Английская Википедия:2023 Guayana Esequiba crisis

Материал из Онлайн справочника
Перейти к навигацииПерейти к поиску

Шаблон:Short description Участник:RMCD bot/subject notice Шаблон:Use dmy dates Шаблон:Infobox civil conflict Шаблон:Guayana Esequiba sidebar

The long-standing territorial dispute over the Essequibo region escalated into a crisis in 2023. The region is controlled by Guyana but is claimed by Venezuela. The dispute dates back many years and the current border was established by the Paris Arbitral Award in 1899. Venezuela renewed its claim in 1962 and the matter was referred to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 2018.

Significant oil reserves were discovered offshore in the 2010s, which raised the stakes. In September 2023, Guyana granted drilling licenses in the disputed waters. In December 2023, Venezuela held a referendum of its people asking whether the region should become a state of Venezuela and its population become citizens, among other questions. Although the turnout was reported to be low, the Venezuelan government declared that the results showed overwhelming support for such action. Venezuela then took further steps to press its claim such as publishing maps showing the territory annexed to the country and announcing plans to develop the region.

In response to Venezuela's actions, other countries supported Guyana's position including Brazil, the UK and US. Brazil sent troops to its border with the region and the US conducted military exercises with Guyana. The ICJ warned Venezuela not to take any direct action in the region as a trial is scheduled for early 2024[1] and the Mercosur regional group urged the parties to find a peaceful solution.

On 14 December 2023, Ralph Gonsalves, the Prime Minister of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, hosted a meeting of the leaders of Guyana and Venezuela, as an initiative of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, which he currently heads. Officials from the Caribbean Community, Brazil, Colombia and the United Nations also attended. The leaders agreed to not use any force or escalate tension. A joint statement said that both countries will settle the dispute in accordance with international law, despite adding that Venezuela does not recognize the jurisdiction of the ICJ. Further talks in Brazil are expected within three months.

Background

Шаблон:Main

Dutch colonies

Шаблон:See also

Файл:Dutch Guiana Map (1638).png
A map of Dutch Guiana by Hendrik Hondius I, 1638

Essequibo started off as a colony of the Dutch and was founded by colonists from the first Zeelandic colony, Pomeroon, conquered in 1581, which had been destroyed by Spaniards and local warriors around 1596. Led by Joost van der Hooge, the Zeelanders travelled to an island called Kyk-Over-Al near the Essequibo River (actually a tributary called the Mazaruni). Dutch colonisation of the Guianas occurred primarily between the mouths of the Orinoco River in the west and the Amazon River to the east. In 1658, cartographer Cornelis Goliath created a map of the colony and made plans to build a city there called "New Middelburg", but the Second Anglo-Dutch War (1665–67) put an end to these plans. Essequibo was occupied by the British in 1665 (along with all other Dutch colonies in the Guianas), and then plundered by the French. The following years the Zeelanders sent a squadron of ships to retake the area. While the Suriname colony was captured from the English by Abraham Crijnssen, the by then abandoned Essequibo was occupied by Matthys Bergenaar.

After 1745, the number of plantations along the Demerara River and its tributaries rapidly increased, resulting with the Demerara colony. Particularly, British colonists from Barbados began settling here. After 1750 a commander of the British population was assigned, giving them their own representation. Around 1780 a small central settlement was established at the mouth of the Demerara River, which received the name Stabroek in 1784, named after one of the directors of the West Indian Company. A group of British privateers captured Essequibo and Demerara on 24 February 1781, but did not stay. In March, two sloops of a Royal Navy squadron under Admiral Lord Rodney accepted the surrender of "Colony of Demarary and the River Essequebo". From 27 February 1782 to February 1783 the French occupied the colony after compelling Governor Robert Kinston to surrender. The peace of Paris, which occurred in 1783 restored these territories to the Dutch.

British Guiana

Шаблон:See also

Файл:British Guiana - 1908 - WDL.png
Map of British Guiana in 1908

In 1796, the Essequibo was permanently occupied by the British and by 1800, Essequibo and Demerara collectively held around 380 sugarcane plantations. But it also became involved in one of Latin America's most persistent border disputes because the new colony had the Essequibo river as its west border with the Spanish Captaincy General of Venezuela. Although Spain still claimed the region, the Spanish did not contest the treaty because they were preoccupied with their own colonies' struggles for independence. In 1822, independence leader Simón Bolívar ordered his representative in London, José Rafael Revenga, to present an official complaint to the British authorities, writing: "The settlers of Demerara and Berbice have usurped a large portion of land that according to the last treaties between Spain and Holland belong to us on this side of the Essequibo River. (...) that said colonists place themselves under the jurisdiction and obedience of our laws or withdraw to their former possessions". After Venezuela obtained its independence in 1830, it defined its borders as those that made up the former Captaincy General of Venezuela, which included the Essequibo region.[2] On 21 July 1831, Demerara-Essequibo was united with Berbice to create British Guiana.

