A rift over ports and the export of natural gas has taken Bolivia and Chile to startling levels of acrimony.

Mario Canseco

Ever since the end of the 1879 war against Chile, Bolivia has tried several times to recover its lost ports. The last bilateral effort to find a solution ended with an unenthusiastic response by Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet, which led to the end of diplomatic relations between the two countries in 1978.

The developments of the past six months have brought this lengthy dispute back into the spotlight, after Bolivian president Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada presented a proposal to export natural gas.

The landlocked country had already lined up a consortium to begin construction on the project, but required sea access in order to finalize the deal. Bolivia sits on the continent's second-largest natural gas reservoir, and the United States and Mexico were mentioned as prospective customers.

This past October, Sánchez de Lozada was forced to resign over the controversial plan. While championing the idea of exporting natural gas as a way to relieve Bolivia's dire financial situation, the president hinted at merely using a Chilean port for the pipeline, and stayed away from all questions regarding sovereignty.

Vice-president Carlos Mesa took over from Sánchez de Lozada and vowed to continue with the gas pipeline project. The new head of state dramatically changed the position on sea access by not seeking consent from Chile's government, turning the entire project into a debate over the repatriation of what once was Bolivia's territory.

The public quickly applauded the government's new rationale, and Mesa's ratings soared during his first weeks in office. According to an October 2003 poll by Apoyo published in El Deber, 66 per cent of respondents approved of the president's performance.

A few weeks after Mesa took office, Chileans appeared to welcome the idea of sharing their ports. 47 per cent of respondents to a November 2003 poll by Fundación Futuro argued positively for Bolivia's development, provided the issue of sovereignty was not discussed.

The debate reached the boiling point at the Special Summit of the Americans, held earlier this month in Monterrey, Mexico. Mesa made the most of an opportunity to discuss the plight of Bolivia in an international stage, and urged Chilean head of state Ricardo Lagos to find a solution to the land dispute. Lagos suggested the restoration of diplomatic ties with Bolivia, but denied the existence of any sovereignty misunderstanding.

The quick exchange between the presidents has led to feelings of animosity in both nations. Many Chileans are no longer willing to help their neighboring country. This month—after the meetings in Monterrey were over—87.8 per cent of respondents to an Ipsos survey disagreed with allowing sea access to Bolivia.

Negotiations towards a much-heralded free trade accord between Bolivia and Chile were suspended in November 2003, a few days after Sánchez de Lozada was forced out. The deal had been positively regarded by many Bolivians, but not anymore. 61 per cent of respondents to a Marketing SRL survey rejected the agreement, another sign of increasing reciprocal hostility.

On the domestic front, Mesa is looking for support. The president has promised a nationwide referendum on the sale of natural gas—an idea originally proposed by Sánchez de Lozada—but the wording of the plebiscite remains unclear.

In a Jan. 4 televised speech, Mesa explained that public backing was essential to continue with reforms, and scheduled the consultation for Mar. 28. The public vote was put on hold for at least a month, as Bolivia's National Electoral Court is missing three members. The additional weeks might help defuse the current pessimistic mindset on both sides of the border.

Archive Search

Search the Angus Reid Global Monitor Politics In Depth archive.