Southern American Territorial Disputes
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 ต.ค. 2020
- Follow me on Twitter: / gkonyoutube
Join the Discord Server: / discord
Become a member on Patreon & get exclusive content! / generalknowledge
Special mention to my patrons: Richard, Ahmed, Danny, Edward, Stephen, MiFE, 43rpak, Rpgkillerspace, Wilhelm, Chet, Roy, Ryan, ou_lyss, Javier, Ryan, Pete, Cesar, Hendrick, Tom, Nancy, Hassan, Francis
Business Contact: gilfamc@gmail.com
Thanks for watching, remember to subscribe to catch future videos!
Which other territorial disputes should I talk about?
Peru Colombian War due to territorial dispute
Malvinas argentinas
Doing the continents one by one sounded like a good idea
Nicaragua claims San Andrés and Providencia Island. And although the court said the island were Colombian, Colombia lost a lot of maritime territory
Oceania, that should be interesting
Fun fact: Bolivia still keeps its navy cuz they believe they will take the coast again
True
You'll do it one day Bolivia. You'll do it one day
Actually it's because navy also operates in the rivers. Paraguay have a navy too
Brazil and france are in the same continent lol
@@Dougulas322 brazil and paraguay also had a naval battle in the war of the triple alliance and it was on a river (battle of the riachuelo).
France: "So, we need someone else to resolve this dispute..."
Netherlands: "Yes, someone who wouldn't favor one over another..."
Russia: "Umm, I hate you both equally, sooo..."
France and Russia were pretty good friends at the time. This was right before they created an alliance due to their mutual enemies in Germany and Austria
@@DistantFungus20 I know, I am Russian and I know my history. I said that just for a joke :)
@@Smirnaffskiy czar alexander 3 said that the region belonged to Suriname
If they were going for maximum hate, they should have asked the British and Spanish, who despised France and the Netherlands passionately.😈
@@tesnacloud Yeah, those two also despised eachother passionately and would probably start a war themselves... And if they didn't it would be in the interest of the Netherlands as both the Spanish and British would've had more to gain from a weak France. It's not just about sentiments, but also about strategy.
6:55 "The US refused to intervene" well there is someting you don't hear very often
As someone living in the Middle East it felt weird
At the time they had no hope against the UK, which was also supported by other powers like Germany and Italy
Oil has left the chat
Rwanda
Because we aren't a Apc yet
As a Brazilian I must say. The border disputes that we have with are neighbors are nothing serious at all. Both islands are uninhabited and have 0 resources. And towns are built between Uruguay and Brazil all the time and no one cares anyway. You can basically walk freely between Uruguay and Brazil.
Are you from rio grande do sul? Eu sou uruguaio mais moro na fronteira
Calígula Nope São Paulo. But I go a lot to Rio Grande do Sul
@@SamuelChac0n Tu escreves muito bem em Português,parabéns
@@daniy1426 obrigado mano
@@SamuelChac0n No such thing as Uruguay. That is the occupied territory of Cisplatina. One day we shall drive the Castilians back to their land just like our ancestors did with the moors. Many of you will die but this is sacrifice I'm willing to make.
Outside of South America Chile, Argentina and the UK also have a dispute over a ton of Antarctica ignoring the Antarctic Treaty.
wait until 2040. That year will be fun.
Shit is gonna go down in that zone around 2040, holy hell
The land claims as of 1959 are "grandfathered;" so, even disputed claims are valid!
The UK will probably get its slice since it has the power to enforce its claim, Chile will probably get a deal with the UK and Argentina will get nothing.
@@felipeoyarzun5424 What will happen in 2040?
Brazil: I feel like I don't need this, I just want it...
Most of those territories nobody needs and nobody lives there.
Brasil representando kkkkjjj
Exactly lol
@@i05CrafterGames ó o cara com a foto da confederação do equador
Also Brazil is so huge, it's like: who cares about the litte island, or a small creek, just give it to the smaller country, you have enough territory yourself, leave some for the rest.
