Rund Abdelfatah
EUROPE has rejected Gibraltar’s appeal to ban local fishing.
Gibraltar officials had proposed a ban on fisherman using nets to fish around the Rock, with the purported goal of preserving native wildlife.
According to a spokesperson from the European Court of Justice, the decision is ‘final’ and not open to appeal.
The court in Luxembourg had already rejected Gibraltar’s first appeal, made back in May 2011, against the European Commission’s decision to classify the marine area called the ‘Western Strait’ as protected Spanish territory.
Britain had supported the appeal on the basis that the inscribed zone included a British natural habitat already registered by the UK.
Despite continued protest from Gibraltar officials, the European Commission has stood firmly by the ruling and said it hopes Spain and Britain will work in collaboration going forward.
Utter nonsense, the ruling has nothing to do with fishing and as its made by a Spanish judge, hardly surprising.
Best thing to do now is for the Gibraltarian fishermen to fish-out the stocks around the Rock so there’s nothing left for the Spanish fishermen to catch.
Spanish fish markets are loaded with undersized, illegal catches and nothing is done about it.
The UK should now enforce shipping quotas around the British isles, especially for Spanish boats.
Y nosotros deberíamos prohibir a las ambulancias de Gibraltar entrar en terreno español hasta que se aclare el contencioso de las aguas y alargar las colas.
En el fondo habría que cerrar la verja y pomper relciones con los británicos hasta que acabe de una vez lo de Gibraltar.
De acuerdo, cerca de la frontera, no hay ambulancias, vamos a los enfermos y los pobres mueren – típico Franco.
Gibraltar será siempre británico hasta el último de la herencia de Franco está muerto y enterrado.
¡Viva España libre (un día) y que viva Gibraltar!
Brujo, tienes mucho que aprender.
Brujo says for the benefit of non spanish speakers;
brujo
August 22nd, 2012 9:14 pm
“Y nosotros deberíamos prohibir a las ambulancias de Gibraltar entrar en terreno español hasta que se aclare el contencioso de las aguas y alargar las colas.
En el fondo habría que cerrar la verja y pomper relciones con los británicos hasta que acabe de una vez lo de Gibraltar.”
Translation of above word for word.
And we should prohibit the Gibraltar ambulances from entering spanish territory until such time as the dispute about the waters is cleared and lengthen the queues.
In the end we should close the frontier and break relations with the British until the Gibraltar issue ends. ”
End of translation.
Brujo you know you sound sooo much like a little fat guy with a moustache with his arm up saluting in the fascist manner. You know who I mean, the one that stopped the oxygen for Gibraltar hospitals and the wine for Gibraltar’s catholic church services, causing interminable queues and finally closing the border for 15 years causing his own people true hardship by having them scattered all over Spain, leaving their families, their homes and the place where they had been born because they had jobs in Gibraltar when all this happened. All this came from a man who proclaimed himself a catholic christian and apostolic and was followed around like you would a Saint under a canopy when he entered and left a church, just like if he were the Pope himself.
Incredible in the past but nowadays having to listen to the same diatribe from another spaniard.
This decision by European Court of Justice significantly undermines the UK’s claim to sovereignty of the Bay of Algeciras as the ‘Estrecho Oriental’ conservation area to be maintained by Spain covers an area previously claimed by the UK.
Under EU law, only the member State with sovereignty over the land or sea in question can apply for it to be designated an EU conservation site. By ruling again in favour of Spain, the European Court of Justice has recognised Spain’s claim to sovereignty over the Bay of Algeciras.
Spain will continue to protect its fishermen and enforce Spanish and EU laws over those waters. If the current occupants of Gibraltar have a problem with Spain’s actions then they should encourage their British over-lords to honour their commitments under the Brussels Agreement and heed the numerous UN General Assembly resolutions and enter into discussions with Spain over the decolonisation of Gibraltar.
antonio2
You must be stuck in some type of time wrap. Spain has not been a dictatorship for over thirty years. Your comments appear to be somewhat unbalanced given the fact that, if anything, it’s Gibraltar that needs a dose of freedom.
You seem to have forgotten the fact that Gibraltar is listed by the UN as a territory that still needs to be decolonised by the UK. Perhaps you should direct your comments to your British over-lords instead of Spain.
antonio2
¿típico Franco?
He de suponer que piensas que soy un fascista o de derechas.Tampoco que le vea demasiado sentido a la actual izquierda.
Brujo, tienes mucho que aprender
No lo dudes amigo y nunca se debe dejar de hacerlo,quizá dejaste de hacerlo no lo sé,pero dudo que se de gente como tú o de la hipocresía inglesa.Además es divertido dices que hasta el último de la herencia de Franco está enterrado pues me alegro y que se pudra el cabrón en el infierno pero si piensas que solo los fascistas españoles quieren Gibraltar tienes mucho que aprender de los españoles.
Mira quizá seas uno de los que trabajan en Gibraltar u en Ingalterra y por eso eres tan complaciente en este aspecto.
The present Spanish governments’ attitude (and Brujo’s) towards Gibraltar is quite understandable – like a child in a sweetshop with a barrier between him and his favourite sweets. But that barrier will always be there until Spain is advanced enough for the Gibraltarians to want to remove it and join with Spain.
Of course Spain wants Gibraltar, a bustling commercial city-port with has enjoyed billions of Euros of investment over three centuries. Who wouldn’t? Money for nothing?
Like a child, Spain must learn how to behave itself in matters such as chronic, endemic corruption before the sweeties are handed over.
About the EU judgement that got leaked before it was announced:
“http://www.chronicle.gi/headlines_details.php?id=25806”
“http://www.chronicle.gi/headlines_details.php?id=25805”
Brujo you may hate Franco but unfortunately you have been contaminated by his doctrine. I pity you.
Gibraltar’s EU appeal had a Spanish Judge and Registrar
Not only that, she was apparently the daughter of one of Franco’s ex-ministers!
But why should Gibraltar worry about dictats from the EU – the Spanish don’t.
Inthename
Entonces debería ser católico,racista y todo el pack de derechas mi novia debería ser de aquí y no de Ecuador por ejemplo.
Deberías suponer que las apariencias engañan, además tu eres el que está apoyando una invasión y los problemas que conlleva, eres tú el que no se conforma con el gibraltar del tratado.
Yo he leído mas de los nazis los aliados y de los rusos.
Quizá estas contaminado por una actitud nelsoniana con toques democráticos del actual colonialismo como el Israelí.
Colonia británica=Problemas
Comentas que cerrar la verja es una actitud de nazi pero si tan independiente es Gibraltar y tan civilizados somos todos deberíamos ser capaces de hacerlo y no generar más problemas sobre el asunto, así Graq bretaña se ocupará de todos los problemas de Gibraltar y vosotros puede que accedais a vuestro ansiado estatus de país con todo lo que conlleve.
Dices que soy un nazi ,pero que español te diría que fueses independiente ahora eso sí ,si no lo quieres ser ,que se ocupen los británicos de todos tus problemas y que pierdan un poco en relaciones por el camino ,como los demás y ya está.
Lo que si te veo son unos toques de Almodovar dramatismo.
Antonio2
The Gibraltar Government was not even notified of the ruling before it was leaked to the spanish press and posted as news in Europa Sur and the ECJ webside. but Gibraltar is a law abiding and serious country and goes by the rule of law.
Gibraltar’s EU appeal had a Spanish Judge and Registrar
“http://www.panorama.gi/localnews/headlines.php?action=view_article&article=9212”
Government not formally notified of ECJ ruling
“http://www.panorama.gi/localnews/headlines.php?action=view_article&article=9213”
For once and if you will all excuse me I will answer Bruji in his own language and then translate.
