HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » UN expands Argentine sove...

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 11:07 AM

UN expands Argentine sovereignty over maritime area

Source: Buenos Aires Herald

The United Nations Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) ratified a report presented by the Argentine Foreign Ministry in 2009, which suggested Argentina be granted an extension of sovereignty over the South Atlantic to 350 miles from Argentine shores (from the current 200 miles). The country has been granted status as the “coastal state” and, as such, gained rights to exploit its natural resources — a crucial potential benefit for the country.

“We are reaffirming our sovereign rights over the resources of our continental shelf: minerals, hydrocarbons and sedentary species,” Argentine Foreign Minister Susana Malcorra said following the announcement of the CLCS resolution yesterday. She added details of the UN Commission’s approval of Argentina’s 2009 proposal and revealed that its approval had been unanimous.

The ratification of Argentina’s 2009 proposal expanded the country’s sovereign territory by some 1.7 million km² (650,000 mi²) and represents a 35% increase in the offshore continental shelf area regarded as sovereign Argentina territory. The country gains “sovereign rights for the purpose of exploring and exploiting natural resources,” on the continental shelf according to the 1958 CLCS Convention.

The announcement heralded a boost to the government’s commitment to Argentine territorial claims in the South Atlantic Ocean, including that over the Falklnads/Malvinas Islands claimed by Argentina but currently under British protection. However, while the UN has repeatedly sided with Argentina’s demands for negotiations over the islands rebuffed by the UK government, the new CLCS report does not extend approval of Argentina’s claimed sovereignty over the islands themselves, occupied by the UK since 1833.

Rather, the announcement extends Argentina’s maritime sovereign territory by some 350 miles off the east coast and into the Atlantic Ocean in line with the outer limits of the continental shelf. It also removes the 1958 Convention guidelines of a 200-meter depth limitation on sovereignty over continental shelf territories, opening the door to potential offshore exploitation of natural resources by Argentine interests. Currently two large Anglo-American corporations, Premier Oil and Falklands Oil and Gas, have a hegemony over fossil fuel exploitation in the seas surrounding the Malvinas Islands.

Read more: http://buenosairesherald.com/article/211485/un-expands-argentine-sovereignty-over-maritime-space

48 replies, 6906 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 48 replies Author Time Post
Reply UN expands Argentine sovereignty over maritime area (Original post)
forest444 Mar 2016 OP
Ghost Dog Mar 2016 #1
forest444 Mar 2016 #4
Ghost Dog Mar 2016 #12
forest444 Mar 2016 #15
Ghost Dog Mar 2016 #17
forest444 Mar 2016 #23
Ghost Dog Mar 2016 #24
forest444 Mar 2016 #26
Ghost Dog Mar 2016 #38
hack89 Mar 2016 #2
forest444 Mar 2016 #3
hack89 Mar 2016 #5
forest444 Mar 2016 #6
hack89 Mar 2016 #7
forest444 Mar 2016 #8
Ghost Dog Mar 2016 #14
forest444 Mar 2016 #21
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply .
Ghost Dog Mar 2016 #25
forest444 Mar 2016 #28
Nye Bevan Mar 2016 #34
Ghost Dog Mar 2016 #37
Xithras Mar 2016 #9
forest444 Mar 2016 #10
Xithras Mar 2016 #13
Ghost Dog Mar 2016 #36
hack89 Mar 2016 #11
Ghost Dog Mar 2016 #16
Xithras Mar 2016 #18
hack89 Mar 2016 #19
Ghost Dog Mar 2016 #20
Xithras Mar 2016 #22
Ghost Dog Mar 2016 #27
forest444 Mar 2016 #29
Xithras Mar 2016 #30
Ghost Dog Mar 2016 #40
Adrahil Mar 2016 #35
Judi Lynn Mar 2016 #31
forest444 Mar 2016 #32
christx30 Mar 2016 #33
Bacchus4.0 Mar 2016 #44
Ghost Dog Mar 2016 #39
Ghost Dog Mar 2016 #41
Ghost Dog Mar 2016 #42
Blue_Tires Mar 2016 #43
forest444 Mar 2016 #46
Blue_Tires Mar 2016 #47
forest444 Mar 2016 #48
Ghost Dog Mar 2016 #45

Response to forest444 (Original post)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 11:37 AM

1. It is a very large continental shelf.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ghost Dog (Reply #1)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 12:52 PM

4. The folks at Google have really outdone themselves with Google Earth.

To think that was all above water during the last ice age.

