On Feb. 2, the government-controlled Nicaraguan Institute of Territorial Studies published a new, “official” map, altering the limits agreed to by both countries since 1897, when an American military engineer, acting as an arbiter, clearly defined the border line.
The redrawing is the most recent action of a campaign started in past August, after Nicaraguan troops occupied a 3.5 square kilometer peninsula in the North-Eastern tip of Costa Rica and started a series of works with devastating environmental damage.
Known both as Isla Los Portillo and Harbor Head, the area is part of a universally-recognized wetland. Nicaraguan San Juan River flows through its west side; to the East stands a salty lagoon, protected from the Caribbean by narrow sand banks.
Right after the military occupation, Nicaragua dredged a canal across the small peninsula, thus cutting it out from Costa Rican territory and directly connecting the San Juan River to the lagoon.
The occupation openly violated the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Costa Rica. Deforestation was the immediate environmental impact, but a more serious one will follow: the destruction of the sand banks, because the river flows directly through the canal. The impact upon the wetland and its surrounding poor communities on both sides of the border will be devastating.
If these territorial and environmental aggressions have not escalated into armed conflict, with immediate severe repercussions for Central America, it is because Costa Rica does not have an army. It is a peaceful country; for six decades our security has been based upon international law and multilateral institutions.
The Nicaraguan government tried to justify its action by falsely claiming that the border set 114 years ago had never been verified “on the ground” and that, having done so, it determined that Isla Los Portillo is part of Nicaragua, not Costa Rica.
Using flawed maps to support its de facto aggression is nothing new. Right after it occurred, six months ago, Nicaraguan commander Edén Pastora, the man in charge of dredging the canal, resorted to an incorrect Google map to support the occupation. After Google´s admission and correction of the flaw destroyed Pastora´s argument, then came the “inspection on the ground”, which led to the new and altered “official” map.
Even if Nicaraguan claims to Costa Rican territory were sincere and well grounded, they came after its president, Daniel Ortega, had unilaterally resorted to military force. Invade now and explain later – that has been his cynical policy.
• Immediately after the occupation, Costa Rica took the case to the Organization of American States (OAS), which on Nov. 18 and Dec. 7 asked for clearing the area of military forces. However, Nicaragua has rejected the competence of the OAS in the case.
• We requested and obtained an urgent mission of observers from the Secretariat of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International Importance to evaluate the environmental damages produced by the occupation. Its report, issued on Jan. 3 and factual in its assessment, was disregarded and discredited by Nicaragua.
• We tried to engage the Ibero-American community in a political solution to the conflict. However, President Ortega did not dare to attend a summit of heads of state from Latin America, Spain and Portugal held in Argentina at the beginning of December. Instead, he sent the president of the nonindependent Judiciary Power.
• Costa Rica also denounced Nicaragua at the International Court of Justice for violating the border agreement of 1897, occupying and damaging part of our territory and resorting to force. We anticipate its ruling.
Nicaragua´s intervention in Costa Rica is a major blow to international law and to peace and stability in the Americas. It is the first time, since a brief war between El Salvador and Honduras in 1969, that troops of a Central American country have occupied the territory of a neighbor.
On top of all this, a hate campaign waged by Ortega’s government against Costa Rica is poisoning long-term relations between the two countries and people. This is particularly serious for us, since 10 percent of our population is composed of Nicaraguan migrants.
Despite such serious implications, the international community has shown a minor interest in the case. May the message be that if no weapons are fired and no casualties are counted, there is no reason for concern? This would be a terrible message for disarmed countries such as Costa Rica, and for convincing others to invest in development and institutional building instead than spending on weapons.
What is at issue, therefore, is much more than a serious bilateral conflict.
**Laura Chinchilla is president of Costa Rica.
