“Our Independence and territorial integrity are NOT for negotiation.”
The Belizean people have spoken “loud and clear” on every occasion before and after Independence.
National Hero Philip Goldson stood with the Belizean people in 1968 and 1981, when the government party was leaning toward appeasement. Nevertheless, PUP Prime Minister George Price fulfilled his mission and led Belize to Independence on September 21, 1981, albeit under a State of Emergency.
The whole world (United Nations) stood with the Belizean people in 1981 to become a nation with clearly defined borders – our territorial integrity intact. That was that. We had crossed the “bridge” into nationhood.
The 1984 landslide UDP government passed the Constitutional Amendment without opposition in 1985, denying Belizean citizenship to Guatemalans or anyone who still insisted on endorsing their claim to our territory. You cannot want to be a part of me, while at the same time denying my identity and existence, as defined before the whole world in 1981.
But appeasers fell to the diplomatic pressure and trickery of Guatemalan agents with a “Joint Communique” in 1989. It was “under the radar”, and Belizeans did not understand, they were not made to understand, that our country’s leaders were, in effect, repealing, or attempting to repeal, or circumventing the important 1985 Constitutional Amendment. Had they known, we would have “brakesd” that communiqué, which was never properly communicated to the Belizean people.
Emboldened by that step, Guatemala, with the encouragement and assistance of the U.S. controlled O.A.S., then went forward with the Maritime Areas Act. The PUP government and the UDP opposition leaders went along with the M.A.A., until they explained it to the Belizean people, who said an emphatic “NO!!” The UDP opposition voted against it in the House, but their party split over the MAA, and NABR was formed, with national hero Philip Goldson as leader.
NABR teamed up with the UDP in time to win the next general elections in 1993, with a promise to repeal the MAA, which the UDP never fulfilled.
So? The PUP took office again in 1998 (they also failed to repeal the MAA), and soon thereafter they came with the Reichler/Ramphal Proposals in 2001 with its “Adjacency Zone”. It was a “confidence building measure”, we were told. Confidence for whom; about what? Our border? Our territory? Our land? But the Guatemalan government withdrew before it was even put to a referendum by the Belizean people.
Now, for the last two years, since “talks broke down” again, both PUP and UDP leaders have been speaking in favor of taking our case, along with Guatemala, to the ICJ. Is it because both political parties are dominated by lawyers? Do they feel compelled to “reason things out” with Guatemala? Can’t they understand that there are certain things that are beyond reason?
This is beyond a so-called dispute over property. Britain and Guatemala had a dispute over property, territory; Her Majesty will figure how to compensate Guatemala. But Belize has asserted herself as a nation. And the case has already been put to the world, and supported by the world. The case is over. Belize is Belize, with its borders clearly defined in its Independence Constitution. Any hint at anything other than that is an insult to our integrity as a nation. The O.A.S. “adjacency zone” is the most sinister, diplomatically subversive, and strategically diabolical thing the architects of the Webster’s Proposals could have come up with. If we accepted this “adjacency zone” bull___, and the Belizean people have always rejected it outrightly, then we would be saying that, yes, we are not sure that the border should be there.
The Belizean people will decide in a referendum whether our UDP government should go ahead with this plan to go to the ICJ.
Some leaders think they are smarter than the Belizean people. Being a lawyer, even a good lawyer, makes one qualified to deal with legal arguments, above and beyond the capacity of the ordinary citizen. But when it comes to common sense arguments of right and wrong, and what’s good for Belize, the Belizean people know best. If they didn’t, we would have lost our country in 1968, or in 1981. And the Belizean people will show our leaders what to do with the ICJ idea.
The Belizean people have changed somewhat since 1968 (Webster’s Proposals), since 1981 (Heads of Agreement), since 1991 (Maritime Areas Act), and since 2001 (Reichler/Ramphal Proposals). The question is: how much have we changed? Many immigrants have become new citizens, and many citizens have migrated to the U.S.A. When the bell rings for the referendum on the ICJ, the world will know who and what are the Belizean people; and they will know IF the Belizean people still know who and what they are; that is, if they will allow a group of esteemed foreign judges to determine who and what is the Belizean nation, which has from our Independence in 1981, been clearly defined with the full blessing, approval and support of the United Nations of the world.