Monarch From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 362 posts, RR: 6 Posted (11 years 1 week 1 day ago) and read 795 times:
Hi all,
Just wondered what you thought about the current situation between the UK, Spain & Gibralter- the people of Gibralter want to remain British, but Britain wants to give power to Spain.
The people of Gibralter should decide who governs them and a huge majority want Britain too. Why can't Tony Blair and Jack Straw see this?????
Gibralter should remain British and Tony Blair should be doing everything in his power to support the people of Gibralter. Many Gibraltarians see Blair as a traitor, because Margaret Thatcher stuck up for the people of the Falklands and Blair won't do the same for them.
Banco From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 14752 posts, RR: 55 Reply 3, posted (11 years 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 743 times:
The Spanish argument might be a bit stronger if they didn't have their north African enclaves in Cueta and Melilla. They can't really argue the unjustness of the situation when they have the same thing.
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
Krushny From Spain, joined Dec 2000, 776 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (11 years 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 743 times:
First, it is spelled Gibraltar .
And people from the UK, before calling Blair a traitor please research how many taxpayer pounds does it cost to maintain this enclave. Maybe if they lost their many perks, the Gibraltareans would not be so enthusiastic about remaining British.
And Saintsman, I do not see the relation between the Canaries and Gibraltar. Can you please elaborate?
Saintsman From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2002, 2065 posts, RR: 2 Reply 5, posted (11 years 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 733 times:
Krushny,
The Canary Islands are nowhere near Spain, being off the coast of West Africa, which is the same as Gibraltar being nowhere near the UK. How then did the Canaries become Spanish? They must have taken them, probably by force which is the same as how Gibraltar became British.
Gibraltar has been British for over 300 years and at that time it was the way land became owned. Spain conquered vast countries (particularly S America) and so did Britain, both having big empires. Most of that land has been given up but both countries retain land all round the world. These days if the majority of local population wish to become independent then it is granted. This is not the case with regard to Gibraltar.
Both countries still have disputes today where the majority of the people do not wish to become independent (The Basque Region and N Ireland). Both governments will not give up these places so why should Gibraltar be different?
Pacificjourney From New Zealand, joined Jul 2001, 2698 posts, RR: 9 Reply 6, posted (11 years 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 723 times:
Surely it is up to all the British people to decide who remains British or not, the people of Gibraltar AND the other 60 million or so.
2 years ago these same flag waving patriots did a nimby about fixing a broken Nuclear submarine in their dockyard ( the naval facilities being the reason Britain maintained Gibraltar in the first place ) but now want to continue all the tax free and tax payer subsidised perks of remaining British.
If they really want to remain British then let them pay their own way like everyone else, or move to Manchester. If it were me I would start learning Spanish, fast !
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12715 posts, RR: 80 Reply 7, posted (11 years 1 week 5 hours ago) and read 704 times:
Yes they did make a bit of a fool of themselves over that sub.
The UK military presence has declined drastically in the past 20 years, the main naval dockyard was closed in 1983.
Let's face it, the place was only ever British for purely military considerations.
I doubt if Blair would risk handing the rock over to Spain without some kind of referendum, I think he wants to be seen to be doing the right thing, and generally cultivating influence in the EU.
Parra From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (11 years 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 678 times:
I remember reading that in the last referendum only one person voted for transfer to Spanish sovereignty, however this was some years ago and the memories of Franco were still probably fresh in the minds of most Gibraltarians, although I would imagine that the overwhelming majority would still want to remain British if there were a referendum today.
The reason for the current dialogue between Blair and Spain is to try and resolve the thorn in the side of the relationship between the UK and Spain. Spain frequently threatens to veto UK sponsored euro legislation and generally acts as a a pain-in-the-arse. Maybe Blair sees that the whole UK is paying in more weays than one for a few people down in Gibralter.
Some people have brought up the Canaries and Ceuta. I can't think of a country that didn't have far flung territory in the recent past?
Anyway. I love Spain and I love the UK so I hope an amicable solution is found. Why not joint sovereignty like Andorra? It's soverignty alternates every year between a spanish bishop and the french president.