Thanks for that, Ghost Dog. This ruling is important above all because it gives Argentina increased authority to stop illegal fishing along the continental shelf by the British, the Chinese, and others. It will also impact certain oil exploration plans going forward.

As the article mentioned, it doesn't address the Falklands/Malvinas dispute at all; but it does make the western half of the 200-mile "economic zone" Thatcher illegally decreed thirty years ago illegal. Not that anyone expects them to abide by laws (heaven forbid).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Reply #4)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 02:19 PM

12. I do think this is correct (pssst: for Uruguay too!).

Now: defend it. Including by means of further diplomacy, please. But, any hydrocarbons are unusable, except maybe in some very specialised, eg. medical, applications.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ghost Dog (Reply #12)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 02:29 PM

15. That's the rub, isn't it.

The Argentine Coast Guard spends millions each year patrolling and dispersing myriad illegal fishing boats in the area (mainly British and Chinese). Even Greenpeace has condemned the poaching off Argentine shores; but to no avail.

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=es&u=http://www.greenpeace.org/argentina/es/noticias/Greenpeace-denuncia-pesca-ilegal-en-el-Mar-Argentino/&prev=search

Besides the Falklands (of course), guess where most of those boats unload their illegal cargo?

Uruguay.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Reply #15)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 02:37 PM

17. Ah. Fishing is a very immediate issue

(as it is between the Spanish Canary Islands where I live and the Morocco-occupied Western Sahara coast). The Uruguay factor... from the big neighbor's point of view... I need to look more closely. Oh, please not let there be conflict there.

Forget about any oil or such. Poison.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ghost Dog (Reply #17)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 03:13 PM

23. Beautiful!

I've always heard that the Canary Islands are among the most visually stunning places on earth. I hope to visit someday, hopefully in the near future.



As for Uruguay, my understanding is that, like with most neighbors, there are a number of disputes. The caveat there being that most Uruguayans and Argentines share a common culture, ethnicity, and history.

Their relationship is in some ways akin to the one between the U.S. and Canada, and I might even venture to say there are more differences between the U.S. and Canada than between Uruguay and Argentina.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Reply #23)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 03:37 PM

24. Yes. Here, I have made very good friends from both countries,

from whom I learn much.

I very much welcome this into my understanding and my heart.

Peace.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ghost Dog (Reply #24)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 03:40 PM

26. You're a true man (or lady) of the world.

Puts my boring life to shame.

Good chatting with you as always, Ghost Dog.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Reply #26)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:58 AM

38. With you too, forest444. Man of the world in no way, except

in libraries. I am only geographically familiar with Spain and her islands, France, Northern Italy, Switzerland and the British Isles, with visits to Cuba, Marrakech and Istanbul.

Socially, though, in places like the Canary Islands, London, Barcelona, Geneva one meets a diverse range of people.

You live in the USA?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Original post)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 11:48 AM

2. The Falklands still have their 200 mile economic zone

so no big change.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #2)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 12:23 PM

3. Well, it means the western half of said zone is now illegal per international laws of the sea.

But you're right: when, after all, have scruples ever stopped the British Empire.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Reply #3)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 12:55 PM

5. No, that is not what it says

But I think you know that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #5)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 01:20 PM

6. That's exactly what it says, whether you know it - and like it - or not.

Said determination awards Argentina “sovereign rights for the purpose of exploring and exploiting natural resources,” on the continental shelf according to the 1958 UN CLCS Convention.

In other words, the 200-mile economic zone Thatcher declared for the Falklands cannot overlap Argentina's 350-mile economic zone.

This wasn't an issue in the past because the two economic zones just barely overlapped; but the new 350-mile area literally brushes up against the Falklands' western shores.

I agree with you on this much: it's not likely to be of much consequence going forward, given the British Empire's infamous history of flouting international laws (which they consider themselves above).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Reply #6)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 01:33 PM

7. The proper thing would be to let the people of the Falklands decide

and have the UN ratify that choice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #7)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 01:42 PM

8. On the sovereignty dispute perhaps - which this ruling does not impact at all.

Even though they were implanted by the occupying country, I'm inclined to agree with you.

That's quite a bit more consideration than the British showed the 1,500 Chagossians who were forcibly removed in 1971 to make way for a new U.S. military base on Diego García.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/chagos-islanders-tell-britain-they-want-to-resettle-their-former-home-a6830671.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Reply #8)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 02:27 PM

14. As regards Diego Garcia, I/we doubt British people, nor governments

ever had any choice in that (dirty) matter.

