Actual and Future Threats Emanating from the Commons: A Chilean Approach

• Author: Francisca Moller - Jorge Balaresque
• Position: Professor of International Law, Chilean Naval War College (Academia de Guerra Naval) - Chilean Navy (Ret.), is Professor and Head of the Strategy Department, Chilean Naval War College
• Pages: 157-173

VIII

Actual and Future Threats Emanating

from the Commons: AChilean Approach

Francisca Moller and Jorge Balaresque*

Introduction

Strategy is about solving problems—in fact, the best strategy is the best solu-

tion to that problem. This very simple way of looking at strategy is in itself

very complex. The problem that needs to be solved must be well defined and un-

derstood and the strategic solution has to be feasible with the means that are in

hand. To complicate things further, most of the situations that need solving are

probably all "in the future." Additionally, the problem may be simply stated as

"terrorism," but we all know that is not enough. Apart from some novelist, who

could have conceived that commercial airplanes could be used in such ahorrible

manner as they were on September 11?

This "solution" must also fit scenarios that themselves will undoubtedly differ

from region to region throughout the world, even from country to country. Areso-

lution that is good for one region or country may not be applicable to another.

Thus, when in 1947, aChilean lawyer from Vina del Mar—does anybody today re-

member his name? 1—presented his theory of an expanded coastal State territorial

*Francisca Moller is Professor of International Law, Chilean Naval War College (Academia de

Guerra Naval). Rear Admiral Jorge Balaresque, Chilean Navy (Ret.), is Professor and Head of the

Strategy Department, Chilean Naval War College. The views expressed in this article are those of

the authors alone and do not necessarily represent the views of the Chilean Government, the

Chilean Navy or the Chilean Naval War College.

Threats Emanatingfrom the Commons: AChilean Approach

sea, who anticipated that it would evolve into the 200-nautical-mile exclusive eco-

nomic zone (EEZ) that is now universally accepted? In 1947, he was presenting a

solution for the risk to the national whaling industry as foreign whalers operating

just off Chilean shores were very quickly exterminating the mammals.

Solutions also have their own levels ofresponsibility: the political or grand strategic level

decision makers have to be able to recognize the problems, state their objectives and

create the necessary means—and perhaps the legal structure—to attain them. On the

other hand, the "means" or forces that will implement the policies need clear-cut in-

structions as to what they can or cannot do in resolving the problem. As we all know

with regard to threats at sea, there will always be aconflict between the freedom of the

seas and certain control measures that would help to confront the threats effectively.

Globalization has resulted in the rapid advance of communications capabilities

and technology, agreat mobility ofhumans and capital, aweakening of commercial

barriers and the creation of important multinational corporations, which every day

acquire agreater importance in international affairs. All this has made borders

more permeable and the world economies more interdependent, with all the ad-

vantages and disadvantages that this entails. Globalization provides enormous ben-

efits and opportunities, but it also has negative effects. Unfortunately the benefits

are still concentrated in afew nations, creating false expectations, rivalries, tensions

and divisions among the rest. We know that today most conflicts are intra-State

conflicts. These originate for multiple reasons, including lack of governance, cor-

ruption and ethnic and religious problems. All of these are causes ofinstability, civil

war, social disorder, systematic violations of human rights, massive migration and

frontier tensions. These effects not only create instability in the States where they oc-

cur but also have the potential to cause negative repercussions within the region or

throughout the whole international system. The world has seen apolarization of

those who support and those who oppose globalization. The former focus on the

possible benefits associated with participating in the global economy. The latter are

concerned that they are too far removed from the level of economic development

that would permit them access to globalization's benefits, or they consider global-

ization to be the cause of all their problems—the loss of national identity, the relax-

ation of moral values and the weakening of the principle of sovereignty of States.

In aglobalized world, we have not only the traditional threats, but new threats

giving rise to new risks have emerged. These are not planned or organized by a

State—at least not openly. These risks rise from the proliferation of international

criminal organizations, piracy, cyber attacks, small arms trafficking, the spread of

weapons of mass destruction, drug trafficking and terrorism. We must also men-

tion potential AIDS and bird flu pandemics and natural disasters and other prob-

lems, such as droughts, floods, soil degradation and overexploitation of natural

158