Latest news with #territorialdispute
Telegraph
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Starmer is determined to let the sun set on Britain, regardless of what we think
In October last year I was trying not to cut myself shaving when Tony Blair's former Chief of Staff, Jonathan Powell, popped onto the radio to talk about the Chagos Islands and why the UK should surrender them to Mauritius. That is, just why the British taxpayer should pay billions to give their own territory away to a third country thousands of miles away from the strategic archipelago (not even its neighbour), and which – in all the complex and intriguing history of those islands – had never ruled over them for so much as half an hour. Refashioned by the Blairite recycling facility as Keir Starmer's National Security Adviser, Powell had been appointed 'Special Envoy' to negotiate with the Mauritius Government: an ominous early warning from the Labour administration. With the world on fire, were there not more pressing matters to resolve in the foreign policy file? Asked whether such a giveaway would make Britain 'smaller', Powell – the man responsible for advising on the United Kingdom's national security – replied with patrician disdain: 'These are very tiny islands in the middle of the Indian Ocean where no one actually goes, so I don't think we should be too worried about losing that bit of territory we're probably losing more to tidal erosion on the east coast'. This most sophisticated of Starmer's political operatives had let the mask slip (not to mention my razor). That comment – and the Chagos giveaway in general – reveals the government's real agenda in foreign and defence policy: Starmer is determined to use his enormous power to shrink the UK's influence and global reach. It's the same old self-limiting – even self-harming – policy all too often promoted by the British elite (of any party). Confusing our allies, and letting down those – like the Chagossians – who honestly seek British protection. How revealing that Powell chose coastal erosion as his metaphor. Isn't that precisely how Starmer and his ilk sees British power and influence: pre-destined to an endless, unstoppable erosion, like the disappearance of a coastal shelf? A Britain forever gradually shrinking in global affairs. In a literal sense, of course, Powell was correct. These are a group of very tiny islands – but the most significant is Diego Garcia, which houses a joint US-UK military base – for the use of which we now must pay billions. A base bristling with vital surveillance equipment, a place to park bombers and submarines in range of the Indo-Pacific; until yesterday, a little piece of Britain in the most contested strategic domain on earth. Yes it's true that not many people actually go – you were very unlikely to have met anyone who had ever visited British Indian Ocean Territory – most of them are at the more secret end of the UK's armed forces. Wasn't that the point? You could not visit the islands without a permit also because the territory was an almost unspoilt conservation zone, with one of the largest protected marine science areas in the world, unique stocks of coral reefs, and some very endangered turtles. Under the strict bylaws, drawn up by world-class ecological experts in the Foreign Office – you couldn't take so much as a can of fizzy drink onto one of the islands without properly accounting for it. Starmer has spoiled all that. Why? No country thinks the value of its territory has anything to do with its size or population density. No Prime Minister approaches sovereignty according to the Powell doctrine. And notwithstanding the Government's vile treatment of the Chagossians – who have legitimate grievances but have been excluded from its process – I'm not sure it's really about that either. Starmer's deal is simply a deliberate choice to lessen the UK's global reach. Deep down, Starmer is not concerned with the intricacies of the Chagossian story, access to the electromagnetic spectrum, or the threat of international courts. He simply believes in creating a smaller, less globally assertive United Kingdom. This deal is a signal to the closely watching world that under his leadership Britain is likely to pull out of its commitments – and can be forced out of deeply historic ones. It is a sign to every international negotiator that the British taxpayer can be taken to the cleaners, and to every international lawyer that they need only raise the threat of a spurious claim and Britain might blink. The only positive I can find is that younger British leaders coming through on the Right all hate it – and many of them are working on reversing the erosion.
