daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Latin American & Caribbean Forums > Latinscrapers > Foros de El Caribe > Foro del Caribe - Caribbean Forum > Foros locales de El Caribe - Caribbean Local Forums > Belize Forum



Reply

 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 9 votes, 5.00 average.
Old May 11th, 2010, 01:55 AM   #1
manuel merida
Registered User
 
manuel merida's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Chiquimula y Guatemala
Posts: 54
Likes (Received): 0

Territorial dispute between Belize and Guatemala

para los que estaban hablando del conflicto Guatemala-Belice aqui les va la verdadera historia.
España en tiempos de la colonia permitio a los ingleses explotar el bosque al norte de belice, justo en la frontera con mexico. Pero como ya sabemos que los ingleses son personas de muy poca palabra se fueron adentrando hacia el sur, hasta livingston, izabal incluso, luego Se hizo un tratado en donde se acordaba que Belice pasaba a ser parte de Inglaterra, siempre y cuando se construyera una carretera al pacifico, en este tratado los ingleses volvieron a demostrar que no tienen palabra y se apropiaron a la fuerza de belice, y como ya sabemos que los gringos siempre ven los intereses de sus papitos ingleses, nos mandaron a la fregada e incluso se hicieron incursiones militares para intimidar a los guatemaltecos. Por eso decimos que belice es Guatemala y el que crea que no lo mas seguro es que no es guatemalteco. Viva Guate.
manuel merida no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
 
Old June 16th, 2010, 07:09 PM   #2
OSHERM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Fraijanes
Posts: 233
Likes (Received): 1

Aqui hay dos opciones para los Beliceños o entregan los territorios ocupados o le dan una fuerte indennizacion a Guatemala por el uso del terretorio durante todo este tiempo, ahi que le ayuden los ingleses y tambien otorgar un porcentaje (50-50) de participacion en la explotacion de los recursos naturales, economicos dentro del territorio reclamado de por vida. Asi que lo mas facil es que entreguen los territorios.

Inlaterra sabia lo que hacia y es por ello que no invertieron nada en Belice y por eso no existe mayor desarrollo en comparacion a las demas ex-colonias britanicas.

Estos piratas no solo con Belice si no que tambien con las Islas que reclama Argentina y ahora incluso encontraron petroleo en dichas islas, estos recursos pertenecen a la Argentina, entoces por igual se debe aplicar con Belice
OSHERM no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 17th, 2010, 01:33 AM   #3
Hotu Matua
Registered User
 
Hotu Matua's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Monterrey
Posts: 8,444
Likes (Received): 1001

Y los beliceños, ¿qué opinan?
Hotu Matua no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 17th, 2010, 11:39 AM   #4
Tillor87
Moderador
 
Tillor87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: 90 210 Guararí Hills
Posts: 24,303
Likes (Received): 1931

Es un tema interesante. Sepámoslo llevar tranquilamente. Sería interesante ver la opinión de los beliceños pues la que siempre vemos (al menos en mi caso) es el pensar guatemalteco.


Acá abajo pongo un documento tomado de una fuente beliceña para leer su opinión.
__________________
CRCRCRCRCR
C O S T A .. R I C A
SIETE PROVINCIAS
San José | Alajuela | Heredia | Cartago | Guanacaste | Puntarenas | Limón
Tillor87 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 17th, 2010, 11:46 AM   #5
Tillor87
Moderador
 
Tillor87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: 90 210 Guararí Hills
Posts: 24,303
Likes (Received): 1931

CHAPTER 6.

GUATEMALA REVIVES CLAIM





The dispute moved now to the "court phase." Guatemala proposed arbitration, and Britain suggested taking the matter to the Hague Court. Guatemala was not in favour of the dispute being examined purely on a legal basis. In July 1939, Guatemala published a White Book on her claims, and in 1940 Britain again offered arbitration in any of three ways: either to the Hague Court, or to a tribunal of international lawyers examining the matter under Chapter 4 of the Hague Convention, or to a tribunal of three international lawyers-one member to be selected by each party and one of them by the President of the United States. Guatemala rejected all three, and in 1940 Guatemala claimed that the Treaty was invalid, and therefore, for the first time, claimed the whole of British Honduras, "She also considers that the non-compliance of the obligations on the part of Great Britain has caused to the Republic, material and intangible damages because of the loss of advantages which the country would have derived from its development and from its foreign trade if the expected highway to the Atlantic Coast had been constructed. The British occupation of British Honduras cut off all maritime communications with the Department of Peten closing it off thereby orographic and political barriers that have prevented its progress and development". (69)

During the Second World War, President Ubico did not press the matter, but after his downfall in 1944 the new Guatemalan Government promulgated a constitution in 1945, declaring British Honduras to be a part of Guatemalan territory. Britain offered in 1946 to take the dispute to the International Court, but Guatemala refused unless it would be determined ex aequo et bono, acceding to the principle of equity, what is just and good. Another principle Which Guatemala adheres to is the principle of uti possidetis, which is based on the theory that "... the Central American Federation inherited the sovereign rights formerly possessed by Spain and that on its dissolution its member-states inherited the territorial jurisdiction which corresponded to them respectively as administrative divisions of the old Captaincy-General of Guatemala ." Guatemala further argues that during the colonial period, Belize formed a part of Peten or Verapaz during the period of Guatemala's membership of the Central American Federation and after the Federation had dissolved. This principle, applied by Gautemala and between other Latin American states, is a principle which is not recognized by international law and applies only to those states who have agreed to be bound by it. (70)

During this time Guatemala increased its publicity of her claims on the country, and began sending propaganda material to British Honduras. In March, 18, 1948 Britain suspected that Guatemala would invade the country, and dispatched troops and warships to British Honduras. This provoked wide-spread demonstration in British Honduras against Guatemala. Guatemala enacted her Constitution of 1945 including Belize as part of its territory, taught it in her schools, placed it on her maps and her stamps, and even kept vacant seats in her Assembly for representatives of her "Department." She would regularly place her claim in speeches before the United Nations, and in 1957, her Ambassador in London even made offers to British Honduran legislators for associateship with Guatemala. (71)

Guatemala's troop build-up at the border was a conscious shift on Guatemala's part from the traditional ways of negotiating and using diplomatic channels, to the use of force. The latter was seen as the only solution to acquiring Guatemala's Ôlost territory'. This attempt failed when the British landed troops in British Honduras to protect it from the invasion.

The borders between Belize and Guatemala were officially closed, but colonel Niederheitmann, from El Peten, concluded that the drawbacks for Guatemala in maintaining the closure would be too many. The colonel gave three logical reasons against such an action: it would be necessary to have at least three battalions patrolling the border and it would be impossible to maintain them financially since they would require supplies, lodging and equipment. Secondly, it was fundamental to consider the number of Belizeans who sought jobs in Peten, and that medium, through which the people in Peten made a living, was in Belize, which was where milk, clothes, tools, beer, ice and even soft drinks were bought and resold. Hence, he concluded that it wouldn't be worth depriving both Belizeans and Guatemalans alike of their livelihood. Niederheitmann's third point was that closing the border, would have dire consequences to Peten and be costly for Guatemala which would need to supply Peten with at least 17 daily airlifts. (72)

During the crisis of 1948, Peten remained isolated from the rest of Guatemala and because of its geographical location with Belize became more dependent on Belize in terms of commercial exchange. This situation created the urbanization and colonization of Poptun as a way to protect Peten and help in the claim over Belize. (73) These were the beginnings of extensive trade ties between Belize and Guatemala. The economic interaction which started at the borders has multiplied tenfold and today continue to be of great economic significance to both countries in spite of the political obstacles.