Under the aegis of the Royal Geographical Society, the German-born explorer and naturalist Robert Hermann Schomburgk conducted botanical and geographical exploration of British Guiana in 1835. This resulted in a sketch of the territory with a line marking what he believed to be the western boundary claimed by the Dutch. As a result of this, he was commissioned in 1840 by the British government to survey Guiana's boundaries. This survey resulted in what came to be known as the "Schomburgk Line".[3][4] The line went well beyond the area of British occupation and gave British Guiana control of the mouth of the Orinoco River.[5] Schomburgk's initial sketch, which had been published in 1840, was the only version of the "Schomburgk Line" published until 1886, which led to later accusations by US President Grover Cleveland that the line had been extended "in some mysterious way".[3]

In 1850, Britain and Venezuela reached an agreement whereby they accepted not to colonise the disputed territory, although it was not established where this territory began and ended.[3] The dispute went unmentioned for many years until gold was discovered in the region, which disrupted relations between the United Kingdom and Venezuela.[6] In 1876, gold mines inhabited mainly by English-speaking people had been established in the Cuyuni basin, which was Venezuelan territory beyond the Schomburgk line but within the area Schomburgk thought Britain could claim.Шаблон:Citation needed That year, Venezuela reiterated its claim up to the Essequibo River, to which the British responded with a counterclaim including the entire Cuyuni basin, although this was a paper claim the British never intended to pursue.[3]

In October 1886 Britain declared the Schomburgk Line to be the provisional frontier of British Guiana, and in February 1887 Venezuela severed diplomatic relations. In 1894, Venezuela appealed to the United States to intervene, citing the Monroe Doctrine as justification. The United States did not want to get involved, only going as far as suggesting the possibility of arbitration.[3]

During the Venezuelan crisis of 1895, the United Kingdom and Venezuela attempted to settle the territorial dispute. Venezuela argued that Spain–whose territory they had acquired–controlled land from the Orinoco River to the Amazon River in present-day Brazil.[5] Spain, according to Venezuela, only designated its claimed Guiana territory to the Dutch, which did not include much land within the disputed territory.[5] Meanwhile, Britain, who had acquired the Dutch territory, stated that the disputed Guiana region was not Spanish because it was so remote and uncontrolled, explaining that the original natives in the land had shared the territory's land with the Dutch instead of the Spanish and were thus under Dutch and British influence.[5] On 3 October 1899 the Tribunal ruled largely in favour of Britain. The Schomburgk Line was, with two deviations, established as the border between British Guiana and Venezuela.[3] One deviation was that Venezuela received Barima Point at the mouth of the Orinoco, giving it undisputed control of the river, and thus the ability to levy duties on Venezuelan commerce. The second placed the border at the Wenamu River rather than the Cuyuni River, giving Venezuela substantial territory east of the line. However, Britain received most of the disputed territory, and all of the gold mines.[7]

In 1949, the US jurist Otto Schoenrich gave the Venezuelan government a memorandum written by Mallet-Prevost, which was written in 1944 to be published only after his death. Mallet-Prevost surmised from the private behavior of the judges that there had been a political deal between Russia and Britain,[8] and said that the Russian chair of the panel, Friedrich Martens, had visited Britain with the two British arbitrators in the summer of 1899, and subsequently had offered the two American judges a choice between accepting a unanimous award along the lines ultimately agreed, or a 3 to 2 majority opinion even more favourable to the British. The alternative would have followed the Schomburgk Line entirely, and given the mouth of the Orinoco to the British. Mallet-Prevost said that the American judges and Venezuelan counsel were disgusted at the situation and considered the 3 to 2 option with a strongly worded minority opinion, but ultimately went along with Martens to avoid depriving Venezuela of even more territory.[8] Said memorandum led to complaints by Venezuela in the United Nations in 1962.[9][10]

Guyana

Venezuela signed the Geneva Agreement in 1966 with the United Kingdom prior to the independence of Guyana, which occurred that same year, which established bases for a negotiated solution to the territorial dispute.[11][12][13][6] Five months after Guyana's independence, Venezuelan troops began their occupation of Ankoko island and surrounding islands in October 1966 with Venezuelan troops quickly constructing military installations and an airstrip.[14] In 1969, the Rupununi uprising occurred in an attempt by ranch owners to secede from Guyana.[15]

By 1970, after the expiry of the Mixed Commission established according to the 1966 Geneva Agreement, Presidents Rafael Caldera and Forbes Burnham signed the Port of Spain Protocol, which declared a 12-year moratorium on Venezuela's reclamation of the Essequibo, with the purpose of allowing both governments to promote cooperation and understanding while the border claim was in abeyance. In 1983, the deadline of the Port of Spain Protocol expired, and the Venezuelan President Luis Herrera Campins decided not to extend it anymore and resume the effective claim over the territory.

