The Terrestrial Triangle Dispute Between Peru and Chile: A Legal-Spatial Analysis Based on the ICJ Ruling (2014)

Abstract

The controversy over the land triangle between Peru and Chile represents one of the most symbolic and complex border disputes in contemporary South America. Although the International Court of Justice resolved the maritime dispute between the two countries in 2014, the ruling left out a clear definition of the starting point of the land border. This omission reignited the debate over the sovereignty of a 3.4-hectare strip of land known as the land triangle. This article critically analyzes this dispute from a legal, documentary, and geopolitical perspective. Using qualitative methodology and content analysis, it examines the legal basis of the 1929 Treaty of Lima, the technical evidence of the 1930 Joint Boundary Commission, subsequent agreements, and the interpretation of the ICJ ruling. The results show that the Peruvian position, which maintains that Concordia is the starting point of the land border, is based on a coherent interpretation supported by international law and diplomatic practice. On the other hand, the Chilean position is based on technical alignment agreements that have no legal hierarchy superior to the current treaty and no competence to redefine boundaries. It is concluded that the conflict, although of minor territorial scale, has a high symbolic, historical, and political content, which complicates its resolution. Finally, it raises the need to resume bilateral dialogue, institutionalize border consultation mechanisms, and strengthen technical cooperation as a way to avoid diplomatic escalation. The importance of the case as a precedent in the peaceful resolution of border disputes in Latin America and as a case study on the interaction between law, diplomacy, and historical memory is highlighted.