[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Good evening. I would like to substantiate my position, expressed already, about keeping the territories geographically located in a different Region than the mother country where they are, and not moving them in a different geographic region. I would like to call your attention to an international treaty that indirectly addresses this matter: the treaty of Tlatelolco (http://www.opanal.org/opanal/Tlatelolco/Tlatelolco-i.htm). If you check the Additional Protocol I (http://www.opanal.org/opanal/Tlatelolco/Tlatelolco-i.htm#35), you will notice that this engages States that have territories in Latin America and Caribbean. While the signatories are the States (so far France, the Netherlands, UK and US, as in http://www.opanal.org/opanal/Tlatelolco/status-i.htm) that are, de jure or de facto, internationally responsible for territories in LAC, the treaty applies only to said territories, creating a juridical distinction between, for instance, France (FR) and French Guyane (GF). The residents of the French Guyane are protected by an international treaty against any direct or indirect use of nuclear weapons in their territory (including testing or storage), and this status is different from the one of their colleagues in Metropolitan France. All this to say that for international law the common nationality is not a sufficient reason for lumping together residents of different regions. As for the second problem, i.e. the question of Antartica, it can be assigned to AP by redesigning AP to include AQ, but this only with the agreement of Argentina and Chile. I just incidentally note that, if the same logic that led to the assignment of GF to Europe had been applied to AQ, the latter should have been split in the slices of different sovereignity. Of course with terrible problems, because the slices themselves to not have an ISO-3166 code. But again, this shows only that the "belonging to a country" is an attribute and not a property of a territory. On the other hand, geographical location is a property (assuming we can limit our observation to few thousand years), and therefore should remain the guiding factor. Regards Roberto Gaetano This email message is intended only for the use of the named recipient. Information contained in this email message and its attachments may be privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication to others. Also please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system. [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index] |