Into the 21st century, Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez eased border tensions with Guyana under advice of his mentor Fidel Castro[16] and in 2004, Chávez said during a visit in Georgetown, Guyana, that he considered the dispute to be finished.[16] In response to Chávez' nationalization of oil assets primarily belonging to ExxonMobil, it spearheaded efforts to find oil in neighboring Guyana in the 2000s.[17] ExxonMobil has been involved in multiple disputes with Venezuela over such assets, with US analyst Steve LeVine considering it was very litigious and "sending a signal" to others considering interfering with their contracts,[18] with multiple defeated attempts at arbitration over sixteen years,[19][20] the latest submitted on 27 November 2023.[21]

Guyana discovers oil deposits

Файл:Arbv GC23.jpg
Venezuelan Guaicamacuto-class patrol boat similar to the Commandante Hugo Chavez, which captured Guyanese ships in January 2021
Файл:Exxon Mobil Logo.svg
Guyana has granted concessions to the multinational oil corporation ExxonMobil, including in waters claimed by Venezuela

Venezuela became more aggressive towards Guyana during the administration of Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro.[11] The Venezuelan Navy detained an oil exploration vessel conducting seafloor surveys on behalf of the government of Guyana on 10 October 2013, with the ship and its crew being escorted to the Venezuelan Margarita Island to be prosecuted. The Guyanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs said the vessel was in Guyanese waters,[22] but its Venezuelan counterpart sent a diplomatic note to Guyana stating that the ship was conducting oil research in Venezuelan waters with no authorisation from the country, and demanded an explanation.[23] Maduro visited Guyana and discussed the dispute. In Georgetown, Maduro affirmed that the Geneva Agreement was signed by “an old Acción Democrática government and the old British Empire” as part of a “psyop, through contempt and racism, to invade Guyana”.[24]

Guyana handed new oil concessions to ExxonMobil in 2014, whose Venezuelan assets Chávez had nationalized seven years prior.[25] In 2015, Venezuela accused ExxonMobil of breaching international law while drilling for oil in Guyana, and a minor crisis broke out wherein Guyanese authorities seized a Venezuelan vessel, the Yakuana, in Guyanas's territorial waters, with both parts demanding an explanation for the other; they later agreed to meet to try to improve delimitation of each other's territorial waters.[26] Maduro announced in 2015 that he would take the dispute to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and in 2018 Guyana initiated an arbitration proceeding against Venezuela to decide the validity of the 1899 Paris Award.[24]

Between 2015 and 2021, the Center for Strategic and International Studies wrote that about 8 billion barrels of oil reserves were discovered in Guyana,[11] with Guyana becoming among the top twenty countries by proven oil reserves. By 2023, BBC News reported that Guyana had discovered 11 billion barrels worth of oil reserves.[27] Guyanese Natural Resources Minister Rafael Trotman admitted that ExxonMobil had financially backed Guyana for legal disputes,[28] in addition to a "non-disclosed signing bonus" paid by ExxonMobil according to then president David Granger. ExxonMobil Country Manager, Rod Henson, said the payments were customary and usual for petroleum agreements.[29] Guyanese experts noted the government had ignored environmental concerns[30] and that ExxonMobil had no oversight and its executives were frequently seen with top officials, with ExxonMobil having embarked on a public relations and regulatory capture campaign.[17]

Файл:Venezuelan Air Force Sukhoi SU-30MK2 AADPR.jpg
A Venezuelan Sukhoi Su-30, similar to the two fighter jets that entered Guyanese airspace in March 2021

On 7 January 2021, President Maduro issued Decree No. 4,415, claiming 200 nautical miles of seabed from the Orinoco Delta for Venezuela, extending into where Guyana made oil discoveries.[11] Days later on 21 January, Guaicamacuto-class patrol boat Commandante Hugo Chavez GC 24 captured two Guyanese fishing boats within the EEZ of Guyana.[11] Months later on 2 March 2021, two Sukhoi Su-30 fighter jets of the Venezuelan Air Force made low passes at Шаблон:Convert over the Guyanese town of Eteringbang.[11] Guyanese Foreign Minister Hugh Todd responded to the incident a day later, stating "the incursion of our territory of the two Venezuelan fighter jets is a clear indication that the government of Venezuela is prepared to use aggression and intimidation to accomplish what cannot be accomplished by legal means: the surrender by Guyana of its patrimony."[11]

In April 2023, the ICJ ruled that it has jurisdiction over the dispute in a lawsuit filed by Guyana in 2018 to determine which nation controlled the disputed territory.[31] Following further discoveries of oil and gas fields,[32] on 19 September 2023, Guyana authorized six foreign oil companies including ExxonMobil to drill in the waters claimed by Venezuela.[33][34] In October, ExxonMobil Guyana Limited (EMGL) President, Alistair Routledge, told reporters that "we have not been scared away by Venezuela…that’s why we’re still working in Guyana. That’s why we anticipate continuing to do so for decades to come".[35] Guyana also criticized Venezuela for rejecting the ICJ's prerogative to rule on the matter after it rejected their proposal of establishing direct talks instead.[36]