Uruguayan here!
Greatly explained (some things about our independence are slightly wrong tho). Here, nobody cares about those disputes because we get on really well with Brazil, so those two uninhabited regions are not drifting us apart.
For the record, Brazil does most of the maintenance of Masoller. I'm not saying it should be theirs, but they seem way more interested than us hahaha
I'm brazilian, and I didn't know about that territory dispute hahah I wouldn't mind if Uruguay actually gained the dispute, neither would I if Brazil did. Anyway, despite our history of occupation, greetings from a neighbor and hermano
@@gustavodeoliveira5254 yeah, I see how disputes in other countries can get super intense, and when I tell foreigners that Uruguay has a dispute they are like "omg so you guys are at war!?!". It seems like here in South America, border disputes are mostly meaningless... Nothing can ruin our friendship anyways, irmão 🇧🇷🇺🇾
@@JuanbianchibOP exactly, most of them is just for convinience, like resolving who's the owner of some island. I love our continent, we are very united and friends with one another
@@gustavodeoliveira5254 poor as fuck but happy, hahaha
Our disputes we resolve on the field in the Libertadores da América.
Ecuador and Peru had one of the longest territorial disputes in history. Basically starting after independence with Gran Colombia and ended in 1941 with the treaty of Rio
I don't think the dispute has ended. Ecuador claims that the treaty of Rio is invalid as Ecuador signed it under duress.
Technically ended in 1998 with the Brasilia Presidential Act, which ratify the Treaty of Rio
@@dragonbook2198 it ended in 1995 with the cenepa war
I think it was important to mention it on this video since ecuador literally got half of its land annexed by peru
@@velcranoxofficials9970 yes and as an ecuadorian i was kind of impressed that it wasn't included, but I guess that it was because the disputes ended long ago
Britain and France are my favouite South American countries.
*sad Dutch noises*
@Deinis de Sousa I love how Turks proclaim themselves to be Europeans, how delusional can they get? Even better, there are people who say with full confidence that Turkey is European, while at the same time saying that Russia is Asian country, just because they have a lot of land in Asia. Or when maps of Europe has Turkey but not Eastern Europe past Poland.
@@artur24able well multicontinetal countries are a thing, for example chile is a tricontinental country because it owns islands in oceania an has self proclaimed sovernty over part of the antartic so you could say that russia and turkey are bicontinal countries
@@polako7370 Not the same thing, Russia is European country that expanded into Asia, while Turkey or Ottomans, expanded into Europe from Asia.
@@artur24able same with chile, the islands in oceania are polonesian culture, you probably know of rapa nui, they don even consider themself chileans but chile has international recognition over them so tricontinental, i dont really get your point, russia covers to continents so why not bicontinetnal also their culture takes somthing for each continent, the same with turkey they are occidentaliced, i feel a lot of hate in you thougts thoug
Not even the Peru-Ecuador border? There’s entire wars over it
Indeed there was a war. But all is over now
Perhaps it is cause there is no dispute anymore?
there is no dispute today. Literally every south american country had border disputes after Independence.
The last war was in 1995 and they signed a peace agreement in 1998. After that there wasn't any dispute between Perú and Ecuador, and both countries have very good relations since then.
The dispute is over
Bolivia:GiB sEa
CHILE:HOW ABOUT A NO
nOrMiE
Joshua Mcdonald “Dr. Evil, can I paint his yoo-hoo gold?”
“How bout NO!”
But Bolivia has sea, is in the south of Ilo, Perú.
Suriname and Venezuela, both claiming a chunk of Guyana: 🤝
😭 right
Though Suriname doesn't actively pursue thier claim of our territory unlike Venezuela
Why are you everywhere
You are everywhere alongside the regular guy with a mustache
@@MrLrebelo1 lol
You saw my comment on the other video
Avery the Cuban-American is in every comment section. You can’t change my mind.
