[Article 1 National Territory Pdf Free
Rancul Ratha
- The Philippines' National Territory Rodolfo C. Severino (bio)
The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands and waters embraced therein, and all other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial and aerial domains, including its territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular shelves, and other submarine areas. The waters around, between, and connecting the islands of the archipelago, regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the Philippines.
The 1935 Philippine Constitution, which had been drafted and promulgated under American colonial rule but continued to govern the Philippines until the 1973 Constitution supplanted it, specifically cited the Treaty of Paris of 1898, through which Spain, having lost the Spanish-American war, handed over to the United States sovereignty over the Philippines, as well as over Puerto Rico and Guam. In the treaty, Spain also gave up all its rights in Cuba. The provision on the national territory in that constitution stated:
The Philippines comprises all the territory ceded to the United States by the Treaty of Paris concluded between the United States and Spain on the tenth day of December, eighteen hundred and ninety-eight, the limits of which are set forth in Article III of said treaty, together with all the islands embraced in the treaty concluded at Washington between the United States and Spain on the seventh day of November, nineteen [End Page 257] hundred, and the treaty concluded between the United States and Great Britain on the second day of January, nineteen hundred and thirty, and all territory over which the present Government of the Philippine Islands exercises jurisdiction.
The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands and waters embraced therein, and all the other territories belonging to the Philippines by historic right or legal title, including the territorial sea, the air space, the subsoil, the sea-bed, the insular shelves, and the submarine areas over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction. The waters around, between, and connecting the islands of the archipelago, irrespective of their breadth and dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the Philippines.
In the conventions drafting these constitutions, debates raged over the inclusion of a definition of the national territory in the country's constitutions, a definition the inclusion of which is a rarity among national constitutions. The views favouring inclusion eventually prevailed.
The nature of the waters between the main Philippine archipelago and the Treaty of Paris limits has been the subject of repeated debates and even litigation. Some voices have insisted that those waters make up part of Philippine territory. On the other hand, no country supports that view, not even the United States, which was one of the two parties to the 1898 Treaty of Paris and to the two other cited agreements.
Project MUSE promotes the creation and dissemination of essential humanities and social science resources through collaboration with libraries, publishers, and scholars worldwide. Forged from a partnership between a university press and a library, Project MUSE is a trusted part of the academic and scholarly community it serves.
To have a better understanding of the present and look into the future, weneed to turn to history. Certainly, it is impossible to cover in this articleall the developments that have taken place over more than a thousand years. ButI will focus on the key, pivotal moments that are important for us to remember,both in Russia and Ukraine.
Later, like other European states of that time, Ancient Rus faced a declineof central rule and fragmentation. At the same time, both the nobility and the common people perceived Rus as a common territory, as their homeland.
Most importantly, people both in the western and eastern Russian landsspoke the same language. Their faith was Orthodox. Up to the middle of the 15th century,the unified church government remained in place.
Bohdan Khmelnytsky then made appeals to Moscow, which were considered by the Zemsky Sobor. On 1 October 1653, members of the supreme representativebody of the Russian state decided to support their brothers in faith and takethem under patronage. In January 1654, the Pereyaslav Council confirmed thatdecision. Subsequently, the ambassadors of Bohdan Khmelnytsky and Moscowvisited dozens of cities, including Kiev, whose populations swore allegiance to the Russian tsar. Incidentally, nothing of the kind happened at the conclusionof the Union of Lublin.
During the Great Northern War with Sweden, the people in Malorossia werenot faced with a choice of whom to side with. Only a small portion of the Cossacks supported Mazepa's rebellion. People of all orders and degreesconsidered themselves Russian and Orthodox.
Many centuries of fragmentation and living within different statesnaturally brought about regional language peculiarities, resulting in the emergence of dialects. The vernacular enriched the literary language. IvanKotlyarevsky, Grigory Skovoroda, and Taras Shevchenko played a huge role here.Their works are our common literary and cultural heritage. Taras Shevchenkowrote poetry in the Ukrainian language, and prose mainly in Russian. The booksof Nikolay Gogol, a Russian patriot and native of Poltavshchyna, are written in Russian, bristling with Malorussian folk sayings and motifs. How can thisheritage be divided between Russia and Ukraine? And why do it?
