But the major thing about fragments of nay type is ACCESS

Anyone can pass through your terr. seas without permission.
BUT they can't pass through your land without permission.

Enclaves have in international law a right to access across intervening
land. But presumably not fragments like Nakhichevan, tho i am not sure on
this.

>From: David Mark <dmark@...>
>Reply-To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
>To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] Largest enclave
>Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 18:40:07 -0500 (EST)
>
>
>On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Brendan Whyte wrote:
>
> > >If an exclave is defined as a disconnected piece of a unit that one
>cannot
> > >reach except by going through one or more other units of the same
>'level'.
> >
> > So still landlocked? Rules out Kalinigrad?
>
>Not land locked-- land is irrelevant to the fiat objects we are dealing
>with here. But land-plus-12-mile-limit-locked. If one can reach
>international waters from Kalingrad territory without passimg through
>other countries' sovereignty, then it is not an exclave or enclave.

But it is not irrelevant, as you have right of passage through terr waters
byond the baseline, high seas or no. Thus a coastal fragment is never cut
off fomr access, exceptt for military/hostiles.
On land there is only right of access to enclaves, totally inside another
piece of land.
B

>
> > And Jungholz is neither also? So remains a pene-enclave and a
> > pene-exclave??
>
>According to your definition, yes.
>
>David
>

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com