Argentina Sues United States

[camberiu]

Argentina sues United States at Intl Court of Justice over its sovereign debt



This is now. Try to imagine (if you can) how it must have been like here in this neighborhood when Argentina had the largest economy and the most powerful military in the region.

 

[Rich One]

Washington will not accept the jurisdiction of the Hague Court for a while..... if ever

 

[French jurist]

Interesting development.

US will say the ICJ has no jurisdiction, and will block the enforcement of any ruling (if any against the US) claiming the US sovereignty.

Kind of the same situation Argentina is in right now.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States

 

[Hybrid Ambassador]

A country can try to settle the dispute in the ICJ in Hague, but if the other does not agree then nothing can be started.
Case in pointe: Japan vs Korea~ dispute on two piece of rocks in the ocean. We the Japanese call those rocky isletes
the "Takeshimas" the Koreans calls them "Dokdo" trying to bring Korea over to ICJ but they refuse to come and settle the dispute. See Youtube video.
================================================================================

Earlier this month, there was an article in The Korea Herald asking the question “will U.S. back Korea over Dokdo?” As Ankit Panda outlined in The Diplomat, it is quite clear that Washington would not choose between allies based on the U.S.-Korea Mutual Defense Treaty. Moreover, the analogy that some in South Korea are making, to U.S. inclusion of the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands under the U.S.-Japan Treaty, is manifestly flawed. Yet, while the answer may be clear, the article signifies another disturbing trend over the past few years in Seoul which paints Japan, especially under the Abe administration, as a security threat. Meanwhile, Abe has spent the past few months, following his visit to Yasukuni Shrine last December, trying to keep his head down on worsening ties with Korea in an attempt to patch up relations.
Diplomatic jousting over Dokdo/Takeshima has been a constant over the past decade and has ebbed and flowed with the change of political leaders in South Korea and Japan. But, as Michael Devitt has explained, the status-quo on the dispute is relatively firm: “the only way South Korea will relinquish control is if military force is used to eject it from the islets. Even then, enough military capability would have to be maintained in the vicinity on a more or less permanent basis, to ensure that South Korea could not take the islets back. It is hard to imagine that Japan would ever be willing to attempt such a military undertaking, or could amass the capability to actually sustain control if it ever did seize the islets. In effect, South Korea’s de facto control is permanent.”

So, why not bring the case jointly to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to finally put the issue of sovereignty to rest? In fact, this has been a previous approach by Tokyo, which has asked Seoul three times to agree to a joint submission to the ICJ. South Korea has refused each time, as it believes there is no dispute over the sovereignty of the islets. During Tokyo’s last approach in 2012, the South Korean Foreign Ministryresponded, “Dokdo is clearly part of Korean territory historically, geographically and under international law, and no territorial dispute exists. The Japanese government’s proposal to take the Dokdo issue before the ICJ is not worth attention.” Ironically, this is similar to Tokyo’s approach with China over the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea.

Clearly frustrated with Seoul’s refusal to consider a joint submission, Tokyo has begun to think about bringing the dispute unilaterally to the ICJ (although such talk is largely symbolic and meant for leverage). This threat became a diplomatic tool for Japan after former South Korean President Lee Myung-bak dramatically changed the status quo around the disputed isles through his visit to Dokdo in August of 2012. Tokyo responded diplomatically but the move also helped contribute to the growing feeling of “Korea fatigue” amongst some politicians in Japan. Indeed, one of the outgrowths out the Lee visit to Dokdo was growing political support in Tokyo for events trumpeting Japan’s sovereignty over the islands. This past February, for example, Abe sent a parliamentary secretary to the Takeshima Day festivities in Shimane prefecture for the second year in a row. Thus far, Abe has demurred on elevating the status of central government support for the holiday in order to avoid a deeper diplomatic trench with Seoul.
http://thediplomat.c...eshima-dispute/

http://www.mofa.go.j...paci/takeshima/

https://www.youtube....h?v=zeoH8-bVhPw

 

[ARbound]

Honestly, its stuff like this that should put the Government of CFK next to definition of the word conchudo(s).

Last time I checked we don't even take the ICJ seriously and, that aside, Our government is not the funds

Good lord, talk about an ineptocracy...

 

[Davidglen77]

Really sad that this government is still beating a dead horse....the US will most certainly quickly reject Argentina's claims and the possibility of a suit. You would think Argentina would have learned their lesson about bringing unfounded claims to the ICJ when they tried to sue Uruguay over the Botnia celulose plant....Uruguay DID agree to have the case heard and The Hague panel of judges voted against Argentina 14 to 1, with the 1 vote being from the judge appointed by Argentina. It's common knowlege that the reason Argentina tried to block the operation of that plant was the company originally wanted to build it in Argentina, but after the nightmare bureaucracy and bribe requests from the Argentine government, Botnia said "bye-bye" to Argentina and went across the river.

 

[syngirl]

Honestly, its stuff like this that should put the Government of CFK next to definition of the word conchudo(s).

Any excuse to post the Feinmann conchudos clip that I love so much

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgzHaZPeyuo

 

[ajoknoblauch]

Really sad that this government is still beating a dead horse....the US will most certainly quickly reject Argentina's claims and the possibility of a suit. You would think Argentina would have learned their lesson about bringing unfounded claims to the ICJ when they tried to sue Uruguay over the Botnia celulose plant....Uruguay DID agree to have the case heard and The Hague panel of judges voted against Argentina 14 to 1, with the 1 vote being from the judge appointed by Argentina. It's common knowlege that the reason Argentina tried to block the operation of that plant was the company originally wanted to build it in Argentina, but after the nightmare bureaucracy and bribe requests from the Argentine government, Botnia said "bye-bye" to Argentina and went across the river.

You misunderstand the situation. Unless international courts agree or at least concur with Argentina, they lack jurisdiction.

 

[ben]

Honestly, its stuff like this that should put the Government of CFK next to definition of the word conchudo(s).

Last time I checked we don't even take the ICJ seriously and, that aside, Our government is not the funds

Good lord, talk about an ineptocracy...

Unless I am guilty of a severe misreading of the situation (or it's being severely misreported), this is the textbook definition of insanity.

The govt. issued bonds stating disputes would be governed by New York law. Disputes occurred, they were governed by New York law. What is this about?

BUT: The point of this is probably purely domestic: the 'todos' in '_____ para todos' would likely see this as proof that Argentina has a legitimate grievance.

And when the US inevitably doesn't accept ICJ jurisdiction, that will perversely strengthen the narrative: Argentina has a legitimate grievance, it filed suit 'by the rules', but it can't get a fair hearing because the US puts itself above the law. You (or the 'todos') might even forget that that's exactly what Argentina wanted to do but couldn't.