I'm from Suriname... And It's all The Netherlands' fault. We don't lay our claims as strongly as we did before, although it's still taught to be our land in school. And plus, we have astronomically good relations with Guyana and French Guiana (France) despite the border disputes.
Wow you're from Suriname, I've never saw someone from there even living in Brazil, would you mind talking a little bit?
@@octaviosander8898 Of course! No problem
@@b.r.9180 Spreek je ook nederlands?
@@jamadir Ja, natuurlijk. Alleen zijn er kleine verschillen bij sommige woorden.
@@b.r.9180 Is dat jouw moedertaal of spreek je iets anders thuis?
Chile's border disputes:
1) Bolivia's coastline, which has been part of Chile for about 2 centuries now so probably isn't going to change any time soon.
2) Some ice.
Since 1879 and the War of The Pacific.
Huh. Looks like I have my South American history quite severely wrong then.
@@randomguy-tg7ok Bolivia does still have a Navy up on Lake Tititcaca and on a number of rivers in the Amazon basin. Also even though Bolivia is landlocked a new series of dams and locks on the Rio Maderia and Rio Mamore means that sea going ships can now reach Bolivia!
Practically every South American country disputes Chile's existance.
200 years, 130 years, doesn't matter, its a long-ass time anyway and it's dispute is closed by both countries and an international court, so it's quite settled.
Plus Bolivia is maybe the weakest country when it comes to militar power in South America, after maybe those 3 small countries to the north of Brazil
Will you make one of these for Oceania? There are a few little curiosities, rather than disputes. The Norfolk Island issue is quite interesting, they were essentially their own country and descendants from the Bounty mutineers (they were moved to the island from Pitcairn). During the 2008 economic crisis, they asked to join Australia, which they did. However, they hate having to pay tax (they didn't before) to access Australian government services like healthcare and welfare. Now New Zealand is also looking at its sea boundaries because of the Zealandia microcontinent, which could result in re-drawing of boundaries with Australia, although the prospect of war breaking out between Aus and NZ for territory is zero. Plus Australia has a billion micro-nations as our constitution states that anyone with any royal blood can declare their own country, and basically every Anglo-Saxon can trace their heritage back to a king at some point, so Australia is full of people claiming their own house is a seperate country.
Wasn't Norfolk a prison island in the XIX century? under Australia's (or maybe UK's direct) control?
To add to what's said in the video: "Îles Malouines" (aka Malvinas aka Falklands) were given this name by Bougainville to honor the city of Saint Malo, in Brittany. That city is famous for having been the home port of the "corsaires" (sort of king-licensed pirates) and also of many sailors from the discoveries era.
Malouines itself comes from the port town of St Malo in France, and St Malo was established by a Welshman called Maclou, who later was Sainted, so both names are of British origin.
In the 70's there was actually a near resolution to the Chile/Bolivia conflict. Both countries had military dictators at the time, and there were talks between both governments to grant Bolivia a small strip of coast near the Chile/Peru border (a la DR Congo), but the Peruvians objected to it and it failed. :(
If this was made on Chile's territory, why did the Peruvian government think they had any saying on the matter?
I wouldn't call it a near "resolution", though, since the dispute was resolved with the 1904 Peace Treaty. Everything afterwards has been a long tradition of Bolivian governments supporting irredentism as a way to distract Bolivians from their own domestic problems. And they have been so vocal, that even though there's no actual territorial dispute to be solved, Chile has been open to negotiations a couple times.
@@Bronze_Age_Sea_Person - In the 1883 treaty between Chile and Peru, it was agreed that Chile would need to get the approval of Peru if they wanted to cede former Peruvian territory to any other nation. Some think they added that clause in order to spite Bolivia. Read - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Ancón
No "peruvian objection" whatsover. That's some dumb myth you people keep spreading without even veryfing.
@@Bronze_Age_Sea_Person Because they do by treaty. A previous agreement needs to be done between Chile and Peru per 1929 Treaty.
