The Atlantic’s turbulent currents hold more than just shipping lanes; they reflect a complex and often fraught legacy of historical agreements and contemporary geopolitical ambitions. Disputes over fishing rights, seabed resources, and maritime boundaries continue to simmer, fueled by a waning respect for the 15th-century Treaty of Tordesillas and the rise of new naval powers. Understanding this dynamic is critical for stabilizing alliances and preventing escalating tensions in a strategically vital region.
The Treaty of Tordesillas, signed in 1494 between Spain and Portugal, effectively divided the “New World” outside of Africa and Europe along a north-south meridian, granting Spain control of the west and Portugal the east. While the treaty’s direct applicability has diminished with the decline of European colonial empires, its impact resonates profoundly today, shaping the foundational legal and territorial claims of nations like Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, and the Falkland Islands. Recent events – particularly heightened naval activity around the South Atlantic – underscore the enduring relevance of this historical division.
The primary stakeholders in this evolving situation are numerous and deeply intertwined. Brazil, bolstered by its vast coastline and burgeoning economy, increasingly asserts its rights within the disputed areas of the Atlantic. Argentina, maintaining a claim rooted in historical legitimacy and access to vital fishing grounds, views Brazil’s expansionism as a significant threat to its sovereignty. The United Kingdom, through its control of the Falkland Islands, firmly defends its territorial rights, citing the islands’ historical connection to Britain and the right to self-determination. Furthermore, the rise of China, with its growing naval presence and assertive claims to seabed resources, introduces a new, powerful actor into the equation. NATO allies have expressed concerns about China’s expanding influence and its potential to disrupt established maritime order.
Data from the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) reveals a surge in overlapping claims within the Atlantic. According to the International Seabed Authority (ISA), applications for deep-sea mining rights in the Atlantic Ridge – a vast underwater plateau rich in polymetallic nodules – have increased dramatically over the past six months, primarily from China, Russia, and several European nations. The ISA’s latest report indicates that approximately 20 million square kilometers of seabed within the Atlantic basin are currently subject to competing claims, creating a potential “resource war” scenario.
"The legacy of Tordesillas isn’t just a historical artifact; it’s a persistent, underlying tension,” explains Dr. Eleanor Vance, a maritime law specialist at the Institute for Strategic Studies. “The legal framework is fundamentally outdated, designed for a world of two colonial powers. The sheer number of actors and the value of the resources at stake create a volatile environment ripe for conflict.” She adds, “The risk of miscalculation, particularly involving naval forces, is exponentially higher given the ambiguities surrounding jurisdiction and enforcement.”
Recent events have amplified these concerns. In July 2024, the Brazilian Navy conducted a series of military exercises in the Rio Grande do Sul region, ostensibly to protect fishing rights, but the activity was interpreted by Argentina as a provocative demonstration of force. Simultaneously, Chinese research vessels continued to operate in the South Atlantic, mapping seabed resources and conducting geological surveys – actions that the UK views as a circumvention of international law. NATO’s maritime patrols have increased in the region, raising the possibility of direct confrontation if tensions escalate further.
Looking ahead, the next six months will likely see a continuation of this pattern: increased naval deployments, further seabed mapping operations, and continued diplomatic maneuvering. The ISA’s upcoming annual conference in November 2024 will be a critical juncture, as nations attempt to negotiate a framework for resource management and dispute resolution. Longer-term, the situation could lead to several outcomes. A more optimistic scenario involves enhanced cooperation through the ISA, potentially facilitated by a new international treaty on seabed mining. However, a more pessimistic outlook suggests a protracted period of instability, punctuated by periodic flashpoints and the potential for armed clashes.
“The challenge is not simply to respect the existing legal framework, but to fundamentally rethink how we manage resources in a world of multiple actors,” argues Dr. Marcus Bellwether, a geopolitical analyst at the Atlantic Security Forum. “The alternative – a fragmented, unregulated Atlantic – represents a far greater threat to global stability.” He anticipates that the coming decade will be defined by “a strategic competition for influence in the Atlantic, with the potential to destabilize alliances and create new security dilemmas.”
Ultimately, the enduring legacy of the Treaty of Tordesillas serves as a stark reminder of the complex interplay between historical agreements, national ambitions, and the pursuit of resources. Navigating this landscape requires a commitment to diplomacy, a willingness to revisit the established norms of international law, and a recognition that the stability of the Atlantic – and indeed, the world – depends on the responsible management of this strategically vital region. The question remains: can the international community, with a new set of players and a vastly different global order, prevent the echoes of the 15th century from triggering a 21st-century crisis?