Bolivia's land-locked navy dreams of leaving Lake Titicaca

From the shores of Lake Titicaca high in the Andes, you can still see the Bolivian navy puttering around, in the hope thatthey may, one day, see the bright blue ocean to the west once again. While La Paz stands on the abyss of civil war, its population starving and its economy in free fall, its leaders are strangely preoccupied with rectifying what has long been relegated to the history books.

From the shores of Lake Titicaca high in the Andes, you can still see the Bolivian navy puttering around, in the hope thatthey may, one day, see the bright blue ocean to the west once again. While La Paz stands on the abyss of civil war, its population starving and its economy in free fall, its leaders are strangely preoccupied with rectifying what has long been relegated to the history books.

It has been 100 years since landlocked Bolivia lost its sea access to Chile, following the War of the Pacific. But every year since then, Bolivians celebrate "Bolivian Sea Day". This 23 March will be like the others, when the navy obsessively salutes the remains of Eduardo Avaroa, an officer killed by the Chileans in a battle in 1879.

Bolivian leaders raise the sea issue every year at the General Assembly of the Organisation of American States. In fact, it's been a constant thread of Bolivian foreign policy to blame its woes on its lack of coastline. They have pleaded for help from the region, and for years these appeals have fallen on deaf ears. But, in recent weeks, Bolivia's age-old cries have been grabbing unprecedented international attention.

It all began at the Ibero-American Summit in Bolivia in mid-November, when Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan President, said he would one day like to bathe in a Bolivian sea. While this diplomatic faux pas may have seemed unsurprising from such a provocative character, the chorus of statements from other world leaders in support of Bolivia's campaign came as a shock to neighbouring Chile.

Kofi Annan offered his help to resolve the issue. Jimmy Carter threw in his hat, saying Chile should offer a fair solution. And Luis Inacio Lula, Brazil's new President, also expressed his desire to see a solution to a problem he characterised as threatening the region's stability. In Chile, the issue has forced emergency debates in Congress and is dominating talk shows and front pages.

It is a political nightmare, not least because President Ricardo Lagos has been trying to promote diplomacy through multilateral institutions, an approach highlighted in its work with other non-permanent members of the Security Council, in opposition to the war on Iraq. But the tables have turned in Chile's approach since Mr Chavez's comments, as it insists this is a strictly bilateral issue.

Soledad Alvear, the Chilean Foreign Affairs Minister, tried to extend an olive branch on Thursday: "Chile works with all countries of the world seeking relationships built on peace and friendship - of course, very particularly with our neighbours."

Carlos Mesa, the Bolivian President, responded that there is peace, but not friendship between Chile and Bolivia. He said his country will force sea access on to the agenda at the Summit of the Americas in Mexico next week.

Mr Mesa says the summit is the perfect venue because it deals with development, democracy and stability in the region. And he says Bolivia's lack of sea has compromised all.

Within Chile, political forces are lining up against any transfer of territory. Joaquìn Lavìn, the right-wing presidential hopeful and Santiago mayor, is urging the government not to cede "even a millimetre of territory", and to reach a "modern-day" solution.

Chile is not entirely opposed to giving Bolivia land. In 1975, Augusto Pinochet tried to negotiate a land transfer to Bolivia of a 10km-wide corridor of Chilean territory. But Peru prevented it. Under a peace treaty signed in 1929, Chile cannot give up any of its former Peruvian territories (such as the area in question).

President Lagos stressed on Thursday that Chile's hands were tied due to the international treaty, which must be respected. Senior officials in the Chilean government have quietly said that Peru will never concede, because it does not want to lose its border with Chile, for strategic reasons. And Peru had been silent on the issue, until late on Thursday. In response to Lagos's comments, Carlos Ferrera Costa, the president of Peru's ministerial council, said Peru will allow a sea passage for Bolivia. Checkmate. Now Chile will need to find a new excuse for its opposition, such as fears of narcotrafficking through a sovereign Bolivian port. Or it will be forced to put its cards on the table about how it really feels about a Bolivian sea.

Still, some experts say Bolivia's campaign is a pipe dream, and it is unnecessary because they already have free access to Chilean ports. Claudio Fuentes, the vice-president of the Latin American Faculty of Social Sciences, an independent think tank, said 300,000 tons of Bolivian products move across Chilean ports every year.

The sea issue is symptomatic of the remaining territorial tensions and the appeal of political populism in the region; both problems threatening democracy and the stability of the region. But these are two problems on which next week's Summit of the Americas will not be focusing.