Analysis
Because each side was convinced of the legitimacy of its own claim the pretensions of the other party were considered as usurpatory, an ill-omened beginning that burdened the relations of both countries.
The treaty did resolve an immediate concern of each side, but subsequently it became evident that in the far south, about 42°S to 52°S, article 1 of the treaty posed problems of interpretation and application.
Some Argentine political publicists argue that articles 2 and 3 of the treaty were ambiguous, but they have to admit the truth that the later Argentine interpretations were refused by the international tribunal, that Argentine maps of the first decade also applied the Chilean interpretation and the two papal proposals as well as the treaty of 1984 maintained the Chilean interpretation of the treaty, at least in so far as the land border line.
There could be other reasons for the Argentine difficulties over the interpretation. Michael Morries observes about the Argentine policy:
- «Rearguard Argentine efforts has been made to gain recognition for some kind of shared management regime for the strait, in order to mitigate what was perceived as the striking diplomatic defeat for Argentina in the 1881 treaty granting Chile control over the strait.»
The Southern Patagonian Ice Field is the last still pending issue in order to apply the 1881 Boundary Treaty.
Read more about this topic: Boundary Treaty Of 1881 Between Chile And Argentina
Famous quotes containing the word analysis:
“A commodity appears at first sight an extremely obvious, trivial thing. But its analysis brings out that it is a very strange thing, abounding in metaphysical subtleties and theological niceties.”
—Karl Marx (1818–1883)
“Ask anyone committed to Marxist analysis how many angels on the head of a pin, and you will be asked in return to never mind the angels, tell me who controls the production of pins.”
—Joan Didion (b. 1934)
“Whatever else American thinkers do, they psychologize, often brilliantly. The trouble is that psychology only takes us so far. The new interest in families has its merits, but it will have done us all a disservice if it turns us away from public issues to private matters. A vision of things that has no room for the inner life is bankrupt, but a psychology without social analysis or politics is both powerless and very lonely.”
—Joseph Featherstone (20th century)