Australian Politics Forum - NO WHALING SLAUGHTER In Our Waters

Andrei.Hicks

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23818
Carlsbad, CA
Gender: male

Re: NO WHALING SLAUGHTER In Our Waters
Reply #60 - Jan 11^th, 2011 at 12:34pm

Australia has as much claim to those waters as Chile basically.

International waters is dictated not by Australia's domestic law or what they claim....

Argentina claims the Falklands, Spain claims Gibraltar.
Doesn't make it their just cos they say does it.

In reality, Japan does not recognize this sanctuary and you can't just pick an area and decide what it is, when you dont own it!!

Back to top

Anyone who lives within their means suffers from a lack of imagination - Oscar Wilde

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: NO WHALING SLAUGHTER In Our Waters
Reply #61 - Jan 11^th, 2011 at 1:01pm

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jan 11^th, 2011 at 12:34pm:

Australia has as much claim to those waters as Chile basically.

International waters is dictated not by Australia's domestic law or what they claim....

Argentina claims the Falklands, Spain claims Gibraltar.
Doesn't make it their just cos they say does it.

In reality, Japan does not recognize this sanctuary and you can't just pick an area and decide what it is, when you dont own it!!

Actually Australia DID put in a claim for the waters, which would have made them recognised under International Law...but requested that it be held...because it was against the 'spirit' of the Antarctic Treaty...

And the Southern Ocean Sanctuary was set up and defined by the IWC....not by Australia...

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49581 At my desk.	Re: NO WHALING SLAUGHTER In Our Waters Reply #62 - Jan 11^th, 2011 at 1:10pm Quote: Actually Australia DID put in a claim for the waters, which would have made them recognised under International Law...but requested that it be held...because it was against the 'spirit' of the Antarctic Treaty... In other words - not our territory.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Andrei.Hicks

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23818
Carlsbad, CA
Gender: male

Re: NO WHALING SLAUGHTER In Our Waters
Reply #63 - Jan 11^th, 2011 at 1:10pm

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 11^th, 2011 at 1:01pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jan 11^th, 2011 at 12:34pm:

Australia has as much claim to those waters as Chile basically.

International waters is dictated not by Australia's domestic law or what they claim....

Argentina claims the Falklands, Spain claims Gibraltar.
Doesn't make it their just cos they say does it.

In reality, Japan does not recognize this sanctuary and you can't just pick an area and decide what it is, when you dont own it!!

Actually Australia DID put in a claim for the waters, which would have made them recognised under International Law...but requested that it be held...because it was against the 'spirit' of the Antarctic Treaty...

And the Southern Ocean Sanctuary was set up and defined by the IWC....not by Australia...

Under what jurisdiction does the IWC have to state this as a sanctuary in international waters?

Note the IWC is a voluntary body from which countries can remove itself (eg Norway) and not be subject to its charter?

It has no more authority than the UN Convention on Refugees - which too is a voluntary set of articles.

Japan is under no obligation to recognize this as a sanctuary.

Back to top

Anyone who lives within their means suffers from a lack of imagination - Oscar Wilde

IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 59483
Here
Gender: male

Re: NO WHALING SLAUGHTER In Our Waters
Reply #64 - Jan 12^th, 2011 at 9:57am

freediver wrote on Jan 11^th, 2011 at 1:10pm:

Quote:

Actually Australia DID put in a claim for the waters, which would have made them recognised under International Law...but requested that it be held...because it was against the 'spirit' of the Antarctic Treaty...

In other words - not our territory.

THe Antarctic treaty has no impact on other claims and does not cover the EEZ at all.

For the area not covered by the Antarctic treaty the claim is probably valid and has been in place since around 1930 when we commenced continuous habitation of the area.

The treaty allows all nations to engage in research in Antarctica, protects wild life (on the land mass and ice shelf) and the environment. It neither supports or nullifies any claims.

I think your comparison is a poor one: With about 80 continuous years of habitation I would think more in common with the ratified claim over the Coral Sea Islands.

I.E

In the case of the Coral Sea Islands because the Australian Bureau of Meterology has operated a manned weather station on Willis Island since 1921.

In the Antartic case we have inhabited a manned station since about 1930.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jan 13^th, 2011 at 9:08am by Dnarever »

IP Logged

Andrei.Hicks Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 23818 Carlsbad, CA Gender:	Re: NO WHALING SLAUGHTER In Our Waters Reply #65 - Jan 13^th, 2011 at 9:06am I'm quite surprised to find you of all people, dna - in disagreement with Greenpeace on the subject of Sea Shepherd. Seems their stance mirrors mine - anti-whaling but finding the methods used by Watson & Co utterly deplorable.
Back to top	Anyone who lives within their means suffers from a lack of imagination - Oscar Wilde IP Logged