Guatemala at the time, embarked on a regional campaign to gain support for its cause in the dispute. On 17 March 1949, during a meeting of the American Commission of Dependent Territories, Guatemala presented the Commission with their arguments regarding the Belize question. The focus of their argument was based on the fact that Guatemala "will continue to disagree that the dispute be submitted to the International Court of Justice if it will be judged solely on a legal basis, since fundamentally the case of Belize involves more than just the technical legalities, instead, it is a moral issue that involves history, economics and justice". (74) The signatories of the Central American Republics all supported the declaration of Antigua of 1955- which stated that the territory of Belize is an integral part of Guatemala and consequently of Central America and that the measures taken to claim this territory concerns all the signatories to that declaration. (75)

On the other hand, Mexico maintained its position: if the status of Belize is altered in Guatemala's favor, then the legal and historical rights of Mexico over a part of that territory cannot be discounted. Of great political significance for Belize, was the British government's decision to devalue the Belizean dollar. In the teeth of unanimous opposition from the unofficial members of the Legislation, the necessary legislation was enacted and intensely opposed by the mass of the urban population. Devaluation became the immediate occasion for the formation of the Peoples Committee which later became the Peoples United Party (PUP) and this issue, more than any other, fueled the anti-colonialist movement. "Devaluation of the dollar bound the country more closely to Britain, rather than to its traditional market and source of supplyÑthe United States. In the short term at least, devaluation raised the price of imports, and thus the cost of living, at a time of acute economic depression. It also brought into the open the conflict of interest between the business community which was its immediate beneficiary and the working class. Finally, it had a similar effect on the opposing viewpoints of the other Ôsuitable citizens' who refused to fill the void unless an on official majority was established in the Legislative Council. (76)

The year 1960 marked a very important year for colonies, especially, Belize. "...it was to have the most critical impact on Guatemalan posture and the entire Belize question". (77) The General Assembly on the 15th December 1960, adopted Resolution 1514 (XV), the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples:

"All peoples have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development." ( Article 2 of the U.N. Declaration, text )

"The Declaration affirmed that Ôsubjection of people to alien...domination constituted a denial of fundamental human rights, is contrary to the charter of the United Nations and is an impediment to the promotion of world peace and co-operation.' Further, it enjoined Ôimmediate steps be taken in trust and non-self-governing territories or all other territories which have not yet attained independence, to transfer all powers to the peoples in order to enable them to enjoy complete independence and freedom. In this way, the concepts of self-determination, of anti-colonialism, and territorial integrity, gained international legal currency...' The process would now begin whereby Belize would no longer be treated as merely the passive object of the dispute. In acknowledgment of her inherent right to self-determination of her own destiny, she would eventually be accorded active and equal status in the continuing negotiations over her future." (78)

This explains clearly that with this United Nations declaration, Belize and other colonies like it now had the security it needed, and which consolidated its right to claim independence and its sovereignty in the face of the territorial claim by Guatemala. It is arguable that the 1960 United Nations Declaration may have facilitated the first modern-day negotiations of the Twentieth Century, the Webster Proposals, in which the mediator allowed for Belize to become an independent nation. Other aspects, as will be seen, failed to be agreeable or acceptable to the Belizean electorate.

The objective of becoming independent was paramount for Belize and the Honourable George Price, the First Minister, on August 5th, 1962, was the Guest Speaker at the anniversary of the Belize Men's Meeting held at Wesley Church in Belize City. Mr. Price delivered an address entitled, "Appointment With History" in which he made reference to the Anglo-Guatemalan dispute, setting forth his government's policy on the matter. He stated,

"Let every citizen be assured that we do not intend to be integrated, reincorporated, assimilated or taken over by any country. The whole world knows that our political aims are self-government within the Commonwealth and independence....while we shall not surrender even one square centimeter of our national territory, we do not propose to spew recrimination or insults against our neighbours....because of our steadfastness, our demeanour, our willingness to meet our neighbours at the conference table, we expect in time that they will acknowledge our right to freely exercise the principle of self-determination, guaranteed us by the Charter of the United Nations, self-determination to be a nation". (79)
__________________
CRCRCRCRCR
C O S T A .. R I C A
SIETE PROVINCIAS
San José | Alajuela | Heredia | Cartago | Guanacaste | Puntarenas | Limón
Tillor87 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 17th, 2010, 11:49 AM   #6
Tillor87
Moderador
 
Tillor87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: 90 210 Guararí Hills
Posts: 24,303
Likes (Received): 1931

CHAPTER 7.

WEBSTER PROPOSAL


Negotiations between the United Kingdom and Guatemala in search of a solution to Guatemala's claim to Belize were bilateral negotiations until 1962. It was a significant historical moment because in that year delegates from Belize were permitted for the first time to participate in the Anglo-Guatemalan negotiations which took place in San Juan, Puerto Rico with the U.K. and Guatemala as principals. Belize had not yet achieved self-government and so the delegates were members of the Executive Council which comprised Hon. George Price, who later became Prime Minister of Belize, Mr. Albert Cattouse and Hon. Louis Sylvestre, along with Hon. Harrison Courtney Sr. as the delegation's legal adviser.

The main thrust of these negotiations was to seek a solution to the dispute through economic cooperation. The parties agreed to request the Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLA) to undertake a study of the implications of closer economic cooperation between Belize and the Central American States with a view to Belize joining the Central American Common Market. It was also agreed to establish a tripartite committee, to be composed of representatives from Guatemala, Britain and Belize charged with the task of promoting mutual economic and social development between the peoples of Guatemala and Belize. (80)

Although ECLA was commissioned to undertake the study contemplated, little else emerged from the agreements reached at San Juan. The tripartite committee was never appointed and diplomatic relations between the U.K. and Guatemala were broken in 1964, when Belize achieved internal self government. Guatemala protested that the U.K. had failed to consult her on this constitutional advance for Belize as she was obliged to do.

In June 1965, Britain, in consultation with Belize, agreed with Guatemala to submit the dispute to a Mediator appointed by the United States Government. The Mediator, Mr. Bethuel M. Webster, delivered his report in April 1968, in the form of a draft Treaty, the main provisions of which may be summarized as follows: (81)

1. Article 1 of the draft treaty provided that British Honduras would be granted independence under the name of Belize not later than 31st December 1970. (82)
2. Article 2 obliged Belize and Guatemala to grant to each other's goods free entry through their ports and free transit through predetermined routes of each country. (83)
3. Under Article 3, the port of Belize city would be declared a duty free port for the benefit of Guatemala and placed under the control of a supra-national Authority. Guatemala was obliged, at the request of Belize, to provide similar facilities for Belizean goods. (84)
4. Article 4 guaranteed nationals of each country free movement in the territory of the other as well as the right to the same treatment as was accorded by each country to its own citizens. This included the right to freely acquire and dispose of personal real property. (85)
5. Under Article 9, Guatemala and Belize agreed to establish a supra-national Authority to be charged with the responsibility of carrying out certain powers and functions including the supervision and control of free ports, as well as the designation of transit routes. Britain was required to pay to the Authority US $4m. to assist the Authority to perform its functions under the Treaty. (86)
6. Article 10 provided that Belize, would join CACM before 31st December 1970 with financial assistance from Britain. (87)
7. Article 13 obliged Guatemala and Belize to consult and cooperate with each other on such matters of mutual concern in foreign affairs as may be raised by either government. (88)
8. According to Article 14, the defence of Belize would be handled within the framework of the Inter-American Treaty of 1947, to which Belize would accede. In that event it would not be necessary for Belize to conclude bilateral defence arrangements with any other country. (89)

The plan placed the defence, foreign affairs and, to a certain extent, the economy of Belize under Guatemalan control after independence. The normal channel of communication to international bodies by the Belize government was to be through the Guatemalan government. The two governments were to consult on matters of external defence but this was tantamount to Belize being subjected to the dictates of Guatemala. Even the provision of internal security in Belize, a responsibility expected within dependence, was to be the subject of consultation and co-operation. Belize was to accept a customs union with its neighbour, which was to be allowed free access to its Caribbean ports and territorial waters. It was to be rewarded with Guatemala's support for its entry into the Central American community and into the Inter-American community and in particular into the Organization of American States (OAS) and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). (90)

