INTRODUCTION
With the passage of the Maritime Areas
Act in January 1992, Belize took an important, if
controversial, step towards the definitive solution
of the territorial dispute with is neighbor Guatemala.
Belize became independent on 21 September 1981 with
a claim over its entire territory still being vigorously
pressed by Guatemala, necessitating the continued
presence of British troops.
And while Belize's future is obviously closely related
to Central America, it has hitherto been isolated
from other countries in the isthmus because of the
lingering Guatemalan claim. It now seems that at last,
after a long history of frustrated attempts at settlement,
this anachronistic claim will be resolved, giving
the people of Belize the peace and security they have
sought for so long.
BACK
TO TOP
BEGINNINGS
The original inhabitants of Belize were the Maya,
whose highly advanced civilization reached its peak
in the years 250 to 1000 A.D. After the society went
into decline, however, the Maya continued to inhabit
the territory in scattered villages and communities.
The Spanish, who claimed the territory as part of
the Americas granted them by the Pope, encountered
the Maya in the 16th and 17th centuries, but they
failed to permanently subdue them, and the Spanish
never settled the territory.
By the middle of the 17th century, British pirated
had been using Belize's treacherous coastline as a
base to plunder Spanish ships, and by the end of the
century some enterprising pirated switched to logwood
cutting to supply the dye industry in Europe. They
established permanent settlements in Belize. By the
third quarter of the 18th century their major activity
was the export of mahogany, which required them to
move further inland and to import more Africans as
slaves.
Meanwhile, the Spanish continued to assert sovereignty
over the territory; during the 18th century they attacked
the British settlers, and on four occasions (1717,
1730, 1754, 1779) forced them to leave. In the peace
treaties of 1763 and 1783, however, Spain, while reserving
its sovereignty, accorded to the British settlers
the right to cut and export logwood from the Hondo
to the Belize River. And in 1786 Spain agreed to extend
the limits southward to the Sibun, and to allow the
export of mahogany as well, but the settlers were
forbidden to establish fortifications, plantations
or a system of government.
Spanish authorities asserted their right to inspect
the settlement between 1787 and 1796, but the outbreak
of war in Europe in that year ended those visits;
a Spanish attack on the settlement in 1798 was repulsed,
and although Spain continued to claim sovereignty,
and the British to acknowledge it, the British settlers
established de facto sovereignty during the first
years of the 19th century.
Not only that, but they rapidly extended the limits
of the settlements beyond those set by the 1786 agreement.
By the 1820's, when Spain was ousted from the area
by the various Independence movements in the Americas,
the settlers had penetrated as far south as the Sarstoon;
at that time the population was about 4000.
Although the United Provinces of Central America
and, after its dissolution in 1839, Guatemala, claimed
sovereignty over Belize as an "inheritance"
from Spain, the British never accepted such claims
since neither Spain nor any Central American entity
had ever occupied the territory. In 1840 Britain declared
that "the law of England is and shall be the
law of this settlement or Colony of British Honduras."
Not until 1862, however, did the British officially
declare Belize to be a colony.
BACK
TO TOP
THE ANGLO GUATEMALAN TREATY, 1859
By that time, Britain had signed a boundary treaty
with Guatemala as part of a series of actions designed
to regularize Britain's position in Central America
in the face of the assertion by the United States
of America of the "Monroe Doctrine" of 1823,
which forbade interference by any European power in
the newly emerging Latin American republics.
In 1850 the U.S. and Britain concluded the Clayton-Bulwer
Treaty, agreeing that neither would colonize any part
of Central America, leaving in doubt Britain's already
existing domination over Belize, the Mosquito Shore
and the Bay Islands.
A further treaty negotiated in 1856 (Dallas-Clarendon),
however, agreed that the Mosquito Shore should revert
to Nicaragua and the Bay Islands to Honduras, but
with regard to Belize it said: "That Her Britanic
Majesty's Settlement called British Honduras, on the
shores of the Bay of Honduras, bounded on the North
by the Mexican province of Yucatan, and on the south
by the river Sarstoon, was not and is not embraced
in the (1850) Treaty," and it called for the
limits of Belize to be settled by treaty between Britain
and Guatemala within two years.
Although, for reasons unrelated to Belize, the Dallas-Clarendon
treaty was not ratified, Britain proceeded to carry
out its terms by direct negotiations with the three
parties concerned, concluding treaties with Guatemala,
Honduras and Nicaragua in 1859 and 1860.
The 1859 treaty between Britain and Guatemala defined
the boundaries between Belize and Guatemala as those,
which exist to the present day. It constituted recognition
by Guatemala of a pre-existing frontier and a pre-existing
sovereignty over Belize by Britain.
It was not, therefore, a treaty of cession, as Guatemala
later claimed, although Article 7 of the Treaty committed
both parties to conjointly use their best efforts
to establish communication by cart road and rivers
between Guatemala City and the Atlantic Coast of Guatemala,
near the settlement of Belize.
At various times in the following years Britain variously
offered a cash settlement and proposed alternatives
such as a railway link, but no agreement was ever
consummated, and by the end of the century it seemed
to have been forgotten. Indeed in 1931 the two countries
exchanged notes after joint commissioners had placed
concrete monuments on parts of the frontier, stating
that "these monuments forms parts of the boundary
line between British Honduras and the republic of
Guatemala."
Guatemala raised no question about Article 7 then,
but began to do so two years later, and in 1940 it
declared that the 1859 treaty had become void because
of the failure to implement Article 7, arguing that
the treaty was a disguised treaty of cession, Article
7 representing compensation. Since the treaty was
void, they argued, the territory reverted to Guatemala,
and a new Guatemalan constitution in 1945 declared
Belize to be Guatemalan territory.
But by that time, however, Belize was experiencing
the first stirrings of the nationalist movement among
its population of about 60,000: over the past century
and half, history had fashioned a new people - neither
British nor Guatemalan, but Belizeans.
To the indigenous Maya and the Africans and their
descendants, successive waves of migration had added
Indian, Garifuna, Mestizo, West Indian and other peoples
to Belize.
They had evolved a multi-cultural identity out of
their environs and experience, which was quite different
from that which, prevailed in Guatemala. The Independence
movement grew rapidly in the 1950's and by 1961, following
the U.N. Declaration on the Granting of Independence
to Colonial Countries and Peoples, Britain agreed
that Belize could proceed to independence whenever
it so desired.
BACK
TO TOP
NEGOTIATIONS
One obstacle remained, however: Guatemala, the most
powerful country in Central America, with a large
army and a history of military dictatorships, continued
to press its claim to the territory and to back this
up with the threat of force. The modern series of
negotiations attempting to resolve the dispute began
in 1962 when elected Belizean representatives joined
the British delegation in direct negotiations with
the Guatemalans.
The following year Britain agreed to a new self-government
constitution for Belize, and Guatemala subsequently
broke off diplomatic relations with Britain.
In 1965 the parties agreed to submit the dispute
to mediation by U.S. President Johnson, but when his
mediator, Bethuel Webster, submitted proposals in
1968 which would lead to effective Guatemalan dominion
over Belize, the people of Belize rejected the proposals.
Talks begun in 1971 were abruptly terminated the following
year when Guatemalan plans to invade, assisted by
El Salvador, were frustrated by the reinforcement
of British troops.
And in 1975, when talks were resumed, Guatemala demanded
the cession to it of the southern quarter of Belize
in return for recognizing the independence of the
rest.
It became clear to the Belize government that after
13 years of fruitless negotiations under the British,
the Guatemalans had in fact hardened their position,
and that a radically new approach, involving a major
Belizean initiative, would have to be taken.
The support of the world's nations would have to
be enlisted, and Belize itself must lead this campaign,
since Guatemala's position, for which she had Latin
American support, was that a European power had usurped
Latin American territory and was holding it against
the true wishes of its people.
BACK
TO TOP
INTERNATIONALIZATION
With CARICOM and Commonwealth support already assured,
Belize approached the Non Aligned Movement's Conference
of Foreign Ministers in Peru in 1975, and won a declaration
of unconditional support for its independence and
territorial integrity. An "Office of the Belize
Representative" was established in New York and
countries were lobbied to support Belize.
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 inadmissible attempt
to dictate the outcome of negotiation, 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, but there were two
serious drawbacks: except for Cuba, no Latin American
country supported the resolution, and the United States
also refused to vote in its favor.
Belizean diplomats then concentrated on winning those
votes. In Central America, they carried out an intensive
campaign with trade unions, political parties and
movements, other civic groups and individuals and
the media, and gained an impressive level of public
support urging governments to side with Belize. Even
within Guatemala they gained the support of many such
groups, despite Guatemalan edict declaring such support
punishable as treason. And in the United States they
lobbied senators and congressmen and Latin American
solidarity groups, apart from direct talks with the
State Department.
The first major breakthrough came in 1976, when Panama's
President Omar Torrijos, who was seeking Non Aligned
support for a new Canal treaty, threw in his lot with
Belize and initiated an intensive campaign of his
own to win other Latin American countries to the Belize
cause. Only the year before, Panama, along with the
other five Central American countries, had signed
a joint declaration supporting Guatemala.
Realizing the enormity of Panama's desertion of its
cause, Guatemala promptly broke off diplomatic relations,
but the following year, Mexico, Venezuela, Argentina
and Peru also voted for Belize. In 1978 Costa Rica
and Colombia followed suit, and in 1979, after the
triumph of the Sandanista revolution, Nicaragua, until
then Guatemala's staunchest ally, threw all its weight
behind Belize. A majority of the Central American
countries now supported Belize's situation that had
appeared impossible only three years before.
All these resolutions called for negotiations to
continue and in a series of talks between 1975 and
1980, punctuated by a couple of threatening moves
by Guatemala (the most serious, in 1977, necessitating
massive British reinforcement), Guatemala, while reducing
the size of its demand, continued to insist on land
cession. During this time both Britain and the United
States leaned heavily on Belize to persuade it to
give up at least a small strip of land in the south.
Since Belize's only effective defence against a Guatemalan
invasion was the presence of British troops, and since
the U.S. power to restrain the Guatemalan military
was deemed to be crucial, it was not easy for Belize
to resist these pressures and still maintain the support
of these powers. This was done by skillful negotiation
and with critical support of CARICOM countries and
the effectiveness of the Special Committee of Ministers
of the commonwealth, which had been formed to assist
Belize.
BACK
TO TOP
A CRITICAL YEAR
1980 was an absolutely critical year for Belize.
The vast majority of Latin American states were prepared
to support Belize.
The United States was also coming around to support
Belize, but it was President Carter's last year in
the White House, and there was no telling what the
policy of his successor would be.
In Central America the success of the Nicaraguan
revolution has sparked change in El Salvador, and
Guatemala itself was having to give increasing attention
to its own insurrectionist movement.
Cuba, a strong supporter of Belize's cause, was the
current chair of the Non Aligned Movement and the
Commonwealth, with a West Indian as its Secretary
General, was strengthened by its role in the resolution
of the Zimbabwe crisis.
Internally Belize had just emerged from an election
based squarely on the independence issue, with a fresh
mandate to lead Belize to an early independence. It
seemed to be one of those moments in history when
you either seize the time and go for it, or risk being
left behind by the tide of history.
Belize decided to go for it. It introduced a daring
resolution at the United Nations with three new critical
elements. It declared that Belize should become independent
by the follo9wign year.
It called on Britain and Guatemala to continue to
seek an agreement, but insisted that this could not
prejudice Belize's movement to independence.
And it not only called on Britain to continue to
guarantee the security and territorial integrity of
Belize, but also requested the relevant organs of
the United Nations to facilitate the attainment of
Belize's independence and to guarantee its security
and territorial integrity thereafter.
Of the 139 countries that voted for the resolution,
one was Britain itself and another was the U.S.A.
All the members of the Security Council voted for
it; no country voted against. This victory was capped
when the OAS, until then considered Guatemala's turf,
itself endorsed this resolution.
In December 1980 Britain announced the convening
of a constitutional conference to agree on an independence
constitution, but Belize was not yet in the clear,
since Britain was still refusing to provide a defence
guarantee, arguing that greater effort must be made
to reach a settlement with Guatemala.
BACK
TO TOP
HEADS OF AGREEMENT
Talks held in early 1981, however, failed to provide
a solution and in March, Britain prevailed on Guatemala
to sign a document agreeing to recognize the Independent
State of Belize "and respect its sovereignty
and territorial integrity in accordance with the existing
and traditional frontiers."
This is itself was a tremendous achievement, since
Guatemala was not only agreeing to Belize's independence
and full sovereignty, but also relinquishing its claim
to any Belizean territory.
This, however, was made conditional on the completion
of treaties to give effect to certain clauses in the
document. The document was called "Heads of Agreement,"
and it listed a number of areas subject to negotiations;
if such negotiations proved fruitful and agreement
was reached, Guatemala would drop its claim and recognize
Belize's independence.
Most of the clauses, however, were subject to widely
different interpretation, and Belize and Guatemala
were very far apart in interpreting the, - which is
of course, which it was necessary to merely list the
topics for further negotiation.
The agreement established a joint commission of Belize,
Guatemala and Britain to prepare draft treaties to
give effect to its provisions.
As far as Belize was concerned, it was working to
a timetable requiring it to become independent that
very year, and it was clear that the partied were
so far apart on the critical issues that it would
be impossible to arrive at any agreement in time.
Belize had to agree to the process of negotiation,
however, if it were to gain Britain's assurance of
a defence guarantee, which had become an indispensable
prerequisite to a secure independence at that time.
On the other had, any delay might have resulted in
Belize losing the favorable conditions of the regional
and international conjuncture.
Unfortunately, some persons in Belize interpreted
the "Heads" in the way that Guatemala was
interpreting them, and on that basis decided that
it represented a sell-out of Belize to Guatemala.
As a result, serious riot broke out which resulted
in the imposition of a state of emergency.
But the joint commission appointed by the agreement
proceeded to negotiate. As was predicted, the talks
failed to reach any common ground, and in July Britain
persuaded that it was useless to try any further.
The, and only them, did Britain agree to maintain
its troops ion Belize as a defence guarantee and Belize
proceeded to independence without having arrived at
a settlement with Guatemala, but with its territory
and sovereignty intact.
BACK
TO TOP
THE EFFECTS OF INDEPENDENCE
Once Belize was independent, its position with regard
to negotiations with Guatemala was enormously strengthened.
And with every passing day, as it consolidated its
independence and established relations with ever more
countries, Guatemala's claim became less and less
plausible and its threat of force less and less credible.
In an important respect, however, Belize's independence
was compromised by the need to keep British forces
in the territory as a defence against a possible Guatemalan
aggression.
Until the dispute was definitively resolved and Guatemala
dropped her claim, Belize would in a sense remain
at the mercy of the British, who could use the continued
presence of their forces to limit Belize's sovereign
will, whether in relation to negotiations with Guatemala
or otherwise.
Although already independent, therefore, it remained
necessary for Belize to seek a negotiated solution.
In any case, although the other Central American countries
recognized Belize, Guatemala was still able to block
Belize's participation in certain initiatives that
could redound to its development.
BACK
TO TOP
CHANGE IN GUATEMALA
But Guatemala needed time to adjust having "lost"
Belize, as well as to make a negotiated solution more
feasible. In 1985, a civilian government headed by
President Vinicio Cerezo was elected in Guatemala
and tentative approaches between the two governments
began to materialize.
By that time, too, there had been a change of government
in Belize, with the United Democratic Party under
Prime Minister Manuel Esquivel assuming office.
An important victory for Belize came in December
1985, when the OAS agreed to suspend the operation
of Article 8 of its Charter in five years' time. This
article had prevented Belize from becoming a member
of that organization. After the article fell in December
1990, Belize became a member of the OAS in January
1991, with Guatemala's blessing.
In 1987, meanwhile, a bi-partisan commission of four
government and two opposition House members began
serious negotiations with Guatemala, Belize maintaining
its position on the territorial integrity of its continental
and island territories, and discussing issues like
the maritime boundary and economic cooperation proposals
on land and sea.
There developed in these negotiations the understanding
that the essence of a negotiated solution lay in Guatemala
accepting Belize's traditional borders and in Belize
agreeing to limits its territorial sea claims in the
south.
BACK
TO TOP
TERRITORIAL SEA
Belize, as a British Colony, has never claimed a
territorial sea of more than three miles, that being
long standing British policy. Indeed, the international
resolutions affirming Belize's territorial integrity
often referred to its "traditional and existing
frontiers," which clearly included a territorial
sea of three miles, and this is what the new State
of Belize acquired upon attaining independence.
In 1982, however, the United Nations Convention on
the Law of the Sea accorded every country a right
to claim twelve miles of territorial sea, thereby
opening the way for Belize to extend its territorial
sea to twelve miles. The Convention also declared
that, where adjacent states were each unable to claim
twelve miles because of the short distance between
the two, each would be entitled to claim up to the
median line.
Guatemala had, since 1939 claimed territorial sea
of twelve miles, but the British government had consistently
refused to acknowledge such a claim. Still, Belize
only claimed three miles of territorial sea, and Guatemala
had acted in accordance with the reality of claiming
only three. If Belize were, in 1982, to claim its
full rights under the new international law, this
would have the effect of closing off Guatemala's access
to the high seas except by passing through either
Belizean or Honduran territorial waters. Clearly,
Guatemala would regard this as an hostile act.
It would have been foolhardy for Belize to attempt
this, and in any case, it is certain that Britain,
which remained committed to Belize's defence, would
not have allowed it; that is to say, it would refuse
to assume a defence responsibility which would have
become necessary in the event of such action.
Both the PUP (which returned to office in September
1989) and the UDP governments, therefore, wisely refrained
from making any formal territorial sea claim, conscious
that this would be an important card in negotiations
aimed at Guatemala dropping its claim to Belize.
BACK
TO TOP
RECOGNITION OF BELIZE BY GUATEMALA
The negotiations were suspended in August 1990, as
Guatemala went into an election campaign. The new
President, Jorge Elias Serrano, had publicly stated
that he would press for an early resolution of the
dispute, but his first months in office were taken
up with the internal national reconciliation process.
The process that led to the recognition of Belize
by Guatemala and to the establishment of Diplomatic
relations between the two countries is described as
follows in a publication of the National Bi-partisan
Commission (made up of leaders of government and the
opposition) of October 1991:
In July 1991, it was agreed to resume talks, the
first one to be at the level of officials. At a meeting
in Miami attended on behalf of Belize by Ambassador
Robert Leslie, the Guatemalans activated the process
to allow for the quick recognition of Belize and the
establishment of full diplomatic relations.
On 14th August 1991 the Guatemalan government declared
that "it recognizes the right of the Belizean
people to self-determination," and announced
that it will continue negotiating and will exhaust
all legal and proper procedures which lead to a definitive
settlement of the territorial dispute.
On 16th August 1991, the government of Belize, after
consultation with the Opposition, introduced a bill
in the National Assembly for an Act to provide for
the territorial sea, internal waters and exclusive
economic zone of Belize.
In introducing the bill, it was noted that the effect
of it would be to allow Guatemala access to the high
seas through its own territorial waters, and that
this should be considered "as a sign of good
faith on the part of Belize to pursue negotiations
with the Republic of Guatemala in search of a settlement
of the outstanding dispute."
On 5th September 1991, the British government issued
a statement saying that "in recognition of the
political and economic scope of this decision) of
Guatemala to recognize Belize) and wising to support
the development of full and normal relations between
Belize and Guatemala, HMG have agreed to commit L22.5
million as an initial contribution to launching the
joint project to renew and extend the road network
linking the two countries…"
On 11th September 1991, the governments of Belize
and Guatemala announced their decision to establish
full diplomatic relations with immediate effect and
to exchange Ambassadors at the earliest opportunity.
BACK
TO TOP
THE MARITIME AREAS BILL
Belize, however, had yet to pass the Maritime Areas
Bill. Conscious of the extreme sensitivity of Belizeans
to anything to do with Guatemala, the Bi-partisan
Commission decided to tour all district towns to explain
the Bill to the people before passing it into law.
In October 1991, Prime Minister Price, Foreign Minister
Said Musa and Opposition Leader Esquivel toured the
country in support of the Bill, but they met some
unexpected opposition.
At first the complaints centered around Belizean
fishermen who erroneously thought they were losing
fishing rights that they had previously enjoyed, but
this later spread to wider demands in some quarters
that Belize should give up absolutely nothing to Guatemala.
After the round of public consultations and after
hearing the views expressed by several organizations,
the government decided to amend the Bill before passing
it in the House.
The amended Bill declared a territorial sea of twelve
miles, except for an area in the south from the Sarstoon
river, Belize's southern boundary with Guatemala,
to the Ranguana Caye, where a territorial sea of three
miles is proclaimed.
It also declared an exclusive economic zone of two
hundred miles, all these distances being measured
from the declared baseline, in accordance with international
law.
Belize is fortunate in that its topography allows
it to declare a baseline nor from the low water mark
along the coast as is normally the case, but rather
by straight baselines joining appropriate points along
its reef, cayes and atolls.
All the waters to the landward side of the baseline
become Belize's internal waters, equivalent to every
respect to its land territory. This already gives
Belize an enormous area of sea as internal waters.
From that baseline the law accords Belize 12 miles
as territorial sea from its border with Mexico to
Ranguana Caye in the south; thereafter, from Ranguana
Caye to the Sarstoon River, Belize claims a territorial
sea of three miles.
Because of the topography of the areas between Belize
and Guatemala in the south, the sea boundary between
Belize and Guatemala is governed by Article 15 of
the Law of the Sea Convention, which states: "Where
the coasts of the two States are opposite or adjacent
to each other neither of the two states is entitled,
failing agreement between them to the contrary, to
extend its territorial sea beyond the median line
every point of which is equidistant from the nearest
point of the baselines from which the breath of the
territorial seas of the two states is measured."
Because of its own topography, Guatemala is able
to benefit from Article 10 of the Convention, which
allows a baseline to be drawn across the entrance
points of a bay.
Guatemala is therefore able to claim a closing line
across the Bay of Amatique, and this line becomes
part of its baseline.
But because of Article 15 of the Convention, Guatemala's
territorial sea cannot extend beyond the median line
between the baselines of Belize and Guatemala, unless
and until Belize were to agree by treaty with Guatemala
to vary the present situation.
The mere fact that Belize passed an internal law
claiming no more than three miles in the south does
not mean that I forgoes the right to claim what it
has the right to claim under international law, nor
does it mean that Guatemala can lay any kind of claim
to it.
This is clear from an interpretation of international
law and the Maritime Areas Act, not out of legal necessity,
but in order to make it clearer to the Belizean people,
actually spells it out. In addition, government has
taken steps internationally to make this abundantly
clear.
The Maritime Areas Act says that the area between
the three-mile limit and the median line is merely
reserved for the time being to negotiate a sea boundary
with Guatemala.
In other words, it is contemplated that some part
of that area will be offered to Guatemala in negotiations,
with a view to allowing Guatemala access to the high
seas through its own territorial sea.
If an agreement is reached, the proposal will be
put to a referendum in Belize. If the people approve
the proposal, the law will be amended to extend Belize's
full entitlement under international law - that is,
to the median line or the twelve-mile limit where
that applies.
Of course, the difference would be that in the former
case Guatemala would finally drop its claim, whereas
in the latter case the claim would continue to bedevil
future generations of Belizeans.
In the meantime, that area between the three-mile
limit and the median line becomes part of Belize's
exclusive economic zone.
BACK
TO TOP
EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE
There are differences in a country's rights with
regard to its territorial sea and its EEZ. In the
territorial sea a country exercises sovereignty; this
extends to the air space above the territorial sea
as well as to its bed and subsoil.
The major limitation on a country's full sovereignty
over the territorial sea is the right of innocent
passage, which the ships of all states enjoy. Passage
means passing over the sea without entering internal
waters or calling at a port, as well as proceeding
to or from internal waters or calling at a port.
And passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial
to the peace, good order or security of the coastal
state. Acts of pollution, research or fishing, for
example, are not allowed as part of innocent passage.
Warships do have rights to innocent passage, but only
if they comply with laws and regulations of the coastal
state.
In the exclusive economic zone on the other hand,
the coastal state has sovereign rights over all the
natural resources of the zone in the waters, sea bed
and subsoil, and generally with regard to any activities
for the economic exploitation and exploration of the
zone.
It also has jurisdiction with regard to the establishment
and use of any artificial structures, research and
the protection of the environment. But the EEZ is
NOT considered part of the high seas, which are open
to all states. Article 86 of the Law of the Sea convention
specifically states that "high seas" do
not include the EEZ.
In short, the Maritime Areas Bill extended Belize's
territorial sea from its traditional three miles to
twelve miles for most of its coast line, while maintaining
it at three miles in the south for a temporary period
until negotiations with Guatemala produce an agreement
as to ho much of that area Belize will cede to Guatemala
in order to assure it access to the high seas through
its own territorial waters and for agreeing to drop
its claim.
Such a proposal would have to be agreed by Belizeans
in a referendum, failing which Belize would claim
the full amount allowed by international law. In the
meantime, that reserved area will be Belize's exclusive
economic zone, giving it, to the exclusion of all
others, sovereign rights over all the resources of
that zone, something it had not claimed before.
BACK
TO TOP
FUTURE NEGOTIATIONS
Although Guatemala has recognized Belize it had not
formally abandoned its claim. In any case, there is
a need to define the maritime boundary between the
two countries. Future negotiations will focus on this
issue - in effect, on the location and size of the
sea corridor that Guatemala requires in return for
formally dropping its claim. Other issues will also
be discussed, such as the use of ports and joint exploitation
of a part of Belize's EEZ-not necessarily that part
in the south.
Belizeans are a reasonable people. They know from
their own experience, for example, that one should
not deny one's neighbor a right of way out of her
property if the desire is to live in peace and harmony.
Indeed, the negotiators might be assisted by the
wording of the relevant article in the Heads of Agreement
of 1981: "Guatemala shall be accorded such territorial
seas as shall ensure permanent and unimpeded access
to the high seas." It is clear that only part
of the area reserved by the Maritime Area's Act is
necessary to achieve that objective.
While a few Belizeans have questioned the need to
negotiate with Guatemala at all, stating that its
claim is totally unfounded, the vast majority understands
that, although unfounded, the claim exists, and has
been regarded as an article of faith by generations
of Guatemalans.
It is only in the recent Guatemalan Constitution
that the clause stating that Belize is a part of Guatemala
was removed and replaced with a clause empowering
the President to seek a solution to the dispute and
requiring the proposed solution to be put to the people
in a referendum.
Indeed, president Serrano took a very bold step when
he recognized the State of Belize and, necessarily,
the territory that State encompasses. Almost all the
political forces in Guatemala have vigorously condemned
him for doing so.
Some allege that his act was unconstitutional and
have taken him to court, while others lament the fact
that he thus gave up the most important card in Guatemala's
negotiating deck.
But the act is done, and, in accordance with article
VI of the 1933 Montevideo Convention on the rights
and Duties of States, to which Guatemala is a party,
such recognition is unconditional and irrevocable.
President Serrano's foreign minister resigned in
protest at the move, and many powerful forces in Guatemala
are opposing his attempts to solve the dispute once
and for all. It is certainly not in Belize'' interest
to give comfort to such forces by taking an intransigent
position.
BACK
TO TOP
THE NEED TO NEGOTIATE
What is more, there is such a thing as reality, which
has to be faced. Belize cannot take what would generally
be regarded internationally as an unreasonable position
and then expect others to protect Belize from the
consequences of such action.
Of course, Guatemala has absolutely no valid claim
to Belize, and Belizeans have succeeded in convincing
the world of the justice of their cause, but that
can never be a reason to refuse to negotiate; and
negotiations always involve some attempt at compromise.
What can give Belizeans comfort is that they will
end up getting less than they have a right to claim
in terms of territorial sea. Not many countries enter
such negotiations with that type of assurance.
Compare for example, the case of the Palestinians,
who are fighting to sit at the negotiating table with
a power that forcibly usurped their land, expropriated
their property and submitted them to a system every
bit as oppressive as apartheid.
Or consider Mandela and the African National Congress
negotiating with white supremacists for a peaceful
transition to majority rule, something that is the
unquestionable right of the African people whose age
old homeland was usurped by the whites.
The point is that you negotiate precisely because
there is disagreement.
Belizeans are also understandably wary of Guatemala
because of its long history of military dictatorship
and its record of the abuse of human rights. But no
one is asking us to approve the internal situation
in Guatemala. The objective of the negotiations is
to find a settlement to the dispute, one, which will
allow the Guatemalan government to drop its claim
to Belize and establish the kind of good neighbor
relations that will be mutually beneficial to both
countries.
BACK
TO TOP
TIMES HAVE CHANGED
Belizeans should become aware that there have been
significant changes in Guatemala's position with regard
to Belize over the past few years, particularly after
the "Belice es Nuestro" clause was removed
from the constitution. We should not continue to react
to Guatemalan initiatives as it we were still in the
bad old days, when Guatemala's military massed troops
on the border and threatened to invade us. Times have
changed, and our attitudes must keep pace with the
times.
As Foreign Minister Said Musa said when he addressed
us on the occasion of constituting the National Advisory
Commission:
"It is encouraging to put on record the
fact that for some time now relations between Belize
and Guatemala have been typified by respect and understanding,
particularly after diplomatic relations were established
between our two countries on the 11th September, 1991.
An incident, which occurred in early February, demonstrates
the quality of this new relationship. After an advertisement
appeared in an oil magazine published in Texas, inviting
tenders for exploration in certain areas and the accompanying
map showed an area which Belize has claimed as its
EEZ under the aforementioned Act I, sought clarification
from the Guatemalan government. Guatemala's Foreign
Minister Gonzalo Menendez Park, wrote me a letter
the following day, 13th February, 1992, indicating
that the description of the area had not been consulted
with the Ministry of External Affairs, that it was
an involuntary error and that this area will not be
allotted to any tenderer. He further assured me that
the next tender notice due to be published in June
will only contain areas already duly delimited so
as not to give rise to any misinterpretations.
"This response makes it clear to the Government
of Belize that the Guatemalan Government understands
and accepts the effect of the Maritime Areas Act,
i.e. that by it Belize does not abandon its right
to claim the affected area as its territorial sea,
but merely reserves it for negotiation and in the
meanwhile it has the status as part of Belize's exclusive
economic zone.
"With regard to adjacent states as well as
to all states of the world, therefore the situation
of the affected are is that Belize has declared that
area as part of Belize's exclusive economic zone.
"With this clear understanding it is possible
to proceed to negotiations which will hopefully lead,
within a reasonable time, to mutually acceptable agreements
which will enable Guatemala to formally drop its claim
with regard to Belize and allow our two countries
to enjoy the friendly and respectful relations both
our peoples have long desired."
The Foreign Minister went on to say: "These
are indeed extraordinary times, times when the solution
of long standing regional conflicts by peaceful means
is firmly on the agenda. The international and regional
conjuncture favors the attainment of an honorable
settlement which will enable to rid itself once and
for all of the claim that has traumatized, divided
and held back the development of the country for too
long."
The cogency of his remark was punctuated by the fact
that only a couple of months before, the government
of El Salvador and the FMLN guerrilla had signed a
peace treaty putting an end to a civil war in which
75, 000 people had been killed and millions displaced.
Two days before that, President Serrano declared
to the Guatemalan Congress that his government was
ready to sign a peace treaty with the Guerrilla movement
in Guatemala. And the Salvadoran and Honduran Presidents
met recently to discuss the creation of a "dry
canal" through Honduras; these two countries
had engaged in a bitter war only a few years ago that
claimed many lives.
Those who insist on living in the past are condemned
to lose the future. We must wake up to the fact that
the world, and our region, has changed and it is time
for us to put this anachronistic claim behind us and
take the opportunity history now offers us. The Foreign
Minister reminded us that: "Belize has a critical
role to play in the region.
As both a Caribbean and Central American country,
it can act as an effective link between the two sub-regions
and help bring about the level of cooperation between
them that is absolutely necessary if they are to survive
and develop in a world increasingly determined by
the effectiveness of regional economic blocs."
"But the immediate task is to negotiate a peaceful
settlement with Guatemala, one that will be acceptable
to the people of Belize as well as those of Guatemala.
As it did in 1981, Belize must now seize the time
and got for it, thereby sparing future generations
the agony of living under a threat and of seeking
solutions in a climate which may not be as favorable
as the present climate now is."
BACK
TO TOP
LEGAL OBSTACLES
In the course of 1992, however, it became clear that
the Guatemalan government's intention to move expeditiously
towards a definitive settlement of the dispute was
seriously affected by a virulent political campaign
carried out in the congress and in the press against
President Serrano's recognition of Belize. In particular,
a case had been presented to the Constitutional Court
challenging this recognition.
Understandably, the government of Guatemala felt
constrained in carrying out any negotiations with
Belize while this constitutional case was pending,
and it took the courts much longer than originally
anticipated to consider the case and reach a decision.
On 3rd November 1992, by a vote of 4 to 3, the court
declared that the President's action in recognizing
Belize did not violate the Guatemalan Constitution,
but it referred several matters to the Guatemalan
Congress for ratification.
On 24th November 1992, the Congress, by a vote of
78 to 24, with 13 abstentions, and after lengthy debate,
approved the President's actions and authorized him
"to continue negotiations, including the use
of international courts, in order to validate Guatemala's
territorial rights over Belize, and, upon arriving
at a definitive settlement, to submit same to popular
consultations in accordance in with Article 19 of
the Guatemalan Constitution."
These events enable the Guatemalan Government to
pursue negotiations with Belize. As a first step the
Foreign Minister of Guatemala announced on 25th November
1992, that he will constitute a "Council on Belize"
to advise his government on how best to proceed with
the negotiations.
Belize stands ready at any time to continue the negotiations
and with the same condition that and proposed definitive
settlement must be first submitted to a referendum
before final approval.
BACK
TO TOP
LISTEN WITHOUT PREJUDICE
We the members of the National Advisory Commission
are determined to take out responsibility seriously,
and we believe that an important part of our task
is to keep the Belizean people informed about the
fact surrounding the issues involved. An informed
public is the only guarantee of success in this endeavor.
We said as much to the minister at our first meeting,
and he assured us of government's full support to
carry out this work.
As persons who are independent of any political party,
but who, because of our mandate, are cognizant of
the issues, it is our hope that Belizeans will read
and listen to our explanation without the hang-ups
and prejudices we normally harbor toward persons belonging
to a party other than our own. At the same time, we
welcome comments, questions, and alternative interpretations.
We do not claim to have all the answers or all the
facts, and are open to ideas from any quarter.
BACK
TO TOP
CONTACT THE NATIONAL ADVISORY
COMMISSION
Please feel free to write us with your comments,
questions and suggestions for future publications
at:
National Advisory Commission
c/o Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Belmopan, Belize
Telephone: 08-22167;22322
Fax: 08-22854
Belmopan, February, 1993
|