Timeline of events

Venezuela announces referendum

Файл:Nicolás Maduro in 2023.jpg
Nicolás Maduro, the main proponent of the 2023 Venezuelan referendum

On October 23, 2023,[37] the National Electoral Council approved several issues, and the Constitutional Council of the Supreme Court of Justice officially confirmed it on November 1, 2023.[38] The government of Nicolás Maduro promoted a consultative referendum in Venezuela for 3 December 2023 in which five questions were asked of citizens, among them, whether they agree to "oppose, by all means, in accordance with the law, Guyana's claim to unilaterally dispose of a sea pending delimitation, illegally and in violation of international law" and whether they would be in favour of giving Venezuelan nationality to the 125,000 inhabitants of the Essequibo.[39][40][41] The government has criticized the "abuses of ExxonMobil" and the United States Southern Command,[33][41] deploying a media campaign that has appealed to Venezuelan patriotism.[42]

Opposition leaders provided different responses to the referendum. Presidential candidate for the opposition political coalition María Corina Machado assured that sovereignty was not consulted, but rather exercised, and asked to suspend the referendum to form a national team with the purpose of filing a claim with the ICJ,[43] while Manuel Rosales and Henrique Capriles, both former opposition presidential candidates, were in favour.[44] Rosales called on Venezuelans to vote in the referendum, and Capriles announced that he would participate in the referendum.[44] The referendum caused a diplomatic crisis between both nations.[45]

Reported military buildup

In October 2023, it was reported that the Venezuelan military was building a runway near the border with Guyana's Essequibo "to develop" the region. Guyana's president Irfaan Ali responded by saying the country will not give up "an inch" of the region.[46] Guyana asked for Venezuela to explain their troop buildup in the border, and the Venezuelan ambassador Carlos Amador Pérez Silva said that the troops were mobilized to curb illegal mining in the region.[47]

In the context of increasing tensions between the two countries, Guyana's main opposition party, Alliance For Change, called on 4 November for a ban on Venezuelans with Guyanese citizenship from voting in elections, as well as not granting citizenship to more people from the neighboring country.[48][49]

Representatives of both Venezuela and Guyana asked in a hearing held at the ICJ in mid-November 2023 that the Court recognize their sovereignty over the Essequibo. Guyana also requested that the referendum be repealed, alleging that Venezuela intended to annex the territory, a request that the Venezuelan government rejected.[32] Guyanese Prime Minister Mark Anthony Phillips took the case to the Organization of American States (OAS) where he accused Venezuela of a military buildup near the Essequibo border, and warned of the consequences of it for Guyana's sovereignty. OAS Secretary General Luis Almagro, the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) and the United States government expressed their support for Guyana.[50]

On 23 November, senior military officers from the Guyana Defence Force and the Brazilian Armed Forces met for a military exchange. Brazil has been a strong supporter of Guyana in the border dispute.[51]

Brazil is currently trying to establish mediation between both countries to avoid an armed conflict.[52] Two teams from the United States Department of Defense were scheduled to visit Guyana in late November.[41] Guyana proposed establishing foreign military bases in its country.[33] The Brazilian Army mobilized towards the border of both countries anticipating a possible Venezuelan invasion.[53] Reports from Brazilian intelligence in early December suggested an imminent military move by the Venezuelan Army against Guyana in the coming days, raising concerns about regional stability and territorial disputes in South America.[54]Шаблон:Better source needed

The Brazilian foreign ministry, Itamaraty, held a summit between foreign and defense ministers of South American countries on 22 November, wherein Venezuelan foreign minister Félix Osorio claimed Venezuela "may be forced by the people to take measures"[55] On the same day, Brazil sent special envoy Celso Amorim to Caracas, wherein he talked directly with Maduro, who told him there'd be no war, but the Brazilian government remained worried, and Amorim warned that the situation could "spiral out of control".[56] Amorim stated Brazil would "not accept any solution that is not peaceful".[57]

On 30 November, Brazilian Minister of Defense José Múcio announced that the Brazilian Army would send 60 troops to Pacaraima to reinforce security at the border crossing with Venezuela, seeking to impede a potential Venezuelan crossing into Guyana from Brazilian territory.[58]

On 1 December, the International Court of Justice ordered Venezuela to refrain from taking action to change the status quo in the border dispute with Guyana. "The court observes that the situation that currently prevails in the territory in dispute is that Guyana administers and exercises control over that area," presiding judge Joan Donoghue said. "Venezuela must refrain from taking any action which would modify that situation," she added.[59] On 4 December, Brazilian defense portal Defesa Net published an article detailing that an anonymous source from a Guyanaese officer claimed roughly 200 Venezuelan special forces had entered Guyanese territory disguised as civilians in order to conduct sabotage and other preparation operations.[60]

On 6 December, Venezuelan Foreign Affairs Minister Шаблон:Interlanguage link and Guyana Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation Hugh Todd had a phone call, at Guyana's request, and the countries agreed to "keep communication channels open", according to Venezuela's government.[61]