Bruji, no pongas palabras que yo no he utlizado. No te he llamado nazi. Te he dicho que por tus ideas me recuerdas a ese senor bajito que tanto dices que odias, y por lo tanto deberias odiar tambien sus ideas. No se de donde eres, ni porque nos tienes tanto coraje, pero como antes te he dicho, y despues de tantos ultrajes, no os deseo ningun mal. Al revez, me alegro cuando os va todo bien, y me apeno que esteis en la situacion que estais ahora. A Eso le llamo ser tolerante a no poder mas, porque si por tus ideas nos rigieramos todos me estaria regocijando de lo que os pasa ahora y lo por venir.
Si tu esposa es guatemalteca, preguntale a ella porque se tuvo que marchar de su pais, y preguntante tu tambien porque se estan marchando tantos jovenes del tuyo ahora y tantisimos miles antes cuando estaba Franco en el poder.
Si estuvieramos al lado de otro pais mas democratico que el tuyo ya nos hubieran dado la independencia, puesto que nos gobernamos y nos financiamos nosotros solitos. En lo unico que se mete Inglaterra es en Defensa y en politica exterior por las consabidas razones de estar ubicados donde estamos. Pero por desgracia estamos al lado de un pais que no respeta nada, ni leyes, ni acuerdos, ni derechos humanos. Un pais que tergiversa toda noticia a su antojo, que os esta mintiendo y os los estais tragando. Porque si no echan a una periodista como Ana Pastor y otros? Por decir las cuatro verdades del barquero sin tapujos. Si crees que te estoy injuriando nada mas tienes que ver las noticias por algun canal que no este manipulado y prensa que sea mas plural e independiente que la Razon o el Ya. No queremos ser independientes por la sencilla razon que por el Tratado de Utrecht a que tanto os gusta referiros, Inglaterra no puede traspasar el territorio, pero todo se andara, acuerdate que somos ciudadanos britanicos y no colonos como os encanta llamarnos.
No me gusta Almodovar lo siento, asi que no se a que te refieres. Dramatismo no, realidad vivida. Prefiero leer los versos de Federico Garcia Lorca y Miguel Hernandez entre otros.
Ya te he leido en otros foros y se que por tus comentarios nos tienes que odiar muchisimo. No se porque, nada te hemos hecho, al revez hemos proporcionado trabajo a millones de los vuestros durante los tres siglos que llevamos aqui, y seguiremos proporcionando trabajo y cobijo, sabes porque, porque somos democraticos y humanitarios. Vale?
Aclarate esas ideas porque envenan el alma y no te traera nada mas que desaliento.
Promised translation:
Bruji, don’t put words into my mouth which I have not said. I have not called un a Nazi, I have told you, that because of your ideas, you remind of that little man whom you say you hate so much, but apparently you don’t hate his ideas which are your own. I don’t know where you are from, and neither do I know why you hate us so much, but I had told you before that even after being on the receiving end of so much abuse from your country, I don’t wish you anything bad. On the contrary, I am glad when things go well for your people and it saddens me to see the situation they find themselves in now. I call that being tolerant to a fault, because if we all went by your ideas we would be rejoicing at your situation now and in the near future.
If, as you say your wife is from Guatemala, ask her why she and so many others had to leave her country, and ask yourself too why so many of your own youth are leaving the country now and why so many thousands had to leave Spain during the time of Franco.
If we were next to a country that was more democratic than yours is, we would have already obtained independence, because we govern and finance ourselves. The only thing Britain takes care of is defence and foreign affairs exactly because of who we have next door. Unfortunately we are next to a country that does not respect the law, Treaties accords, nor human rights. A government that chops and changes news to their convenience, which is lying to you and you are swallowing all their lies. Why else would they get rid of Ana Pastor and others like her? Because they called a spade a spade without lies.
If you think I am insulting your country all you need to do is listen to newsbroadcasts that are not manipulated and read press other than La Razon or Diario Ya.
We don’t want to be independent precisely because of the Treaty of Utrecht, which you so love to quote, where it says Gibraltar cannot be trespassed to any country without giving Spain first option., but remember Gibraltarians are British Citizens not colonials like you like calling us. We can wait.
I don’t like Almodovar I am sorry, so I don’t know what you are referring to. Dramatics no, lived reality. I prefer to read the poetry of Federico Garcia Lorca and Miguel Hernandez amongst others.
I have read you in other forums and I know you hate us very much, I don’t know why, we have never harmed you, on the contrary. We have provided work for millions of your countrymen during 300 years, and we will continue to do so, you know why? Because we are truly democratic and humanitarian. OK?
You had better clear those ideas from your head because they poison the soul and all they will bring you are disatisfaction.
By the way Brujo I will not answer your comments in spanish anymore, got better things to do. So you should be polite and write in the language the newspaper is printed.
Bruji apologies to youe Eqatorian girlfriend for having got confused with her nationality. But the Question to her still stands.
PS Transferred not traspassed, one’s brain seems to do that when you speak two languages and sometimes at the same times.
Moderator Cheers :)
Inthename
Guatemala is not in Ecuador look at the map and say she let her country by the way.
Además yo no te he dicho que los respondas ni que los traduzcas lo haces por que quieres yo no te odio ni a tu gente odio que el hecho de que ocupas a través de soveranía británica mi tierra y sigue en aumento y yo te he leeído tus comentarios y desde luego un buen vecino como se os llena la boca de palabra, no te trata de robar tierra y agua ,sobre lo del trabajo quizá sea un fenomeno europeo sí reduce esos años de ahí que te diga lo de Almodovar.
Y en referente a lo del veneno el alma ,los chakras y que se yo que te quieras inventar después de ese argumento vienen los hechos, que el problema no se ha resuelto y si sigue siendo británico empeorará quizá para nosotros o quien sabe.
Sobre la independencia la ddefiendo en unos términos ,que has dado en el clavo la defensa debería ser española y el resto independiente si quieres preferiría una españa federal.
Sobre lo de los nazis es por que es parecida de hecho se puede usar como sinónimo casi y supongo que lo entenderás si lees poesía ,yo en cambio soy de documentales y ciencias pero no confío tanto como tu en la sociología tampoco la doy por pérdida.
Y de paso que sepas que tampoco odio en absoluto a los británicos conocí muy buena gente en Manchester pero esto como la verja tiene dos lados y yo estoy al otro.
say she let her country by the way
who say she let her country?
Brujo,
If somebody directs a question at you, the polite thing is to answer, and if you are writing in an english speaking newspaper, the polite thing is to write in the language it is written. It is also polite to say sorry when after reading or not reading the post above where I had made a mistake about your girlfriend’s nationality. I apologised for my mistake and rectified it.
Apart from that.
Maybe the documentaries you are watching are the ones ones which are hung up on You Tube about Gibraltar’s history by some poor troubled mind, pure fiction by the way. I prefer to read history books, the factual ones.
Nobody has stolen anything Brujo. You see you continue to regurgitate Franco’s doctrines. Let me refresh your mind ones again Treaty of Utrecht … Perpetuity…it included an exchange for Menorca and Florida.
The seas… CONVEMAR/UNCLOS – grants us half the Bay of Gibraltar and twelve miles on the eastern side, so who is robbing anything?
You seem to be frustrated with your own government. Imagine our frustration with yours.
If we try and share with you the government of the day wont have it. If we dont give you something, we want the bread buttered on both sides, if we try to give you something you look upon the gift as charity and resent us for it, but you still take it. Then you call us every name under the sun. That is you, Brujo,your country, your people.
If you are on the other side of the fence, you think we are all rich, or thieves, or live off contraband and drugs. You think we dont pay taxes, you think we live off goodness knows what. And this is because you dont really know us, you only know what you have been told.
If you are an Andalucian then maybe you believe in Blas Infante’s dream, its big enough to govern itself and has more resources which could be put to better use internally rather than having to send your taxes to Madrid and then have to beg for some back but….since its not up to me to fix your country I will leave it up to your own people to do so. But think, if I were you I would try to help your country,before you try to jump into mine.
Chevere a tu novia, que te vaya bien.
Read my lips: y o u h a v e l o s t
t h e a p p e a l.
