Argentina and the United Kingdom both claim over the Falkland/Malvinas , South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands, and assert a variety of overlapping appertaining to these features. Several features currently occupied and administered by the United Kingdom and were the focus of an armed conflict between the two States in 1982. In the immediate aftermath of the conflict the United Kingdom declared a 150 nautical mile ‘Falkland Island Protection Zone' (FIPZ) designed to restrict and control the navigation of Argentinean vessels in waters surrounding the Islands. In 1986 the United Kingdom supplemented its 3 nautical mile claim around the Falkland Islands by (1) declaring an ‘Interim Conservation and Management Zone' (FICZ) projected 150 nautical miles from a fixed point located in the center of the Islands, and (2) reiterating its claim to the continental shelf surrounding the Islands. The limits of the FIPZ and FICZ are illustrated in Figure. The primary concern influencing the declaration of the FICZ was the rapid and unsustainable escalation of commercial fishing in waters surrounding the Islands between 1982 and 1986. The declaration of the FICZ and reiterated continental shelf claim prompted Argentina to issue a protest note reaffirming its sovereignty claim to the Islands and ‘its rights of sovereignty and jurisdiction over the surrounding maritime waters, sea-bed and marine sub-soil, rights which it will continue to exercise in its capacity as a in accordance with international .' In 1989 both States entered into negotiations with a view to normalizing diplomatic relations after they were broken off during the 1982 conflict. Design features of provisional joint management frameworks: Following talks held in Madrid in October 1989, both States issued a Joint Statement (1989 Joint Statement) concerning the sovereignty , consular relations and several cooperative measures. Paragraph 2 of the 1989 Joint Statement contains a ‘formula on sovereignty' (Madrid formula on sovereignty) reflecting an agreement to set aside and protect to sovereignty and maritime jurisdiction. It provides as follows: Both Governments agreed that: Nothing in the conduct or content of the present meeting or of any similar subsequent meetings shall be interpreted as: A change in the position of the United Kingdom with regard to sovereignty or and maritime jurisdiction over the Falkland Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas; a) A change in the position of the Argentine Republic with regard to sovereignty or territorial and maritime jurisdiction over the Falkland Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding areas; b) Recognition of or support for the position of the United Kingdom or the Argentine Republic with regard to sovereignty or territorial and maritime jurisdiction over the Falkland Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas. No act or activity carried out by the United Kingdom, the Argentine Republic or third parties as a consequence and in implementation of anything agreed to in the present meeting or in…

You must be Register or logged in to view full content, high resolution maps, charts, pdf and more.

HTML tutorial

>>>please login<<<

Related posts:

  1. Practice on Provisional Arrangements in maritime Disputed Areas, JOINT DEVELOPMENT ZONES, United Kingdom-Argentina in the South West Atlantic case
  2. Canada–United States overlapping claims in North Atlantic and surrounding Machias Seal Island and North Rock
  3. Denmark(Faroe Islands)–United Kingdom maritime boundary and Special Area
  4. France maritime claims with Jersey, United Kingdom, Crozet archipelago, Saint Paul Island and Amsterdam Island, Kerguelen Islands and Netherlands
  5. Argentina–Uruguay overlapping claims concerning boundary delimitation and the Río de la Plata
  6. Barbados–Guyana overlapping claims and Co-operation Zone in Atlantic ocean
  7. Fisheries (United Kingdom v. Norway) case on the ICJ
  8. The MOX Plant Case (Ireland v. United Kingdom), Provisional Measures
  9. Overlapping claims to internal waters in law of the sea and LOSC
  10. Navigational Regimes of Particular Straits, United Kingdom Straits(Dover Strait, North Channel, Fair Isle Gap) case study
  11. Maritime boundaries between United States of America and Canada(in Atlantic sea)
  12. Sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge (Malaysia/Singapore)
  13. The North Atlantic Coast Fisheries Case (Great Britain / United States of America), fact and decision
  14. Maritime Boundary Disputes in the South China Sea International Legal Issues
  15. difference between islands and rocks in law of the sea
  16. outer limits of the territorial sea in the southern area of the Gulf of Carpentaria (Australia claims on territorial sea)
  17. United Arab Emirates maritime claims about Straight Baselines System in Persian Gulf
  18. International Law in the South China Sea
  19. Overlapping claims to territorial sea in law of the sea and LOSC
  20. Regime of the islands in law of the sea
  21. History of the South China Sea Disputes, facts and legal approach
  22. Presence of Islands as a RELEVANT CIRCUMSTANCES in delimitation process in law of the sea and customary international law
  23. Madagascar maritime claims about baselines(Straight) from which the breadth of the territorial sea
  24. what is the meaning of Historic Bays on tle law of the sea and LOSC
  25. Lebanon maritime claim about Western, Northern and Southern limits of Lebanon’s exclusive economic zone
  26. China claims on the Baselines of the Territorial Sea of Diaoyu Dao and its Affiliated Islands
  27. The Truman Proclamation, 1945 (Proclamation 2667—Policy of the United States With Respect to the Natural Resources of the Subsoil and Sea Bed of the Continental Shelf)
  28. France maritime claims about outer limits of the exclusive economic zone of the Éparses Islands, Mayotte, Reunion Island and Tromelin Island, including lines of delimitation
  29. The meaning and rule of ISLANDS baseline and its difference with rocks and reefs on the law of the sea and LOSC
  30. Lithuania maritime claims about straight baselines as well as the outer limits of the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf
  31. STATE CLAIMS IN SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMITY WITH ARTICLE 4 (LOSC ARTICLE 7), lreland case
  32. Border of seas and oceans in the earth(sea and oceans boundaries)
  33. Norway maritime claims about baselines for determining the extent of the territorial sea around mainland Norway
  34. About the Southern Ocean
  35. The Hague Conference for the Codification of International Law (1930)
  36. Fiji claims on the straight baselines
  37. Table of claims to maritime jurisdiction (as at 15 July 2011)/maritime spaces of countries
  38. About the South China Sea
  39. Where did Earth’s oceans come from?
  40. UK maritime claims about defining the outer limits of a zone adjacent to the territorial sea of the British Indian Ocean Territory, known as the Environment (Protection and Preservation) Zone
Tags: Anglo-Argentine Rivalry after the Falklands/Malvinas War, argentina, Does Argentina have a legitimate claim to the Falklands?, Falkland Islands sovereignty dispute, Falkland/Malvinas Islands, Overlapping claim Falkland / Malvinas Islands, South Atlantic map plots Falklands claims, South Atlantic Maritime Claims, The Falklands/Malvinas conflict, UK / Argentina part of the South Atlantic Ocean, United kingdom, What do Argentines think of Falklands?, What is Argentina's claim to the Falklands?, Which countries support Argentina claim to the Falklands?, Why did the UK and Argentina fight over the Falkland Islands?