Latest news with #LinaSelg
UPI
3 days ago
- Politics
- UPI
Border disputes persist in Latin America
Some border disputes in Latin America wind up in the International Court of Justice in the Hague, Netherlands. Photo by Lina Selg/EPA Aug. 7 (UPI) -- "Colombia will not lose its Amazon River," Colombian President Gustavo Petro wrote this week on X. With that, the president continued to fuel a diplomatic dispute that began days ago with Peru, which he accused of occupying Colombian territory. Petro claimed Tuesday that the Peruvian government had taken control of Santa Rosa Island, situated in a disputed section of the Amazon River. He criticized Peru's Congress for creating the new district of Santa Rosa de Loreto, arguing that the area belongs to Colombia under the 1934 Rio de Janeiro Protocol. Peruvian President Dina Boluarte criticized Petro's remarks, saying they do not contribute to regional integration or the strengthening of bilateral relations. Peru's foreign ministry issued a formal protest, calling the statements an "unacceptable disregard" for the country's sovereignty. Colombian Interior Minister Armando Benedetti said the government may take the dispute to the International Court of Justice in The Hague. In response, Peru deployed military personnel to the area. The diplomatic conflict has become a reminder that, despite progress in regional integration, Latin America's borders remain sources of tension. From century-old disputes to recent conflicts sparked by natural resource discoveries, territorial disagreements remain a persistent challenge throughout the region. One of the most recent disputes involves Venezuela's claim of sovereignty over more than 61,000 square miles west of the Essequibo River, a region administered by Guyana. The conflict dates back to the 19th century, when Venezuela accused Britain of encroaching on the area. Despite an 1899 arbitration ruling, Venezuela has never recognized the established border, and the dispute has escalated in recent years after Guyana's discovery of vast oil reserves in the region. President Nicolás Maduro's government revived the claim through a nonbinding referendum and declared the territory a new state, heightening tensions. The International Court of Justice intervened, urging Venezuela to refrain from any action that could alter the current situation. However, Maduro's administration has rejected the court's jurisdiction. The United States, which has conducted joint military exercises with Guyana, adds a sensitive geopolitical dimension to the dispute. Bolivia's demand for access to the Pacific Ocean remains one of the most sensitive and longstanding issues in its relationship with Chile. The landlocked country lost its coastline during the War of the Pacific (1879-1884). Bolivia brought the case to the ICJ, asking the court to compel Chile to negotiate sovereign access to the sea. In 2018, however, the court ruled in favor of Chile, stating that it is under no obligation to negotiate. Despite the ruling, Bolivia's maritime claim remains a state policy and a central issue in its foreign policy, keeping tensions between the two nations alive. The border between Costa Rica and Nicaragua -- largely defined by the San Juan River -- has been a source of conflict for more than 150 years. The dispute centers on navigation rights along the river, a historically vital route for trade and transportation. In 2010, a Nicaraguan dredging project on the San Juan River triggered a diplomatic crisis. Costa Rica accused its neighbor of invading its territory in the Isla Calero area. The dispute was brought before the ICJ, which ruled in favor of Costa Rica. Despite the ruling, sovereignty over the river and its surrounding areas remains a sensitive issue in bilateral relations, reflecting a history of confrontation and mistrust. Guatemala and Belize are locked in another longstanding territorial dispute. Guatemala claims nearly 4,600 square miles of Belizean territory, a conflict that dates to the 19th century, when Guatemala refused to recognize a border treaty with the United Kingdom, arguing that Belize was part of its territory. Both countries agreed in 2008 to submit the case to the International Court of Justice for a final resolution. The process remains ongoing and represents a hopeful step toward settling a dispute that has dragged on for more than 150 years through diplomatic means.
UPI
23-07-2025
- Politics
- UPI
ICJ to rule on nations' legal responsibility regarding climate change
Climate protesters demonstrate outside the International Court of Justice in The Hague on Wednesday ahead of a non-binding judgment from the top U.N. court on what legal obligation, if any, countries have to prevent climate change. Photo by Lina Selg/EPA July 23 (UPI) -- The International Court of Justice was set to hand down a landmark ruling Wednesday on what, if anything, nations are legally obligated to do to prevent climate change and whether they are liable for the harm already caused by their emissions. ICJ President Judge Iwasawa Yuji, will read out the opinion of the 15-judge bench -- which is advisory only -- in open court this afternoon, wrapping up seven months of deliberations in a case brought by the Pacific island nation of Vanuatu, according to a court news release. The decision of the U.N. court, which could establish a legal benchmark for action on the climate crisis, comes more than two years after Vanuatu successfully lobbied the U.N. General Assembly to vote to seek the opinion of the ICJ. After years of lobbying by Vanuatu, one of several nations under threat from sea-level rise, particularly in the South Pacific, was able to get in front of justices the question of what international law says about countries' obligations to protect the climate from man-made carbon emissions. It was also able to get their view on the legal consequences for governments when their acts, or lack of action, have caused significant climatic and environmental damage. Testifying in The Hague back in December, Vanuatu Climate Change Special Envoy Ralph Regenvanu said the proceedings could prove "the most consequential case in the history of humanity," while Attorney General Arnold Kiel Loughman said the stakes were sky high. "The survival of my people and so many others is on the line," he told the court. Average global sea level has risen 1.7 inches in the 10-year period to 2023, with higher increases in some areas of the Pacific Ocean, driven by a 1.3 degrees Celsius global temperature rise compared to the period before humans began burning large amounts of fossil fuels with the advent of industrialization. Major oil and gas producers, including the United States and Russia, take strong issue with the ICJ's involvement, but Wednesday's ruling in principle caps off a run of incremental gains, including a case before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in Costa Rica. The IACHR ruled that countries were legally bound to avoid harming the environment, protect ecosystems and rehabilitate those damaged by human activity. In 2024, the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg handed down a precedent ordering countries to do more to reduce the "serious adverse effects" of climate change on their populations. The case brought by a Swiss women's organization alleged that their government's climate policies violated human rights law entitling them to "a private and family life" because older women in particular were more vulnerable to climate change as they were more likely to die in heatwaves. They successfully argued that the Swiss government was not taking sufficient action to address, mitigate and adapt to climate change.
