Subject: retraction of message 2089
Date: Apr 18, 2001 @ 06:27
Author: michael donner (michael donner <m@...>)
Prev    Post in Topic    Next
Prev    Post in Time    Next


whoops
upon further review
the situation is much more complicated than i thought
& i was much too casual & glib

for starters the operative map is number 7 rather than number 2 indicated
in the link just below

& there are coords & a loxodrome that just dont match up
etc
etc

back to the drawing board
& profuse apologies
m


>you have probably already seen the ibru exchange above & following
>about the new bahrain qatar boundary decided by the icj
>as well as the map behind it at
>http://www.icj-cij.org/icjwww/idocket/iqb/iqbjudgments/ijudgment_20010316/iqb_i
>judgment_20010316_Map2.jpg
>
>
>
>the mention of the 2 tripoints in the message is very interesting
>
>the uncertain tripoint at the north terminal of the new icj line
> namely the bahrain qatar iran tripoint
>is only an eez tripoint in need of confirmation & neednt slow us down for now
>
> also a 12nm bahrain qatar terminus
> or tripoint with everyones land if anyone prefers
> falls well within the icj allocation
> & it is mentioned but not depicted nor so characterized by the icj
> & also neednt detain us
> since we too have been largely ignoring these el tripoints so far
>
>but the tripoint at the south terminal
> the actual bahrain qatar saudi territorial tricountry point
>has had us on high alert since before st patricks day
>when you may recall its likelihood of becoming the first maritime
>territorial tricountry point in the world was first really appreciated
>
>& who can forget the almost immediate followup in message 1873
>when the first report of the ensuing qatari saudi actualization arrived
>
>but what is new in the forwarded message here is the express or implied
>expectation of further negotiation between bahrain & saudi arabia
>
>
>still
>based on what arif has said about the construction of islamic boundary law
>around sovereign tax streams rather than sovereign territory
>which gave me the impression that this whole bhqasa tripoint deal was
>really already done as of the link in message 1873
>i have to wonder again if any further negotiation of this point is not a
>vain expectation
>
>what could any of the 3 monarchs have further to discuss about this tripoint
>
>the lines are already fully drawn separating all 3 sovereignties
> & i grant there is this seemingly blatant loose end
> from a western territorial perspective
>
>but the tax implications
> meaning in this case the allocation of the oil royalties
>are now fully cut & dried in islamic law
>if i understand correctly
>
>so i will be very interested to see if any further bahraini saudi boundary
>confirmation or clarification will ever occur
>& i frankly rather doubt it on this issue
>for why would they choose to resort to western law at all again if the
>matter has now already been fully settled in islamic law
>
>& indeed it would seem to be a cultural sellout & an embarrassment if they
>were to go thru all the diplomatic motions necessary to reaffirm the
>tripoint just to assuage western oil companies that there is sufficient
>title to do business
>if there already clearly is
>
>
>well it may be a good test case
>
>& i know i am way way out on a limb again here
>but it sure looks to me like a done deal already
>on what i would like to welcome & hail as
>
> our first maritime & islamic law tricountry point
>
>
>
>so i guess the message title might also have been
>when does an islamic law decision take effect
>
>
>but anyway what does anybody think about any of this
>
>& feel free to pull it apart as it is only a guess
>
>m
>
>
>>X-From_: owner-int-boundaries@... Tue Apr 17 04:30:59 2001
>>MIME-Version: 1.0
>>Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 09:31:29 +0100
>>Reply-To: Carleton Chris <Chris.Carleton@...>
>>Sender: International boundaries discussion list
>><INT-BOUNDARIES@...>
>>From: Carleton Chris <Chris.Carleton@...>
>>Subject: Re: When does an ICJ decision take effe ct?
>>Comments: To: "DJDzu@..." <DJDzu@...>
>>To: INT-BOUNDARIES@...
>>
>>Dear Dan,
>> An ICJ judgement comes into effect on the day of the judgement. In
>>the case of the Bahrain/Qatar case the Court delimited the line fully apart
>>from the two tripoints at each end. The Parties will have to negotiate with
>>the two third parties to settle these two points. If the judgement had only
>>indicated where the line should be delimited, as in the North Sea case, or,
>>as in the Jan Mayen case, only give approximate co-ordinates for the
>>boundary, the Parties are required to delimit the boundary by negotiation
>>following the guidance handed down by the Court.
>>
>>
>>Kindest Regards
>>
>>Chris Carleton
>>
>>
>>CHRIS CARLETON. MBE. MRICS
>>Head, Law of the Sea Division
>>UK Hydrographic Office
>>chris.carleton@...
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: DJDzu@... [SMTP:DJDzu@...]
>>> Sent: 13 April 2001 20:51
>>> To: INT-BOUNDARIES@...
>>> Subject: When does an ICJ decision take effect?
>>>
>>> Dear Colleagues:
>>>
>>> Like many of you, I have been examining the 16 March 2001 International
>>> Court
>>> decision on the Bahrain-Qatar maritime boundary. I wondered if anyone,
>>> probably the legal specialists, among us could advise me when a boundary
>>> delimited by the ICJ comes into existence. Assuming that the decision is
>>> binding on the parties, does the boundary take effect when it was
>>> promulgated
>>> by the court, or do the countries party to the case need to take some
>>> subsequent actions?
>>>
>>> Thanks for any assistance.
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>> Dan Dzurek
>>
>
>