There is no longer a British Empire, forest444. (y menos mal.) There is a putative neocon US one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ghost Dog (Reply #14)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 02:53 PM

21. That's a good point.

Similar pressures, I suspect, lurk behind Britain's dogged (and costly) attachment to the Falklands. It's no secret NATO has an eye on the air base Thatcher built after Galtieri's eminently stupid invasion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Reply #21)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 03:39 PM

25. .

¡Vote Sanders!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ghost Dog (Reply #25)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 03:44 PM

28. I did!

But will it be enough?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Reply #8)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 10:58 PM

34. Wasn't the population of Argentina mostly "implanted" from Spain?

And the British were living in the Falklands before Argentina was even a country?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #34)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:30 AM

37. During the French Revolutionary years

Spain essentially withdrew, Argentina asserted her independence, and UK (of Great Britain and Ireland at the time) garrisoned the Falklands/Malvinas.

I'll re-read the history.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #2)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 02:01 PM

9. Nope. Everything from Argentina to Antarctica is now Argentina's, except for the 12 mile bubble.

The UN panel just gave the entire continental shelf to Argentina, which includes the land around the Falklands. Because that panel isn't authorized to impinge on territorial waters or the claims over the Falklands themselves, the Falkland Islands/UK retains an EEZ ONLY over the 12 nautical miles within their territorial waters.

The UN just approved Argentinas entire proposal, which extends their EEZ all the way to the shore of Antarctica itself:



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Xithras (Reply #9)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 02:08 PM

10. Excellent find. Thank you, Xithras.

Of course, we both know the British will royally ignore this UN determination - as is very much their wont.

My guess is they won't even relinquish the western half of the 200-mile EEZ around the Falklands Thatcher declared 30 years ago. They certainly won't call off the oil companies that have been exploring in the area for 20+ years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Reply #10)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 02:24 PM

13. Well, I wouldn't go that far

Thatchers claim wasn't illegal. UNCLOS authorizes a 200 mile limit if no other treaties are in place, and because Argentina and the UK have no treaties governing a maritime border, Thatchers declaration was perfectly legal under international law. In situations like this one, international law states that both nations get to declare their EEZ's, and any overlap is simply classified as "disputed". Minus any treaties to the contrary, Thatcher's 200 mile EEZ was consistent with both maritime convention and recognized law at the time. Only the UN could overturn it, which they just did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Xithras (Reply #13)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:18 AM

36. The part of the UN decision covering seafloor around South Georgia

and the Sandwhich Islands would appear at first sight certainly to be erroneous.

That is troubling, and casts a shadow over the entirety

Stay tuned...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Xithras (Reply #9)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 02:11 PM

11. Argentina has recognized a 160 mile exclusionary fishing zone around the Falklands

as part of fisheries management in the region. So it is not so straight forward. The Falklands fishing fleet is big - Argentina certainly doesn't want to destroy existing resource management agreements over a quixotic quest to regain sovereignty. I suspect in the long run it will all come to nothing - the UK and Argentina will come to some agreement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #11)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 02:31 PM

16. Come to some agreement. Naturally.

(If we all vote Left...)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #11)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 02:41 PM

18. I don't know about that. Argentina may be more willing to negotiate now.

Argentina's interests in the Falklands have long been economic. They wanted control of the islands so they could have control over the continental shelf and the resources that come along with it. If the UK EEZ was valid, it cut Argentina's territorial claims by more than half.

Argentina just won its big prize. Whether or not it gets the islands themselves, it now has legal control over the EEZ that it has been seeking since the 1970's. Because the dispute is no longer about control over the seafloor resources, both Argentina and the UK may be more willing to negotiate an end to the dispute over the islands.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Xithras (Reply #18)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 02:44 PM

19. I think the big deal for the Falklands is the fisheries

access to the Falklands as staging areas for mineral exploration is something Argentina would like. There are enough pieces on the table to forge a deal that would benefit all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Xithras (Reply #9)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 02:47 PM

20. You exaggerate, Xithras. There is no connection

between Argentina's continental shelf and Antartica.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ghost Dog (Reply #20)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 03:01 PM

22. Nope. I copied that map straight off the UN website, right out of the approved proposal.

Argentina has claimed a slice on Antarctica since 1942, has had active claims on Antarctica since the 1800's, and was an original signer of the Antarctic Treaty. Those claims are independent of the Argentine continental shelf. While the majority of the newly approved proposal (and the contentious part) dealt with the Argentine continental shelf, the same proposal also asked the UN to recognize that Argentina's claim to the Antarctica also extended to continental shelves attached to that claim. The panel signed off on that as well.

