Spain warns UN Decolonization Committee not to de-list Gibraltar
Spain made a calm but classic contribution before the United Nations Decolonization Committee (C24) last week defending territorial integrity arguments but also warning the Committee not to de-list Gibraltar without sticking to the current UN criteria.
This novel call for the C24 to “respect established procedures” saw Spain’s UN Ambassador Fernando Arias urge the C24 “not to allow territories that have not been decolonised according to the criteria of the Committee, to be removed from the relevant UN list using arguments alien to the criteria of the Special Committee”.
Spain reiterated the view that a sovereignty dispute pushes aside the normal criteria of self-determination and said that new ways need to be explored by the C24 to complete its task. The Spanish Ambassador blamed UK explicitly for the failure to continue talks which, he stressed, the UN calls for regularly but said London has “refused” to engage in for five years.
Ambassador Arias said Spain is confident that both countries will be able to find “imaginative ways to solve their differences without neglecting the interests of the present inhabitants of the colony.”
He said that Spain believes in pragmatic solutions and added that the C24 should be examining, on a case by case basis, “whether the degree of autonomy obtained by some of the colonised territories demonstrates, or otherwise, the ability of the local authorities to rule over their territories responsibly and independently. Should the answer to that question be affirmative, one could question their political subordination to the administering power”.
But whereas that might lead to decolonisation, he said that the case of Gibraltar was one of UK and the Rock conspiring to “colonialism by consent’. This was being done at the expense of Spain’s legitimate rights, he said.
Spain, said Ambassador Arias, cannot under any circumstances accept the perpetuation of the present situation “in which the administering power and the colony seek to ignore Spain’s legitimate rights under the Treaty of Utrecht and the doctrine of the United Nations”.
Arias reminded the C24 that the General Assembly has spent three decades calling for a solution and urging a bilateral solution. He highlighted repeated calls for a resolution to be negotiated under the Brussels Agreement.
“Spain vindicates the resumption of this bilateral dialogue with the UK in which questions pertaining to the bilateral co-operation around Gibraltar should be addressed in parallel with issues of sovereignty, which are plural as contained in the mentioned Declaration,” he said in a reference to Spain’s separation of the isthmus from the general claim linked to the Treaty of Utrecht 1713.
But the Ambassador said that, despite all the issues, Spain remained committed to regional co-operation to create an atmosphere of mutual confidence and cooperation for the benefit of Gibraltar and the Campo.
He insisted that such regional co-operation must set aside issues of “sovereignty and jurisdiction” which he said are for the UK and Spain only. He added that the Forum for Dialogue which included Gibraltar but which “constituted a framework totally independent from the Brussels process” saw advances “hampered by the insistence of that local government (Gibraltar)to address aspects that are the sole responsibility of the United Kingdom.”
Talks, he insisted, must run in parallel and the dialogue on sovereignty must be between Spain and UK alone. That “is the UN mandate”.
Suggested Stories
-
May 17th 2013
Pope Francis condemned the global ‘cult of money’ and the ‘new idols’
-
May 17th 2013
Uruguay’s José Mujica lauds booming Brazil ties
-
May 17th 2013
Prince Harry and PM Cameron launch in New York global campaign to promote Britain
-
May 16th 2013
Falklands’ war: Defense releases stats on deaths of military personnel
34 comments Feed
Note: Comments do not reflect MercoPress’ opinions. They are the personal view of our users. We wish to keep this as open and unregulated as possible. However, rude or foul language, discriminative comments (based on ethnicity, religion, gender, nationality, sexual orientation or the sort), spamming or any other offensive or inappropriate behaviour will not be tolerated. Please report any inadequate posts to the editor. Comments must be in English. Thank you.
Spain is therefore saying the ToU invalidates self determination and the C24 insists the UK and Spain should find a solution by dialogue.
The UK should simply stick to saying we have the right to make the decision and we choose to make that decision based on the wishes of the Gibraltans.
It's all just legal semantics.
When you have 50% youth unemployment and are on the brink of bankruptcy the sensible policy is to rant about 7 square milometres of land you haven't owned for 300 years.
I assume the begging bowl will be passed to the UK when the next bailout is requested via the IMF. They are currently too ashamed or proud to even call the recent bailout by that name.
The UK put Gibraltar on the UN list but should now simply make Gibraltar part of the UK and remove it from the list.
Sadly the C24 doesn't care about what the people of these territories think and have decided to ambush the committee to turn it into a place for despotic states to rant about getting other peoples land... in perpetuity. There will be no end to this nonsense for the next 30 years, and everyone knows it.