So the whole South America is a territorial dispute itself
Like the Balkans
With more land and people
And less advanced
@@Koulstart no.
@@Arauto_Kagnos yes
@@Koulstart no.
Oceania territorial disputes: smoking is bad you shouldn’t do it
South American territorial disputes: I like smoking but with moderation
North American territorial disputes: ohh that’s some good dank kush
European territorial disputes: C O C A I N E
Antartica Territorial disputes: You are drinking the water of the cooler of Chernobyl with a little bit of uranium and tungsten
@@HolyRomanEmpire962-1806 A zest of polonium would be in order too. :)
In relation to Chile and Bolivia in 1879 I have to make some corrections:
- Bolivia had access to the sea well before 1866, it's just that due to the fact that the border between Chile and Bolivia had never been clearly defined before AND due to the discovery of guano deposits defining a border became an important matter. I should also add that in 1843 Chilean Pres. Manuel Bulnes declared the 23rd Southern parallel as being the northern most border of Chile. Bolivia protested against that and several negotiations were attempted, hence the treaties of 1866 and 1874.
- Chilean troops landed in Antofagasta on the 14th of February 1879 and Bolivia declared war first in March 1879. It was during that interval, in march/beginning of April that negotiations were attempted; Chile was not officially at war against Bolivia and Peru until the 5th of April 1879. Peru and Bolivia were Allied, being bound by a secret defensive treaty.
MY SOURCES:
-- Farcau, Bruce W., The Ten Cents War. Chile, Peru and Bolivia in the War of the Pacific, 1879-
1884, Praeger, 2000
-- Dennis, William Jefferson (ed.), Documentary History of the Tacna-Arica Dispute, Kennikat
Press, 1971
-- -Sater, William F., Andean Tragedy. Fighting the War of the Pacific, 1879-1884,
Lincoln/London, University of Nebraska Press, 2007
@Capitalist Insurrection Chile es decir.... aunque las únicos documentos históricos hablaban del paralelo 21°27' sólo porque se le dio la gana al presidente en 1843 decidió que era en el 23°...... ¿y le llamas ilegal a quienes tenían la soberanía de acuerdo a todas las fuentes históricas?
No pues si a Argentina se le hubiera ocurrido en 1850 que su frontera era el oceano pacífico y sacaba una ley diciendo eso pues te podrían decir que la existencia de Chile es ilegal, así de lógico suena lo que dices.
No one:
Chile: L Ö N G
We are very long yes, we could be longer...
south american longboi
Chile took the name chile too serious
@@g_g1241 there's a lot of chilly willy penguins
@@alfonsomango_suyu Well yeah but, do you have axolotls?
Îles Malouines : malouine stands for from Saint-Malo (a French city).
Cool!
Yes, and St. Malo is Breton, and the Bretons are Cornish who fled the Anglo-Saxons, so via St. Malo (being of Bretons i.e. Britons) we can all see that however you slice it, the Falklands are British.
@@EdMcF1 : the Malvinas Islands are Argentine, because we inherited them from Spanish conquistadors and colonizers 🇦🇷
So you reject the conquistadores but not when it suits you
@@jetaddicted : I didn't reject the Spanish conquistadors, they bring our beautiful language, catholic religion, and too many traditions and culture, America was almost empty when Spanish and Portuguese conquistadors come!!
Hello Guyanese here😊 about the dispute between Guyana and suriname is not that serious anymore and I think everyone forget about it. Guyana and suriname are very close now unlike Venezuela and Guyana🙄. So uhmm if I could remember correctly, the previous Guyana government didn't want to start a war but this new one is different. But I hope in the future, Guyana and Venezuela can have a good relationship.
Brazil is so small,we want more
no you don’t
9:57 It is not Masoller. This place is called Rincão de Artigas(or Rincón de Artigas) and it's not claimed by Brazil, it's brazilian territory claimed by Uruguay. Masoller is a village near Rincão de Artigas.