Raising of the Guyanese and Venezuelan flags

At the end of November 2023, the President of Guyana, Irfaan Ali, met with soldiers who guard the border between both countries. In a video released by the government Ali raised the Guyanese flag at an event on the Pakarampa mountain in Guayana Esequiba, near Venezuela's Bolívar state, where he also took an oath of national loyalty.[41] After these acts, the Minister of Defense of Venezuela, Vladímir Padrino López declared that the Venezuelan Armed Forces will be "permanently vigilant" of "any action that threatens" the "territorial integrity", asking the population to vote in the referendum and adding that the conflict "for now" is not a war.[62] The governor of Zulia, Manuel Rosales, claimed that "Guayana Esequiba is one hundred percent Venezuelan territory," arguing that Guyana's actions violated the 1966 Geneva agreement, and criticized the fact that the UN and the OAS did not speak out on the matter.[63]

Afterwards, Venezuelan government officials released a video where local indigenous people exchanged a Guyanese flag for a Venezuelan one. President Irfaan Ali assured that such replacement did not take place.[64] In December, through geolocation, the investigative journalism group Bellingcat determined that the video was recorded near Santa Elena de Uairén, in the Venezulean state of Bolívar and 185 kilometers from where Guyana raised its flag, and not in the Guyana Esequiba as originally claimed.[65] The Venezuelan fact-checking group Cazadores de Fake News reached the same conclusion in its own investigation, confirming with four sources in the area that the video was not recorded in the Guyana Esequiba.[66]

Referendum

On 3 December, the Venezuelan government organized a referendum asking to support its position in the dispute. The National Electoral Council initially reported that Venezuelans voted "yes" more than 95% of the time on each of the five questions on the ballot.[67][68] International analysts and media reported that turnout had been remarkably low and that the Venezuelan government had falsified the results.[69] Analysts also noted that the government could use the referendum to mobilize its popular support and neutralize the opposition primaries success, as well as the growing popularity of its candidate María Corina Machado.[70] Bharrat Jagdeo, vice president of Guyana, said in an interview that he was preparing for the worst and that the government is working with partners to strengthen "defense cooperation".[71][72] In anticipation of the referendum, the Commonwealth of Nations had also issued a statement offering its "full support" to Guyana and urged "all members of the United Nations" to respect the ICJ's decision.[73] On 8 December, Maduro stated in a political rally that he had appointed several personnel to handle the incorporation of the Esequibo and signed several decrees, but he stated that this process would be completed in a timeframe "up until 2030".[74][75]

Militarization of the Brazilian border

On 5 December, the Brazilian Army mobilized 20 Iveco LMV vehicles to join the newly activated 18th Mechanized Cavalry Regiment based in Boa Vista, being expected to arrive in early January.[76] The regiment, originally planned to be activated in 2026, was created from the preexisting 12th Mechanized Cavalry Squadron on 29 November.Шаблон:Efn[77] An additional 600 soldiers will be added to the newly created 18th Cavalry Regiment,[78] and an armored task force composed of 28 armored vehicles was assembled.[79] Brazilian defense minister José Múcio said the presidency had ordered him to "bulletproof the border".[80] The Brazilian military was also concerned that the situation would lead to the creation of additional American military bases in the region.[81] Sources within the military also told reporters that they were detecting no suspicious movement along the Brazilian border, with the precaution of deterrence working there, but they believed Venezuela was more likely to invade from the sea.[82] Brazil is expected to triple its military presence in the border, with much materiel being moved thousands of kilometers from its South and Center-West regions.[83]

On 8 December, Brazilian President Lula warned Maduro against "unilateral measures" by Venezuela regarding Essequibo.[84] On December 11, Múcio characterized the crisis as a "political maneuver", and stated Brazil would not allow Venezuela troops to use its territory "in any hypothesis".[85]

On 18 December it was announced that the Brazilian Army had sent hundreds of MSS-1.2 anti-tank missiles to reinforce the border with Venezuela, sending the weapons would be a way of deterring a possible threat from the Venezuelan armored force.[86]

Venezuela authorizes development in Essequibo

Файл:2023 New Map of Venezuela.jpg
Among his decrees shortly after the referendum, Maduro ordered the publication of a new map, including the Esequibo territory, "in all schools, public entities, universities and 'in all homes' in the country"[87]

On 4 December, National Bolivarian Armed Forces of Venezuela Strategic Commander Domingo Hernández Lárez made several posts on social media of Venezuelan military working on repairing or building new roads, bridges, airstrips and other infrastructure in the border with the Esequibo region, which he described as "our Guyanese routes".[88] On 5 December, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro announced that he would soon permit the exploitation of resources such as gas, oil, and mineral deposits within Guyana Esequiba. He also announced local Essequibo subsidiaries of Venezuelan state owned companies PDVSA and CVG.[57][89] On the same day, Brazilian President Lula stated he'd make a presidential visit to Guyana next year,[90] which analysts interpreted as signalling that Brazil would not tolerate Venezuelan military action.[91] On 6 December, Lula announced a summit with special envoy Celso Amorim and foreign minister Mauro Vieira.[92] The Brazilian Army reported to CNN Brasil that it had detected an increased Venezuelan military presence along the border with Guyana, though it assessed that the buildup by itself still wasn't indicative of an imminent invasion.[93]

