Home »
Middle East News on Dec. 4th, 2018
Tuesday, December 04, 2018
VietPress USA : News source: www.reddit.com
1
We re-introduced the EGALITARIAN SHARED SOVEREIGNTY yesterday. Today we will present some key elements related to the Persian Gulf.
From our previous posts, we have learnt so far that some of the main concerns related to the Persian Gulf are:
Borders
This could be a matter of controversy. In the particular case of territorial sea, although it may seem that borders are not an issue—as the difference has to do with several islands—the exclusive economic zone often creates tension between many of the claiming parties.
For instance, who has the right to explore that exclusive sea-zone? What happens in the zone in which two or more claiming parties overlap? As this point is intrinsically linked to natural resources, it will be examined after introducing the latter.
Defense
National defense will be seen here as the protection of any interest a state has—e.g. possessions, territory, and population—through different means—e.g. military, economic, and diplomatic.
There are several states in which the army and navy are not big, well equipped or trained enough in order to defend their territory or population but they are still respected as states. There are others that in fact do not have military defense at all, their defense being the responsibility of another country or an international organization—e.g. OTAN.
There seems to be no problem with defense. The territory being defended is obviously desirable although the task is one which can be shared. However, what would happen if another party—i.e. a sovereign state with no part in the conflict—decided to invade the third territory? In the hypothetical scenario an external party to the region decided to invade the Persian Gulf, who would defend the area?
The ways in which the situation may develop are as follows:
a) The regional neighbor countries may remain neutral; consequently, the external agent would take over the area if the inhabitants were unable to defend themselves (or in the case of uninhabited islands or the sea);
b) one of the sovereign states may respond to the invasion and defend the third territory;
c) all sovereign states may respond to the invasion and defend jointly or independently the area.
Natural resources
Natural resources are any material in raw condition present in the territory, organic or mineral, that is not initially a product of any kind of human activity. Some states are rich in natural resources, others are not: no particular amount of natural resources defines a state.
But, the distribution of natural resources is usually one of the main problems when dealing with sovereignty disputes even though the involved sovereign States may already be wealthy ones; it is a feature that always presents controversy.
In the case of the Persian Gulf and oil, any decision over this point has particular importance since it could affect the future the legal and political balance in the region.
Next time both are combined (the EGALITARIAN SHARED SOVEREIGNTY and the elements detailed before) to offer a potential ideal solution.
NOTE: based on Chapter 7, Núñez, Jorge Emilio. 2017. Sovereignty Conflicts and International Law and Politics: A Distributive Justice Issue. London and New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.
Dr Jorge E. Núñez Email: j.nunez@mmu.ac.uk Twitter: London1701 Blog: https://london1701.blogspot.com Instagram: griseldacurti Facebook: Griselda Curti Tumblr: drjorgesblog
1
• World appears to be moving forward following shocking murder of journalist and Mohammed bin Salman appears happy to join them BY JAMES M. DORSEY 2 DEC 2018 0 SHARE • 2Comments • • Part of the ‘family photo’ featuring world leaders including Saudi Arabia’s Mohammed bin Salman at the G20 summit in Buenos Aires, Argentina, on November 30, 2018. Photo: EPA THERE WAS A high-five from Vladimir Putin. And for Xi Jinping and Narendra Modi it was business as usual. At home, Saudi Arabia’s media trumpeted Mohammed bin Salman’s meetings with world leaders, tweeting pictures of his encounters, which also included the presidents of South Korea, Mexico, and South Africa. However, Western leaders appeared to avoid the crown prince during the family photo at the Group of 20 summit in Buenos Aires – after almost two months of global outrage at the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. The only Arab leader there, the prince stood rather isolated at the end of the line, at times looking uncertain and nervous. Mohammed waiting for the family photo at the G20 summit in Buenos Aires on November 30, 2018. Photo: Reuters US President Donald Trump, Prince Mohammed’s most vocal backer, did not have time for a one-on-one meeting. Argentina’s President Mauricio Macri kept the prince hanging on when it came to finding time to talk. During an informal conversation on the sidelines of the