w11.zetaboards.com Webutation
Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]

- NATIONS

Domestic News: | International News: P | Military News: | Financial News: | Other News: |
Add Reply
Brazilian Invasion of Uruguay
Topic Started: Jun 6 2015, 04:24 AM (165 Views)
Litos
Member Avatar
Itō Hirobumi
Frank-Walter Steinmeier
Foreign Minister

We note with grave concern the expansionism and violation of the territory of Uruguay by Brazil. While the Brazilian army just seized a border town, these actions are unprecedented for countries like Brazil in the last ten years, and this surprise attack on a friendly country is not welcomed when it comes to the stability and free economic movement of the region. Germany strongly condemns this violation and vows that we will push for sanctions, but not if the Brazilians withdraw immediately: in that event, we will strongly oppose repercussions because we do not believe the majority of the Brazilian people or government urged for this decision, and will do everything we can to counter the effects of this move.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
KnightConcorde
Member Avatar
Canada
Marc Garneau
Minister of Foreign Affairs of Canada

The Government of Canada, like our German counterparts, is also gravely concerned by Brazil's blatant violation of international law and norms with their military operations in Uruguayan territory. Canada supports Germany's calls for United Nations sanctions on Brazil unless Brazil withdraws from Uruguayan territory immediately.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Koning
Member Avatar

Sergey Lavrov
Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation


The Russian Federation has reviewed the situation that has occurred and believes a key element of history is being forgotten by the nations present. The Treaty of Montevideo signed in 1828 between the emerging government of Uruguay and the government of Brazil established the right of Brazil to intervene on matters of territory, subsequently after the Uruguayan Civil War many decades later the 1851 Boundary Treaty was signed granting Brazil control of the territory in which the city Masoller currently sits.

Now should the government of Brazil used diplomacy prior to these measures? Yes that would have been helpful. But by the treaties and precedent that exists between Uruguay and Brazil these actions were not only legal but they were allowed by standing agreements between both countries! As distasteful as it is to those present here can anyone refute the treaties that have been signed in the history of both Uruguay and Brazil that are mentioned here to come to any conclusion other than what we have presented?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
KnightConcorde
Member Avatar
Canada
Marc Garneau
Minister of Foreign Affairs of Canada

Minister Lavrov,

No matter what treaties a nation has signed, launching a military operation in another countries soil without said countries direct request is a violation of the Charter of the United Nations, and thus a violation of international law. The fact remains that while Brazil could have tried to resolve the dispute over this terrirotry through diplomatic means, it didn't. The result is that they have directly violated international law, and thus the international comunity is required to act.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Koning
Member Avatar

Sergey Lavrov
Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation


Except that the treaties signed give Brazil the ability to intervene in Uruguay even militarily should they choose if it involves a territorial matter. We are not denying that diplomacy is the method that should have been used but we are saying that these treaties cannot be ignored because they do matter very much in this situation nor can we ignore that Masoller is the rightful territory of Brazil in this situation.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
KnightConcorde
Member Avatar
Canada
Marc Garneau
Minister of Foreign Affairs of Canada

The Charter of the United Nations is the predominant piece of international legislation, and Brazil has knowingly and willingly violated it by launching an unprovoked attack on Uruguay. While we agree that Brazil has claim to Masoller, that is no excuse for the fact that they launched an unprovoked attack on another sovereign nation.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gabe
Member Avatar

Marina Silva
President of Brazil

I would like to say to all of the representatives here today that in no way deploying military troops to an part of your own nation in any way a violation of international law. You said it yourself Minister Garneau "we agree that Brazil has claim to Masoller" which in turn means we have sovereign right over it and deploying military forces to a part of your own sovereign soil is in no way a violation of international law. As for the 3 boarder guards killed, we sent our troops in with the order not to fire first and they were sent in with camera's as well to record the ordeal, in which they took fire first and were then force to return fire and capture the remaining guards whom will be released by the end of this months once transportation has been arranged for them. As for the removal of troops, that will happen in 1 months once new boarder checkpoints are set up and the troops will be replaced by civilian based policing.
Edited by Gabe, Jun 6 2015, 12:43 PM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
winisle
Member Avatar

Douglas Alexander
Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs

What my Russian colleauge is missing, is that the boundry dispute that Brazil has used as pretence for this attack, is which of two creeks should be used for demarking the boundry between Brazil and Uruguay. We can agree that there is a dispute, and that there is an uncertanty as to where the boundry goes. What isn't in dispute is the fact that Masoller, a village or small town, several hundreds of meters from the two creeks, well into Uruguayian territory, has been seized and occupied by Brazilian forces. Masoller was never in the disputed area.

That makes the Brazilian claims invalid, as the territory in no way is soveregin Brazilian territory, but rather soveregin Uruguayian. We call on Brazil to withdraw its Army from Uruguayian soil, and not to try and replace them with police or other forces.
Edited by winisle, Jun 6 2015, 01:52 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
KnightConcorde
Member Avatar
Canada
Marc Garneau
Minister of Foreign Affairs of Canada

President Silva,
Regardless about whether or not your country claims Masoller and the surrounding area as your sovereign territory, the fact that your military launched an attack on another sovereign nation's de facto territory is a violation of international law, and one that we will and are condemning. In light of this, we support the UK's call for Brazil to withdraw its military forces from sovereign Uruguayan soil, and for Brazil not to try to replace replace those military forces with any form of police or paramilitary forces.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Koning
Member Avatar

Sergey Lavrov
Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation


It would be better for the United Nations to send peacekeepers in to the area just outside of Masoller to ensure further hostilities do not erupt. We have to applaud the Brazilian statements that they plan to withdraw and re-establish the border to reflect their territorial claim which is backed by mutual agreements by Uruguay and Brazil. By withdrawing and re-establishing the peace Brazil is showing the world that it is both responsible and able to handle the gravity of the situation something we find to be very reassuring in regards to this matter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Round 5 · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Skin created by tiptopolive