In sum, it is believed that the proposals exclusively committed Belize to a hemispheric destiny as a satellite or department of Guatemala. Nowhere in the document was it stated that the Guatemalan claim was revoked. Nor was Belize explicitly given the right to seek membership of the Commonwealth, the United Nations or international bodies outside of the Inter-American system. She was, in short, denied the prerogative of an independent state to choose, or reorder at least some of the priorities of her future. (91)

With regard to the country's internal politics, the proposals also made few concessions to the dominant traditional social values. For example, degrees granted from outside Belize or Guatemala were excluded from the reciprocal recognition of educational qualifications. This undermined the dominant British orientation of the educational system in Belize and, in the absence of post-secondary facilities, virtually decreed Guatemala as the new center of higher learning for Belizeans. (92)

Bearing in mind the great disparity between Guatemala and Belize in terms of population and resources, the end result, of these proposals, taken together, would have been the effective domination of Belize by Guatemala. Belize accordingly, declared that these proposals were totally unacceptable. Indeed so unacceptable were they, that unrest and disturbances erupted in Belize even before the government had an opportunity to signify its total rejection of the proposals as incompatible with the aspirations and rights of the people to achieve full sovereignty as a free and independent nation. Requests were made to the Government of the U.K. "to seek other means by which the Anglo-Guatemalan dispute may be satisfactorily and honourably settled so as to allow the country to pursue its unimpeded course to unfettered and sovereign independence." (93) On 20 May, 1968 the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Mr. Michael Stewart, announced that since the draft Treaty was not acceptable to Belize, it was not acceptable to the British Government.
__________________
CRCRCRCRCR
C O S T A .. R I C A
SIETE PROVINCIAS
San José | Alajuela | Heredia | Cartago | Guanacaste | Puntarenas | Limón
Tillor87 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 17th, 2010, 12:16 PM   #7
Tillor87
Moderador
 
Tillor87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: 90 210 Guararí Hills
Posts: 24,303
Likes (Received): 1931

CHAPTER 8.

'TWO TREATY PACKAGE'


In 1969, Great Britain, Guatemala and Belize made renewed attempts at negotiations after the rejection of the Webster report. This time the main emphasis was placed on possible arrangements for economic co-operation between an independent Belize and Guatemala. The approach was considered new and offered a fresh formula that could possibly have put an end once and for all to the Anglo-Guatemalan dispute in an Ôhonourable' manner. This manifested itself in a "Two-Treaty Package": Treaty of Recognition and a Treaty of Economic Co-operation, in the fields of commerce, agriculture, defence, and foreign affairs. The Treaty of Recognition would have ensured Guatemalan recognition of the new state and acknowledgment that the dispute was terminated.

This initiative was put forward by Great Britain after the Government of Belize agreed to make Ôone last attempt' at the settlement of the Anglo-Guatemalan dispute before arranging an independence conference. It was then clearly understood that the talks proposed would not be protracted and would not operate to delay Belizean Independence. It was also understood that a settlement of this Dispute would not eliminate the need for an "Independence Guarantee", from the U.K. This was a prerequisite especially because the settlement would result in a reduction of the scope British military presence in Belize.

The first draft was a multilateral Treaty of Recognition by which as many nations as possible would recognize the new State of Belize, including particularly, the United Kingdom, Guatemala and Mexico. In this way, the claims of both Guatemala and Mexico would officially come to an end. The second treaty in the package, was described as a Treaty of Economic Co-operation to be executed by the United Kingdom, Guatemala and Belize. This, Guatemala and Belize would agree to co-operate in all matters of mutual interest and terms of friendship would be arranged between Guatemala and an independent Belize in order to preserve the peace between the two countries. This latter treaty also included articles on External Affairs and Defence.

During the preliminary talks, the Guatemalan representative expressed Guatemala's readiness to enter into negotiations with complete good faith. Rather than being dogmatic, he believed it would be far better adopting a pragmatic and realistic attitude in the hope of finding a solution. In regards to the treaty of economic co-operation, the Guatemalan representative assured the delegation that Guatemala had much experience of economic co-operation in Central America and despite problems that had surfaced within the organization, the Central American Common Market (CACM) still had great economic strength. He also agreed with the British representative that it was essential that the right atmosphere should be created at the negotiating tables. Further, all parties accepted that it was necessary to maintain a large degree of discretion concerning the negotiations. Therefore the meetings were held privately in Belmopan, Washington D.C. and the Bahamas, among other places. It was taken into account that local political issues were bound to have some bearing on the event. The following material on this issue has been compiled from private government records.

To this end, a point was made which is fundamentally linked to the whole theme of this paper. It was stated that while political problems were of great importance, ultimately the parties were primarily concerned with the welfare of their peoples, and this is why, economic development, as an area of wide co-operation was stressed. Hence, it was agreed that political stability was vital but was not possible without economic and trading circumstances in which people could live happily. The British pointed out that economic co-operation would lead to political co-operation but did not imply any diminution of sovereignty. These talks were the beginnings of a period of negotiations that lasted two years where there were countless private meetings and talks between the representatives.

Basically, the British put the two papers forward, the draft Treaty of Cooperation and a draft Treaty of Recognition, as a basis to begin the negotiations. The draft Treaties did not go into detail since they thought that the treaties stood a greater chance of general acceptance if they were confined to the necessary broad provisions with any details that might need to be included in dealt with in separate annexes. They realized that the Treaty of Recognition was a matter to which the Belizean government attached great importance, for the reason that the main provisions dealt with recognition of and respect for territorial integrity. Four signatories had been specified which they felt were the essential ones.

These drafts were the base of what was used at the negotiating tables. They were continuously subject to counter-proposals and amendments by the contracting parties. There were naturally opposing views expressed by the parties on the different issues and this was reflected in the series of private meetings between them.

The Guatemalan delegation had their own views on the draft Treaty on Economic Co-operation. As regards the Treaty of Recognition, the delegation maintained the view that Guatemala's consideration of this would depend largely on the extent of the co-operation envisaged in the treaty of Cooperation. It was made clear from the start that the arrangements for cooperation with Belize needed to be worked out within a Central American framework and Guatemala wanted to act as advocate of Belize.

In 1969, there had been a General Election in Belize, at which the P.U.P. Government had been returned once again for a period of five years. They were, therefore, now in a position of considerable political strength with greater room to maneuver. But they had come away from those elections with an even greater determination to achieve independence. Just as the Treaty of Co-operation was of special importance to Guatemala, the Treaty of Recognition was the sin qua non for the Belizeans. While Belize was willing to reach accord with Guatemala on the economic side, the Treaty of Recognition was the only possible way of allaying Belize's fears for their future. In order to satisfy the two sides then, it was essential that progress be made on both treaties.

The Guatemalan delegation were the first to outline their eleven suggestions regarding possible measures of economic co-operation which they proposed should be considered and therefore they were put down as a working paper submitted as Annex C:

1. Joint planning for development. This might entail the setting up of a regional development corporation (or other body) with the aim of :

1. preparing development plans entailing, among other things, identification and preparation of projects of mutual benefit to Guatemala and Belize, both for the private and public sectors; and
2. financing these projects by establishing a fund to be managed by the joint corporation. The possible financial participation of other countries is envisaged in this fund.

2. Common infrastructure projects: e.g., ports, highways, telecommunications (participation of Belize in the Central American telecommunications project, both to improve communications for Belize and as an aid to eventual integration), television, hydro-electric and other projects.