I know it hurts but that is democracy in action. Now stop making so much noise and let Spain look after the coast,
Can someone explain to me who these people are who think Gibraltar should be Spanish? Not “oh international law blah” but the actual motivation. What is there really to gain here? If, in some alternate world, Spain had a (dubious) legal claim to Somalia I do not think anyone would be interested in following up on it. So what is the actual motivation? Resources? Pride? Free monkeys? Hidden oil?
Because it seems obvious why the people of Gibraltar do not want to be governed by Spain (exploitation of natural resources, bad governance, different culture, different ethnicity, etc.)
I’ve never actually met a Spanish person who cares about Gibraltar and thinks it should be Spanish. So who are these people who want Gibraltar and why do they want it?
@ aussiesunshine
Read mine:
Nope they wouldnt let me publish it!
aussiesunshine – “I know it hurts but that is democracy in action. Now stop making so much noise and let Spain look after the coast,”
Actually international law isn’t democratic. It is enacted based on treaties ratified by unelected, appointed political representatives. Many are actually part of a the vestiges of a noble class or caste system (e.g. representatives from Japan, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, etc.)
The ICJ (International Court of Justice) is also not democratic. Decisions are decided based on political appointees, not elected judges or a jury system.
In a truly democratic system you’d have the people vote directly – or at least a selection of the people voting directly. And I bet if you took a random selection of the British an a random selection of the Spanish, both would vote for Gibraltar staying British.
Just goes to show how this morass of political machinery no longer reflects the actual will of the people.
antonio2
Your comments that: ‘…like a child, Spain must learn how to behave itself in matters such as chronic, endemic corruption’ are unbalanced and display a high degree of hypocrisy.
For a more balanced view why don’t you open your eyes a little. Here is a small summary from the Transparency International UK website for your enlightenment:
The amount of money laundered through the UK each year is estimated to be £48 billion (2% of UK GDP).
Source: Money Laundering Bulletin, June 2011
71% of UK citizens think corruption is a major problem in the UK.
64% of people think corruption is part of the UK’s business culture.
33% of people think that bribery or abuse of power is widespread among the police.
Source: The European Commission, Special Eurobarometer 374: Corruption, (2012). Click here for more information
Fraud is costing the UK around £73bn a year.
Source: The National Fraud Authority, ‘Annual Fraud Indicator (AFI) Report’, (2012)
In 2011 Transparency International UK published a 3-volume report, Corruption in the UK. The research is the most comprehensive of its kind. Some of the findings are listed below:
Our research examined twenty-three sectors and institutions in the UK.
53.4% of respondents to our national opinion survey believe that corruption has increased either a little or a lot in the UK in the last three years; only 2.5% of respondents believe that corruption has decreased either a little or a lot.
48.1% of respondents do not think the government is effective in tackling corruption; just over one quarter of respondents (25.9%) feel the government is effective, and 25.9% are unsure.
92.7% of respondents would like to report corruption, but only 30.1% would know where to report it.
A leaked Metropolitan Police investigation in 2006 estimated that there are around 1000 corrupt prison officers currently working, with a further 600 officers being involved in an inappropriate relationship with a prisoner.
In 2009 alone, there were 10,090 prosecutions under the 2006 Fraud Act, with no indication as to how many may have included some elements of corruption.
In 2007, the Stevens Inquiry found that irregular payments had been involved in 17 football transfers in the UK.
It is currently estimated that 38,000 people are involved in organised crime in the UK, and such activities cost the economy anywhere between £20 and £30 billion per year.
A 2006 survey for the construction sector in the UK found that 41% of respondents had personally been offered a bribe at least once in their career.
People in glass houses shouldn’t through stones.
@ Further Beyond
The painful difference between UK and Spain is that you can actually find the UK estimates you have so painstakingly researched on the net, but you can’t find those same estimates on the net in Spain.
And you know why? Because in UK people have the freedom of speech and press to be able to gather and print those estimates, whereas in Spain, I am sorry to say, people don’t have that freedom any more. All you have to do is to look at this week’s news in newspapers, which are not being gagged by the present government, to find some of that freedom of expression, the the people of Spain were able to scratch back during Socialists governance and which is quickly being eroded.
The indication of what was to come started with the indictment and later expulsion of Judge Baltazar Garzon but we all know that because it was printed in all the newspapers in the world but just in case some readers are not acquainted with this gentleman :
“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltasar_Garz%C3%B3n”
The only place he has been offered an interview in his own country since is in El Pais.
Let me give you some more reasons why you cannot find the same sort of estimates you present:
They’ve changed the director of RTVE to someone presumably more to their “liking” guess who? Yes the guy who censored the news about the Mad Cow disease in Spain and the mess-up the PP Government made of the Prestige And take a look at the related articles on the side of that particular page.
“http://www.elplural.com/2012/05/18/%c2%a1pedazo-de-presidente-para-rtve-protegido-de-fraga-y-rajoy-fue-el-gran-censor-en-la-tvg-con-%e2%80%98el-prestige%e2%80%99-y-%e2%80%98las-vacas-locas%e2%80%99/”
Here is someone who will tell you better than I ever could Inaki Gabilondo another acclaimed journalist, haven’t seen him in a while.
“http://blogs.elpais.com/la-voz-de-inaki/”
Then came the TVE interviewer Ana Pastor, who was accused of being a “political agent” on the internet by some. You can find the article in the Olive Press. But who she is and her career can be read here
“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ana_Pastor”
Followed by other journalists of similar suspect tendency.
And to top it all they now threaten the Spanish Consumer Protection Agency FACUA with illegalization if they don’t stop publishing their complaints and campaigns against the Government cut backs on their website.
“http://es.globedia.com/facua-amenazada-gobierno-fascista-rajoy”
No more freedom to demonstrate peacefully unless of course it’s against Zapatero
“http://www.elplural.com/2012/05/31/carga-policial-contra-los-mineros-que-protestan-en-madrid-por-los-recortes-del-gobierno-al-carbon/”
You will be hard pressed to find any more film or pictures like the above in the government friendly media.
The PP Government of Spain doesn’t pursue fraudsters and money launderers it wants to reward them
“http://www.elplural.com/2012/06/04/el-gobierno-oficializa-los-incentivos-fiscales-para-defraudadores-y-delincuentes/”
Nobody is saying that the UK is perfect, but at least you get to hear about it in all the press screaming at you on the headlines.
Agree with you FB, the corruption within the UK is not acceptable, any more than it is in virtually every country in the world.
The difference is that you are referring to mainly institutional corruption, by which I mean banks, etc., whereas my comment referred to endemic, i.e. native to the population as a whole, from top politicians down to olive pickers. In Spain you even find crooks who have defrauded the local population being voted back in to the local council!
Money talks in Spain and those with it, however gained, expect and are given deference by those without.
This is little to do with the fishing hassle, but I’d like to know exactly WHY Gibraltarians do not want to be part of Spain, it’s surely not just wanting to keep the status quo?? Come on Gibraltarians, give us your considered reasons, point by point. How would life change?
Antonio2
Isnt it obvious? We are not Spanish. Why should we want to change our nationality, our way of life, our laws or our culture?
It’s no disrepect for Spain as such or its people. We dont want to be French either, or American or Portugese.
Ask a Spaniard whether he would want to change his nationality? Maybe in the current climate some would jump at the chance but it wouldnt happen normally.
It is completely different if you emigrate and then for reasons of red tape you prefer to change your nationality, but even them some prefer to retain their own and have two passports, although deep inside your own roots call to you and remain.
We are often if not daily accused of wanting the bread buttered on both sides just because we enjoy travelling to Spain, like any other tourist would do, and do it more often than most tourists, because that country is right next door, but let me tell you something. If, by any miracle, a frontier with another country suddenly materialised, I can assure you that the cobwebs on the landfrontier to Spain would obscure the view from Gibraltar, for no other reason other than we have had it up to here with spanish politicians and their antics.
It is that simple. I went through the 15 year closure of the Frontier and am none the worse for going through that experience, in fact we saw more of the world during that time than we ever did before, and we can do it again, if the spanish politicians continue in their delirium tremens because they just cannot get their hands on Gib.