The result of the claims is the creation of an EEZ that extends from the Argentine shore to the Antarctic shore, as the map clearly demonstrates.

Of course, it's important to remember that the Argentine claims in Antarctica are still limited by the Antarctic Treaty. While the seafloor may be in their EEZ, they are very limited in what they can do with it. The real power in the declaration lays in the fact that they can now prevent OTHER nations from trying to violate the treaty and use the land in their EEZ without authorization.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Xithras (Reply #22)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 03:42 PM

27. Ok. "Those claims are independent of the Argentine continental shelf."

Oh, shit. Now we're going to have to mention Chile...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ghost Dog (Reply #27)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 03:57 PM

29. I'm just glad they have Michelle Bachelet there, not some Pinochet grease monkey like Piñera.

Argentina and Chile, as you may know, settled their own maritime dispute (over the Beagle Channel and islands) in 1984.

Argentine President Raúl Alfonsín even submitted the treaty to a public referendum - and despite a vitriolic right-wing campaign against it, it won with an astounding 82.6%!

The map posted by Xithras above reflects that treaty (notice the little rightward indentation underneath Cape Horn).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ghost Dog (Reply #27)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 04:04 PM

30. Yes and no.

Both Chile and Argentina claim slices of Antarctica, and those slices overlap on the Antarctic peninsula. The UN panel merely confirmed that the land claims extend to the continental seafloor under the UNCLOS, and didn't rule on the validity of the claims themselves. Those are governed under the Antarctic Treaty, which requires all signatory nations to suspend attempts to enforce their claims against other claimants.

If Argentina tried to prevent Chile from fishing in the EEZ of their Antarctic claim, they would be violating the terms of the Antarctic Treaty. It would be an illegal action if Argentina didn't first formally withdraw from the treaty.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Xithras (Reply #22)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:17 AM

40. I'm guessing the msp comes from Argentins's submission,

rather than from the recommendations in respect to the submission made by Argentina, see the press release in #39 below.

I'm losing patience searching the UN's poorly-designed website for definitive documentation. Can you offer a link to your source for us, please?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Xithras (Reply #9)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 11:16 PM

35. That's insane. That area is bigger than the entirety of Argentina itself. NT

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Original post)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 08:06 PM

31. Guardian: Falkland Islands lie in Argentinian waters, rules UN commission

Falkland Islands lie in Argentinian waters, rules UN commission

Argentina welcomes decision to expand its maritime territory, despite unresolved dispute with Britain over islands

Associated Press
Monday 28 March 2016 19.43 EDT

Argentina’s government is celebrating a decision by a UN commission to expand its maritime territory in the South Atlantic Ocean by 35% to include the disputed Falkland islands and beyond.

The Argentine foreign ministry said its waters had increased by 1.7 million square km (0.66 million square miles) and the decision will be key in its dispute with Britain over the islands. Argentina lost a brief, bloody 1982 war with Britain after Argentinian troops seized the South Atlantic archipelago that Latin Americans call the Malvinas.

The UN commission on the limits of the continental shelf sided with Argentina, ratifying the country’s 2009 report fixing the limit of its territory at 200 to 350 miles from its coast.

“This is a historic occasion for Argentina because we’ve made a huge leap in the demarcation of the exterior limit of our continental shelf,” foreign minister Susana Malcorra said. “This reaffirms our sovereignty rights over the resources of our continental shelf.”

More:
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/mar/29/falkland-islands-argentina-waters-rules-un-commission


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Reply #31)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 08:16 PM

32. Excellent update. Thank you, Judi.

Question is: will the British comply?

If I were a betting man, I'd probably wager against it. I'd be very surprised, in fact, if they even order the oil companies currently exploring those (now Argentine) waters out.

As far as the islands themselves they know that Argentina has neither the military capacity nor the disposition to enforce its sovereignty over them, and that NATO, moreover, is interested in keeping Thatcher's base available for its own uses.