3. Trade. The establishment at an early stage of a special regime for free trade in products produced in Guatemala and Belize as a first step towards:

4. The progressive integration of Belize into the Central American Common Market. This would of course entail consultations with the other Central American countries and would be a gradual process aiming at the establishment of a common tariff, within say 10 years. This did not mean that Belize could not have a special relationship with CARIFTA. There must be a certain degree of flexibility on this point. There might also be special preferential treatment for investments in Belize in order to further the establishment of certain fields of endeavour. (There are precedents for this in CACM.)

5. Free transit of goods from third countries. Movement in both directions, through Belize for Guatemala, and through Guatemala for Belize is envisaged. Special port arrangements could be made.

6. Free movement of capital. Special treatment of and special exchange facilities for Guatemalan investments in Belize. These could take effect even before Belizean accession to CACM.

7. Special co-operation in the monetary field. Possible assistance of Guatemalan Central Bank in establishing a modern monetary system for Belize, and possibly access to Guatemalan foreign exchange reserves, within limits, in case of balance of payments deficits, provided the monetary arrangements in Belize are adequate for that co-operation.

8. Free movement of persons between the two territories, to facilitate the undertaking of joint projects which might entail movement of labour. This would not imply the acquisition of citizenship rights, except possibly after a number of years.

9. Manpower development and technical training. The provision of scholarships and special arrangements for the training of Belizeans in technical and other institutions and corporations.

10. Quotas, trade agreements, tariffs, international finance, etc. Support, in possible conjunction with other Central American governments, for joint negotiations in these fields.

11. The creation of common bilateral institutions to deal with these and other areas of co-operation, e.g., a joint development corporation, a joint monetary board, and any others that might be required.

The core of the Guatemalan delegation's economic proposal rested on a regional development corporation which would prepare development plans entailing identification and preparation of projects of mutual benefit to Guatemala and Belize, both for the private and public sectors.

The Belize delegation raised some points for clarification: Must projects be of mutual benefit to qualify? How is the fund maintained? Is repayment for projects envisaged? What of the management of enterprises? profits? Would the control of the corporation's activities have equal representation? veto? staff and employees? How would the relationship be with governments? etc.

The Guatemalan idea was further discussed amongst the parties. The Belizean representative felt that for starters, it was essential that such a corporation should make recommendations which would be ad-referendum to Belizean and Guatemalan Ministers. However, the Guatemalan representative believed that this would tend to limit the effectiveness of the corporation. They felt that It would be preferable if the Board of Governors or Board of Directors of the corporation were to be included or consist entirely of Ministers and thus reflect political opinion in both countries. In other words, there would in this way, be in-built political control. Another point raised by the Belizean delegation was that they did not wish to see the setting up of any supra-national organization which would have executive authority independently of the governments concerned and it would be necessary to take account, at every stage of the planning and implementation of any project, of the views of both governments.

The Guatemalan representative tried to clarify this point by saying that he envisaged the regional development corporation not as a supra-national body but as a mechanism of co-operation. It was precisely in order to ensure full governmental support that they thought it convenient to have built-in representative, political authority.

The British delegation made a commitment to make sizeable contributions in the form of grants and loans from the U.K. and other countries with an interest in having a political settlement to the dispute. They also went on record that they would do their best to continue to provide aid and assistance to Belize after its independence and offered to take the initiative in serving as a broker for Belize in approaching other governments to participate in the treaties and to financially contribute to the development corporation. The importance of measures to promote physical integration in CACM was emphasized.

Although the ECLA study was not encouraging in terms of its prognosis of integration for Belize with Central America, the Guatemalan representative pointed out that the ECLA report looked at the situation as it was then but this situation was not immutable. The special proposals for co-operation which they were now putting forward would themselves alter the situation and make Belizean participation potentially fruitful. They were ready to support the idea of a special relationship between Belize and CARIFTA because they recognized the potential benefit for Belize to have a foot in each market. But it was estimated that a period of 10 years would provide for the adjustment of the Belizean economy to the new conditions. Guatemala saw the participation of Belize in both CACM and CARIFTA as the beginning of a wider relationship between Central America and the Caribbean which would open up possibilities of more rapid economic development and would aid political stability. They also envisioned that the possibility of such a relationship would lead to the development of a fruitful link with the U.K. with possibility of expanded trade. In other words it was hoped that Belize and Guatemala could be a bridge between Britain and the Caribbean and Latin America.

As time progressed, Guatemala and Belize continued to raise issues and points and drafts based on the original British drafts. The Belize delegation for example, were concerned that the British draft on Recognition failed to include the word "sovereignty" which should have been a part of Article I of the Treaty of Recognition. The British argued however, that the intention was that both the proposed Treaties should come into force after Belize had become independent. Then it would be a sovereign state entering into a treaty relationship with other sovereign states. Therefore, the mention of , "sovereignty" was not considered necessary especially as the introduction of this word would certainly create presentational difficulties for the Guatemalans, thereby making Guatemalan agreement to the whole package more difficult to secure. Therefore, the British side pointed out that by subscribing to the preamble and Articles of the British draft Treaties the signatories would implicitly recognize Belize as an entity which was distinct from the Republic of Guatemala.

However, if the intention to have Belize gain its sovereignty was an inevitable and obvious reality, then would it have made such a difference whether it was stated in the Treaty itself or simply implied as the British were suggesting? It appears that the British were being extremely cautious and sensitive to Guatemala's reactions and interpretations.

The Belize Premier, George Price, who led the Belize delegations on a few occasions, was particularly concerned about this issue and having the British Government give Belize a defense guarantee which he believed would provide a much simpler way of solving the country's problems. The Hon. Premier, in a correspondence to the British, stressed his position that Belize entered into the discussion at Britain's invitation. He hoped that a possible solution to the Belizean demand for an independence guarantee would be found. Hence, he stated,

"Without this assurance, negotiations of a Treaty of Co-operation is a luxury which circumstances do not permit us to enjoy... we can only go to the conference table again if you can, as our "honest broker" unequivocally secure this assurance".

He also pointed out that the Treaty of recognition would not be "worth the paper it was written on unless it included an obligation in case of breach of the Treaty not only to consult but to act Ô: This was the crucial point of the negotiation and unless the treaty of Recognition provided for more than consultation, his government could not give any further consideration to it. It contained a big flaw in that it did not obligate the signatories to act on behalf of Belize in the case of any breach of the Treaty.

On economic co-operation, the Belize side suggested that it need not take the form of a joint body with administrative and executive powers. It was suggested that economic co-operation be achieved in two steps:

1. a joint technical committee of officials to study and recommend,
2. a meeting of ministers to decide and do

The Belize delegation decided to put forward some alternative suggestions for achieving economic co-operation. Their fear was that if the Guatemalans, by signing a Treaty of Recognition gave up their hope of achieving political domination over Belize, they might nonetheless seek to achieve just as real domination through economic means. Also, Belize's membership of the OAS and the RIO Treaty could be negotiated in advance of independence and take place at independence simultaneously with signature of the Two Treaty Package. By this, the security of Belize would be assured within the Rio Treaty framework immediately on the achievement of independence.

Hence, through consensus, the Belizean delegation rejected the economic proposals put forth by the Guatemalans and presented their own proposal on economic co-operation (Submitted as Annex B): As follows:
A PATTERN OF REGIONAL ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION BETWEEN EL PETEN AND BELIZE

1. REGIONAL BOARDS (CONSEJOS REGIONALES). There shall be Regional Boards charged with the responsibility of studying and recommending economic cooperation between El Peten and Belize in these specific fields:-

1. co-ordination of roads, communications and a regional seaport;
2. regional development of agriculture, fisheries, livestock and forestry;
3. regional trade and industry in which specified articles would enjoy preferential treatment;
4. regional electrification and use of water resources;
5. tourism- The Maya Circuit.