Has that answered your question, because that is my answer.
Antonio2 – “This is little to do with the fishing hassle, but I’d like to know exactly WHY Gibraltarians do not want to be part of Spain, it’s surely not just wanting to keep the status quo?? Come on Gibraltarians, give us your considered reasons, point by point. How would life change?”
I had asked a similar question earlier – I am not sure why some Spanish people want Gibraltar to be a part of Spain. I’m not from Gibraltar (in fact I’ve never even visited), so I don’t know where they are coming from on a personal level. I’d really like to know the reasoning and the motivation on both sides.
But I would wager wanting to keep the status quo has a part to do with it. And that isn’t a bad thing or unreasonable. If Gibraltar is doing ‘better’ in any sense then it is natural the people would not want to become a part of a country that is doing ‘worse’ in any sense (economically, technologically, environmentally, etc.). For example – aren’t taxes less in Gibraltar? Would people from Gibraltar face a more difficult situation economically were it integrated into Spain? That alone seems like a pretty big reason why they wouldn’t want to jump on board.
Anyway I’d like to hear the motivations on both sides for why people in Gibraltar want to stay out (which the vast majority seem to, based on the polls), or why some Spanish people think Gibraltar should be a part of Spain (aside from “oh its our territory”). What is the actual gain/loss for both sides besides a 6km(2) area of land and more fertile fishing grounds?
Reality, are you paid by the OP? Something very fishy indeed about your posts.
Reality
It’s very simple really. You either believe in a world governed by laws or in a world were anarchy reigns supreme.
If other nations chose to act like the UK and establish colonies in other nations’ territories by displacing the existing populations and transplanting their own populations who then claim that they have a right to determine the nationality of the enclave they have colonised then you would have anarchy that would threaten the peace and stability of the whole world. This is why under international law there are territorial limitations to the right of self-determination for transplanted populations living in colonial enclaves where a pre-colonial claim of sovereignty exists.
Why don’t you try to put yourself in the shoes of the other for once and see were logic takes you. It is not just a matter of international law but common sense.
The reason why there are territorial limitations to the right of self-determination for transplanted populations living in colonial enclaves is because otherwise it would be lawful for a group of people from say Ireland to establish an Irish colony on the eastern coast of England and then claim a right under the principle of self-determination to have the land they are occupying declared a part of Ireland.
Can you see the absurdity of the proposition now?
Contrary to what some of the more jingoistic contributors wrongly allege, I’m not arguing that the current population living in Gibraltar should be displaced (even though that’s exactly what the UK did to the Spanish population they forcibly displaced in 1704).
What I’m saying is, that as a matter of common sense and international law, a coloniser cannot legally disrupt the territorial integrity of another State by implanting its own population unto the territory it is colonising. In cases such as these, the inhabitants of the territory have no right to unilaterally determine the nationality of the land they live in.
Reality,
Tax here is higher than in Spain, so is water and electricity (we produce our own), so is food, clothing…generally the cost of living here is higher than in Spain. So its not a matter of pounds shillings and pence. Expats, I know some hate the word but dont know what to use instead, find the lure of Gibraltar is that they have the weather plus the familiar laws, free schooling, cuisine, and language, plus the friendliness of its people,even though I say so myself. There is a ten minute drive to the airport and therefore a gateway to the rest of the world. It is in fact a small self contained country, much like there are others. The crime rate is quite low, though it rose somewhat since the Frontier opened, no aspersions being cast on the people of Spain here but there are other elements to take into consideration, but overall it is a safe place to live in.
Other than the “Oh its our territory” believe me I have read many many many comments from that side and its mainly that, though Brujo and FarBeyond may have different ideas, but I doubt it. If it were a barren piece of rock with no buildings, no bustling economy, no nothing, I doubt whether they would be so keen and it would just be a landscape like the other piece of rock that fell further into the eastern side of Iberia which is called Calpe like the little village beside it in the Benidorm area. The Isle of Perejil in the Moroccan coast is another such remnant of the creation of the Mediterranean sea. As to the fishing stock that would be depleted in a year if they went about the way they are doing now, so what then. The area is 3.5 square miles and its 1,398 ft at its highest point. You can see by any photo that most of it is uninhabitable due to the cliffs which would make it impossible to build on. The town is on the western side, the eastern side has a little village called Catalan Bay. There is no oil in our seas, unless the spaniards know something we dont.
But, one thing makes it very well worth coveting. Its strategic importance. We stand at the entrance of the Mediterranean. With the Spanish colony/enclave of Ceuta on the other side, Spain would command the Straits of Gibraltar and with time maybe even the dolphins would have to pay a toll to go past it, imagine! Or they could lease it off like they do with Rota to the Americans, who knows. Why do you think Britain has absolutely no problem hanging on to it, its British anyway.
FurtherBeyond seems to be suffering from a severe case of selective amnesia, forgetting that the “forcibly” displaced “Spanish” population on the Rock had only a couple of hundred years earlier displaced a Moorish population. Where does FurtherBeyond draw the line? My personal view is that all of Iberia should belong to Italy…
Oh, and the right of self determination is not limited in any way. Please get your facts right!
FurthreBeyond – “It’s very simple really. You either believe in a world governed by laws or in a world were anarchy reigns supreme.”
Actually a false dichotomy fallacy.
However, lets look at a ‘world governed by laws.’ That describes every culture, ever. Anarchy is only a temporary state; society is always governed by laws.
The issue is which laws are relevant. A law in Somalia, for example, is not relevant in New Zealand. What is known as “international law” does not carry the same legal weight within a society as domestic law. For example – capital punishment exists all around the world despite being illegal under international law. State sovereignty – state law – takes supremacy over international treaties.
FurtherBeyond – “If other nations chose to act like the UK and establish colonies in other nations’ territories by displacing the existing populations and transplanting their own populations who then claim that they have a right to determine the nationality of the enclave they have colonised then you would have anarchy that would threaten the peace and stability of the whole world.”
All other nations – without exception – do act like the UK. And it has never resulted in anarchy. Instead of anarchy you have history as it actually happened. The displacement of native populations is how most countries were formed. The United States of America exists because it displaced the native inhabitants. Similarly, Canada, Mexico and Brazil are all in existence due to the displacement of native inhabitants. Australia – displacement of natives. Jamaica, Guyana, Bermuda, Trinidad – all completely displaced and eradicated the inhabitants. There are ethical issues, but none of these countries are living in a state of anarchy as you hypothesize. Nor have any of these events “threatened the peace and stability of the whole world” as you’ve claimed.
FurtherBeyond – “What I’m saying is, that as a matter of common sense and international law, a coloniser cannot legally disrupt the territorial integrity of another State by implanting its own population unto the territory it is colonising.”
1. A non-binding UN resolution is not “international law.” This is a misunderstanding. Not every resolution passed is international law.
2. As per the resolution (not a law) in question, a colonizer cannot disrupt the territorial integrity of another state if it disrupts then national unity. You’re ignoring that important second part – disrupting national unity. Unless Gibraltar disrupts the national unity of Spain then it actually doesn’t fit the text of this non-binding resolution (again, not a law).
You do also seem to avoiding this very important fact – Resolution 2535 (XXII) is not international law, but a non-binding resolution. Are you aware of the difference between the two?
These are the only points that Resolution 2535 even calls for:
1. REGRETS the interruption of negotiations recommended in General Assembly Resolutions 2070 (XX) and 2231 (XXI)…
2. DECLARES the holding of the referendum of 10th September 1967…
3. INVITES the Governments of Spain and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to resume without delay the negotiations provided for in General Assembly Resolutions…
4. REQUESTS the Secretary-General to assist the Governments of Spain and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in the implementation of the present resolution…
So the resolution “requests” and it “invites” and it “regrets” The only thing it even has a firm “declaration” of is a referendum that was to take place in 1967. And Spain actually never took part in that referendum.