I'd expect representatives of the nations to just turn up and say 'Mr Biased Chairman, all I have to say is this committee completely goes against it's own remit with no way of ever possibly being taken off your list.'. Then some country that greedily wants their territory can just rant on about some [s]hi[t]story.
Then in 30 years everyone decides the UN is sh!te and useless.
Ie; In the 1970s-80s Britain agreed to a lot of what Argentina wanted and had lots of negotiations with them. Pity the scummy (then) foreign office ignored the islanders (big mistake).
Result of Britain negotiating=Argentina illegally invades the Islands.
Britain stops talking and boots the Argentines out.
Britain then properly defends the Islands and encourages autonomy of government, helps FI develop their economy and does not talk with Argentina.
Result=no Argentinian invasion (yet) and more freedom for theFalkland Islands.
Perhaps Spain does not appreciate British financial help and would prefer us not to lend them money??
Now we have a country that is both an administering power (over Western Sahara) and an other claimant (Gibraltar) encouraging the C24 to not take territories that are askong off of their little list?
I've heard of the concept of Spanish Honour, this is perhaps an example of Spanish Logic?
In my view, Britain should simply declare that, in respect of Spanish claims, the Treaty of Utrecht is null and void. No Spanish “claims” are recognised and nor will any be acceded to.
If this is OK, why can't this be done in the case of the Gibraltar and the Falklands for that matter. It seems odd when you compare the two examples.
And all this stuff about territorial integrity - shouldn't the Canary Islands be part of Morocco??
Forget Ceuta and Melilla - the recent military intervention on Parsley Island is an even better example of the hypocrisy being displayed by Spain.
www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/jul/18/spain.gilestremlett
It's only managed to remain hilarious because nobody got killed.
Source: geocurrents.info/geopolitics/britain-vs-spain-and-spain-vs-morocco-in-the-strait-of-gibraltar#ixzz1yGA72z2c
Perhaps Britain should just incorperate all the overseas territories just like Spain. Then Spain would have nothing to complain about. :)
Source: geocurrents.info/geopolitics/britain-vs-spain-and-spain-vs-morocco-in-the-strait-of-gibraltar#ixzz1yG9Zn9DM
You don't understand the situation of Gibraltar
Under the Treaty of Utretch of 1713, Gibraltar was only meant to be a British military base, that's it. A base with limited extraterritoriality, that's why in Article X of the Treaty,it says:
“ It is understood that this property is to be ceded WITHOUT ANY TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION”!!
Do any of you get that? WITHOUT ANY TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION!
another thing, the base was known up until 1830, as the ” Town and Garrison of Gibraltar IN THE KINGDOM OF SPAIN!!
Do you get that?? IN
under what treaty does the Uk has northern ireland?
lets make a deal, is none of spain's business to mention N.ireland, so is not Uk business to mention c&m and canarias, ok?
ceuta and melilla are a continuation of christian reconquista, something that even England supported , ok? The moors from north africa were the ones that invaded spain , ok? so spain had and still has the right to protect herself from moor invaders.
gibraltar on the other hand, was a bunch of thugs taking advantage of a civil war to seize a strategic waterway.
where was king carlos 2 right to choose who would succed him to become king of spain, huh?
Yes everybody has a past - the UK, Spain, Morroco - the World.
The current population of Gibraltar are what matter in 2012. They have made their position clear.
The small land mass is of no real benefit to Spain and apart from the current PM most people I know here have no interest whatsoever in gaining Gibraltar.
Spain is FF****F*F*F*F*FKING ANNNGRRYYY about this tiny place having a tiny bit of sea, and it's going to do anything it can to stop them having a nice time and FUUUUC***CKCKINGGG RUINNNN THEMM.
Like seriously, do they have a pathological condition these spanish speakers [Bolivia, Argentina, Spain]?
The people of N.Ireland wished to remain British, as do the Falklanders and the people from the rock.
“Under the Treaty of Utretch of 1713, Gibraltar was only meant to be a British military base, that's it”
This is a complete and utter lie. Not one single part of that is even true or mentioned in the treaty. The rock did not become a military base until 1854, The Treaty of Utrecht was signed in 1713.
I wonder what your position on Spain's overseas citys who mostly do not even wish to be Spanish and are claimed by other nations? Why does Spain automatically have these citys while we can not, in your view?
Royal Navy warship, HMS Diamond is currently in the port Gibraltar
On her maiden operational deployment.
www.chronicle.gi/headlines_details.php?id=25167
TORNADOS ARRIVE ON THE ROCK
Eight RAF Tornado aircraft from IX(B) Squadron and 31 Squadron,
will be arriving in Gibraltar on June 22
www.chronicle.gi/headlines_details.php?id=25166
[Don’t panic espania , its just training,]
[20]
your living in the wrong century .
