UN and Argentinian Territorial Waters
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Well, Lincolnshire
Age: 69
Posts: 1,101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UN and Argentinian Territorial Waters
https://www.rt.com/news/337508-argen...ers-falklands/
Good old UN.
Looks like the Argentinians won't be happy until the Boating Lake in Hyde Park comes under their jurisdiction.
Good old UN.
Looks like the Argentinians won't be happy until the Boating Lake in Hyde Park comes under their jurisdiction.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
like all territorial disputes the only efffective solution is mutual understanding and negotiation
If Argentina played a long game and tried to talk to the FI responsibly I'm sure they'd get the islands eventually (say 50+ years)- but politicans like to stir things up.......
If Argentina played a long game and tried to talk to the FI responsibly I'm sure they'd get the islands eventually (say 50+ years)- but politicans like to stir things up.......
nobody cares what the the UN says.
Another one for the lawyers......
The map that illustrates the quoted article seems to indicate that Argentina now extends to the south pole and that the associated Antarctic waters 'belong' to them. That would suit the Russians who run the quoted site would it not?
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Falkland Islands
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
......what the Argentinians (and probably the Daily Mail) claim the UN said and what the UN actually said/put down in writing are actually two different things.
"With regard to the recommendations in respect of the submission made by Argentina, it is recalled that, previously, the Commission had already decided that it was not in a position to consider and qualify those parts of the submission that were subject to dispute and those parts that were related to the continental shelf appurtenant to Antarctica (see CLCS/64, paras. 76 and 77 and CLCS/76 para. 57)”
In other words, they have only commented on the extension in areas NOT subject to dispute.
Also, the extension in the undisputed areas is really nothing to make a huge fuss about - since there is the option to reserve rights over a larger area than previously, many countries have done so. The U.K. have filed similar claims for extension, based on Rockall. Claims have also been filed for the Falklands/South Georgia/South Sandwich Islands. CLCS has not yet ruled on these, but presumably will also be unable to comment on disputed areas.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Great Midwest
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is a key statement in the article:
"The UN is yet to officially confirm Buenos Aires announcement, but according to Article 76, paragraphs four to seven of the Convention, the coastal state can “delineate the outer limits of its continental shelf, where that shelf extends beyond 200 nautical miles from the baselines …”
So basically Argentina has said; Article 76 says I can define the limits as I see fit. Now let the international community challenge that my decision. There has been no "ruling" by the UN. The link is a list of recent rulings: LINK
"The UN is yet to officially confirm Buenos Aires announcement, but according to Article 76, paragraphs four to seven of the Convention, the coastal state can “delineate the outer limits of its continental shelf, where that shelf extends beyond 200 nautical miles from the baselines …”
So basically Argentina has said; Article 76 says I can define the limits as I see fit. Now let the international community challenge that my decision. There has been no "ruling" by the UN. The link is a list of recent rulings: LINK
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
So let's get this straight, Holland is a coastal state. Could it, on that basis, claim out west of Ireland?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,967
Received 2,864 Likes
on
1,228 Posts
No, it would belong to us along with a big chunk of Europe 
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Are you sure the Irish would not have first claim. Curiously, after I read the obit in the DT mentioned in another thread I read about Sealand and its claim to parts of Essex and Sussex.
Why dont the French put in a claim? When claiming (inaccurately) that we nicked the islands from them (there was no such country as Argentina at the time), they conveniently forget that Spain had previously nicked them from the French. My niece, who is English but has lived in Argentina for 40 years and is to all intents and purposes Argentinian tells me she had no idea that Las Malvinas is a corruption of Les Malouines, the original name given to the islands by French fishermen from St Malo who were ejected by the Spanish. Their attitude is a bit like Spain banging on about Gibraltar and hoping that nobody will notice Ceuta and Melilla in Morocco.
In any case I understand this UN committee is merely an advisory body and has no power to make alterations as to who does or does not own territorial waters.
In any case I understand this UN committee is merely an advisory body and has no power to make alterations as to who does or does not own territorial waters.
Labours Shadow Defence Secretary, Emily Thornberry, grilled by Julia Hartley-Brewer on Talk Radio today, with input from Falklands veteran Rear Admiral Chris Parry CBE...
JH-B - "Emily, would you like to respond?"
Thornberry - "No, not really!"
https://audioboom.com/boos/4366547-e...o-on-falklands
Just when you thought she couldn't get any worse
JH-B - "Emily, would you like to respond?"
