border problems between the two.

This was during a meeting with Secretary General of the Organization of American States (OAS).

José Miguel Insulza, Ortega said his government “will for peace” but stressed that they will defend “the rights which belongs to the Nicaraguan people.”

The president proposed to Costa Rica to continue the advancement of signaling the common border between the two nations to progress solving the border problem of the river San Juan.

He noted that it should be clear that the river belongs to Nicaragua “in full and sovereign.”

On the other hand, Ortega also expressed concern about the possibility that third parties could use this situation between Nicaragua and Costa Rica to create more confrontation.

Costa Rica and Nicaragua hold a border dispute by dredging the river San Juan and San Jose’s complaint about the alleged presence of Nicaraguan army soldiers on the southern border.

In 2009 the International court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague ruled Nicaragua’s sovereignty over the river and the right to regulate navigation while Costa Rica may navigate the tributary with commercial fines.

Story courtesy of Agencia Pulsar, a news agency run by AMARC-ALC network of community radios