Ok Andean, how do you explain the Spanish hanging on to the Portuguese territory of Olivenza?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disputed_status_of_Olivenza
I think the Spanish are a bit hypocritical, given Ceuta, Melilla, canaries and olivenza
I haven't studied the Olivenza case in detail, so I can't really comment on that. Olivenza is something that goes way back to the 1297. Portugal took over the territory from the then Kingdom of Castille in the Treaty of Alcañizes of 1297, and then Spain took it back during Napoleon times.
Portugal does not have a claim on Olivenza, they just don't recognize Spanish sovereignty over it, the SAME that Spain does not recognize Portuguese sovereignty around the SALVAJE ISLANDS in the Atlantic Ocean(just north of the Canaries). Spain accused Portugal of taking advantage of the Spanish Civil War in the 1930's the steal the islands.
So,in a sense, Spain and Portugal are “ even out”, but in my view, Spain and Portugal being neighbors with a long history in common, they can figure out their differences respecting these two territories ( Olivenza and Salvaje Islands).
Ceuta and Melilla ARE TOTALLY DIFFERENT, you have to look at the historical context here.
Before the pirate Rooke (note, many British historians themselves say that what Rooke did in Gibraltar was an act of piracy) seized Gibraltar in 1704, Spain was the sole Gate keeper of the Western Mediterranean, Moorish pirates would raid the coasts of Andalucia and capture any “Kaffirs ”(infidels, as they called non-muslims) and sell them as slaves. They also attacked any Christian ships (Spanish, Maltese, Italian,etc) ,looted and sell the entire tripulation as slaves ( if you were a non-believer, by their law, they can sell you as a slave).
So Spain set up these outspost to watch out against this menace (also the Ottoman Empire), one in Melilla, then one in Oran(present day Algeria) and another in Tripoli(present day Libia), but the Ottoman seized these last two I think.
Anyways, people that to look at the historical contexts of things,C&M served (and still do) a legitimate purpose not only the REST of Spain but for all Mediterranean Christendom basically.
Ceuta was part of the Kingdom of Fez (now Morocco) when is was invaded and stolen by Portugal in 1415, and was later siezed by Spain.
Melilla was part of the Kingdom of Fez (now Morocco) when it was invaded and stolen by Spain in 1497.
There were no treaties authorising the theft of these African colonies.
Spain should return these colonies to their rightful owners Morocco before a muslim jihad takes them.
Ofcourse they would. You can see the basic Spanish mentality from andean there. History is by far more important than human rights in his eyes. The Spanish government also views it this way.
The hilarious thing is, Spain LEGALLY gave up the rock. It's even more funny than Argentinas claim on south Georgia.
So, a country takes a bite out of the territory of another country, and then in a position of power gets a treaty that confirms sovereignty of said territory - although it is later claimed by the original owners of said territory that the treaty incorrect.
You can apply the above scenario to either Olivença, or Gibralter. Therefore for Spain to protest about the UK, when they have their own territorial dispute, not only with Morrocco with over the enclaves they retain there, but also with Portugal over Olivença is a little like the pot calling the kettle black - or to use a spanish turn or phrase - the donkey is talking about ears.
But this is the whole problem with the Gibraltar situation, Falklands situation etc. The latin mentality of “Patria” is the issue. Spain desperately clings on to the regions that don't want to be part of Spain - País Vasco, Cataluña and both Spain and Argentina are unwilling to accept self determination of people that live in a territory that they claim - when the UK, without this mentality is ready to give a free vote to the Scots for their independence if they so will. It's called democracy - but there again, countries that are relatively speaking very young democracies (and that is a stretch of the definition in Argentina) are not able to to this with their own regions or territorial claims.
So the question is - how far back in history do we need to go to redraw the borders? Maybe Spain and Argentina should look in the direction of somewhere like Hungary, or indeed Germany that lost large areas of territory after WW2, and you don't hear them continually bleating about it.
Time for our latin friends to grow up a bit.
And they both know it
They are looking for a distraction, and who is the target [again]
The British,
Always the British,
In fact, because they scrooge up there own country, and are corrupt, and incompetent to run there own affairs,
They blame the British,
They are just envy and jealous of us,
Bitter and hateful,
But hey,
As long as the brits get the blame, everything is ok.
@20 The Acts of Union 1800 and the Anglo-Irish Treaty 1922. “A strategic waterway”? It's a Rock!
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!