The Guyanese president told Brazilian media that President Lula assured him Brazil would support Guyana, and thanked him for Brazil's "mature" position, while characterizing Venezuela as "reckless" and "unpredictable". He claimed they were working with the United States Southern Command and expected "strong statements" to be made within the next 24 hours.[94] The United States also announced military exercises with Guyanese forces.[95]

Venezuelan arrest warrants and detentions

The same day, the Venezuelan government issued fourteen arrest warrants against opposition members, including for three members from the team of opposition political candidate María Corina Machado, accusing them participating in an alleged plan to sabotage the 3 December referendum, supposedly financed by Exxon Mobil. It also confirmed the detention of an American citizen, Savoi Janson Wright, accused of financing them.[96] That night, president of the Venezuelan NGO Súmate, Roberto Abdul, who also helped with the organization of the opposition presidential primaries, was detained by officials of the Bolivarian Intelligence Service.[97][98]

The Venezuelan government also issued orders against opposition leaders and dissident Chavistas, including Yon Goicoechea, Juan Guaidó, Julio Borges, Andrés Izarra, David Smolansky, Lester Toledo, Carlos Vecchio, Leopoldo López and Rafael Ramírez, accusing them of participating in a conspiracy to boycott and sabotage the referendum.[97]

Guyanese helicopter crash

On 6 December, a Guyana Defence Force (GDF) Bell 412 helicopter crashed en route from Georgetown-Camp Ayanganna to Arau, situated directly along the Venezuelan border in Essequibo, coming down about Шаблон:Convert east of Arau. It carried three crewmen and four passengers, and was piloted by GDF Lieutenant Colonel Michael Charles.[99] According to the Chief of Staff of the Guyanese military, Omar Khan, there were no indications the aircraft was shot down from the sky. Authorities had stated that there was "bad weather" in the area.[100] Five GDF soldiers were killed:

  • Brigadier (retired) Gary Beaton
  • Colonel Michael Shahood
  • Lieutenant Colonel Michael Charles
  • Lieutenant Colonel Sean Welcome
  • Staff Sergeant Jason Khan

Lieutenant Colonel Andio Michaeal Crawford and Corporal Dwayne Jackson survived.

US military involvement

The United States Southern Command said on 7 December that its forces would participate in joint operations beside the Guyana Defense Force (GDF) in an effort to improve collaboration with security measures. US statements also said that the United States "will continue its collaboration with the GDF in the areas of disaster preparedness, aerial and maritime security, and countering transnational criminal organizations" and that the North American nation "will continue its commitment as Guyana’s trusted security partner and promoting regional cooperation and interoperability."[101]

Vladimir Padrino Lopez, Venezuelan defense minister, described the actions of the United States as a "provocation", saying that Venezuela "will not be diverted from our future actions for the recovery of the Essequibo."[102]

UK military involvement

On December 17, United Kingdom's minister for the Americas and Caribbean David Rutley visited Guyana, and said "I am in Guyana... to offer the UK's unequivocal backing to our Guyanese friends". Rutley also met with ambassadors of the United States, France, Canada and the European Union to speak about international support for Guyana in the dispute.[103]

The UK announced on December 24 it was sending one warship (HMS Trent) to the coast of Guyana without mentioning Venezuela. Venezuelan Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino said on social media that Venezuela would stay "on alert following provocations that put at risk the peace and stability of the Caribbean and our America."[104]

Diplomatic discussions

Prime Minister of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Ralph Gonsalves issued letters on 9 December to presidents Ali and Maduro, saying his nation would host discussions on the conflict alongside President Lula and UN General Secretary Guterres, writing "Let us all resolve to make this historic gathering a successful one. So much is at stake for our Caribbean and Latin American civilization."[1] It was announced that the discussions would be mediated by the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC).[105] Ali and Maduro agreed to the talks, with a proposed date of 14 December being announced.[1] Following a phone call with Lula, President Maduro stated that he was looking for "peace and understanding".[106] Representatives from both nations reaffirmed their beliefs on the dispute; Venezuela continued its claims of sovereignty over the Esequiba region while Guyana said that a determination by the ICJ must be made.[1]

On 14 December, high representatives (including the presidents) of Venezuela and Guyana met in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and agreed to not use any force and to not escalate tensions over Esequiba. A joint statement said both coutries will settle the dispute in accordance with international law, despite adding Venezuela does not recognize the ICJ jurisdiction over the case. Officials from the CARICOM, Brazil, Colombia, the United Nations and the CELAC also attended the meeting. Further talks were scheduled to be held in Brazil within three months from the meeting.[107]