2. These Regional Boards shall comprise officials with scientific and technical competence appointed by the Government of Belize and the Government of Guatemala. Their membership shall be not less than six members of each BoardÑhalf Belizean appointees and half Guatemalan appointees having joint Belizean-Guatemalan chairmanship.

3. The Regional Boards shall submit to the two Governments their recommendations on regional co-operation in the designated fields of this Treaty or in other fields agreed by the Government of Belize and the Government of Guatemala.

4. Governments of Belize and Guatemala shall each make decisions in respect of recommendations of the regional Boards and decisions of co-operation shall be formalized at the meeting of the Belizean and Guatemalan Ministers responsible for the subject under agreement.

5. There shall be a Regional Development Bank, known as the Bel-Guat Bank, through which investment would be channeled to finance regional projects. The Board of Governors of the Bel-Guat Bank shall be two Governors appointed by the Government of Belize and two Governors appointed by the Government of Guatemala. The chairman shall be the fifth Governor appointed by the World Bank (not a Guatemalan or a Belizean).

6. Resources of the Bel-Guat Bank shall be provided by contributions from Belize, Guatemala, the United Kingdom and other countries who take an interest in the settlement of the Anglo-Guatemalan dispute and likewise an interest in ensuring the independence of Belize and the economic development of Belize and El Peten on a regional basis.

7. This pattern of regional economic co-operation can be applied to the fields of cultural, educational and social affairs, when it has been proven an effective instrument in promoting economic co-operation on a regional basis.

8. By the time economic co-operation between Belize and El Peten becomes a reality, Belize will no doubt be a member of CARIFTA. It should not be impossible for Belize to become also a member of CACM, thus providing a link between the Caribbean economic region and the Central American-Mexican economic region- all components of the Caribbean Basin.

The Belize delegation reiterated that their concept of economic cooperation was that no supranational body should be created and that executive decisions as to which projects ought to be undertaken should be matters for the two governments, no doubt in consultation, to take. The method would be that the proposed Regional Boards, to consist primarily of technicians and officials, would undertake examination and selection of projects at the technical level, thereafter examinations by the two Governments would then decide which projects were to be taken further. And they would then jointly sponsor applications to the proposed Regional Development Bank of Finance. It would then be for the Bank to take decisions on whether or not, and if so how, the projects should be financed. It would be open to the Bank to finance private projects subject, however, to these having been approved by the two Governments.

Hence, based on the difficulties that the Belize and Guatemalan delegation had with the first drafts put forward by the British, a second draft Treaty of Co-operation was put forward. The points raised in past meetings by the parties were taken into consideration. e.g. The Belizean wishes that reference be made to the setting up of the Development Bank and the draft Guatemalan Statute for a Development Corporation. It was pointed out that the objectives in Article I closely followed those of the Caribbean Development Bank:

Article I: The Government of Belize and the Government of Guatemala hereby establish for the purposes of planning, promoting and financing of the joint regional development of Belize and Guatemala, a Regional Board (hereinafter referred to as "the Regional Board") and a Belize/Guatemala Development Bank (hereinafter referred to as "the Bank"). These organs shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Annex, have the following objectives:

1. to contribute to the harmonious economic growth and development of Belize and Guatemala;
2. to secure, by means of mutual co-operation, the creation of greater opportunities for investment and employment and the betterment of the standards of living of both peoples.

Some of the points raised by the Guatemalans were also considered e.g., that the Regional Board give attention to projects such as infrastructure and trade. However there was a failure to consider a great deal more of their points which were vital to the Guatemalan proposal:

The progressive integration of Belize into the Central American Common Market. Free transit of goods from third countries, free movement of capital, special co-operation in the monetary field, free movement of persons between the two territories. The meetings moved on and each party had to address what the other had failed to consider. Besides having the Regional Board as a central issue on the Guatemalan agenda, it was decided that for a Treaty of Collaboration to be "saleable" in Guatemala, it must present Belize as becoming the sixth Central American state, in a close relationship to Guatemala. The Guatemalans pointed out that they had come a long way from saying "Belize is ours", but they believed that there still needed to be some link between the two countries before any progress could happen. The Belize representative agreed that Belize certainly had a Central American destiny, but argued that the two sides might see the destiny in different terms. For Belize, if Guatemala were prepared to recognize Belize, then many things, including economic collaboration, or integration would be possible.

Integration was occurring at all levels of economic life in Central America. There were, for example, regional associations in the private sector-Chambers of Commerce, industrialists, bankers, telecommunications etc. In the public sector there was exchange of information and consultation between Ministers of Health, Agriculture and Public Works.

The adoption of the free trade regime and the common tariff had given rise to a remarkable growth in the volume of intra-area trade. Between 1961 and 1966, this trade increased from 37 to 176 million dollars with the share of intra-area imports in total imports rising from 7.4 to 18.8 per cent. According to the ECLA study, all the participating countries benefited from this expansion in trade. In proportionate terms, the greatest increase was registered by Costa Rica, whose exports to the area rose from 2 million dollars in 1961 to 26 million in 1966. At the other end of the scale was Honduras, where exports expanded from 8.3 to 21.5 million dollars. The ECLA paper did a closer study of the commodity structure of this trade and it revealed there was a marked tendency for exchanges to take place in the same categories of goods. Nonetheless, they detected from the trade figures for 1965, certain patterns of specialization among the individual countries. As a broad generalization, they deduced that, for example, Guatemala tended to specialize in items like processed foods, manufactures of rubber and paper, paints, and electrical appliances, while El Salvador specialized in cotton fabrics, textiles, yarn and materials. The ECLA study concluded that the process of integration had already begun to permit each country to find lines of specialization within the context of a competitive market.

The ECLA study observed that trade between Belize and Central America had been very minimal, with exports to, and imports from Central America accounting for no more than 1 per cent of the total exports and imports of British Honduras. However, in absolute terms, the country's total exports to Central America nearly doubled between 1960 and 1965, rising from 102,000 to 200,000 U.S. dollars. During the same period, imports from the same source expanded more than six-fold, climbing from some 59,000 to 382,000 dollars. The study further showed that the country's trade with the individual Central American countries showed Guatemala as being the most important individual market in that region. Exports to Guatemala accounted in 1965 for nearly 57 per cent of the country's total exports to Central America. Nonetheless, the study showed that the increase in exports that took place between 1960 and 1965 was principally concentrated in Honduras, and to a lesser extent in Nicaragua and Costa Rica. Imports from Central America also tended to originate from Guatemala, although Honduras was becoming an almost equally important source. The figures showed imports from Guatemala as rising from U.S. 37,000 dollars in 1960 to U.S. 199,000 in 1965, while from Honduras it rose from U.S. 7,000 to U.S. 165,000 dollars.

The study attributed the low level and narrow structure of trade to the fact that historical patterns of development in both Belize and Central America gave emphasis to trade with metropolitan centres, as opposed to exchanges with neighbouring countries. Therefore, the study said that it was not surprising to find, in the absence of special measures to promote stronger economic ties, Belize was virtually isolated from its neighbours.

The ECLA study concluded that, free access to the Central American Common Market was not likely to give rise in the near future, to a significant expansion of British Honduran exports to the countries of the area and of domestic industries oriented to this market. The study said that such obstacles to such trade were British Honduras' geographical situation, long distances away from the main consumption centres of the region, the lack of adequate transport facilities and the supply constraints imposed by the country's incipient industrial development. Such short-run possibilities of increasing trade as did exist, although worthy of further investigation, were not likely to provide sufficient gains as to justify the immediate accession of British Honduras, as a full member, to the Central American Common Market. The study furthermore concluded that this would imply the renunciation of her present special trading arrangements within the Commonwealth. It would give rise to a considerable increase in internal prices and costs, as a result of adopting the much higher Central American common tariffs.