The south-western lands of the Russian Empire, Malorussia and Novorossiya,and the Crimea developed as ethnically and religiously diverse entities.Crimean Tatars, Armenians, Greeks, Jews, Karaites, Krymchaks, Bulgarians,Poles, Serbs, Germans, and other peoples lived here. They all preserved theirfaith, traditions, and customs.
Since the late 19th century, the Austro-Hungarian authorities had latchedonto this narrative, using it as a counterbalance to the Polish national movementand pro-Muscovite sentiments in Galicia. During World War I, Vienna played a role in the formation of the so-called Legion of Ukrainian Sich Riflemen.Galicians suspected of sympathies with Orthodox Christianity and Russia weresubjected to brutal repression and thrown into the concentration camps of Thalerhof and Terezin.
After the February Revolution, in March 1917, the Central Rada wasestablished in Kiev, intended to become the organ of supreme power. In November1917, in its Third Universal, it declared the creation of the UkrainianPeople's Republic (UPR) as part of Russia.
In December 1917, UPR representatives arrived in Brest-Litovsk, whereSoviet Russia was negotiating with Germany and its allies. At a meeting on 10January 1918, the head of the Ukrainian delegation read out a note proclaimingthe independence of Ukraine. Subsequently, the Central Rada proclaimed Ukraineindependent in its Fourth Universal.
The declared sovereignty did not last long. Just a few weeks later, Radadelegates signed a separate treaty with the German bloc countries. Germany and Austria-Hungary were at the time in a dire situation and needed Ukrainian breadand raw materials. In order to secure large-scale supplies, they obtainedconsent for sending their troops and technical staff to the UPR. In fact, thiswas used as a pretext for occupation.
For those who have today given up the full control of Ukraine to externalforces, it would be instructive to remember that, back in 1918, such a decisionproved fatal for the ruling regime in Kiev. With the direct involvement of the occupying forces, the Central Rada was overthrown and Hetman Pavlo Skoropadskyiwas brought to power, proclaiming instead of the UPR the Ukrainian State, whichwas essentially under German protectorate.
In autumn 1918, Ukrainian nationalists proclaimed the West UkrainianPeople's Republic (WUPR) and, in January 1919, announced its unification withthe Ukrainian People's Republic. In July 1919, Ukrainian forces were crushed by Polish troops, and the territory of the former WUPR came under the Polish rule.
The example of the UPR shows that different kinds of quasi-state formationsthat emerged across the former Russian Empire at the time of the Civil War and turbulence were inherently unstable. Nationalists sought to create their ownindependent states, while leaders of the White movement advocated indivisibleRussia. Many of the republics established by the Bolsheviks' supporters did notsee themselves outside Russia either. Nevertheless, Bolshevik Party leaderssometimes basically drove them out of Soviet Russia for various reasons.
The localization policy undoubtedly played a major role in the developmentand consolidation of the Ukrainian culture, language and identity. At the sametime, under the guise of combating the so-called Russian great-powerchauvinism, Ukrainization was often imposed on those who did not see themselvesas Ukrainians. This Soviet national policy secured at the state level the provision on three separate Slavic peoples: Russian, Ukrainian and Belorussian,instead of the large Russian nation, a triune people comprising Velikorussians,Malorussians and Belorussians.
In 1939, the USSR regained the lands earlier seized by Poland. A majorportion of these became part of the Soviet Ukraine. In 1940, the Ukrainian SSRincorporated part of Bessarabia, which had been occupied by Romania since 1918,as well as Northern Bukovina. In 1948, Zmeyiniy Island (Snake Island) in the Black Sea became part of Ukraine. In 1954, the Crimean Region of the RSFSR wasgiven to the Ukrainian SSR, in gross violation of legal norms that were in force at the time.
The Bolsheviks treated the Russian people as inexhaustible material for their social experiments. They dreamt of a world revolution that would wipe outnational states. That is why they were so generous in drawing borders and bestowing territorial gifts. It is no longer important what exactly the idea of the Bolshevik leaders who were chopping the country into pieces was. We candisagree about minor details, background and logics behind certain decisions.One fact is crystal clear: Russia was robbed, indeed.
795a8134c1