Abstract
From 2008 to 2013, Peru and Chile were entangled in a maritime dispute presented and argued at the International Court of Justice in The Hague (ICJ). While the most visible stages of the case at the ICJ took place during 2012/2013 and ended with a favourable judgment towards Peru’s arguments, both countries became increasingly amicable in several other areas of common interest. Moreover, lately both countries have become much more economically interdependent on one another, which can partially explicate a constructive approach towards improving relations. This paper will present evidence that potentially explains change in rival relationships utilizing theoretical frameworks that relate to nation branding and to public diplomacy. Furthermore, it argues that societal-level engagement via the Peruvian diaspora arguably contributed to the improvement in Peruvian–Chilean relations. By means of interviews with relevant agents and analysis of media and secondary data, it will describe how Chilean society became receptive to Peru’s charm offensive.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
From Encyclopedia Britannica Online: In “Spanish Guerra del Pacífico, (1879–1883), [was a] conflict involving Chile, Bolivia, and Peru, which resulted in Chilean annexation of valuable disputed territory on the Pacific coast. It grew out of a dispute between Chile and Bolivia over control of a part of the Atacama Desert that lies between the 23rd and 26th parallels on the Pacific coast of South America.” Source: https://global.britannica.com/event/War-of-the-Pacific, accessed on February 14, 2017.
This adjacent land was denominated colloquially as the land triangle (triángulo terrestre), since this portion of the Pacific Ocean, which Peru claimed and won is shaped much like a triangle as well.
As of late, Anholt’s recent work has sought to bridge CI and PD in a more balanced manner. Furthermore, he has presented a new concept entitled the Good Country Index, which aligns much more coherently with issues of global governance and arguably is closer to PD than CI.
Part of the public diplomacy conceptual discussion of this text is part of the author’s doctoral dissertation proposal.
Some analyses estimate 250,000 Peruvians residing in Chile, the report entitled "Informe del Observatorio Iberoamericano sobre Movilidad Humana, Migraciones y Desarrollo (Obimid) June–August, 2016. La Migración en Chile: Breve reporte y caracterización". provides the estimate used in the paper. See: http://www.extranjeria.gob.cl/media/2016/08/informe_julio_agosto_2016.pdf.
The author is indebted to Carolina Merino. She compiled macroeconomic and survey data, as well as the interviewing she conducted contributed to the empirical aspects of this text. Her work is part of her Master's thesis comparing Peruvian and Chilean gastrodiplomacy.
Chile's International Economic and Trade Department provides statistical data via reports on Chile's FDI.
Such as student exchange scholarships, namely the Beca Alianza del Pacífico, for university students from Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Peru.
The survey was conducted by the Universidad Bernardo O'Higgins (Chile) and Universidad Norbert Wiener (Peru) in Santiago and in Lima with about 1000 surveyed in both countries' capital cities.
Interview conducted in Santiago, Chile on October 17, 2016.
Per interview with Chef Carlo von Muhlenbrock, via email, December 2, 2016.
Interviewed via email, food critic Daniel Greve replied on December 6, 2016.
An echo chamber is a concept that explains the consumption of media content that aligns with your views, and consequently those individuals rarely expose themselves to news that might be contrary to them.
A social media analysis concept that describes how those users who hold a prominent role in the platform can influence discussion topics and eventually alter the opinions of other users (or really provide an opinion/viewpoint for the uninformed).
References
Anholt, S. 2007. Competitive Identity: The New Brand Management for Nations, Cities and Regions. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bonilla-García, M.A., and A.D. López-Suárez. 2016. Ejemplificación del proceso metodológico de la teoría fundamentada. Cinta de moebio 57: 305–315.
Cull, N.J. 2009. Public Diplomacy before Gullion: The Evolution of a Phrase. The Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy, 19–23. Milton Park: Taylor & Francis.
Cull, N.J. 2013. The Long Road to Public Diplomacy 2.0: The Internet in US Public Diplomacy. International Studies Review 15 (1): 123–139.
Erazo, J.L. 2014. Fallo de La Haya: controversia maritima Perú contra Chile: escenarios juridico y politico. Sáez Editores.
Gilboa, E. 2008. Searching for a Theory of Public Diplomacy. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 616 (1): 55–77.
Hocking, B., J. Melissen, S. Riordan, and P. Sharp. 2012. Futures for Diplomacy: Integrative Diplomacy in the 21st Century. The Hague: Netherlands Institute of International Relations “Clingendael”.
Melissen, J. 2005. The New Public Diplomacy: Soft Power in International Relations. Palgrave: Macmillan.
Melissen, J. 2011. Beyond the New Public Diplomacy. The Hague: Netherlands Institute of International Relations’ Clingendael’.
Méndez-Coto, M.V. 2016. Diplomacia pública y marca-país en las Américas. Un acercamiento a las experiencias de Brasil, Chile, México y Perú. Temas de Nuestra América. Revista de Estudios Latinoamericanos 32 (59): 81–98.
Nye, J.S. 1990. Bound to Lead: The Changing Nature of American Power. New York: Basic Books.
Nye, J.S. 2008. Public Diplomacy and Soft Power. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 616 (1): 94–109.
Pamment, J. 2014. Articulating Influence: Towards a Research Agenda for Interpreting the Evaluation of Soft Power, Public Diplomacy and Nation Brands. Public Relations Review 40 (1): 50–59.
Portland Communications. 2015. Soft Power 30 Report. http://www.softpower30.portland-communications.com/ranking/. Accessed 13 Feb 2016.
Snow, N. 2009. Rethinking Public Diplomacy. The Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy. Milton Park: Taylor & Francis.
Strauss, A., and J.M. Corbin. 1997. Grounded Theory in Practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Tuch, H.N. 1990. Communicating with the World: US Public Diplomacy Overseas. New York: Macmillan.
World Economic Forum. Which Countries Come Top for ‘Soft Power’? https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/07/which-countries-come-top-for-soft-power/. Accessed 6 Dec 2016.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Aguirre, D. Conceptual implications of Peru’s recent charm offensive in Chile: societal-level engagement driving a shift in bilateral relations?. Place Brand Public Dipl 16, 121–130 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41254-019-00131-9
Revised:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41254-019-00131-9