As a result of the ECLA study, Belize, had its legitimate concerns regarding this huge endeavour, which to a great extent still hold true today. Belize was the least advanced of the six countries and had not participated in the progress made so far. Therefore the steps towards integration would be limited and phased. But the Belizean representatives were concerned that balanced growth be an important principle of the integration and special arrangements made to ensure that the less developed member countries shared in the benefits of integration. An example of this at the time was the decision of the Economic Council to allow Panama's integration to be a progressive process which would imply some form of limited or associate membership. Another issue important to Belize was that she not only hoped to participate in co-operation matters with the Caribbean Basin while maintaining her status in Central America, but as was previously mentioned, she hoped to play an integral role in bridging the Caribbean with Central America.

This is testimony that the idea of Belize serving as a bridge between Central America and the Caribbean is not a phenomenon of today since the idea was being explored with more than twenty years ago during these meetings.

The ECLA study had also pointed out that most trade was overland and the network of highways constructed-of which some $200 million had been spent since 1960 had contributed greatly to the expansion of trade, and great progress had also been made with the development of regional telecommunications and electrification.

Thus, possible products which might be developed in Belize for export to CACM, including rice, cotton, textiles, tobacco, foodstuffs, leather goods and soya beans were discussed by the Belizean representatives. Likewise, it was agreed that there was great scope for co-operation between Guatemala and Belize over tourism, and package tours could be arranged where tourists could enjoy the Belizean cayes (pronounced keys), hunting in Guatemala and visiting the Mayan ruins shared by both countries. Another tourism potential which was discussed was the possibility of gambling.

The two sides concluded that CACM was not just an inward-looking organization, since it was looking towards the possibility of some sort of association with CARIFTA and the Andean group, and had been exploring the possibility of establishing trade with Panama and Mexico on an agreed list of items.

The Belizean representatives analyzed the points in relation to the integration scheme. They contended that Belize's participation should be limited and gradual, given the ease with which she could be seamped because of her small population and undeveloped economy. It also recognized that detailed technical studies would be required to identify the range of items. In order to stimulate realistic target dates for the eventual freeing of trade. On an eventual customs union, potential commitments to CARIFTA would be taken into consideration. On the free movement of persons, it would be taken into account, Belize's position and policies which were subject to the normal health and security requirements, the protection of the interest of nationals, particularly, with regard to employment opportunities. To meet the concern of the Guatemalans, it was agreed to recommend: (a). reciprocal abolition of visa requirements with the development of an appropriate identification system for movement of visitors between Belize and CACM. It was intimated that U.K. might be prepared to consider meeting the costs of developing the identification system; (b) reciprocal extradition arrangements under a much simplified judicial system of extradition for criminals other than what existed. On free movement of goods, the goods would be subject to the right to impose reasonable administrative charges but not to the imposition of any duty or taxes. This was in accord with the international agreement on the movement of intransit goods and conformed to GATT's requirements.

The point on monetary arrangements was clear but it was indicated that for a start, something could be worked for Belize with the clearing arrangement for the settlement of intra-regional trade. This Central American Clearing House, which was established in 1961 provided for the settlement of inter-country balances arising from intra-area trade and transactions. Under this arrangement, the Central Bank of each country was obliged to grant up to 500,000 dollars in regular credits to the other four taken together. These regular credits were settled in cash every six months. Once the limit of the regular credit was reached, any excess was subject to weekly settlements in cash, although the creditor country was free to decide whether it wished to enforce this obligation. Credits earned interest at 3 1/2 %. Transactions were denominated in a unit of account called the "Central American peso", which was equivalent to the US dollar.

These and other points were raised and assessed as to their viability to Belize and Guatemala. Joint project possibilities were named including tourism, La Ruta Maya, port development, cotton, veneer, plywood, pulp, paper, road development, power development including flood control and irrigation, fisheries, confined to International Fisheries and Fish Farming, lime and calcium for road building, fertilizers, meat processing using cattle from Central America, tobacco, food processing, coastal shipping and telecommunication including television.

Although there seemed to be co-operation on both sides and some degree of cohesion, in addition to a great deal of will to come to a resolution at this point, the meetings that followed showed the contrary. In spite of this progress, it showed that Belize and Guatemala were far apart in their goals and there appeared to be no flexibility on either side.

In essence, the problem boiled down to the fact that Guatemala sought to satisfy its constitutional obligation to re-incorporate Belize by a Treaty of Economic Co-operation, so involving Belize in the Central American community so that it might be said to have "thereby successfully discharged this obligation." While Belize would attempt to give Guatemala a "face saving device" it could not agree to provide satisfaction of the obligation written into the Guatemalan Constitution. In fact, the Belize delegation stood by their own draft which left little room for negotiation. They felt that to go further would have been very difficult for them. Although the intentions were noble, reality proved otherwise.

A vital factor which contributed to this hesitancy in the integration scheme was that fact of Belize's cultural reality which was different from Guatemala and had because of history, become a different entity, culturally and politically:

..."history had fashioned a new people, neither British nor Guatemalan, but Belizean. To the indigenous Maya and the Africans and their descendents, successive waves of migration had added Indian, Garifuna, Mestizo, West Indian and other peoples to Belize. They had evolved a multicultural identity out of their environs and experience which was quite different from that which prevailed in Guatemala". (94)

One very significant point which was voiced was the importance of Belize establishing its own identity. This perhaps was the beginning of Belize's struggle to identify as either a Central American country or as a Caribbean nation. The PUP/ George Price philosophy, promoted this integration with Latin America and his supporters, the masses, (blue-collar Belizeans) were the majority. Whilst the NIP, Phillip Goldson faction, (upper-middle class Creoles,) supported the status quo colonial identity. This non-cohesion in philosophy affected the integration process with Central America, a process which today is an inevitable reality. The lip service of fully integrating with the Caribbean was certainly unrealistic in terms of trade. Like Belize these countries were in the same position of importing more and exporting less and so the commercial interaction would have been very limited if any at all. On the other hand, the progress being made with the other Central American countries was substantial and Belize would certainly have gained. But, the Government of Belize felt that Guatemala's domination of the Central American Community was such that Belizean membership would in practical terms amount to direct domination by Guatemala over Belize. Furthermore, it was believed that attempts were made by Guatemala to secure considerable control over the foreign affairs and defence of Belize, although no demand for cession of land was made during these talks.

Both governments knew that whatever plans they made, and before any decision could be made, it had to be put first before the people of Belize and Guatemala. Guatemala was not progressing on the Treaty of Economic Co-operation, which was the compensatory device that was hoped would have been a fair compromise for the relinquishing of the claim over Belize. In essence, the Guatemalans felt that Belize was gaining far more than them. Belize was not as open to the ide of integrating into Central America as they would have wanted, while it would have gained its sovereignty and independence. The former, was to "compensate" the Guatemalans for their recognition and dropping the claim. Nevertheless, it was not enough for the Guatemalan government, who had to answer to the military as well, a force to be reckoned with especially on this issue. It was a pill too hard to swallow and Guatemala, after breaking off the talks, decided to invade Belize .

Parallel to this breakdown in talks, the ECLA study confirmed the economic incompatibility between Belize and CACOM- and Guatemala found a pretext to disengage. The talks broke down in 1972 amidst reports that Guatemala was preparing to invade Belize. Guatemala charged of menacing reinforcements when Britain deployed the aircraft carrier, HMS 'Ark Royal', and the destroyer, HMS 'London', armed with missiles and several frigates and ground troops to Belize. (95)

The issue was further aggravated when Guatemala secured the cooperation of El Salvador for the invasion and occupation of Belize. In return, El Salvador would then have been rewarded with the right to settle half a million peasants in Belize over a ten-year period. (96) Guatemala has always defended this military build-up at the border by claiming that a military patrol was ambushed by the guerillas which forced them to take this action near the border. (97)

While at a ministerial meeting in Washington on the 20th of March 1972, Guatemala protested against Britain's action, pointing out that, Britain had not removed its troops from the border, the negotiations were broken and Guatemala would take military action if Belize became independent. Britain maintained its position that it was responsible for defending Belize making it very difficult to reduce its troops under the circumstances. (98)

Under the circumstances, the OAS became involved in the dispute and at a meeting of the Foreign Ministers of the OAS in April of 1972, Guatemala tabled a resolution seeking the imposition of sanctions to force the removal of British troops from Belize, alleging that "they were poised to invade Guatemala". (99) A letter from Belize was sent repudiating Guatemala's claim and pointing out that it was Guatemala's aggressive plan that had required the British reinforcement. (100) Britain invited the OAS to send a military observer to investigate the nature of the British military presence; in May, the observer visited Belize and reported that the British presence was of a purely defensive character.