summit, French President Emmanuel Macron was overheard admonishing Mohammed, saying he “never listened”, while the crown prince tried to assure him that “it’s OK”. French officials later said the men were discussing the killing of Khashoggi at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and the war in Yemen. Prince Mohammed chatting with French President Emmanuel Macron in Buenos Aires. Photo: Bandar al-Jaloud/Saudi Royal Palace/AFP Similarly, British Prime Minister Theresa May opted to focus on those two topics, rather than economics and trade as her country struggles with the uncertainty of Brexit, the UK’s departure from the European Union. May insisted Riyadh needed “to build confidence that such a deplorable incident could not happen again”, referring to the Saudi team sent to Turkey to murder Khashoggi. The message Prince Mohammed probably took home from the G20 summit was that illiberal democratic, authoritarian and autocratic leaders were happy to do business with the kingdom and the crown prince despite persistent assertions that he ordered the killing. British Prime Minister Theresa May and Prince Mohammad during their meeting in Buenos Aires. Photo: EPA Trump and western Europe’s leaders appeared to play to public opinion but do nothing to threaten their relations with the kingdom. The US president also chose not to have a formal meeting with Prince Mohammed’s foremost detractor, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. The crown prince may also have been heartened that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada, which Saudi Arabia had a diplomatic row with earlier this year, was the only leader to raise the Khashoggi issue during the G20’s formal proceedings. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau during a plenary session at the G20 Summit on December 1, 2018. Photo: EPA Other US allies made clear the kingdom’s financial largesse and willingness to guarantee the flow of oil would go a long way to ensure they would choose realism above principle. The Saudi Press Agency reported after Mohammed’s meeting with Modi that the crown prince pledged to meet India’s oil and petroleum product needs. Prince Mohammed may have achieved his goal of showing Saudi Arabia – specifically himself – remained a player by attending the G20 summit, despite the storm surrounding Khashoggi’s death still raging. But the prince is not out of the woods yet. The kingdom, eager to project itself as a regional and world power, has suffered significant damage to its reputation which will take time and hard work to repair. Just how hard depends on whether the US Congress decides to sanction Riyadh, if the Europeans will follow suit, and on Turkey successfully pushing for an international investigation into the killing. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan walking past Prince Mohammed before the G20 summit family photo. Photo: Reuters “We have never seen Khashoggi’s murder as a political issue,” Erdogan told a news conference in Buenos Aires. “For Turkey, the incident is and will remain a flagrant murder within the Islamic world. International public opinion will not be satisfied until all those responsible for his death are revealed.” He described Saudi Arabia’s response to the killing as “unbelievable”. The US Senate, meanwhile, pushed forward last week – despite opposition from Trump – with a resolution that would end American military support for the Saudi-led war in Yemen, a conflict which has cause a major humanitarian crisis. Yemenis queuing up to get their daily bread rations from a food aid distribution centre in Sanaa, Yemen, on November 28, 2018. Photo: Xinhua Prince Mohammed’s case was not helped by the leak of a CIA report saying he sent 11 messages to Saud al-Qahtani – a former close aide – at the time Khashoggi was killed. However, the intelligence agency admitted it lacked direct evidence of the crown prince “issuing a kill order”. Qahtani has been accused of overseeing the killing and been fired from his position as Mohammed’s adviser and information tsar. He has also been sanctioned by Washington. The CIA claims Prince Mohammed told associates in August 2017 they “could possibly lure [Khashoggi] outside Saudi Arabia and make arrangements” if the Washington Post columnist refused to return to the kingdom from the US. Mohammed with President Xi Jinping. Photo: Xinhua/AP Nevertheless, the G20 summit suggests Prince Mohammed and the kingdom may have taken their first step towards putting the Khashoggi affair behind them. Even if US lawmakers slap sanctions on the kingdom, the prince is likely to remain secure in his position as king-in-waiting. Keeping Khashoggi in the headlines will prove increasingly difficult as it seems much of the world has signalled that it is moving on.
James M. Dorsey is a senior fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies
1
Hạnh Dương
www.Vietpressusa.us