And Brazil doesn't claim Masoller.
@@henriquem.9763 adn the border dispute ended years ago congrats on fooling yourself
You're right!
Que pertence ao Brasil! É incontestável e o Uruguai não tem direito a nada.
@@weslleyavelino867 até 1973 vocés nao tinham direito a nada. Entao estabeleceram una cidade artificial invadindo a área, e devido al suporte de seus militares nossa ditadura nao fez nada. Territorios ilegais seguem sendo ilegais e nao dao direito segundo dotrina internacional.
I still remember when they taught us in school that we owned Guyana Essequiba. It was until my teen years that i realized that they lied and Guyana was actually an Independent country , which was mindblowing at the time
No, sera que entendias mal. A mi siempre me la enseñaron como "'zona de reclamación". Guyana es un país si, pero del esequibo a la izquierda.
@@kinkaju
No, en esa escuela estaban empeñados en que guayana era parte de Venezuela. Dado que los maestros no eran los mejores no me sorprende hoy en dia, pero a un niño le puedes decir lo que sea y se lo cree
Brazil x Uruguay land dispute, nobody cares. I live 100km from the place
This isn't a border dispute or anything but it's kinda related. So when I travelled to Uruguay I visited this place called Chuy, the main avenue of which is in the border with Brazil, effectively splitting the town in half. It was very funny and wacky. If you wanted to buy something in the other side of the street, you nedded to find a place to exchange currencies to do so. I suggest you make a video on these situations.
So you have to exchange currencies? When I went to Paraguay, they would accept the brazilian currency very easily, didn't know that in uruguay things wouldn't be so easy haha
But where are you from?
@@walteraiue5850 I'm from Spain, I travelled to visit my family
Do you know about the Beagle Conflict? It was between Chile and Argentina and almost endend in a war. That conflict was the main reason for chile to spy on Argentina during the Falklands War
@Default Profile Picture I've never heard of that. As far as I know, Chilean support was limited to providing British officers access to a Chilean military air radar in Punta Arenas. Which is a small thing, but some argue was a decisive factor in winning the war, as having the carrier air groups providing 24/7 air cover was impossible. With the Chilean radar, the British knew when Argentine planes took off, so the carrier air groups could take off only when they were needed.
The British task force sailed from Britain, and their bombers operated from Ascension Island in the Atlantic, so free passage and fuel doesn't sound like something Chile could provide.
Biased comment here
LNM conflict ...
@@a2falcone The radar was supplied by the UK, Chile got to keep it after the war. RAF Nimrods and perhaps Canberras (in Chilean markings) were operating from Chile over the South Atlantic. Read about Wing Cdr Sidney Edwards' time in Santiago during the war, he was the 'fixer' with the FACh.
@Default Profile Picture El Reino Unido ayudó a Chile por destruir mucha de la FAA y parte de su armada. La guerra acabó con una Argentina pacífica, últimamente una cosa buena para ambos países.
I like how you describe each event without taking part. As an Argentine I appreciate it.
Using the words invasion and occupation of Argentina, is to choose a part. Because we Argentines call it recovery.
In addition to the fact that he did not speak of the Treaty of Friendship and Trade between Argentina and the UK in which the British government did not make any claim on the islands governed by Buenos Aires, and of the Political and Military Command and the Argentine government and people that the British expelled in 1833, among them the first person to be born in the islands, Argentine daughter of Governor Vernet.
And not to mention that the islanders do not have the right of self-determination recognized by the UN, as they are British settlers.
@@Merovingiocba they are British, what do you expect them to do? go and pick a fight somewhere else.
@@leandrotami the nationality of you or someone who go to another country do not are the same that the land. You dont have self determination.
@@Merovingiocba Legal claims aside it's soon to be 200 years under British control at some point Argentina may have to accept its long distance relationship ended some time ago.