As it turned out, then, the sending of the British military reinforcements to Belize ended whatever invasion plans the Guatemalans had designed. And, of course, the O.A.S. observer's report was a clear vindication of the position taken by Britain and Belize.

A major breakthrough occurred in terms of bilateral co-operation between Belize and Guatemala because for the first time Guatemala entered into an agreement with Belize outside the historical border/recognition agreements. Belize saw the need to expand its telecommunications in Central America and essentially it was agreed by both countries that the object was to improve, and develop telecommunications by both administrations, with Central America and the rest of the world interconnecting the existing system of administrations by direct voice circuits between Punta Gorda, Belize and Las Escobas, Guatemala.

Therefore, on the 16 May, 1975, a meeting was held at the Guatemala Company of Telecommunications in Guatemala City between the Hon. Louis Sylvestre, Minister of Energy and Communications, representing the "Belize Telephone Authority', of Belize, and Colonel Mariano Rayo Ovalle, Manager of the Guatemala Corporation of Telecomunications "Guatel", where the actual signing and ratification occured. (101)
__________________
CRCRCRCRCR
C O S T A .. R I C A
SIETE PROVINCIAS
San José | Alajuela | Heredia | Cartago | Guanacaste | Puntarenas | Limón
Tillor87 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 17th, 2010, 12:17 PM   #8
Tillor87
Moderador
 
Tillor87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: 90 210 Guararí Hills
Posts: 24,303
Likes (Received): 1931

CHAPTER 9.

INTERNATIONALIZATION CAMPAIGN



Guatemala refused to resume negotiations until Britain reduced its troop strength in Belize. It was not until 1975, after Belize's election in late 1974 that the talks resumed. However, Guatemala's position seemed to have hardened since they were demanding the cession of the southern quarter of Belize in return for recognizing the independence of the rest. This prompted the Belize government to embark on a radically new approach in which it would have to gain the support of the world to its independence. Therefore, the objectives of its internationalisation campaign were: 102

1. To gain the support of as many nations as possible for Belize's early and secure independence with its territory intact; 103
2. To use this support to influence the negotiating process; 104
3. To secure a credible defense guarantee with troops stationed in Belize preferably with other nations joining the British, but failing that, putting more pressure on Britain to assume sole responsibility for Belize's defense; 105
4. To exert pressure on Britain and the U.S.A. to fully respect Belize's position. 106

With the support of CARICOM and the Commonwealth, Belize secured the support from the Non-Aligned Movement.

A series of diplomatic victories followed, when in 1975, the General Assembly of the United Nations passed a resolution affirming Belize's right to a secure independence with all its territory and declared that any proposals that may emerge from negotiations between Britain and Guatemala must respect this right. Guatemala condemned this as an in admissible attempt to dictate the outcome of negotiations and declared that it would not be bound by the resolution. The vote of 110 in favor, 9 against and 16 abstentions was a great victory for Belize. Except for Cuba, however, no Latin American country supported the resolution and the United States also refused to vote in its favor.107 Belize embarked on an intensive campaign in Central America, targeting trade unions, political parties and movements, individuals, civic groups, and the media and in the United States they lobbied senators and congressmen and Latin American solidarity groups apart from direct talks with the State Department. (108) The first breakthrough came in 1976 when Panama declared its support for Belize's cause and the following year, Mexico, Venezuela, Argentina and Peru also voted for Belize. Two years later, in 1978, Costa Rica and Columbia also followed suit and in 1979, after the triumph of the Sandinista revolution, Nicaragua, until then Guatemala's strongest ally, threw its weight behind Belize.

The British finally agreed to cooperate fully with Belize in its U.N. initiative to gain independence, its role then being to try to get the Belizeans to frame the resolution in as agreeable a way as possible.

In understanding how small states like Belize pursue their national interests, writing in 1981 in an article titled "Transforming International Regimes", Steven D. Krasner speaks of the position of small states in the international arena. According to Krasner, "At the international level all states are accorded formal equality as sovereigns: The underlying power capabilities of states establish no presumptive differentiation with regard to certain basic rights, especially sole legitimate authority within a given geographic area. At the same time, the present international system is characterized by an unprecendented differentiation in underlying power capabilities between large and small states. Never have states with such wildly variant national power ressources co-existed as formal equals. (But) very weak states can rarely hope to influence international behavior soley through the utilization of their national power cababilities". (109)

However, Krasner goes on to point out the opportunities that the character of post-World War II organizations has given small states hither to undreamed of ways of influencing behavior and promoting their interests. In particular he cites the United Nations General Assembly and "regional" and "universal" coalitions as affording the chance for small states to engage in what he calls "meta-power behavior" to secure their objectives.

The Belize internationalization campaign utilizing the U.N.G.A., the Non-Aligned Movement and the Commonwealth of Nations ("universal"coalitions); and CARICOM, Central America and the O.A.S. countries ("regional" coalitions), is therefore a classic example of Krasner's model at work. The 1960 U.N. Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Peoples, the character of post World War II organizationsÑNAM, Commonwealth etc.Ñcertainly afforded Belize, in Krasner's words, "a set of opportunities" to gain global support and thus influence the course of the territorial controversy in their favor. That the Belizean leaders, new at the game of diplomacy and international relations, did such a good job in developing and carrying out their strategy, must surely count to their historical credit.
__________________
CRCRCRCRCR
C O S T A .. R I C A
SIETE PROVINCIAS
San José | Alajuela | Heredia | Cartago | Guanacaste | Puntarenas | Limón
Tillor87 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 17th, 2010, 12:19 PM   #9
Tillor87
Moderador
 
Tillor87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: 90 210 Guararí Hills
Posts: 24,303
Likes (Received): 1931

Compañeros, son muchas páginas más, pero creo que vale la pena.

Si gustan leer más, puede ingresar a la fuente:

http://www.belizenet.com/bzeguat/chap10.html


Saludos
__________________
CRCRCRCRCR
C O S T A .. R I C A
SIETE PROVINCIAS
San José | Alajuela | Heredia | Cartago | Guanacaste | Puntarenas | Limón
Tillor87 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 17th, 2010, 07:19 PM   #10
kev89
Agente de cambio
 
kev89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Guatemala City
Posts: 2,463
Likes (Received): 3

Esto lleva como 300 años, será que podrá terminar en la siguiente década?
__________________
J'ai vingt ans

kev89 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 18th, 2010, 01:36 AM   #11
Remolino
Registered User
 
Remolino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 441
Likes (Received): 5

Dicen que Guatemala y Belice llevaron el caso a la corte internacional de la haya. Dicen que para el 2011 pueda que se de una decision.
Remolino no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 18th, 2010, 06:31 PM   #12
OSHERM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Fraijanes
Posts: 233
Likes (Received): 1

EL TERRITORIO DE BELICE ES DE GUATEMALA, NO SE DICE MAS. LOS BELICEÑOS SE PUEDEN QUEDAR, IR A LONDRES O DONDE QUIERAN. ESO YA ES LO DE MENOS.
OSHERM no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 26th, 2010, 03:24 AM   #13
pabloassio
Registered User
 
pabloassio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 925
Likes (Received): 113

Quote:
Originally Posted by OSHERM View Post
EL TERRITORIO DE BELICE ES DE GUATEMALA, NO SE DICE MAS. LOS BELICEÑOS SE PUEDEN QUEDAR, IR A LONDRES O DONDE QUIERAN. ESO YA ES LO DE MENOS.
Creo que tienes razón, por que si lo analizamos superficialmente el terreno que hoy es Belice se tenía que ceder a Reino Unido a cambio de una carretera y cosa que Reino Unido NUNCA cumplió.
pabloassio no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 27th, 2010, 06:29 PM   #14
ChackM
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 65
Likes (Received): 1

Interesting theme ...

