"Country possessions" (was: Re: TR35)

From: Doug Ewell (dewell@adelphia.net)
Date: Sat May 08 2004 - 12:46:37 CDT

  • Next message: Doug Ewell: "Re: New contribution"

    Philippe Verdy <verdy underscore p at wanadoo dot fr> wrote:

    > The status of some "possessions" in the Antarctica (AQ) is not clear.
    > They are administered by existing countries for the scientific bases
    > that run there, but have now a limited right for their expansion (the
    > old maps that divided it into sectors to the pole are no longer
    > valid), and the territory itself is placed under an international
    > treaty protected by the United Nations.

    At least in the past, there were some countries -- including some who
    operate scientific bases in Antarctica and some who do not -- who made
    national territorial claims to portions of the Antarctican continent.

    The official U.S. policy, someone correct me if I'm wrong, was that the
    U.S. didn't recognize any country's territorial claims to Antarctica,
    but reserved the right to make such claims itself in the future. (As
    arrogant as that sounds.)

    Philippe's point is basically sound, that once you get beyond
    "countries" with their own fully autonomous government, the lines get
    fuzzy. Additionally, any "list of country possessions" is certain to be
    the subject of dispute between countries with conflicting claims. The
    Falkland Islands, Jammu and Kashmir, Taiwan, etc. For an authoritative
    list of "countries," the UN list is probably your best bet.

    -Doug Ewell
     Fullerton, California

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat May 08 2004 - 12:45:24 CDT