You realize it is 2012 now also, correct? It’s not 1967. If Spain refused to take place in the referendum when the UN resolution called for it, why should we expect anything similar now? Spain won’t even go to the ICJ over the issue.
Do you see that the resolution doesn’t actually even say what you are trying to tell people it says?
J.Roberts
I’m not suffering from any form of amnesia as you rather childishly assert.
The ‘line’ you refer to has been drawn by the UN. My argument concerning the status of Gibraltar is based on the critical fact that Gibraltar continues to be listed by the UN as a territory that still needs to be decolonised.
This is no Spanish conspiracy nor an accident of history, the UK specifically requested that Gibraltar be included on that list. It is also the nub of the issue.
This fact can be used to distinguish Gibraltar from other territories such as Ceuta, Melilla, Yugoslavia etc, that some contributors have mentioned in an attempt to obfuscate the issues.
It also challenges the validity, in international law, of the Treaty of Utrecht. That treaty might have validity otherwise, although there is a valid argument that British occupation of the isthmus and its failure to implement all of its provisions means that the UK is in breach of the treaty.
However, the fact that the UN still identifies Gibraltar as one of a number of territories that still need to be decolonised means that the treaty’s validity today is even more questionable. This is because that Treaty was itself the basis for the establishment of what is by modern law standards an illegal colony.
Neither I nor any reputable international lawyer accepts that treaties are the only basis for international law. For example, under Article 53 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, any treaty that conflicts with a peremptory norm is void: ‘… a treaty is void if, at the time of its conclusion, it conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law. For the purposes of the present Convention, a peremptory norm of general international law is a norm accepted and recognized by the international community of states as a whole as a norm from which no derogation is permitted and which can be modified only by a subsequent norm of general international law having the same character.’
The number of peremptory norms is considered limited but not exclusively catalogued. They are not listed or defined by any authoritative body, but arise out of case law and changing social and political attitudes. Generally included are prohibitions on waging aggressive war, crimes against humanity, war crimes, maritime piracy, genocide, apartheid, slavery and torture.
As an example, the ICJ has ruled that it is impermissible for a State to acquire territory through war as a peremptory norm.
By the way, the UK has the option of referring Gibraltar’s sovereignty to the ICJ if it so chooses. However, the UK is unlikely to do so for a number of reasons.
Apart from the uncertainty inherent in the outcome of any legal decision, equity requires that a party must approach a court ‘with clean hands’ when seeking an intervention or remedy.
However,the UK has failed to comply with international law by not decolonising Gibraltar. It has also failed to honour its commitments under the Brussels Agreement on this issue.
It would be a complete embarrassment, as well as the height of hypocrisy, for the UK to seek the ICJ’s intervention on the application of UNCLOS to the waters of the Bay of Algeciras, given its intransigence in not complying with its international law obligations to meet with Spain to discuss Gibraltar’s decolonisation.
The fact remains that Spain does not recognise the British colony of Gibraltar nor UK sovereignty over the Bay of Algeciras. Spain will therefore continue to protect its fishermen and enforce Spanish and EU law in the Bay of Algeciras.
If the UK has a problem with this then perhaps it should finally heed the many requests of the UN General Assembly, and its own commitments under the Brussels Agreement, and sit down with Spain to discuss the decolonisation of Gibraltar.
Your assertion that ‘the right of self determination is not limited in any way, is wrong. Under international law there are territorial limitations to the right of self-determination for transplanted populations living in colonial enclaves where a pre-colonial claim of sovereignty exists. This is the case with Gibraltar.
A coloniser cannot legally disrupt the territorial integrity of another State by implanting its own population unto the territory it is colonising. In cases such as these, the inhabitants of the territory have a right to have their ‘interests’ considered but they have no right to unilaterally determine the nationality of the land they live in.
Both the UN and ICJ have confirmed that the principle of territorial integrity complements and CONSTRAINS the right to self-determination in cases such as Gibraltar.
If you’re interested in finding the truth on this issue you should stop looking at completely compromised web-sites that spout what is clearly propaganda and instead look at some real international law authorities.
In this regard, you might like to have a look at the following reference by an eminent British international lawyer, and Cambridge University Professor, as just one authority which nicely sets out the relevant international law principles: James Crawford, The Creation of States in International Law (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979) at 377-85.
You were suffering from selective amnesia FurtherBeyond. You only chose to remember the bits of Gibraltar’s history which suit your case. Even the “facts” you did choose to remember were hardly accurate. The people who freely chose (yes, they were not forcibly removed) to leave Gibraltar after 1704 were not Spanish, as Spain did not exist. They were, if anything, Castillian. Not all of them left. There are families on the Rock today who can trace their ancestry there to before 1704.
The right to self determination is not limited, and especially not by territorial integrity, except in one specific case. Sadly you continue to deliberately misinterpret the UN Resolution which outlines that specific case to justify your argument.
I prefer to rely on international law and ICJ jurisprudence, not carefully selected “references”.
Inthename
No he visto nunc un documental sobre Gibraltar,siento tener que escribir en mi lengua pero como la entiendes y en principio te respondía a ti,sobre las normas de comentar en Español a mi no me parece tan grave.
Yo no he dicho nada de la economía de Gibraltar ni nada del tráfico ni tasas y sobre lo del robo yo diría que quizá deberías mirar lo que has escrito has dicho nadie pero yo si creo que generaciones anteriores a la tuya lo han hecho y un ejemplo de tu generción son las aguas.
J Roberts
You can’t even get basic facts right. Spain emerged as a unified nation State in the 15th century well before the colonisation of Gibraltar by the UK in 1704.
You are also wrong when you assert that the Spanish population of Gibraltar were not displaced by the invading Anglo-Dutch forces. Here is a relevant excerpt from Wikipedia for your enlightenment:
‘During the 1960s, the UN General Assembly passed two resolutions on the issue (2231 (XXI), “Question of Gibraltar”[19] and 2353 (XXII), “Question of Gibraltar”[20]). The resolutions on the decolonisation of Gibraltar focused on the “interests” and not the “wishes” of the Gibraltarians. The latter resolution states that:
any colonial situation which partially or completely destroys the national unity and territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and especially with paragraph 6 of Resolution 1514 (XV) of the General Assembly […] Invites the Governments of Spain and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to resume without delay the negotiations provided for in General Assembly Resolutions 2070 (XX) and 2231 (XXI), with a view to putting an end to the colonial situation in Gibraltar and to safeguarding the interests of the population.
From such a point of view, Gibraltarians are seen as mere settlers from the United Kingdom and other countries and only their interests, not their wishes (as the right to self-determination would involve), need be safeguarded. This point of view is supported by the fact that after the Capture of Gibraltar by Anglo-Dutch troops, only 70 out of the original 5,000 Spanish inhabitants remained in Gibraltar’.
Spain a unified state in the 15th century? Are you serious? Just because a group of Iberian kingdoms acted in unison because they happened to share the same monarch did not make them a unified state.
Anyone can edit Wikipedia…
Is self determination not an interest of the Gibraltarian people?What you deliberately fail to mention is that every one of the resolutions you mention above references UN resolution 1514, where the right to self determination for the peoples of non self governing territories is clearly spelled out. UN resolution obviously applies to Gibraltar as it was accepted onto the UN list of NSGTs. The rights spelled out in 1514 have never been limited, and certainly not for the Gibraltarians.
All this tosh about Gibraltarians being mere settlers is demonstrably incorrect. And as I said in a previous comment, where do you draw the line? If you really think that the Gibraltarians are mere settlers, then I hold that the Spanish are mere settlers on Moorish lands and so on. Personally I draw the line in about AD 350. All of Spain (and Gibraltar) should belong to Italy… (absurd, isn’t it?)
J. Roberts
As previously mentioned, the ‘line’ you refer to has been drawn by the UN.
My argument concerning the status of Gibraltar is based on the critical fact that Gibraltar continues to be listed by the UN as a territory that still needs to be decolonised.