On 15 December, Brazilian Defense Minister José Múcio mentioned Brazil was prepared to "take more energetic measures if necessary" to guarantee Brazilian territorial integrity. O Estado de S. Paulo reported that the Boa Vista-based 1st Jungle Infantry Brigade had received dozens of units of the Brazilian-made MSS-1.2 anti-tank guided missile.[108] The early adoption of the ATGM, still in its evaluation stages, would seek to provide a solution to a lack of dedicated anti-tank capabilities in the Brazilian Army at the time of the border crisis.[109]

Analysis and military capability assessments

Шаблон:Main Analysts noted the decision of the Maduro administration to call a referendum may be an attempt to divert attention from Venezuelan internal problems such as the weak economy and high levels of government corruption.[110][111] Political analysts also see the referendum as a nationalist strategy by the Maduro government to rally support ahead of the 2024 Venezuelan presidential election.[112]

Venezuela's actions towards annexing the Essequibo have been compared to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, including the preceding events of the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation and the 2014 Crimean status referendum.[113][114][115][116] James G. Stavridis, former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe stated that the Venezuela's actions, including its referendum, were "an echo of Putin’s invasion of Ukraine two years ago: A much larger neighbor staking a territorial claim without legitimate international legal grounds, preparing for annexation, making new maps and licking its chops at gaining huge natural resources."[115] Igor Macedo de Lucena of Chatham House said "Putin openly gave passports to anyone who entered a Russian administration in Crimea and [the citizens] left their Russian. Maduro can say that there [in Essequibo] is a large population of Neo-Venezuelans and he goes there to defend them from an attack by the Guyana government, all kinds of ideas to misrepresent public opinion and make an attack 'legitimate', when in fact there is no such threat. It's the whole plot of an invasion."[114] [115] Analysts have said that a new conflict occurring within the Americas would benefit Russia as it would likely distract the United States.[114] Russia's involvement is not limited to selling military hardware to Maduro, as there are two reported Russian military bases within Venezuelan territory,[117] as well a detachment of the Wagner Group private military company, which is involved in training Venezuelan elite troops as well as providing personal security for Maduro.[118]

Brazilian analyst Thiago de Aragão said Venezuela has far greater military capabilities than Guyana, which enrolls about 3,000 troops in light combat vehicles. Venezuela reportedly has 123,000 land troops distributed into several regiments as well as 173 main battle tanks, such as AMX-30 and T-72B1, along with reconnaissance vehicles, infantry fighting vehicles and armoured personnel carriers, as well as over 3 million paramilitary militia. It also has significant air and naval assets, compared to only a token air force on Guyana's side. However, any aggression against Guyana could trigger an intervention by regional powers such as Brazil or the United States.[111]

Visiting King's College London professor Augusto Teixeira said the Essequibo region mostly comprises mountains and dense tropical forest, with little to no roads. He suggests that the only feasible option for Venezuela would be moving its troops through Brazilian soil, in the state of Roraima. Military movements through Roraima would be significantly less hampered by the regional geography, as the Raposa Serra do Sol region is composed mostly of cerrado terrain, and the remaining wooded areas have been largely deforested. However, Brazil would not allow Venezuela to make any incursions from its territory. Venezuelan military is concentrated around Caracas and the northern border with Guyana along the Caribbean coast.[119] Similarly, despite the Esequibo territory comprising around 70% of Guyanese territory, it is inhabited by only 125 thousand out of Guyana's already much smaller 790 thousand population.[120]

Responses

Governments

International bodies

  • Шаблон:Flagicon In a joint statement, CARICOM stated that it "earnestly hopes that Venezuela is not raising the prospect of using force or military means to get its own way in this controversy over territory. After all, it has been the long-standing position of Latin American and Caribbean counties, including Venezuela, that our region must remain a zone of peace."[130] Regarding the Venezuelan referendum, CARICOM said that "international law strictly prohibits the government of one State from unilaterally seizing, annexing or incorporating the territory of another state. An affirmative vote as aforesaid opens the door to the possible violation of this fundamental tenet of international law" and it condemned the wording of two referendum questions which says that Venezuela would enforce its claims to the territory "by all means", suggesting that Venezuela would use force.[130]
  • Шаблон:Flagicon Responding to the Venezuelan referendum, Secretary General of the Commonwealth of Nations Patricia Scotland said that the Commonwealth "reaffirms its firm and steadfast support for the maintenance and preservation of the sovereign and territorial integrity of Guyana, and the unobstructed exercise of its rights to develop the entirety of its territory for the benefit of its people."[131]
  • Шаблон:Flagicon Josep Borrell called for a peaceful solution and to avoid unilateral actions, stressing that such actions could "put the stability of the region at risk."[132]
  • Шаблон:Flagicon On 7 December, member states of the Mercosur trade bloc held a summit and discussed the crisis. Venezuela was not present, as it had been suspended in 2016 for breaking the bloc's democratic clause.[133] Lula stated Brazil was looking for a peaceful solution and offered Brazil to mediate the situation.[134] Sources say a joint statement from the bloc is being prepared.[135]