Al Jazeera
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Al Jazeera
Borders and ballots: Why Essequibo is controversial in Venezuela's election
Like many Venezuelans, Oliver Rivas grew up looking at maps of his country: a triangle on the edge of the Caribbean Sea. But one region always stood out. In school textbooks and on classroom posters, a stretch of land in the east was marked differently, with shading, red marks or dashed boundary lines. That region was Essequibo, a 160,000-square-kilometre (62,000-square-mile) area rich with jungles, rivers and mountains, not to mention resources like oil and gold. 'It always appeared as a claimed zone or disputed territory," Rivas said. "We always understood that it was subject to controversy. That's what we learned in school. But it has always been part of the map of Venezuela, part of Venezuelan territory." For the majority of Venezuelans like Rivas, that territory — roughly the size of Florida — belongs to their country. But Venezuela's neighbour Guyana, a former British colony, has administered the region for over a century. It claims Essequibo as its own. As Venezuela prepares for parliamentary and regional elections on May 25, that longstanding territorial dispute has returned to the spotlight. For the first time, Venezuela will elect representatives not only for its 23 recognised states but also for a new state: Guayana Esequiba. Rivas is standing as a candidate. He's running on behalf of the socialist coalition led by President Nicolas Maduro. Eight seats in Venezuela's National Assembly have been assigned to Essequibo. But neither Rivas nor any of the other candidates can campaign there. Those who live in the region — mainly those with Guyanese citizenship — can't even vote. The Guyanese government has warned that participating in Venezuela's election could amount to treason. Even international bodies have rejected the vote. On May 1, the International Court of Justice, the highest judicial body at the United Nations, ruled that Venezuela must "refrain from conducting elections" for Essequibo while it continues to weigh the territorial dispute. Nevertheless, Rivas and supporters of the new state see the regional elections as crucial to assert Venezuela's longstanding claim over Essequibo. He considers the opportunity 'an honour'.
The Guardian
23-05-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
‘Full-frontal assault': Guyana president decries Venezuela ‘sham' elections for disputed region
Venezuela's decision to elect officials to administer a swathe of Guyanese territory constitutes 'a full-frontal assault on Guyana's sovereignty and territorial integrity' that 'undermines regional peace', the country's president, Irfaan Ali, has warned. Venezuelans will head to the polls on Sunday to chose regional governors and lawmakers, including officials who would supposedly govern Essequibo, a territory which is internationally recognised as part of Guyana. The area is largely jungle but also rich in oil, gold, diamonds, timber and other natural resources. Ali told the Guardian the move was part of a 'campaign to provoke confrontation' and that the 'implications are grave – not just for Guyana, but for the entire western hemisphere'. 'The sham elections Venezuela seeks to stage in our territory are not only illegal – they are an act of brazen hostility. This threat is not just aimed at Guyana. It undermines regional peace,' Ali said. Guyana, an English-speaking former British and Dutch colony, has for decades administered the region, which makes up two-thirds of its territory and is home to 125,000 of its 800,000 citizens. It says the frontiers were determined by an arbitration panel in 1899. Venezuela also lays claim because the region was within its boundaries during the Spanish colonial period. The centuries-old dispute was reignited in 2015 when the US energy giant ExxonMobil discovered huge crude reserves in the region, and escalated in 2023 when Guyana began auctioning oil-exploration licences. In late 2023, after holding a referendum asking voters if it should be turned into a Venezuelan state, President Nicolás Maduro threatened to partially annex the region by force and pledged to hold elections there. Caracas describes Essequibo as 'an inalienable part of the Venezuelan territory and a legacy of our liberators' and has rejected an order by the international court of justice to suspend its plans. 'No international pressure, judicial blackmail, or foreign tribunal will make us back down from this conviction,' Venezuela said. Dr Christopher Sabatini, Latin America expert at Chatham House, said the move to push ahead with elections was 'intended to stoke the fires of nationalism'. Guyana's chief of defence staff, Brigadier Omar Khan, has called on Guyanese Indigenous communities – particularly those living along the border – to share any relevant information about Venezuela's attempts to organise the election. 'I want you to be vigilant,' Khan told Indigenous leaders on Tuesday. He also warned that any resident participating in the elections would be charged with treason and other felony crimes. 'If anyone participates or takes any similar action, it will amount to support for a passive coup,' Khan told the Associated Press. 