A conflict with more than 180 years of history. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) heard this Tuesday, November 14, Guyana’s request to “block” the referendum that Caracas plans to carry out on December 3 on the disputed Essequibo region, rich in mineral and hydrocarbon resources. On Wednesday, November 15, Venezuela will present its arguments before the international court.
There are some 160,000 square kilometers of jungle territory, located west of the Essequibo River, and a historic dispute that was raised this Tuesday, November 14, to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the main judicial body of the United Nations. Venezuela and its neighbor Guyana return to confrontation over the claim to the Essequibo border region, which is home to a large number of precious minerals, oil, hydrocarbons and attractive biodiversity for tourism.
The driving force behind the complaint that Guyana filed with the Hague-based body is the controversial referendum that the Venezuelan authorities plan to carry out on December 3, one of the few unanimous causes between the opposition and Chavismo led by Nicolás Maduro. They all act under the same claim: “Essequibo is from Venezuela.”
But Guyana alleges that this is an “existential threat” to its territorial integrity and this Tuesday asked the ICJ, in the first of two public hearings on Georgetown’s request, to stop its neighbor’s popular consultation and thus avoid “ chaos in the region.”
“It seeks to create a new Venezuelan State that intends to annex and incorporate into its own territory the entire Essequiba region of Guyana, more than two-thirds of its national territory and grant Venezuelan citizenship to the population,” the representative of Guyana said in his speech. and former Foreign Secretary, Carl Greenidge.
The referendum in question has a clear nationalist overtone and analysts anticipate a favorable victory, but it will not be binding on International Law. The ballot will consist of five questions that the Venezuelan Government asks its citizens, but it is the first, third and fifth questions that concern the authorities of the South American country. According to Guyana’s lawyer, Paul Richler, “they are far from neutral.”
The first question on the ballot refers to the 1899 arbitration award, which awarded the territory to Guyana – still under the mandate of the United Kingdom – and which Caracas considers null. A second question about support for the 1966 Geneva Agreement that sought “a practical and satisfactory solution.”
A five question referendum
The last three read: “Do you agree with Venezuela’s historical position of not recognizing the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice to resolve the territorial controversy over Guayana Esequiba? Do you agree to oppose, by all means consistent with the law, Guyana’s claim to unilaterally dispose of a sea pending delimitation, illegally and in violation of International Law?
And finally: “Do you agree with the creation of the state of Guayana Esequiba and the development of an accelerated plan for comprehensive care for the current and future population of that territory that includes, among others, the granting of citizenship and ID? of Venezuelan identity, in accordance with the Geneva Agreement and international law, consequently incorporating said state on the map of Venezuelan territory?
“Venezuela has made it clear that the purpose of this referendum is not to evaluate public opinion, it is to obtain popular support for decisions that the Government has already taken and to have licenses to act,” Richler criticized in his intervention before the ICJ, arguing the possible use of the military forces of Venezuela to annex the disputed territory, once the referendum is concluded and grant Venezuelan nationality to the inhabitants of that region.
The Venezuelan president, Maduro, did not take long to respond on his social networks to his neighbor’s accusations before the judicial body: “In all the spaces and tribunes that we have, we will defend the historical truth of Venezuela, the cause of all and all that we love this blessed land,” he wrote.
Pending the debate they will have today #14Nov the deputies of the National Assembly on our Essequibo. Guyana, Exxon Mobil and the US Southern Command are not going to impose legal colonialism, much less repeal our CRBV. No sir! Our answer,… pic.twitter.com/3GxUWMl3SO
— Nicolás Maduro (@NicolasMaduro) November 14, 2023
A “sinister plan by Venezuela to take over Guyanese territory”
Georgetown insisted that this is a “sinister plan by Venezuela to take over Guyanese territory.” And it is that The Essequibo region represents around 70% of Guyana’s territory, former British colony, and has a population of about 125,000 inhabitants.
The first time it filed a complaint against Caracas before the ICJ was in 2018, but it was not until this year that the Court declared itself competent to resolve the controversy, after the request for provisional measures prior to the Caracas referendum, whose representatives will intervene. at the hearing this Wednesday, November 15.
Maduro announced the consultation in September of this year in response to the completion of oil tenders in “waters pending to be delimited” by his neighbor. A tension that increased after the multinational ExxonMobil found oil in the waters of Essequibo, in 2015, which provoked even greater economic interest in that region in order to exploit its natural resources. Maduro maintains that Guyana does not have jurisdiction to grant concessions in maritime areas off the Essequibo.
Guyana is currently the nation in the world with the highest number of barrels of crude oil produced per inhabitant, according to local media. Precisely, geostrategic interest crosses borders. Not only does the multinational hydrocarbons operate in that area, a military platform of the United States Southern Command is also located.
On Monday, the Venezuelan president sent a letter to the UN Secretary General, António Guterres, asking him to “act as a de-escalator” and resume the “direct dialogue process” between both countries in dispute in accordance with the provisions of the Geneva Agreement of 1966, the only mechanism recognized by Caracas for the resolution of the conflict, and which Guyana signed three months before its independence from the United Kingdom.
Said agreement established “the procedures for finding a solution through peaceful means,” but negotiations were never reached. In fact, shortly before his death, Hugo Chávez pointed out that the dispute “was a legacy of colonialism.”
According to local media in Guyana, the current leftist leader asked his counterpart Irfaan Ali to abandon the process before the International Court of Justice and enter into bilateral talks with Caracas, mediated by the Caribbean Community (Caricom). Something that the Guyanese authorities reject, alleging that Venezuela’s intentions “threaten the peace, security and stability of the region.”
Guyana insists that the court judges issue a series of urgent orders to stop the referendum proposed by the Venezuelan National Assembly and approved by the National Electoral Council and the Supreme Court of Justice of Venezuela. “It is no exaggeration to describe the current threat to Guyana as existential and the need for interim measures as urgent,” Greenidge argued.
With EFE, AP and local media
#Venezuela #Guyana #dispute #Essequibo #International #Court #Justice