Belize Outlines 11-Point Proposal To End Latest Border Dispute

BELMOPAN, Belize, Apr. 13, (CMC) – Belize has outlined 11 new proposals that it hopes will end the latest border dispute with Guatemala, Foreign Minister, Wilfred Elrington, has said.

Erlington, who met with his Guatemalan counterpart, Carlos Raul Morales, last Friday, to discuss the incident in the Sarstoon area, said that Belize is hoping the new proposals will form part of a new agreement between the two countries.

Erlington said that Belize is hoping that the “channels of the Sarstoon River shall continue to be freely navigable by vessels and boats of each of the two countries, without any interference or trailing by the other”.

Last month, the Belize government called on the Organization of American States (OAS) to conduct an investigation, following a shooting incident, in which a senior Belize Defence Force (BDF) member was shot, at least four times, while in the Sarstoon area.

Guatemala and Belize have had a long-running border dispute, with Guatemala claiming the whole or part of Belize since 1940.

Last month, the 15-member Caribbean Community (CARICOM) reiterated its support for Belize in its ongoing border dispute with Guatemala, following an incident involving the BDF and the Guatemalan Navy near the mouth of the Sarstoon River.

Belize sent a protest note to Guatemala over the incident but the Guatemalans replied disagreeing with it’s version of the incident.

Erlington said that the second proposal calls for “whenever any vessels of any one of the parties approaches the base of the other party or any other vessel, it shall reduce its speed as a token of respect and friendship and to avoid injury or damage to persons or property”.

He said the law enforcement and armed forces of both parties shall refrain from any threatening, abusive or unfriendly actions, words or behaviour of any kind, with respect to each other in and around the said river.

“Law enforcement and armed forces of both parties shall respect the right of the citizens of each other to make lawful and environmentally sustainable use of the river for fishing and recreation,” Erlington said, adding that the “parties shall cooperate to prevent or limit hazards and reduce and eliminate adverse consequences arising from floods, droughts and incidents involving substances hazardous to water”.

He said that the parties shall also cooperate on the basis of sovereign equality, mutual benefit and good fate in order to promote and achieve the goals of this agreement, and that both parties shall cooperate in preventing and countering any illegal activities, including drug trafficking, human trafficking, arms smuggling, contraband and other illegal activities of a transnational nature.

“And to this end, the parties may develop plans and conduct joint law enforcement and military patrols or operations, including search and rescue, which may include the participation of third countries,” he said, adding that the “parties shall cooperate to avoid incidents on the Sarstoon River conducive to tensions between them.

“In the event of such an incident, the parties should immediately communicate with one another to contain it, resolve it and prevent its recurrence,” and as a “matter of courtesy and to promote good working relations, commanders assigned to the Sarstoon River may visit each other by mutual arrangement to discuss matters of mutual interests”.

Erlington said that the parties shall, on a regular basis, exchange information.

“This includes an undertaking for any one party to inform the other party, beforehand, of any non-routine activity in or near the Sarstoon River.

“By mutual arrangement, the parties shall install practical means of radio and other communications to facilitate these exchanges,” he said.

Erlington said that if a dispute arises between the parties as to the interpretation or implementation of the protocol, “they shall seek as soon as reasonably practicable to resolve it by negotiation and should they fail to satisfactorily resolve any such dispute, either of the parties may request the Secretary-General of the OAS to use his good offices to propose a solution to this dispute, and the other party hereby agrees to accept such offices and to comply in good fate with the recommendations of the Secretary-General.”