Thornberry - "No, not really!"
https://audioboom.com/boos/4366547-e...o-on-falklands
Just when you thought she couldn't get any worse
Oh I dunno - you have to have a certain sympathy for mainstream Labour politicians who all of a sudden have found that a bunch of excitable teenagers have voted a complete idiot as their party leader. Short of saying "my leader is a nutter" its difficult to see what they can do, other than carry on plotting (as I am sure they are doing) for his removal ASAP.
Note that the "members" vote alone would have secured Corbyn's victory.
Source: Results of the Labour Leadership elections ? The Labour Party
This does pose an interesting dilemma for Cameron and chums:
On one hand he'll say that the UN position on the Falklands is merely that, a position and nothing legally binding,
On the other hand he's saying that the "EU deal" that he's managed to scrape together on Brexit cannot be altered by EU ministers after the fact because it will be lodged with the UN.
Anyone for cake (having and eating)?
On one hand he'll say that the UN position on the Falklands is merely that, a position and nothing legally binding,
On the other hand he's saying that the "EU deal" that he's managed to scrape together on Brexit cannot be altered by EU ministers after the fact because it will be lodged with the UN.
Anyone for cake (having and eating)?
Stuff - ok, I stand corrected on the vote. However I should be very much surprised if having seen Corbyn's dismal performance as leader since taking over, a large numbers of those members who voted for him will be regretting their actions and seeking to do something about it as soon as they can.
At the time of the war it amazed me that those on the left were willing to see The Falklands fall into the hands of what was at the time an extreme right wing dictatorship rather than support the war for its liberation. Argentina is currently a democratic republic with a left-leaning president, but the country can hardly be called stable, given the economic problems throughout the region, so does Corbyn really want to risk giving it a say in the running of The Falklands when Argentina could quite conceivably revert to some extreme form of government should one of its periodic economic collapses reoccur?
At the time of the war it amazed me that those on the left were willing to see The Falklands fall into the hands of what was at the time an extreme right wing dictatorship rather than support the war for its liberation. Argentina is currently a democratic republic with a left-leaning president, but the country can hardly be called stable, given the economic problems throughout the region, so does Corbyn really want to risk giving it a say in the running of The Falklands when Argentina could quite conceivably revert to some extreme form of government should one of its periodic economic collapses reoccur?
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Holland is a coastal state. Could it, on that basis, claim out west of Ireland?"
Not when the UK and Norway have agreed to their boundary meeting in the middle of the N Sea
Way back in the 50's the Brits, Norwegians, Danes and the Netherlands carved up the N Sea and issued oil exploration licences - I think the Germans were sleeping as they were left a small triangle of water offshore Hamburg not extending to the UK line (which was pretty much halfway across the N Sea).
The Danes promptly found some oil fields - the Germans woke up and screamed bloody blue murder as on any "reasonable" definition the fields would have been in German waters. After a few years of arguing the Netherlands and the Danes agreed to a corridor extending German waters to the UK line but the boundary dodged around, leaving the oil fileds in Danish waters
Someone told me that the UK boundary is still not agreed with France & Belgium in the Channel/Straits of Dover area and there are still issues as to where the boundary runs between Eire and the boundary offshore N Ireland for a few miles from the beach.....
Not when the UK and Norway have agreed to their boundary meeting in the middle of the N Sea
Way back in the 50's the Brits, Norwegians, Danes and the Netherlands carved up the N Sea and issued oil exploration licences - I think the Germans were sleeping as they were left a small triangle of water offshore Hamburg not extending to the UK line (which was pretty much halfway across the N Sea).
The Danes promptly found some oil fields - the Germans woke up and screamed bloody blue murder as on any "reasonable" definition the fields would have been in German waters. After a few years of arguing the Netherlands and the Danes agreed to a corridor extending German waters to the UK line but the boundary dodged around, leaving the oil fileds in Danish waters
Someone told me that the UK boundary is still not agreed with France & Belgium in the Channel/Straits of Dover area and there are still issues as to where the boundary runs between Eire and the boundary offshore N Ireland for a few miles from the beach.....
I remember at the time of the Scottish referendum, the SNP saw the Scottish/English boundary extending out across the North Sea along the line of latitude from Berwick on Tweed, whereas the English side saw it as following a diagonal, basically extending the terrestrial border north- eastwards.
All academic now, unless the Brexit lot win in the referendum, when I suppose it will all kick off again.
All academic now, unless the Brexit lot win in the referendum, when I suppose it will all kick off again.