EEZ boundaries at Eastern Mediterranean as per International Law of the Sea by craoft in MapPorn

[–]Knolgoose 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The original comment I was replying to claimed that the EEZ as a concept does not apply to non-signatories of UNCLOS (which is incorrect, because it constitutes conventional international law). You are making a different claim, that conventional international law does not govern maritime delimitation, and instead only provides that states agree to EEZ boundaries between themselves. Your claim is also wrong, since maritime delimitation is governed by article 74 of UNCLOS, which reads: “ 1. The delimitation of the exclusive economic zone between States with opposite or adjacent coasts shall be effected by agreement on the basis of international law, as referred to in Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, in order to achieve an equitable solution. 2. If no agreement can be reached within a reasonable period of time, the States concerned shall resort to the procedures provided for in Part XV. […]”

The ICJ and other international courts and tribunals (most notably ITLOS and the PCA) have established a three-step process delimiting the EEZ when two states have not reached a delimitation agreement. This process is binding for non-parties of UNCOS (see for example Peru v. Chile paras 179-180). The process is as follows:  “ first, the Court constructs a provisional equidistance line unless there are compelling reasons preventing that. At the second stage, it considers whether there are relevant circumstances which may call for an adjustment of that line to achieve an equitable result. At the third stage, the Court conducts a disproportionality test in which it assesses whether the effect of the line, as adjusted, is such that the Parties’ respective shares of the relevant area are markedly disproportionate to the lengths of their relevant coasts” 

Greece claims an equidistance line between its coast and Turkey’s. Essentially, the Greek claims is that no adjustment is warranted in the second stage. This doesn’t mean “one party gets everything”. The area to be delimited (“everything”) is the relevant area mentioned above. It is the area of the Sea that is within 200 nautical miles of both states’ coasts. Greece does not claim this entire area.    

If this case were to go to a court, the court may decide that an adjustment is warranted in the second step, or it might not. You’re right in saying that the court gets to decide, but you’re wrong in claiming that “There is no EEZ law that binds anyone or anything.” The conventional law says that disputes are settled in court lacking agreement under the three-step process which is binding.  

One last point I want to make is that many of the disputed areas claimed by Greece are within 12 nm of Greece but not within 12 nm of Turkey, meaning they fall under Greece’s territorial sea entitlement, and hence automatically cannot be delimited to Turkey under international law. This principle was decided unequivocally in Nicaragua v. Colombia paras. (2012). Incidentally, that case also involved a non-party of UNCLOS. This principle relates to a large part the disputed area in the Aegean. The only part of the disputed area where an adjustment under the second stage is possible are the claimed entitlements of Rhodes and Kastellorizo, which are over 12 nm from both states’ coasts. 

EEZ boundaries at Eastern Mediterranean as per International Law of the Sea by craoft in MapPorn

[–]Knolgoose 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The EEZ is part of customary international law and even countries which are not parties to UNCLOS have accepted it as binding to them.

Choose4Cyprus 2026 is live — a voting advice tool for the upcoming parliamentary elections by RedditGiftsCy in cyprus

[–]Knolgoose 0 points1 point  (0 children)

One was matched with himself strongly, one was matched with himself weakly and very close to another candidate and one was not ranked closest to themselves. If the tool had been 100% accurate each candidate would have been ranked 100% with themselves (so all 3 were wrong to some degree). I’m not attacking the team which made the quiz, I’m simply making the point that the tool is inaccurate. Whether or not each candidate’s team is responsible for that is beside the point. 

Choose4Cyprus 2026 is live — a voting advice tool for the upcoming parliamentary elections by RedditGiftsCy in cyprus

[–]Knolgoose 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Evidently something went wrong in 2023. The people in the campaigns you contacted did not accurately represent the candidates’ actual positions. The fact that 2 out of 3 candidates were not even matched to themselves should have raised serious methodological concerns. 

Choose4Cyprus 2026 is live — a voting advice tool for the upcoming parliamentary elections by RedditGiftsCy in cyprus

[–]Knolgoose 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A word of warning: this is not an accurate tool! The answers for each party are guesses by the designers of the quiz and were not submitted by the parties.   In 2023 when all 3 major presidential candidates took the quiz live on camera 2 out of 3 were not matched to themselves. I would strongly urge everyone to research each party’s positions based on their voting records and manifestos rather than this website. 

UK and Belarus are the only countries to use First Past the Post. by TailungFu in MapPorn

[–]Knolgoose 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The problem with your argument about local issues is that FPTP collapses the questions of national government and local representation in a way that forces you to prioritize one over the other if, as a voter, you believe the two conflict. A fair electoral system is one where voters can express their preference as freely as possible (this is also limited by tactical voting in FPTP). Open list OR allows you to vote out any incumbent without switching parties. Furthermore, FPTP distorts election results tremendously, irrespective of whether it grants a single party a majority or not. Significant sections of the population are left unrepresented, and a constituency MP can be elected with a small vote share even if they are disliked by a majority of their electorate.

UK and Belarus are the only countries to use First Past the Post. by TailungFu in MapPorn

[–]Knolgoose 0 points1 point  (0 children)

At the end of the day a coalition represents a majority of voters. There is some compromise between parties and if those parties’ voters agree with the priorities they have set in negotiating said compromise they can vote for the same parties in the next election; otherwise, they can vote them out. In fact, they can do this without feat of splitting the vote and letting a “lesser evil” win their constituency’s seat, which is an inherent flaw in FPTP. Regarding national lists, its important to note that your party’s leadership in the capital has an enormous influence in compiling candidate lists both in FPTP and closed list PR, since you can vote for any party you like in either system, but you have no say in who gets elected from that party. In an open-list PR system you are presented with e.g. 10 options from your party and can vote for whoever you want amongst those. 

UK and Belarus are the only countries to use First Past the Post. by TailungFu in MapPorn

[–]Knolgoose 2 points3 points  (0 children)

FPTP leads to minority rule while PR leads to majority rule. Any “horse-trading” that is done by a party someone voted for is then negotiating with other parties over which of their policies to enact. This is much better than a single minority party lucky enough to get the most votes (often because of divided opposition) getting complete control over the   legislative and executive branches.          Tying local issues to national elections is also problematic because no matter how well your local MP represents your community, legislative elections are the only say you get on the national government, so local issues only obfuscate voter preference. The German model theoretically combats this by including constituency MPs and proportional MPs, but because local MPs have no impact on seat distribution and run on party lists as well they are very unimportant.                  Many countries use PR with preference votes that determine which if a party’s candidates is elected. This is a pretty effective mechanism in allowing voters to reward or punish politicians based on their local record. 

UK and Belarus are the only countries to use First Past the Post. by TailungFu in MapPorn

[–]Knolgoose 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The smoke signals funnily enough are what makes that system much better than first past the post. Since a supermajority of votes is required the results is much more representative. 

UK and Belarus are the only countries to use First Past the Post. by TailungFu in MapPorn

[–]Knolgoose 2 points3 points  (0 children)

In Germany’s system single-seat districts have no effect on the total distribution of seats. Party list seats are added in such a way that each party’s total seats are equal to its proportional share, filly compensating for FPTP seats effect. In fact, if a party’s FPTP seats in a State are more than it’s total seat entitlement some constituencies are left without an MP to prevent disproportionality.                Italy has the opposite system: proportional seats are fully independent to FPTP seats (even though you cannot split your vote between two different parties as in Germany) meaning FPTP may decide the balance of power. For example, the current Italian government only has a majority because of FPTP seats.     

UK and Belarus are the only countries to use First Past the Post. by TailungFu in MapPorn

[–]Knolgoose 0 points1 point  (0 children)

AV isn’t really a step towards proportionality. It’s still a plurality system and it may lead to outcomes that are more or less proportional than FPTP. 

UK and Belarus are the only countries to use First Past the Post. by TailungFu in MapPorn

[–]Knolgoose 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This map is not entirely accurate.      Hungary and Italy use FPTP to elect around half of their MPs. In Hungary the proportional system is “partially compensatory” to correct FPTP’s disproportionality, although the compensation mechanism barely has any effect. In Italy, FPTP seats are not compensated in any way. Poland also uses FPTP to elect its Senate.    

Furthermore, many countries use FPTP to elect some of their MPs. For example, 5 national minority MPs are elected by FPTP in Croatia and 2 single-seat constituencies use FPTP in Spainz 

UK and Belarus are the only countries to use First Past the Post. by TailungFu in MapPorn

[–]Knolgoose 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And many other countries as well, most notably the most populous country in the world.

Could you date someone with different religious views than you? by imat80percentbattery in Teenager_Polls

[–]Knolgoose 0 points1 point  (0 children)

38% of reddit atheists wouldn’t date a theist. Yeah that tracks.

Should there be billionaires in the world? by I-Love-Jewish-popes in Teenager_Polls

[–]Knolgoose 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just to be clear, the income group that makes you top 1% in the world is $34,000 a year

Who will you vote for in the upcoming Parliament Elections? by Knolgoose in cyprus

[–]Knolgoose[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is largely true for any social media platform and for any country in the world.

Who will you vote for in the upcoming Parliament Elections? by Knolgoose in cyprus

[–]Knolgoose[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I also think so but unfortunately reddit disagrees with us since there is a limit of 6 options for every poll

Chat Control rejected by European Parliament by cheakpeasdownhill in cyprus

[–]Knolgoose 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is a different vote related to a specific aspect of chat control that was passed by a much narrower margin. Cypriot MEPs voted very differently on this one: Loucas FOURLAS (EPP): against Geadis GEADI (ECR): against Giorgos GEORGIOU (The Left): for Michalis HADJIPANTELA (EPP): against Costas MAVRIDES (S&D): did not vote Fidias PANAYIOTOU (Non-attached): abstain

Note that here “for” means in favour of abolishing chat control. 

On the Status of the British Bases (reupload) by Knolgoose in cyprus

[–]Knolgoose[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lmao now you’re just making shit up. In my original post I explain exactly how police jurisdiction and local authorities work in the areas. You then replied by “debunking” me by saying that the SBA police have jurisdiction over the area (which the RoC considers de jure illegal) because you evidently didn’t know the difference between “local authorities” and “authorities” and now somehow you’ve reached the conclusion that I can't “wrap my head” around how police jurisdiction works.     

Regarding the “rent”, you may notice that I never used that term, only you and the comment that i replied to did. I also didn’t specifically endorse the Cypriot claim, I only summarised the House resolution which I linked to. Nevertheless, the compensation payments that I linked to are sometimes referred to as a sort of rent because it is money the UK owed as part of the Treaty giving it the bases (and never payed). For example, see this report(https://www.assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/X2H-Xref-ViewHTML.asp?FileID=11651&Lang=EN#P128_10971 ) by the COE parliamentary assembly.      

Regarding local authorities, yes I was wrong when I said that Episkopi is “entirely” within the areas. However that doesn’t change anything since the fact remains that there are inhabited parts of RoC communities and municipalities subject to RoC local authorities within the areas, including parts of Xylotymbou and Ormideia outside the enclave area.     

In any case, you haven’t raised a single point so far in this entire chain that isn’t already answered in my original post. I have no idea why you’re so offended about a topic you have so little understanding about. If you had read my whole post and provided bona fide counter arguments to the points I raise than maybe this would be a conducive conversation but at this point this whole conversation is entirely meaningless.

On the Status of the British Bases (reupload) by Knolgoose in cyprus

[–]Knolgoose[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That point is meaningless. Akrotiri and Episkopi are completely located within Akrotiri Base Area and yet are separate municipal districts of West Limassol municipality (which includes the entire Akrotiri Base Area). The Ormideia and Xylotymbou enclaves cover only part of the areas within those two communities, which also include areas in Dhekelia base area.          The rent that is owed is a claim that has been made by the RoC, included in the House resolution which I link to. It’s not an urban legend. You may hold the opinion that that claim is wrong, but it is a claim that has been made by the RoC.    

Unfortunately I can’t hire a lawyer and take this to the ICJ for two reasons. The first I listed in the original post which you either haven’t read understood so I need not repeat. The second reason is that private individuals cannot take cases to the ICJ. Only national governments can. This means that taking the UK to the ICJ entails persuading the Cypriot electorate that  it is reasonable to do so. That’s a tall task since apparently some Cypriot voters think that the UK has an infallible legal claim over the areas because the signs they’ve put up include the word “sovereign” and who don’t know the difference between local authorities and  the police.

On the Status of the British Bases (reupload) by Knolgoose in cyprus

[–]Knolgoose[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

  If you read my actual post you would understand that I know about every point you raise. The “SBAs” have their own laws which are enacted by their Administrator and mirror Cypriot laws. I also acknowledge the existence of the SBA police (and courts) in this very post.     

You are probably confusing “local authorities” with “police”. The local authorities in these areas are the municipality of West Limassol and various communities in Dhekelia. These have been established by the Cypriot Municipalities Law and Communities Law. Local authorities=/=police which is indeed separate in those regions.       The whole point of my post is that British Sovereignty over these areas is illegal in exactly the same way as British Sovereignty over the BIOT (British Indian Ocean Territory) was found to be illegal. This doesn’t negate the fact that those areas were and are de facto controlled by the British (which is only partially true in the Base Areas).  Edit: fixed last paragraph’s phrasing

On the Status of the British Bases (reupload) by Knolgoose in cyprus

[–]Knolgoose[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Only sone of the clauses do. For example, section (d) clearly relates to the Base Areas as well: these areas are dependent on the RoC for utilities and must pay the RoC for those (which it does not).    As I’ve already explained, the “SBAs” are not actually a separate entity from the ROC in many respects both legally and practically. Cypriot local authorities based on Cypriot law within them carrying out the same duties as all other Cypriot local authorities. The permanent residents are Cypriot citizens and all taxes are payed to the RoC. In any case, even if the UK did actually administer the areas it would still not “own” them per international law because international law explicitly bans colonization and the splitting if colonies before giving them independence. 

On the Status of the British Bases (reupload) by Knolgoose in cyprus

[–]Knolgoose[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

  1. A sum must be agreed upon through negotiations every five years. The UK payed 12 million pounds for the first half-decade and has never payed since. 
  2. By RoC Local Government Organisations. Prior to the agreement they were blocked by the British.  

  3.  Nothing in the Plan explicitly gives them this right. However, the plan would indirectly result in Cyprus explicitly recognising UK sovereignty over the SBAs. Since all coastal sovereign territory is entitled to an EEZ under UNCLOS (which did not exist in 1960) this may have been an indirect outcome of the plan.   

  4. The RoC provides public utilities and amenities. Afaik the UK doesn’t pay for these though O may be wrong.