Latest Commentaries
Thursday 30 April 2026
All of Sir Ronald's commentaries up to April 30th, 2026 can be read in the "Commentaries" section of this website. The most recent one is entitled, " A Pin, a Principle, and the Integrity of the Caribbean
-Territorial claims are decided in court, not worn on a lapel- "
When a Head of Government displays, in official engagements with other states, a symbol that asserts a territorial claim against a neighbour, that act ceases to be personal expression. It becomes an instrument of state policy. It is intended to communicate, to reinforce, and to normalise a position that is very much in dispute.
That dispute is not abstract. It is currently before the International Court of Justice, to which Guyana has turned for a final and binding determination of the validity of the 1899 Arbitral Award that fixed the boundary between the two countries.
Venezuela now asserts that its position is grounded in international law and in the Geneva Agreement. That claim requires careful scrutiny. The Geneva Agreement did not determine sovereignty, nor did it invalidate the 1899 Award. It established a mechanism for the peaceful resolution of a controversy and, ultimately, the pathway that has led the matter to the Court. It is therefore incorrect to suggest that the Geneva Agreement justifies unilateral assertions of territorial entitlement while the very question it addresses is before judicial determination.
In that context, it is difficult to reconcile assertions of fidelity to international law with conduct that appears designed to shape perceptions of a matter that is sub judice. A state cannot credibly submit a controversy to judicial settlement while simultaneously seeking, through symbols, legislation, or administrative acts, to advance the outcome it desires outside the courtroom.
See the entire commentary in the commentaries section.