This is no Spanish conspiracy nor an accident of history, the UK specifically requested that Gibraltar be included on that list. It is also the nub of the issue.
This fact can be used to distinguish Gibraltar from other territories such as Ceuta, Melilla, Yugoslavia etc, that some contributors have mentioned in an attempt to obfuscate the issues.
It also challenges the validity, in international law, of the Treaty of Utrecht. That treaty might have validity otherwise, although there is a valid argument that British occupation of the isthmus and its failure to implement all of its provisions means that the UK is in breach of the treaty.
However, the fact that the UN still identifies Gibraltar as one of a number of territories that still need to be decolonised means that the treaty’s validity today is even more questionable. This is because that Treaty was itself the basis for the establishment of what is by modern law standards an illegal colony.
J. Roberts – “You were suffering from selective amnesia FurtherBeyond. You only chose to remember the bits of Gibraltar’s history which suit your case.”
I’m not commenting at all on you (J. Roberts) or FurtherBeyond here (and I didn’t even read the posts). Just wanted to say something on the phrase “selective amnesia.”
A better term is actually “confirmation bias.” This is when we search out facts to confirm our biases (or beliefs). It is also when we remember the facts that support our beliefs and forget/ignore facts to the contrary.
Confirmation bias a psychological thing we all do; but it isn’t amnesia, where you’re forgetting something due to some psychological or organic brain issue.
Again – Not commenting on the posts, the argument, J. Roberts, FurtherBeyond, Barbary macaques, or taking any sides – I don’t know if confirmation bias or amnesia is in play or not – just wanted to point out there is actually a term that specifically describes what you’re trying to say better than ‘selective amnesia.’
Because what’s the point in arguing in comments if we don’t argue with a bit of style?
But this is what you do all the time, Reality.
Fred: Never feed a troll on speed. Remember?
OK FutherBeyond, so if you say the UN draws the line I take it you mean the line is when the UN Charter was ratified? 1948. Anything before that, especially if it conflicts with the UN Charter or anything which flows from the UN Charter, is irrelevant. Whatever happened is 1704 is neither here no there. It has no bearing on the situation. The only thing that matters is what flows from the UN Charter.
Now let’s see. The UN Charter has self determination for all peoples as a key principle. This is repeated in UN Resolution 1514, where this right and other rights are spelled out for the peoples of NSGTs. Nowhere has the UN curtailed those rights or limited them in any way for Gibraltar. The UK voluntarily put forward Gibraltar as a NSGT and Gibraltar was accepted by the UN onto the of NSGTs with all that status entails. Spain is not on the list of NSGTs so 1514 does not apply to Spain. It is up to the NSGT in question to decide when it has become decolonised and ask for its removal from the NSGT list. The options available to a NSGT for decolonisation are spelled out in Resolution 1541. The Gibraltarians have repeatedly asked to be removed from the NSGT list, yet Spain blocks this every time and then and then complains that Gibraltar remains a “colony” because Gibraltar’s is still on the NSGT list!!!
The fact that Spain has chosen not to propose the inclusion of Ceuta, Melilla and a host of other some garrisoned and some uninhabited bits of rock along the north Moroccan coast is a matter for Spain. It just shows how two-faced Spain is when it comes to Gibraltar though, and how ready to swallow Spanish propaganda some of Spain’s blinkered supporters are. Spain: The last colonial power in Africa!
J Roberts
Your view that ‘…whatever happened is 1704 is neither here no there. It has no bearing on the situation. The only thing that matters is what flows from the UN Charter’ is not even accepted by the UK which to this day acknowledges that, in accordance with the Treaty Of Utrecht, Gibraltar cannot become independent without Spanish consent.
As previously discussed, whether Gibraltar is a case of external self-determination in the colonial context -involving the right to establish an independent State – is in dispute. The distinct question in Gibraltar’s context concerns the relation between the territory and the neighbouring State, Spain.
For self-determination in the sense of giving rise to a right to freely elect the disposition of a given territory, it is first necessary to identify a population that holds that right. I have already provided reasons why the current population of Gibraltar doesn’t qualify as ‘a people’ that holds that right.
The majority view amongst international lawyers rejects the notion that enclave populations without distinct ethnic, linguistic, or religious characteristics enjoy a right of external self-determination as respects the particular territory they inhabit.
You continue to quote UN Resolution 1514, but you seem oblivious to the fact that this resolution specifically confirms that the principle of territorial integrity complements and CONSTRAINS the right to self-determination.
That resolution specifically states that‘…any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.’ A declaration of independence by Gibraltar would ‘disrupt the national unity and territorial integrity of Spain. This is because, unlike Ceuta and Melilla which pre-exist the creation of the Moroccan State, Gibraltar was colonised by the UK while it was an integral part of Spain.
I can’t understand why Brujo is allowed to post in Spanish on an English language forum.
If anyone tried to post in English on a Spanish language forum it would be deleted straight away.
Stuart – “I can’t understand why Brujo is allowed to post in Spanish on an English language forum.
If anyone tried to post in English on a Spanish language forum it would be deleted straight away.”
What if it was a Spanish forum for Spanish expats living in the UK? You think they would delete posts in English? Because, remember, you’re in a Spain-land now. Reading a newspaper about Spain. Some people speak Spanish here. You should too.
This reminds me of a time I went into an English bar in Torremolinos or Benalmadena. I asked for a ‘cana.’ The bartender says, “Oh, you’d like a small beer.” I was a bit surprised because he was obviously offended that I had ordered in Spanish. I said, “Yes, a small beer, please.” I finish drinking my “small beer.” And again, not being used to being in an English-speaking environment (where I live no one really speaks English), I paid and instinctively said ‘gracias.’ And the man actually stops me and says; “Oh, you mean thank you. You’re welcome.”
Point of the story – if you are so xenophobic that it bothers you to read something in Spanish, in Spain, in a newspaper about Spain – what are you even doing here?
It’s as if there are entire communities of foreigners who hate the Spanish, but continue living in Spain anyway. You’re not an African refugee. You can go anywhere in the world you like. No one is forcing you to be here if you hate Spain or the Spanish people.
Anyway, onward with the victim complex, “…if anyone tried to post in English on a Spanish…”
I’m sorry FutherBeyond, but which UN document says that any provisions in the Treaty of Utrecht apply with respect to Gibraltar? For Gibraltar’s independence to be contingent on Spanish consent is in direct conflict with the UN Charter and a number of UN Resolutions. I don’t think it will stand up in court for a second – whatever the UK government says.
There is nothing in the UN Charter or any of the relevant UN Resolutions which disqualify Gibraltarians as a people or limit their right to self determination. In fact the resolutions all reaffirm the right to self determination for Gibraltarians.
As I mentioned in an earlier post. You deliberately misinterpret a resolution to suit your position. UN resolution 1514 only applies to NSGTs. Declaration 6 of Resolution 1514 is specifically there to avoid the dismemberment of NSG territories while they are undergoing decolonisation. This is mainly to stop the Administering power keeping the “best bits” and giving independence to the rest. This resolution does not apply to Spain as Spain is not on the list of NSGTs. Spain’s territorial integrity and national unity has not been disrupted by Gibraltar and self determination trumps territorial integrity as we have seen time and again, not to mention backed up by ICJ jurisprudence. The most recent example is South Sudan.
Oh and by the way, the UK gained Gibraltar by treaty, just as Spain gained Ceuta by treaty. Stop pretending there is some fundamental difference between the two situations. The only difference is that Spain never had the cojones to propose Ceuta’s inclusion on the NSGT list.
J Roberts
‘Oh and by the way, the UK gained Gibraltar by treaty’
Is this the same treaty you were referring to when you also said?
‘…whatever happened is (sic) 1704 is neither here no there. It has no bearing on the situation…irrespective of what the UK government says’.
I think you really should make up your mind. But if its any consolation to you, I agree with you that the Treaty of Utrecht is beside the point, as it allowed the UK to establish its illegal colony in Spain in the first place.