See also

Notes

Шаблон:Notelist

References

Шаблон:Reflist

Партнерские ресурсы
Криптовалюты
Магазины
Хостинг
Разное

  1. ↑ 1,0 1,1 1,2 1,3 Шаблон:Cite web
  2. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  3. ↑ 3,0 3,1 3,2 3,3 3,4 3,5 Humphreys, R. A. (1967), "Anglo-American Rivalries and the Venezuela Crisis of 1895", Presidential Address to the Royal Historical Society 10 December 1966, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 17: pp 131–164
  4. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  5. ↑ 5,0 5,1 5,2 5,3 King, Willard L. (2007) Melville Weston Fuller – Chief Justice of the United States 1888–1910, Macmillan. p249
  6. ↑ 6,0 6,1 Шаблон:Cite journal
  7. ↑ King (2007:260)
  8. ↑ 8,0 8,1 Schoenrich, Otto, "The Venezuela-British Guiana Boundary Dispute", July 1949, American Journal of International Law. Vol. 43, No. 3. p. 523. Washington, DC. (USA).
  9. ↑ Isidro Morales Paúl, Análisis Crítico del Problema Fronterizo "Venezuela-Gran Bretaña", in La Reclamación Venezolana sobre la Guayana Esequiba, Biblioteca de la Academia de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales. Caracas, 2000, p. 200.
  10. ↑ de Rituerto, Ricardo M. Venezuela reanuda su reclamación sobre el Esequibo Шаблон:Webarchive, El País, Madrid, 1982.
  11. ↑ 11,0 11,1 11,2 11,3 11,4 11,5 11,6 Шаблон:Cite journal
  12. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  13. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  14. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  15. ↑ * Шаблон:Cite journal
  16. ↑ 16,0 16,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  17. ↑ 17,0 17,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  18. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  19. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  20. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  21. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  22. ↑ Шаблон:Cite news
  23. ↑ Шаблон:Cite news
  24. ↑ 24,0 24,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  25. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  26. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  27. ↑ Шаблон:Cite news
  28. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  29. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  30. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  31. ↑ Шаблон:Cite news
  32. ↑ 32,0 32,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  33. ↑ 33,0 33,1 33,2 Шаблон:Cite web
  34. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  35. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  36. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  37. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  38. ↑ https://demerarawaves.com/2023/10/23/venezuelan-electoral-council-approves-five-questions-for-referendum-on-essequibo/
  39. ↑ Шаблон:Cite news
  40. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  41. ↑ 41,0 41,1 41,2 41,3 Шаблон:Cite web
  42. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  43. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  44. ↑ 44,0 44,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  45. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  46. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  47. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  48. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  49. ↑ Шаблон:Cite news
  50. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  51. ↑ Ошибка цитирования Неверный тег <ref>; для сносок auto не указан текст
  52. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  53. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  54. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  55. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  56. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  57. ↑ 57,0 57,1 Шаблон:Cite news
  58. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  59. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  60. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  61. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  62. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  63. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  64. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  65. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  66. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  67. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  68. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  69. ↑ Шаблон:Citation
  70. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  71. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  72. ↑ Шаблон:Cite news
  73. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  74. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  75. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  76. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  77. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  78. ↑ Шаблон:Cite news
  79. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  80. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  81. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  82. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  83. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  84. ↑ Шаблон:Cite news
  85. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  86. ↑ Exército Envia Mísseis Contra Ameaça Blindada para Defesa de Roraima
  87. ↑ Шаблон:Cite news
  88. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  89. ↑ Шаблон:Cite news
  90. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  91. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  92. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  93. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  94. ↑ Шаблон:Cite AV media
  95. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  96. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  97. ↑ 97,0 97,1 Шаблон:Cite news
  98. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  99. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  100. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  101. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  102. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  103. ↑ Шаблон:Cite news
  104. ↑ Шаблон:Cite news
  105. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  106. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  107. ↑ Шаблон:Cite news
  108. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  109. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  110. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  111. ↑ 111,0 111,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  112. ↑ Шаблон:Cite news
  113. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  114. ↑ 114,0 114,1 114,2 Шаблон:Cite web
  115. ↑ 115,0 115,1 115,2 Шаблон:Cite web
  116. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  117. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  118. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  119. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  120. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  121. ↑ 121,0 121,1 Шаблон:Cite news
  122. ↑ Шаблон:Cite news
  123. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  124. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  125. ↑ Шаблон:Cite news
  126. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  127. ↑ Шаблон:Cite news
  128. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  129. ↑ Ошибка цитирования Неверный тег <ref>; для сносок USsupport не указан текст
  130. ↑ 130,0 130,1 Шаблон:Cite web
  131. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  132. ↑ Шаблон:Cite news
  133. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  134. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  135. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
Источник — http://wikihandbk.com/ruwiki/index.php?title=Английская_Википедия:2023_Guayana_Esequiba_crisis&oldid=12827897