Eamon Courtenay denounces foreign minister’s statement
The term artificial was used in December by Foreign Minister Wilfred “Sedi” Elrington to describe our borders with Guatemala. The public condemnation was fierce and the minister turned to the Webster dictionary to explain himself away. But that did not quell the outrage, in particular since there has been no word yet from Prime Minister Dean Barrow on this issue of huge national importance. But what does artificial really mean and how does it affect the negotiating process in years to come or better yet, was Belize’s national interest compromised? This morning the former foreign minister, Senator Eamon Courtenay, who also sits on the Belize negotiating team said that his successor is flat wrong.
Eamon Courtenay, Senator
“I think the statement by the Foreign Minister is to be condemned. The Party Leader, honorable John Briceño was very clear in condemning what the Foreign Minister said in characterizing our border as being artificial. I mean the history is very clear. Let’s not forget it. It is the People’s United Party that has a history of unwavering and unbroken struggle and fight for the definition of our border, for the respect for that border and for maintaining the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Belize. For us and I believe for all Belizeans, we have a border and that border is real. Anybody who characterizes it as artificial is flat wrong and there can be no compromise on that issue.”
“The first problem that arises from the use of that phrase is political. Belizeans, and rightly so, react in a visceral and impulsive way to anybody who characterizes our border as being in question or in doubt and the use of the word artificial means that it lacks a permanence or a reality. One can go to Webster and one can go to Oxford and find any meaning but when Joe and Mary are talking on the street, they understand the difference between something that is artificial and something that is real. So I think from a political point of view it is a problem when the foreign minister of a country speaks of a border like that. From a legal point of view, let us have no doubt about it, the Guatemalans are going to use it when we come to court. They are going to cite something as we currently cite statements made by foreign ministers of Guatemala back in the thirties and other times. We cite that the Guatemalan Foreign Minister, who speaks on behalf of the country internationally, said ABC and therefore Guatemala must be held to it. Similarly, when the foreign Minister of Belize makes a statement, he is speaking not personally but for Belize and, therefore, Guatemala is going to no doubt seek to use it. To be fair to Wilfred, I don’t think that statement by itself, prejudices our case in the sense of oh we are going to lose because he said that. But what it does is it gives Guatemala one other thing to use against us. I say it is counterproductive. If the foreign minister misspoke, he must say so. If the Foreign Minister made a mistake he must say so and state the position officially, clearly for all.”
When he was questioned if the term adjacency zone can also be interpreted as if there were no western borders, Courtenay said that the document establishing the adjacency area was signed with the assurance that the territorial integrity of Belize was not in question. On Wednesday morning, Minister Sedi Elrington will have his say on Open Your Eyes.