ChackM no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2010, 01:31 AM   #15
Chacho
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 746
Likes (Received): 10

¡Buenas a todos!
Vale, yo entiendo la postura guatemalteca pero sinvergüenzas hay en todos sitios. Es como el acuerdo estadounidense-mejicano. Ahora, como posteriormente del tratado de Guadalupe-Hidalgo, no se respetaron la protección de la cultura, la posesión de tierras y demás cosas que se establecían en el acuerdo por parte de los gringos hacia los habitantes mejicanos al norte de la frontera y que quedaban ya en parte de territorio estadounidense ¿deberían entonces devolverle a Méjico todo el territorio cedido?.
Es decir, volviendo al caso "Belice", si eso fue en época colonial cuando se hizo el tratado/pacto/acuerdo, aunque no se llegara a cumplir por las dos partes (sí el consentimiento español pero no la construcción de la carretera por parte inglesa), esto quiere decir que, desde tal momento, se permitió el acceso a los ingleses a aquella zona de la costa atlántica de lo que aún no sería Guatemala. Por tanto:
Punto 1: si aún era colonia española, no existía Guatemala como nación.
Punto 2: el territorio que ocupó Reino Unido (la actual Belice) de quien se independizó en 1981 fue del propio Reino Unido y está reconocido como tal.
Punto 3: si España vio que el acuerdo (de época colonial, pongamos s. XVII porque no sé la fecha) no se cumplió, tuvo tiempo para reclamar (si es que no lo hizo. Si sí lo hizo, entonces Guatemala tendría más derecho desde mi punto de vista de ejercer soberanía sobre territorio Beliceño).
Chacho no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2010, 03:07 PM   #16
WG-85
Caracas, Venezuela
 
WG-85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Gran Caracas
Posts: 10,897
Likes (Received): 575

Los ingleses tambien quitaron a Venezuela la guayana esequiba (150.000 km2) a Argentina las islas Malvinas (12.000 km2) y Gibraltar a España (5 km2)

por todas partes hicieron de las suyas, y eso que ya tenian un imperio gigantesco..

y los herederos de los ingleses: los estadounidenses le quitaron a Mexico la mitad de su territorio (2.000.000 km2) a España le quitaron filipinas, cuba, puerto rico, guam y las marianas) y a Colombia Panama.

ademas aprovechando la invasion francesa a España le quitaron la luisiana española (2.500.000 km) e invadieron y compraron la florida española

puros despojos anglosajones a los pueblos hispanos.
__________________

''Si he hecho descubrimientos invaluables ha sido más por tener paciencia que cualquier otro talento.''
Isaac Newton

''La tolerancia es la que separa a los niños de los adultos''.
Doménico Cieri
WG-85 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2010, 04:47 PM   #17
messitadeluz
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 49
Likes (Received): 0

los ingleses son piratas, todo tipo de disputa en la que esten envueltos no es verdaderamente de ellos
messitadeluz no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 31st, 2010, 03:27 AM   #18
Leo Nic
In God we trust
 
Leo Nic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Space Coast
Posts: 3,953
Likes (Received): 424

No pues qué les puedo decir...
Por se de padre Nicaragu:ense comprendo perfectamene lo que sienten los Guatemaltecos al tratar de recuperar su territorio. No es justo que sólo porque una potencia tenga dinero y fuerza los países pequeños sufran. A Nicaragua le quitaron San Andrés y durante una invasión de un filibustero perdio el Guanacaste. Es verdad que ha pasado mucho tiempo, 180 años y que la gente en esos territorios ya ha sido consientizada de que son de otra nacionalidad. En sí ya han pasado varias genraciones. Pero para los Nicas todavía sentimos esos territorios como nuestros.
A cómo dije antes, duele que le quiten a uno parte de su tierra.
Me pregunto cómo se sentirán los Mexicanos con tanta tierra que perdieron contra EEUU.
Lo malo es que como ya ha pasado mucho tiempo, es muy posible que la corte niege a Guatemala derechos sobre Belize.
__________________

I look forward to a great future for America - a future in which our country will match its military strength with our moral restraint, its wealth with our wisdom, its power with our purpose.
My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.
JFK


No vino para juzgar al mundo...Sino que el mundo por él sea salvo...
Leo Nic no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 31st, 2010, 09:31 PM   #19
Tillor87
Moderador
 
Tillor87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: 90 210 Guararí Hills
Posts: 24,303
Likes (Received): 1931

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo Nic View Post
durante una invasión de un filibustero perdio el Guanacaste. Es verdad que ha pasado mucho tiempo, 180 años y que la gente en esos territorios ya ha sido consientizada de que son de otra nacionalidad. En sí ya han pasado varias genraciones. Pero para los Nicas todavía sentimos esos territorios como nuestros.
Son casos muy distintos los de Guanacaste y Belice, ni comparables.

A Guatemala sí "le jugaron sucio" pues les dieron un cheque en blanco, una territorio a cambio de una promesa, pero la promesa acabó en.... nada.

Pero ya que traés el temita de Guanacaste acá, que como dije, nada tiene que ver con Belice, pues bueno... Lo de que aún los sienten como suyos, yo lo que les diría es que ese sentimiento no va a cambiar nada y por el contrario sólo dolor les va a generar. En tanto se acepte la realidad y no se viva en "el si fuera de otra forma..." Los guanacastecos no solamente se sienten identificados 100% con Costa Rica, sino peor, odian que los liguen con Nicaragua. Guanacaste es tica, es simplemente una realidad, aceptalo mejor y viví tranquilo con el territorio que actualmente tienen.


Ahora, como moderador del foro de Belice que soy, les pido que volvamos y tratemos exclusivamente el tema Guatemala-Belice... nada tiene que hablarse acá ni de Colombia, Costa Rica, México o EEUU.

Se les agradece.
__________________
CRCRCRCRCR
C O S T A .. R I C A
SIETE PROVINCIAS
San José | Alajuela | Heredia | Cartago | Guanacaste | Puntarenas | Limón
Tillor87 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 31st, 2010, 10:53 PM   #20
Leo Nic
In God we trust
 
Leo Nic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Space Coast
Posts: 3,953
Likes (Received): 424

Vitiok, seguro que vos lo mirás de esa manera y nada similar porque vos sos de la parte que se le anexó un pedazo de tierra. Tus ojos siempre lo va a ver de otra manera. Aquí el que está cambiand el tema sos vos porque no he traido ningún pleito aquí.
Es una comparación legítima de un pueblo que se a visto perjudicado a otro. Hay mucha diferencia a como comprendiste me mensaje. Siento mucho que como tico no te haya gustado mi comentario, pero estoy seguro que los guatemaltecos sí van a comprender perfectamente lo que estoy diciendo.
Tranquilo que solo traje una analogía, no fue la continuación de nuestra discución previa en otro foro.
Saludes a todos.
__________________

I look forward to a great future for America - a future in which our country will match its military strength with our moral restraint, its wealth with our wisdom, its power with our purpose.
My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.
JFK


No vino para juzgar al mundo...Sino que el mundo por él sea salvo...
Leo Nic no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like v3.2.5 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu