But the most memorable part of the interview happened when Elrington took off the tender gloves reserved for Guatemalan diplomacy and got into political hard talk against his PUP predecessor Eamon Courtenay.
We asked Elrington about the senate motion that Courtenay brought before the Senate, in a push to amend the Maritime Areas Act.
This law relaxes Belize's claim to it's full territorial waters between the Sarstoon River and the Ranguana Cayes. Under international Law, Belize is entitled to 12 miles of territorial waters, but when the law was passed, Belize only claimed 3 - to make room for a negotiated settlement. All hops of that were officially abandoned when Belize and Guatemala committed to take the dispute to the ICJ in 2008.
Dissatisfied that that the Barrow Government was not pushing to amend it, Courtenay and the PUP brought their motion to the Senate, but it was defeated last week Wednesday. Today, the Foreign Minister told us that he is pleased that it failed, since the PUP had years to amend it. Here's how he explained why:
Hon. Wilfred Elrington - Minister of Foreign Affairs
"That prospect of a settlement failed from 1993-1994. You had all that time between then and now - how many years, 20 years, 30 years?"
Aaron Humes - Ch 5
"I believe that Mr. Courtenay has said that the final acknowledgement from the OAS that there would be no more further negotiations is I believe when the special agreement was signed in December 2008."
Hon. Wilfred Elrington
"No, no, no, absolutely not! That's is in classic style misinformation and disinformation for which Mr. Courtenay is famous. Most people don't know. Most people don't understand him but the truth is that that could have been dealt with immediately after the Guatemalans persisted in their claims. That is right after 1993-1994. So, it's no truth that it was not until 2007, and in 2007, when they agreed - you know, it was in 2007 that the proposal was made to have this matter dealt with at the ICJ, 2007. They were still in office. When the court looks at the Belize case, they will look at all the details and the evidence, and they will look and say that well in 1993, you were prepared to limit your claim to 3 miles, when you were entitled to take 12. What is this saying? How are we to - if, in fact now, we were to take the position that we want to be - the Guatemalans could get some more, well you couldn't complain because in 1993, you agreed to limit your claim to 3 miles. That should never have been done. But yes, it has to be made clear to the Guatemalans, and to the world, and the court that we are entitled to more that 3 miles, and that we will seek to obtain all we are entitled to. The question as to when that is to be done, according to the lawyers, we have time to do that. We have time. We have lots of time to be able to do that."
Email
Print