The response from London will basically be "come and take it." I hope I'm wrong about that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Reply #32)

Mon Mar 28, 2016, 09:27 PM

33. I think it all just depends on what

the people that live there want. If they want to move back to Britain, or if they want to become Argentinian citizens, then Argentina will get control of the island. If they want to stay there and stay British citizens, then Argentina will have to work around it.
The UN can say whatever it wants. We know they have no actual means of enforcing their proclamations. If London says "Come and take it", all the UN can or will do is shrug their shoulders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Reply #32)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:09 AM

44. No the British won't comply forest. Its a non-binding decision of the UN. Britain isn't going

to give up its sovereignty because the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf made a stupid determination.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 03:23 AM

39. Here is the UN CLCS press release:

Last edited Tue Mar 29, 2016, 08:11 AM - Edit history (1)

Commission on Limits of Continental Shelf Concludes Fortieth Session

ROUND-UP RELEASE

http://www.un.org/press/en/2016/sea2030.doc.htm

NEW YORK, 28 March 2016 (Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea) — The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf held its fortieth session at United Nations Headquarters from 1 February to 18 March 2016.  Besides the two weeks of plenary meetings (8 to 12 February and 7 to 11 March), the Commission, working through its subcommissions, devoted five weeks to the technical examination of submissions at the Geographic Information Systems laboratories and other technical facilities of the Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea.

The active subcommissions continued their work during the fortieth session.  These were the subcommissions established for consideration of the submissions made by Brazil in respect of the Brazilian Southern Region (partial revised submission); Norway in respect of Bouvetøya and Dronning Maud Land; South Africa in respect of the mainland of the territory of South Africa; the Federated States of Micronesia, Papua New Guinea and Solomon Islands, jointly, concerning the Ontong Java Plateau; France and South Africa, jointly, in the area of the Crozet Archipelago and the Prince Edward Islands; Kenya; Mauritius in the region of Rodrigues Island; and Nigeria.  Some subcommissions met with the respective delegations.

At the plenary level, the Commission adopted, without a vote, two sets of recommendations, namely the recommendations in respect to the submission made by Argentina, and the recommendations in respect to the submission made by Iceland in respect of the Ægir Basin area and in the western and southern parts of Reykjanes Ridge.  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).

The Commission also continued, at the plenary level, its consideration of draft recommendations in respect to the submission made by the Cook Islands, concerning the Manihiki Plateau and commenced its consideration of draft recommendations in respect to the submission made by Uruguay.

The Russian Federation, headed by Sergei E. Donskoi, Minister for Natural Resources and Environment, presented its partial revised submission in respect of the Arctic Ocean before the plenary of the Commission.  The Commission assigned the examination of the submission to the subcommission established to consider the submission made by the Russian Federation on 20 December 2001.

Also, the Commission established a new subcommission to consider the submission made by Seychelles concerning the Northern Plateau Region, which has begun its work.

The Commission decided that it would hold three weeks of plenary meetings during the forty-third session in order to consider draft recommendations submitted to the plenary before the term of office of the current members expires in June 2017.

Details of the fortieth session will be reflected in the Statement by the Chairperson of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf on the progress of work in the Commission, which will be issued as document CLCS/93.

For additional information on the work of the Commission, see the website of the Division atwww.un.org/Depts/los/index.htm.

OCEANS AND LAW OF THE SEA

For information media. Not an official record.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ghost Dog (Reply #39)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 09:42 AM

41. So Macri and his minister appear to be exaggerating,

in light of the highlighted text above, the meaning of the UNCLCS's recommendations for disemination by the media:



http://www.telam.com.ar/english/notas/201603/6262-president-macri-the-new-map-of-argentina-is-a-states-policy-example.html

... President Mauricio Macri referred to the "new map of Argentina,"  following a resolution by the United Nations Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS), as a State`s policy. 
 
"Some weeks ago, the United Nations Commission  on the Limits of the Continental Shelf approved Argentina`s request unanimously, to extend our continental platform," wrote the President on his  official Facebook account.   

According to the report, Argentina is granted the extension of sovereignty over the maritime territory in the area. The country was granted status as the “coastal State” and, as such, gained rights to exploit its natural resources.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 09:50 AM

42. US State Department cable in relation to Argentina's 2009 submission

to the UNCLCS:

https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/09BUENOSAIRES920_a.html

ARGENTINA AGREES TO PROPOSAL TO RESOLVE DISAGREEMENT OVER ITS CLAIM ON ANTARCTIC SHELF

Date:

2009 August 11, 19:51 (Tuesday)

Canonical ID:

09BUENOSAIRES920_a

Original Classification:

UNCLASSIFIED,FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Current Classification:

UNCLASSIFIED,FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Handling Restrictions

-- Not Assigned --


Character Count:

3090

Executive Order:

-- Not Assigned --

Locator:

TEXT ONLINE

TAGS:

AR - Argentina | PHSA - Political Affairs--High Seas Affairs | PREL - Political Affairs--External Political Relations | PTBS

