Dialogue Maduro asked Guterres to revive talks with Guyana over territorial dispute

Nicolas Maduro asked United Nations (UN) Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to immediately revive the dialogue between Venezuela and Guyana in the wake of the territorial dispute between the two nations.

Maduro told Guterres in a letter sent to headquarters on Friday, “You have the ability to revive dialogue, to avoid decisions outside of international legitimacy that could seriously endanger the peace and security of the region.” is.” In United Nations, New York.


The letter, read by Maduro on state television, reiterates Venezuela’s disapproval of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) intervention in the dispute, as the court declared itself competent to judge the legality of an award. Mediation of 1899, which established the border between the two countries.

“We have tirelessly reiterated that Venezuela has never given its consent to the court to hear about the territorial dispute over Guyana Accrediba, much less to include it in the unilateral action brought by Guyana, which is already far away Has over legal rights, such as arbitration awards. In 1899, “the text says.

Venezuela never accepted the award, noting that the judges were biased and that the process was flawed and instead, signed the Geneva Agreement with the United Kingdom in 1966, just before Guyana’s independence, which it had initially established . The basis for resolving the dispute, but without results, lasted more than two decades.

Instant chat

Maduro remarked in his letter to Guterres that only direct negotiations could bring the parties closer to a “truly negotiated, favorable and definitive solution”.

“We believe that now more than ever it is necessary (…) at its good offices, in the broadest sense, it is possible to resume this dispute with merit, for the purpose of understanding that the direct between Guyana and Venezuela Negotiation. Peaceful and beneficial for both sides, “the letter continues.

See also  Children lose basic skills under virus restriction

Maduro reiterated that Venezuela never agreed to the ICJ to resolve the dispute and therefore rejected the decision that the court issued in December, covering approximately 160,000 square kilometers west of the Esseedibo River But, which represents about two-thirds of the former British colony.

“He has in his hand the transmission of a territorial dispute through peaceful means, a friendly, pragmatic and satisfactory solution (…) for both sides and not through a procedural fraud that seeks to undermine Venezuela’s territorial sovereignty.” Is, ”says the letter.

Once the letter was read, Maduro signed a decree establishing a new maritime zone of Venezuela, called the “Area for the Development of the Atlantic Factory”, intended to strengthen the country’s sovereignty over the region is.


Maduro, on the other hand, reported that he would send a letter addressed to ICJ President Abdulkavi Ahmed Yusuf, in which they oppose the date for which a hearing on the case has been scheduled, from next January 25, he said, to prepare for Venezuela. To “does not provide possibility”.

According to Maduro, the court has “acted strangely”, because “to see the court’s ruling for any case, it may take 3 months or more for a hearing between the parties.”

Without knowing the official verdict given by the Venezuelan court with the seal and signature, he intended to hold a hearing on us on 15 January (…) We requested a change of date and he told us that he had dated for 10 days. Which is a strange, suspicious outbreak “, he insisted.

In his opinion, the American, British and oil lobbies lag behind.

See also  An Ancient Military Ship and Greek Tombs

Facing this situation, he reported that the ICJ has “insisted on the alleged coercion by Venezuela and ignoring the reasons so as to postpone the hearing to April and to do it in person”.

“We demand our rights and, if a hearing is to be called, (that) the Republic of Bolivia of Venezuela must be given the necessary time to learn in a comprehensive and detailed manner about this unjust sentence and to prepare the necessary arguments.” He concluded.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here