As for the comparison with the Canary Islands, it is not very fortunate. Gibraltar was lost as a result of a war, as sanctioned in the Utrecht treaty, as well as Menorca and Florida which later returned to Spanish rule. Later England took more territory than agreed to build the airport.
On the other hand, the Canary Islands did not belong to any other country when the Castilians conquered them. If they were to be separated from Spain, to whom should they go? The original natives have mixed with inmigrants from Spain since long ago, and I am not sure if they would be for autodetermination. It is a similar situation to the UK has with many of its islands in the Atlantic, from the Orkneys to the South Georgians.
As for Ceuta, it is under Iberian domination since the XIV century. At that time Spain, the UK or Morocco did not exist. The population is mostly Spanish. I do not see how Morocco has any right over it. Melilla is similar, but it is Spanish "only" since the XVI century.
Banco From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 14752 posts, RR: 55 Reply 12, posted (11 years 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 651 times:
Krushny, I can't believe your last sentences:
"As for Ceuta, it is under Iberian domination since the XIV century. At that time Spain, the UK or Morocco did not exist. The population is mostly Spanish. I do not see how Morocco has any right over it. Melilla is similar, but it is Spanish "only" since the XVI century.
Is this not precisely the same scenario? The Gibraltarians regard themselves as British, and wish to remain so. Your justification of Ceuta and Mellila is exactly the same as the British for Gib. You can't have it both ways.
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
Krushny From Spain, joined Dec 2000, 776 posts, RR: 1 Reply 13, posted (11 years 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 650 times:
Banco, what you don´t believe of my last sentences? Is there something false or unbelievable?
The difference between Gibraltar and our North African posessions is that England took Gibraltar from Spain by a treaty which has been violated a number of times. Spain took Ceuta and Melilla from entities that no longer exist.
BTW, I do not care if Gibraltar remains British, declares independence or goes back to Spain, as long as it does not annoying things to my country like money laundering, storing damaged nuclear submarines, smuggling, etc. Some time ago, it was used for drug trafficking but it was stopped.
Banco From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 14752 posts, RR: 55 Reply 14, posted (11 years 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 645 times:
Wasn't Gibraltar Dutch prior to the treaty of Utrecht?
As for the damaged nuclear submarine issue, the Gibraltarians themselves damaged their case with their response. Even so, the hysteria surrounding that was ridiculous. What would have had the Royal Navy do? Sink it in the Mediterranean? Gibraltar was the nearest British land, they couldn't sail it back to the UK until it was repaired.
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
Saintsman From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2002, 2065 posts, RR: 2 Reply 15, posted (11 years 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 636 times:
Krushny,
I wouldn't go down the 'annoying things' route or you are likely to provoke a lot of arguements regarding fish quotas, harbouring bank robbers and Bull fighting etc.
I think that after 300 years the issue should be closed and accepted the way it is now - Gibraltar is a British Colony.
And if you think I am anti Spain you are mistaken. I have just returned from a couple of very enjoyable days in Madrid and next month will be holidaying in Mallorca.
Krushny From Spain, joined Dec 2000, 776 posts, RR: 1 Reply 16, posted (11 years 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 626 times:
Banco, you got the continent wrong. It was Africa's southernmost tip that was Dutch before British, not Europe's.
As for the nuclear submarine, it could have been towed to England or wherever they could fix it. Gibraltar had no capabilities to fix the reactor, it only was stored there for some months. I got seamen in my family and their opinion is that what the British government said (had to wait for the summer for towing) was BS; they just wanted to make everyone aware of who owned the place.
Sainstman, OK. No Spain-Britain mudslinging competition. I do not feel like it and besides I would be in clear minority...
Banco From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 14752 posts, RR: 55 Reply 17, posted (11 years 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 623 times:
It was an Dutch/British force that took the Rock - I did some checking - hence my feeling it was a Dutch possession. It wasn't, but that's where my (mistaken) memory came from.
I can't really see your reasoning for why Britain didn't move the sub earlier. Britain has held Gibraltar for so long, why would they feel the need to emphasise it? Besides, there has been a naval base there for years, but it is now shut down. It just doesn't ring true.
It's certainly the case that this topic has soured otherwise excellent British/Spanish relations for years. Ny overall feeling tends to the thinking that it is up to the residents and no-one else. Having said that, Spanish policy has not really been geared to winning the people's hearts and minds over the years. Perhaps that would be a better way forward. I certainly think that the UK government would be fairly quick to dump the place if that was what the population wanted.
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
Roguetrader From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (11 years 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 613 times:
I think this is obviously mainly about Blair and his hoped-for increased cooperation/integration with the rest of Europe. He's using Gibralter as a chess pawn that he is willing to sacrifice to further a greater goal he has in mind. The actual people who live there are not important to him.
Slz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (11 years 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 588 times:
yes, if only Margaret Thatcher would still be the British PM....
Oh, but wait a minute, wasn't it PM Margaret Thatcher who aggreed to hand over Hong Kong to China in 1983 or so?
After all, and this was later often not mentioned, but only the new territories had to be given back to china at the latest after 99 years of lease in 1999, the rest of Hong Kong (i.e. Kowloon, Victoria Harbour etc.) was fully British...
LH423 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 6501 posts, RR: 55 Reply 21, posted (11 years 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 585 times:
Call me ignorant, but I thought Britain gained some upperhand by being in control of the western entrance to the Mediterranean. Why would Britain want to give up this control?
LH423
« On ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux » Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
Go Canada! From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 2955 posts, RR: 12 Reply 22, posted (11 years 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 583 times:
Britain agreed to hand back hong kong, all of it was to be handed back.
The people of gibralter want to be british and will vote no, the issue is that the uk and spanish government will leave it on the table and carry on pushing, it wont be left alone.
Taxpayers pounds? yes of the naval bases, but thats to help protect europe, not just one rock, gib is self-supporting and is a site of great importance, can you see spain allowing the uk to have military forces on the rock if it was joint soverginty?
and regarding spains own little gibs, if you follow that line of arguement u then are stating that spain should be handed back to north africa since large parts were moorish!!!!!!!!!!!
suppose you want portgual as well!!!!
and want about the basque area and catalonia? you forget that spain wasnt unfied until the marriage of aragon and castile, even then the kingdom of narrave existed in the north, spain was seperate states that merged together and also merged with germania to form the hasburg empire and then had the same family as the french monachs!!!!!
if you dont care about gib,then why post?
It is amazing what can be accomplised when nobody takes the credit
Vc10 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 1382 posts, RR: 17 Reply 23, posted (11 years 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 579 times:
If you go along with the Spanish argument of " It belonged to us once, and now we want it back" I wonder if anybody can tell me who owns California, Texas, New Mexico etc. The USA or is it Mexico or even perhaps Spain again.
regards little vc10
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12715 posts, RR: 80 Reply 24, posted (11 years 5 days ago) and read 574 times:
I don't think the escorting of convoys is the Navies mission now, more like expeditionary warfare.
In that respect, the limited facilities of Gibraltar are still of some use, but Spain is a NATO as well as EU member, so any bases are available for use by the RN, at least in theory.
Far more important in the Mediterranean is the large base, including a listening station, in the Sovereign Base Area on Cyprus, very handy for the Middle East.
So Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon's reported opposition to a Gibraltar deal has some validity, but not very much.
25 Banco: Slz396, just on the subject of Hong Kong, you are correct, but it was hardly a decision that could be criticised on such grounds. Hong Kong Island mig
26 Krushny: Go Canada, I suppose your rant was directed against me. Your post is a lot of nonsense, let me answer just some of your points : Taxpayers pounds? ye
27 Banco: The whole military base issue is something of a red herring. They key issue to me is that in a polls 98% of the Gibraltarians (I don't think you can a
28 Parra: As Tony Benn once said, "If democracy actually changed anything, they'd ban it".
Sponsor Message: 
From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 362 posts, 
From Spain, joined Dec 2000, 776 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Jul 2001, 2698 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 291 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 6501 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
