San Andres, Providencia and Santa Catalina (Colombia and Nicaragua)
Like other cases in the Americas, the territorial dispute over the archipelago of San Andres, Providencia and Santa Catalina is rooted in colonialism.[1] The archipelago was discovered by Europeans in the sixteenth century, colonized by Spain, and later occupied by English Puritans from Bermuda. Slaves arrived in 1633 from other Caribbean islands. Breaking up with Spain, Colombia and Nicaragua became independent states. At that time the archipelago—which then included the Islas Mangles (Cum Islands)— and the Mosquito Coast were part of the Spanish Viceroyalty of Santa Fe (or Viceroyalty of Nueva Granada).
In 2001, Nicaragua presented its sovereignty claims at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). In 2007, the ICJ recognized Colombian sovereignty. In 2012, the ICJ ruled that the Esguerra-Bárcenas Treary did not include a maritime delimitation—i.e. there was agreed maritime boundary between Colombia and Nicaragua. Moreover, because Colombia is not a party to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), by application of customary international law, the ICJ used a novel and controversial interpretation—i.e. a mixture of weighted base points, geodetic lines, parallels of latitude and enclaving—and confirmed Colombian sovereignty and granted Nicaragua control over part of the western coastline of the archipelago.
The San Andres, Providencia and Santa Catalina territorial dispute between Colombia and Nicaragua includes the Raizal people. They are a local ethnic and racial minority. With an origin in European colonial past that encompassed slavery, migration and different cultures, the Raizal people have their own culture, including their own language—i.e. creole, and overall identity that makes them define themselves as different from the people in Colombia’s mainland.
While the legal and political status of indigenous peoples is in question in terms of territorial disputes, the Americas also include populations that were at one time settlers. These implanted populations encompass those who relocated either willingly such as the Falkland/Malvinas islanders or were forced like former African slaves in the archipelago of San Andres, Providencia and Santa Catalina—i.e. Raizal community.
Differences between islanders and Colombia’s mainland comprise religious discrepancies between Anglophone/Protestant and Hispanic/Catholic views. In fact, they are sociologically linked with the English and Creole-speaking community on the Nicaraguan coast. Controversially, there seems to be a dominant national vision overriding the local Raizal community by means of imposition by the Colombian state coupled with private sector interests.
More currently, with the Black Lives matter movement, Raizal’s claims for self-determination seem to be taking a more visibility domestically, regionally and internationally. Therein, national level organizations such as Proceso de Comunidades Negras (Black Communities’ Process, PCN) defend the right to political-organizational autonomy of the Raizal people.
NOTE:
This blog series introduces, explains and assesses issues pertaining territorial disputes in the Americas including law, politics, culture, history and religion. There will be new posts every Monday, Wednesday and Friday.
PREVIOUS POST:
NEXT POST:
Neo-colonialism and colonial mindset
AUTHOR’S SAMPLE PEER-REVIEWED ACADEMIC RESEARCH (FREE OPEN ACCESS):
State Sovereignty: Concept and Conceptions (OPEN ACCESS) (IJSL 2024)
AUTHOR’S PUBLISHED WORK AVAILABLE TO PURCHASE VIA:
Monday 20th December 2024
Dr Jorge Emilio Núñez
X (formerly, Twitter): https://x.com/DrJorge_World
[1] See Jorge Emilio Núñez, Territorial Disputes and State Sovereignty: International Law and Politics London and New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group, 2020.
No comments:
Post a Comment