As previously mentioned your views on the application of the principle of self-determination to colonial enclaves are not accepted by the majority of international law scholars. If you’re interested in finding the truth on this issue you should stop looking at completely compromised web-sites that spout what is clearly propaganda and instead look at some real international law authorities.
In this regard, you might like to have a look at the following reference by an eminent British international lawyer, and Cambridge University Professor, as just one authority which nicely sets out the relevant international law principles: James Crawford, The Creation of States in International Law (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979) at 377-85.
Reality
‘Point of the story – if you are so xenophobic that it bothers you to read something in Spanish, in Spain, in a newspaper about Spain – what are you even doing here? It’s as if there are entire communities of foreigners who hate the Spanish, but continue living in Spain anyway. You’re not an African refugee. You can go anywhere in the world you like. No one is forcing you to be here if you hate Spain or the Spanish people’.
Excellent point. In another post I note that you have asked the Gibraltarians, and please excuse my paraphrasing, why they want to continue to live in a British colony in Spain rather that in a Spanish autonomous region in Spain. I think you have answered your own question. Keep up the good work.
@FurtherBeyond. It’s a fact that the UK gained Gibraltar by treaty is it not? Just like it’s a fact that Spain gained Ceuta by treaty. You try so hard to make out that Ceuta’s situation is so very different from Gibraltar’s, but it isn’t really, there are far more parallels that differences. I’m all for Ceuta remaining Spanish if that’s what the people of Ceuta want. I’m not sure why you think I should make up my mind? Where did I say the ToU was still valid today? Just because a treaty was valid in the past does not necessarily make it still valid today, particularly if it is superseded by subsequent treaties, like the UN Charter for example. As far as I’m concerned the ToU was abrogated the minute Spain first laid siege to Gibraltar after the ToU was signed.
I don’t think the ICJ website is compromised in any way and it hardly spouts propaganda. Mostly bald reporting of cases… If the ICJ finds, as it has done on several occasions, that the right to self determination trumps territorial integrity then that is good enough for me. I don’t know what that’s not good enough for you, especially since you have repeatedly stated that you believe the line starts at the beginning of the UN age
On top of that, the UN itself has made it clear that the right to self determination cannot be limited. The UN giveth and the UN taketh away and to date the UN has not taken away or limited the universal right to self determination in any way. As a fully paid up believer in the UN age, I would have thought that was enough for you – but no, you need to trawl the net for “authorities” in international law who happen to co-incide with your warped view of the situation. Personally, your “authorities” don’t stand a chance in the face of ICJ jurisprudence. As for the majority of international law scholars not agreeing that self determination is a fundamental and unlimited right – where did you pull that one from? Any chance you can provide some evidence to back that assertion, because it sounds a lot like BS to me…
FurtherBeyond – “In another post I note that you have asked the Gibraltarians, and please excuse my paraphrasing, why they want to continue to live in a British colony in Spain rather that in a Spanish autonomous region in Spain. I think you have answered your own question. Keep up the good work.”
The Gibraltarians don’t want to be Spanish because they don’t want to have to read something in a foreign language in a foreign country?
I understand your point, but I think we may be talking apples and oranges here. A foreign individual who decides to move to a country, but can’t cope with basic cultural differences, such as the language, is quite a bit different than a colony – also of the same foreign population – that has a 300 year history, who didn’t choose to be born there, yet is still fully able to cope within the cultural context fluently.
Basically – the differences born natives of Gibraltar have for wanting to remain a colony or become independent (of which someone listed a couple dozen or so) are quite a bit different than the reason a foreigner doesn’t want Spanish spoken on an English-language website about Spain.
This is a concise history of Gibraltar. Maybe FarBeyond and others can take out their calculator and sum up the years that Spain as a Nation held Gibraltar as opposed to the 300 hundred years of its British rule. Guzman el Bueno’s ownership of Gibraltar does not count really because he held it as a private gain and did not take it for his country, in fact he bequeathed it under pressure and then tried to take it back from Spain.
“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_history_of_Gibraltar”
@ J. Roberts You can turn yourself inside out and FarBeyond will continue to regurgitate the same XVIII Century mindset in this media and in any other media you can come across. But don’t ask him about Ceuta and Melilla because he will immediately go into denial syndrome.
The problem for Spain is the Moroccan Government are now following Spain’s suit as regards these two Spanish enclaves.
“http://ecodiario.eleconomista.es/espana/noticias/4211297/08/12/Detenidos-cuatro-activistas-marroquies-que-asaltaron-con-banderas-el-Penon-de-Velez.html”
If Spain does not respect that they gave Gibraltar in Perpetuity to England, why should they respect something that was taken from them by the Portugese and then the Spaniards took it over by simply transplanting Castillians to augment their vote when in a referendum they were asked whether they wanted to be under the Spanish or the Portugese flag?
They did the same in the northern part of the Iberian Peninsula. Iberia was then made up by a myriad of small kingdoms usually at war with one another. That is why the Basques, the Catalonians, the Galicians etc don’t want this imposition that was made on them by Castille.
Who were these Castillians anyway but remnants of the Visigoths? They were one of these myriad of kingdoms who allied with Leon by marriage and then with Aragon in a territory that had been under Rome, Goths and Visigoths, and then the Omyyads, up until the fifteenth century when the Christian Reconquista started.
Spain is Spain and they will even negate the fact that, who they call Cristobal Colon, was in reputedly a jew going by the name Cristoforo Colombo and that he was not even Spanish, he was an Italian from Genoa, whom they later threw in a dungeon to rot when they had no further use for them.
@brujo
Sorry didn’t see your post. Maybe if you read the posts by British Gibraltarians (British citizens in fact) plus the links provided, you will start thinking again about your expressed wish here in this newspaper, that the Spanish authorities stop ambulances carrying critically ill British patients to Spanish hospitals under an agreement by the EU and paid for by the Gibraltar Government tax paying community, just so that you can twist Gibaltar’s arm to giving in to Spain. Or maybe you wont.
Revised, I hate being catty but sometimes comments get up your nose and you cannot help yourself, so trying to be precise and concise here:
This is a concise history of Gibraltar. Maybe FarBeyond and others can take out their calculator and sum up the years that Spain as a Nation held Gibraltar as opposed to the 300 hundred years of its British rule. Guzman el Bueno’s ownership of Gibraltar does not count really because he held it as a private gain and did not take it for his country, in fact he bequeathed it under pressure and then tried to take it back from Spain.
“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_history_of_Gibraltar”
@ J. Roberts You can turn yourself inside out and FarBeyond will continue to regurgitate the same XVIII Century mind-set in this media and in any other media you can come across. But don’t ask him about Ceuta and Melilla because he will immediately go into denial syndrome.
The problem for Spain is the Moroccan Government is now apparently following Spain’s suit as regards these two Spanish enclaves if you go by the following reports.
“http://www.diarioelaguijon.com/noticia/4616/”
“http://ecodiario.eleconomista.es/espana/noticias/4211297/08/12/Detenidos-cuatro-activistas-marroquies-que-asaltaron-con-banderas-el-Penon-de-Velez.html”
If Spain does not respect that they gave Gibraltar in Perpetuity to England, why should they think they need to respect something that was taken from them by the Portuguese and then the Spaniards took it over by simply transplanting Castilians to augment their vote when, in a referendum, the inhabitants were asked whether they wanted to be under the Spanish or the Portuguese flag?
They did the same in the northern part of the Iberian Peninsula. Iberia was then made up by a myriad of small kingdoms usually at war with one another. That is why the Basques, the Catalonians, the Galicians etc don’t want this imposition that was made on them by Castile.
Who were these Castilians anyway but remnants of the Visigoths? They were one of these kingdoms who allied with Leon by marriage and then with Aragon in a territory that had been under Rome, Goths and Visigoths, and then the Omayyad, up until the fifteenth century when the Christian Reconquista started.
Lets all go back to the Reconquista times, that should be jolly for some!