'Anything along those lines will speak to a violation of our sovereignty and territorial integrity.' A Venezuelan source said that although the newly created 'Guyana-Essequibo state' included the entire disputed territory, voting would only take place in a border municipality in the Venezuelan state of Bolívar. The source said Venezuelan authorities would be unlikely to cross the internationally recognized border. President Ali said Guyana was a 'peaceful nation' but 'bows to no bully and yields to no threat'. He added that he 'will make every investment – military, diplomatic, technological, and human – necessary to secure and defend our sovereignty and territorial integrity'. The elections come 10 months after Maduro claimed victory in an election he was widely suspected of stealing. A deadly crackdown followed, with Human Rights Watch (HRW) reporting that the government had 'killed, tortured, detained, and forcefully disappeared people seeking democratic change'. Venezuelans will elect 24 state governors and 285 national assembly members in Sunday's poll, but turnout is expected to be low. 'Last year, Maduro stole the votes of Venezuelans and repressed those who demanded fair counting. It's hard to see how many of them will turn out to vote again,' said Juan Pappier, deputy director of the Americas Division of HRW. Víctor Alfonzo, a 33-year-old resident living in the state of Anzoátegui, said that the country no longer 'believes in the political system'. 'I'm not planning to vote. Neither are my friends, nor my family. We know that everything is a fraud with this government, and we don't want to participate,' he said. The Venezuelan opposition has been beset by infighting over whether to abstain from the election, with the handful who are set to run facing bitter recriminations from their political allies. the opposition leader María Corina Machado has called on voters to stay away in the hope of humiliating the government with low turnout. But others warn the boycott could play into the hands of the administration. In 2020, the opposition boycotted parliamentary elections, which rights groups say allowed Maduro's allies to regain control of parliament. 'Those leaders, the ones that sit out, become irrelevant,' said Sabatini. 'They may be marginalising themselves even more, and that, in part, is the government's plan.'
Bloomberg
19-05-2025
- Bloomberg
Equatorial Guinea Wins Rights to Islands in Dispute With Gabon
A top United Nations court ruled in favor of Equatorial Guinea in a long-running territorial dispute with Gabon, awarding it sovereignty over three small islands located in potentially oil-rich waters in the Gulf of Guinea. The case, brought before the International Court of Justice in 2021, centers on the Mbanie, Cocotiers and Conga islands, largely uninhabited isles just off Gabon's Atlantic Ocean coast. The Hague-based court found that sovereignty over Mbanié and the two other islands lie with Equatorial Guinea.
CNA
14-05-2025
- Politics
- CNA
India rejects China's latest renaming of places in Arunachal border state
NEW DELHI: India said on Wednesday (May 14) that it rejects China's move to rename places in the northeastern state of Arunachal Pradesh where the Asian neighbours share a border, adding that the Himalayan territory was an integral part of India. Beijing has renamed places in Arunachal Pradesh in the past as well and the issue has been an irritant in ties between the two countries, especially as they deteriorated sharply after a deadly military clash elsewhere on their border in 2020. They reached an agreement in October to step back from their four-year military stand-off in the western Himalayas, leading to disengagement of troops. Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Lin Jian told a media briefing that Beijing had "standardised some place names in (Arunachal Pradesh), which is entirely within China's sovereignty", repeating what has been Beijing's standard response. Beijing says Arunachal Pradesh, which its calls Zangnan, is a part of South Tibet, a claim New Delhi has repeatedly dismissed. "Creative naming will not alter the undeniable reality that Arunachal Pradesh was, is, and will always remain an integral and inalienable part of India," India's foreign ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said on Wednesday. In April last year, China made a similar move by renaming about 30 locations in Arunachal Pradesh, which India dismissed as "senseless" and reaffirmed the region's status as an "integral part" of the country. India and China share a poorly demarcated 3,800km frontier and fought a brief but brutal war in 1962. There have also been infrequent clashes between their troops, with 20 Indian and four Chinese soldiers killed in the 2020 fighting. The India-China exchange comes days after India and Pakistan ended four days of intense military fighting, during which they used jets, missiles and drones, after New Delhi struck what it called terrorist camps in Pakistan and Pakistani Kashmir. The Indian strike came in response to an Apr 22 attack on Hindu tourists in Indian Kashmir which killed 26 men.