Concepts:

-- Not Assigned --

Enclosure:

-- Not Assigned --

Type:

TE - Telegram (cable)

Office Origin:

-- N/A or Blank --


Office Action:

-- N/A or Blank --

Archive Status:

-- Not Assigned --

From:

Argentina Buenos Aires

Markings:

-- Not Assigned --

To:

Australia Canberra | France Paris | Group Destinations Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR-Mercado Común del Sur) |New Zealand Auckland | Norway Oslo |Russia Moscow | Secretary of State |United Kingdom London | United Nations (New York)


PREVIOUS

1. (SBU) ADCM and ESTCouns delivered ref A points to the Argentine MFA's Director General for Political Coordination, Rafael Grossi, a close advisor to FM Jorge Taiana. Grossi was pleased with the USG proposal regarding Argentina's submission of its claim to the Antarctic continental platform (ref B), which he labeled a "very good outcome," and said he could reciprocate with "something that will provide comfort to our partners." The MFA had held a long meeting on this issue on August 4, he said, where the Foreign Minister had approved the exact wording of Argentina's oral communication to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) on August 24. (Text follows below. Spanish and English versions have been e-mailed to the Department.) Grossi confirmed he would travel to New York to represent the GOA at the Commission's hearing and to work with the Chairman and the Secretariat to ensure Argentina's oral statement is included in the written record of the meeting. He offered to meet with USUN.

2. (SBU) Grossi acknowledged that Argentina is "fully aware" that the way its submission to the CLCS had been handled was "not ideal," but he hoped we understood the reasons why the GOA had done so. "We realize we altered the framework (of the 7 plus 2 agreement) and therefore needed to reassure our friends," he said. Grossi was thankful that this "fair compromise" had avoided an open disagreement. He mentioned that he would meet with the Russians, the Australians, New Zealanders and British later in the day to share with them the proposed language just presented to us. He planned on seeing the French and Norwegians on August 6. Grossi also noted that the British Ambassador had forewarned the MFA of the United Kingdom's forthcoming objection to the Argentine presentation, so that it would not come as a surprise to the GOA.

3. (SBU) Text of GOA statement to the CLCS follows. Begin text. Argentina made a full submission of the outer limit of its continental shelf, including the natural prolongation appurtenant to the continent, the islands and the Argentina Antarctic Sector. However, as Note NU/139/2009/600 states, the Argentine Republic takes into account the circumstances of the region south of 60 degrees South latitude and the special legal and political status of Antarctica under the provisions of the Antarctic Treaty, including article IV thereof, and the Rules of Procedure of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf. Therefore, and in accordance with its rules, the Commission could not take any action, for the time being, with regard to the information in this Submission that relates to continental shelf appurtenant to Antarctica.

End Text. KELLY

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 09:57 AM

43. So when does the invasion force land for Falklands War II?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_Tires (Reply #43)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 10:31 PM

46. Sometime during the middle of one of Cameron's wet dreams.

The fact is that no elected Argentine government has, or would, do any such thing; it took a GOP-supported dictatorship to do so (and 34 years ago at that).

Argentina's budget priorities demonstrate this, moreover. They devote only 2% of their annual budget to the military (the $5 bn. security budget, minus gendarmerie and coast guard). This is barely enough for their own domestic vigilance needs and for basic payroll and maintenance. Nothing you can even begin to plan an "invasion" on.

What a world it would be if all countries had a similar policy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Reply #46)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:39 AM

47. Funny, given how much of a hard-on the Argie gov't has

in at least pretending they want to take back the islands...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_Tires (Reply #47)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 10:16 AM

48. Flag waving is key to all retail politics.

We all remember the Bush years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Original post)

Tue Mar 29, 2016, 05:29 PM

45. UK Gov speaks:



http://www.bbc.com/news/business-35914839

...(T)he UK government has played down the commission's ruling. The Prime Minister's official spokeswoman said: "At this stage we have yet to receive details of (the) report. It is important to note that this is an advisory committee. It makes recommendations, they are not legally binding."

And a Foreign Office spokeswoman said: "The UK Government remains in no doubt over the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands, nor of the right of the islanders to determine their own future."

The Falkland Islands' government said the UN did not make changes in sovereignty in areas where the territory is disputed. Mike Summers, chairman of the Legislative Assembly of the Falkland Islands, which governs the islands' internal affairs, said: "Our understanding has always been that the UN would not make any determination on applications for continental shelf extension in areas where there are competing claims."...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread