Isi Dari New York Agreement

in Sin categoría by

Worse still, on the basis of the agreement of the United States, the Netherlands and Indonesia, UNTEA is the staff of the belligerents. Namely Indonesia and voluntarily limited military assistance to West Irian and ask Indonesia to exercise administrative power, as well as various military operations of Operation Sadar 1965, Operation Bharata Yudha in 1966-1967, Operation Wibawa in 1968-1969, 1969-1970 before their eyes, and harmed the agreement itself. The agreement clearly limited the rights of those who do not participate in this agreement. Thus, this agreement is the basis of the crimes against humanity committed in the west of the Papup. The New York agreement is synonymous with racial discrimination. In addition, there is a particular mankna of the annexation system that has become in Western Papia the type of slavery and contemporary lawyer. Last week, we talked about where the New York agreement was concluded on August 15, 1962. It`s in Villa Huntland Middlleburg, Virginia, USA. Where at the meeting that began from March 23 to August 15, 1962, without any involvement of the Papuans. The New York Treaty was an agreement that was reached to transfer power over Western Irian from Dutch hands to Indonesia. The New York contract was made at the initiative of Elssworth Bunker because it never ended the Battle of West Irian.

One of the results of the New York agreement was the ceasefire and the transfer of power over the Western Irian from the Netherlands to Indonesia. In this case, the signing of the agreement was observed at UN Headquarters by UN Secretary-General U Thant and Ellsworth Bunker. This type of agreement can be described as a non-legal agreement and can be described as null and void. Not only because one of the parties is under pressure and threatened, but also because the mediator is compelled and, as a negotiator and executor, this agreement is not in accordance with the content and the letter. Or the Papuans say, write another play. It can therefore be said that the New York agreement was not concluded at all. In addition, the United States, the Netherlands and Indonesia offered their interests regardless of the consequences or legal consequences that agreements against Papuans could entail. If the parties are negotiated in the law of agreement and negotiation, there should be no agreement if the parties are under such diverse pressure and positions. Because it will influence the content and importance of the agreement, depending on their respective positions, if they are taken by the mediators. Or politically, this agreement will not be well answered and, of course, the agreement will be unilateral when it is implemented. Moreover, there is no provision for the implementation of this New York agreement itself.

Indeed, this agreement, if signed, will have its seat as a United Nations convention. So it`s not a hierarchical fact, but we need rules of implementation. (Is this called the Roma Agreement?) The New York Treaty[1] was an agreement that was launched in 1962 by the United States to transfer power over the Western Pappua from the Netherlands to Indonesia. As has already been said, the agreement was reached to end the war between Indonesia and the Netherlands in order to liberate Western Ireland. The New York agreement was signed by Subandrio, who served as Foreign Minister of the Republic of Indonesia with Van Royen and Schuurman as Dutch delegate.

Si quieres un post patrocinado en mis webs, un publireportaje, un banner o cualquier otra presencia publicitaria, puedes escribirme con tu propuesta a