Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: aladin who wrote (54143)	10/23/2002 11:05:22 AM
From: zonder	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

John - Please. Just read again the POW posts. Nothing in Geneva Convention that says it was necessary for the Taliban to be recognized as the government of Afghanistan. There is still a post by a lawyer out there that was not answered by CB except for "Oh my, I must have touched a nerve :)" or something. I am not morally, or otherwise, mixed up. Please refrain from name-calling. If you have anything to say to counter my points, feel free to post them. If not, silence is gold.

To: aladin who wrote (54143)	10/23/2002 12:08:24 PM
From: zonder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Re: Taliban not recognized etc etc etc Hopefully, the author of these lines will soon join us and I will let him do the posting. For now, please read below: -------------------------------------- regarding the effects of non-recognition on the question of whether or not an organisation purporting to be the government of a country is, in fact the government of that country. For example "Such non-recognition for any reason... can not outweigh the evidence disclosed by this record before me as to the de facto character of Tinoco's government, according to the standard set by international law." (From The Tinoco Concessions arbitration (1923) RIAA 369 or "A declaration by one party that it does not recognise the title of the other will hardly determine the issue, and may be worth very little if it is simply a declaration of political interest and antagonism." Brownlie (1998) p. 86. Basically the point is as I remembered it: recognition by other states is not in itself determinant of whether an organisation is, as a matter of international law, the government of a particular state or territory. It is instead a question of fact: Is it capable of exercising and does it exercise control of a governmental nature over the relevant territory.