Reality
The fact remains that the Gibraltarians are exclusively, and according to international law illegally, occupying a part of Spain. The fact that that occupation has lasted 300 years is neither here nor there as by your own admission they have not assimilated. Clearly they don’t want to be part of Spain. Indeed judging by some of the comments made by them above made they hate everything Spanish.
I don’t really believe we’re not talking about oranges and apples here. Your point that ‘… it’s as if there are entire communities of foreigners who hate the Spanish, but continue living in Spain anyway. You’re not an African refugee. You can go anywhere in the world you like. No one is forcing you to be here if you hate Spain or the Spanish people’, is quite an apt description of the situation in Gibraltar today.
FurtherBeyond, since you draw the line at the UN age, please provide a UN Resolution which acknowledges that Gibraltar is rightfully Spanish territory and that the Gibraltarians are there illegally.
J. Roberts
I can do better than that – I can provide three UN General Assembly Resolutions. To summarise for your benefit from my previous posts – under international law there are territorial limitations to the right of self-determination for transplanted populations living in colonial enclaves where a pre-colonial claim of sovereignty exists. This is the case with Gibraltar which is listed by the UN as a territory that needs to be decolonised by the UK.
A coloniser cannot legally disrupt the territorial integrity of another State by implanting its own population unto the territory it is colonising. In cases such as these, the inhabitants of the colonised territory have a right to have their ‘interests’ considered but they have no right to unilaterally determine the nationality of the land they live in.
According to UN Resolution 1514 (XV) (1960), the principle of integrity complements and constrains the right to self-determination. That resolution specifically states that “any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.” Any attempt by the colony of Gibraltar to establish itself as an independent nation would disrupt the national unity and the territorial integrity of Spain. This is because the UK colonised Gibraltar while it was an integral part of Spain.
During the 1960s, the UN General Assembly passed two resolutions on the issue (2231 (XXI), “Question of Gibraltar”[19] and 2353 (XXII), “Question of Gibraltar”[20]). The latter resolution states also specifically states that “any colonial situation which partially or completely destroys the national unity and territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and especially with paragraph 6 of Resolution 1514 (XV) of the General Assembly” and “invites the Governments of Spain and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to resume without delay the negotiations provided for in General Assembly Resolutions 2070 (XX) and 2231 (XXI), with a view to putting an end to the colonial situation in Gibraltar”.
Furthermore when the colonists of Gibraltar conducted a referendum in 1967 declaring their wish to remain British, the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 2353 (XXII), questioning the validity of the referendum by noting that the referendum was contrary to the various resolutions which it had previously adopted. Thereby confirming once again that the right to self-determination is limited in the case of the current occupants of Gibraltar by the principle of territorial integrity.
The International Court of Justice has also ruled on the limits of the right to self-determination in cases analogous to that of the colony of Gibraltar. For example, in the Western Sahara case the ICJ found that some pre-existing legal ties of a third state to the territory colonized by some other state could in principle affect the decolonization of the territory (see para. 162 in particular).
If you’re interested in finding the truth on this issue you should stop looking at completely compromised web-sites that spout what is clearly propaganda and instead look at some real international law authorities. In this regard, you might like to have a look at the following reference by an eminent British international lawyer, and Cambridge University Professor, as just one authority which nicely sets out the relevant international law principles: James Crawford, The Creation of States in International Law (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979) at 377-85.
300 years after the treaty which ceded Gibraltar to Great Britain, (in exchange for Minorca), is just too long for any modern resolutions, UN or any other organisation, to have any meaningful force. A good subject for countless jollies at the expense of taxpayers but otherwise useless. It can never be enforced unless Spain rolls out the tanks, in which case a modern European war will ensue.
The best idea is for Spain to demolish border controls and let a natural cultural exchange weaken animosities, which one day might lead to unification in a Europe free of nationalistic nonsense.
You can do better FurtherBeyond? I don’t think so. All I can see is a miserable failure to back up your assertions and lots of evidence of you making things up as you go along.
The UK has never implant anyone into Spanish territory. Gibraltar was ceded to the UK by treaty so whoever the UK did or did not “implant” there is a matter for the UK and Gibraltar and has nothing whatsoever to do with Spain.
Furthermore if your assertion is to stand then you need to show that the UN has classified the Gibraltarians as “implated” (with a definition of implated) and a resolution which clearly states that Gibraltar as rightfully Spanish territory.
Resolution 1514 applies to Trust and Non Self Governing Territories; the wording in the Resolution is crystal clear. A Trust or Non Self Governing Territory is a specific and well defined status under international law. Spain is NOT a Trust or Non Self Governing Territory, so Resolution 1514 does NOT apply to Spain. Territorial integrity is protected for territories undergoing decolonisation, but only during that process. Once that process has completed whatever happens inside that territory is up to the people there to sort out amongst themselves, in other words self determination trumps territorial integrity, as South Sudan very clearly demonstrates.
Gibraltar is perfectly entitled, under international law, to establish itself as an independent nation. There are absolutely no limits to this. Gibraltar is not Spanish territory so how Gibraltar’s independence could disrupt Spanish national unity is a big mystery?
You quote resolution 2353, but where exactly does 2353 state that Gibraltar is disrupting Spanish territorial integrity, or that Gibraltar should rightfully be Spanish territory? Resolution 2353 does nothing more than call for renewed negotiations between Spain and the UK over their dispute as the dispute is stalling the decolonisation of Gibraltar. Nowhere does that Resolution 2353 state that the rights of the Gibraltarians have been limited. In fact it references Resolution 1514, where the rights of the peoples of NSGTs are made clear, including the right to self determination. Resolutions 2070 and 2231 both call for the resumption of negotiations to end this sovereignty dispute, and nothing more.
Resolution 2353 does not question the validity of the 1967 referendum. It simply says that the referendum contravened the provisions of Resolution 2231, in other words it was a “hindrance” to negotiations leading to the decolonisation of Gibraltar. Nowhere in any UN resolution is the outcome of Gibraltarian decolonisation a transfer of sovereignty to Spain. Nowhere.
The ICJ was specifically asked to give an opinion on whether Western Sahara had been terra nullis before Spanish colonisation and if not terra nullis, then whether legal ties to Morocco and Mauritania had existed before then. The ICJ simply answered the questions. The ICJ opinion had absolutely no effect on the right of the Sahrawis to self determination. In fact, the ICJ made this clear in the opinion itself, which demonstrates that you have not bothered to read the opinion yourself and if you have, your selective amnesia is more of a problem than I originally thought! I quote: “The court… concludes that the decolonization process envisaged by the General Assembly is one which will respect the right of the population of Western Sahara to determine their future political status by their own freely expressed will. This right to self-determination, which is not affected by the request for advisory opinion and constitutes a basic assumption of the questions put to the Court”
It’s here, in black and white, you can’t hide from the facts:
“http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?sum=323&code=sa&p1=3&p2=4&case=61&k=69&p3=5”
If you think finding the “truth” can be done by relying on the opinion of a single, apparently eminent, author then you definitely need help.
I prefer to rely on primary sources in the first instance, and opinions in the second:
“http://www.un.org/”
“http://www.icj-cij.org”
Angling For Change!
The Gibraltar Government has announced that work on regulations to control fishing and other marine leisure activities is at an advanced stage. The Gibraltar Federation of Sea Anglers are said to be very pleased that these regulations are nearly ready to be put in place. After two years of working on their campaign “Angling For Change” the GFSA say that the government are very close to meeting their aims. An interim report shows that Gibraltar’s marine environment is under threat by over fishing and that Gibraltar must stand firm to protect it. The GFSA also state that the government should stand firm against threats made and aggression shown by the Spanish government. They have recommended that a legislative framework be put in place to dispel and disprove all the accusations made by Spain that Gibraltar was using environmental excuses to prevent Spanish fishing in Gibraltar territorial waters. They also urge the British government to take decisive action and to openly show support for Gibraltar in this latest conflict.
Source: “http://www.gibbook.com/magazine/read/gibraltar-news-14th-september-2012_258.html”