@@bernadmannya relationship that never even existed. Argentina is the ultimate stalker.
Esse canal tem qts anos ja? Poderia ter um video comemorativo mostrando o dono 😁
3-4 anos! Talvez se chegar a 1 milhão de subscritores ahah
@@General.Knowledge poxa.. ok então =)
@@General.Knowledge 12 curtidas so de quem entende portugues. Imagina se eu tivesse escrito em inglês. 😏
Paraguay has been involved with a couple of doozies of border disputes...the one with Uruguay and Brazil touching off the War of the Triple Alliance (South America's bloodiest conflict, resulting in the death of half of the population of Paraguay), and the Chaco War with Bolivia, which was the last real war between South American nations to date...the notorious Camino de la Muerte is a relic of that conflict.
La guerra por el Cenepa entre Perú y Ecuador fue el último conflicto sudamericano.
I never understood why big countries like brazil care about some random uninhabited island with 10 trees while they have a massive rainforest within their borders. Like what is the point. Why would you spent energy and time on something like this.
Dude, we don't care actually. I'm pretty sure 99,999% of Brazilians wouldn't mind if Uruguay and Bolivia took those islands, since they have no inhabitants nor anything interesting there, and we won't fuss over these things. Brazilians don't want to go on a war with no one in this world, not even with the shitty dictator of Venezuela. I'm pretty sure we wouldn't even fight against Hitler if they didn't sink our ships back in the 40s.
@@Bronze_Age_Sea_Person I know there is not going to be a war over some random uninhabited island. It is just strange to me that governments of these countries care so much about basically nothing. Youre blowing things way out of proportion by talking about war. But that was not my point.
Haroen Eissa The border dispute is just a little claim, it’s not like both governments even give a shit. South Americans have like zero hostility with each other’s.
@@francogiobbimontesanti3826 And yet we can't form an union...
Daniel Rossy I’d form a union with you Bro.
Just fyi ‘viscount’ is pronounced ‘vye-count’
I've once heard that, in french, the "s" is almost never pronounced, or never at all, it seems like the case haha (forgive me if that's completely wrong)
And Monjes, pronounced mon-hez, not mon jjjezz
But now I’m just nitpicking.....
It's his Portguese getting in the way. We say "visconde" and have a similar word to Monjes, "monges", that's pronnounced that way.
@@gustavodeoliveira5254 that is why isle is île in French
Territorial disputes in Asia please
Every south asian countries have some disputes.
You are gonna kill him....
China: it's free real estate
0:30 a peruvian here, yes there is no current territorial dispute in which Peru is involved. Regarding land, the last one was settled with Ecuador on 1998 after a military conflict on 1995 over the Cenepa's River Basin. Regarding sea, the last one was settled with Chile on 2014 through diplomacy and a sentence from the International Court of Justice.
Im waiting for Ecuador vs Goat conflict over the Galapagos islands.
It caused a total war.
The Falkland / Malvinas dispute is poorly described. Teatris between Spanish and England, the effective occupation of Argentina until 1830, the usurpation by force of England, etc. isn´t mentioned. Today the principal argument of the british is the local desire to be part of england (Argentina ignore that argument because they think that is en artificial population, not native). The principal argument of Argentina is the inheritance from Spain and the effective control of the area until british invade it. In your video you don´t mention that Magallanes discovered the islands in 1520 under Spanish flag, that the french established in 1764 but they abandoned in 1769 when they recognized spanish authority, and they mantain it until 1810, when was transferred to the Argentine authority. A very unfair video.
There is something terribly wrong in the Question of the Falkland Islands: the right of peoples to self-determination is not applicable because the United Kingdom annexed the territory from Argentina by the use of force in 1833 and the relevant United Nations resolutions and the International Court of Justice have already made absolutely clear that colonies that exist due to a gross violation of the principle of territorial integrity are not entitled to an exclusive right to self-determination, the self-determination of the inhabitants of the Falkland Islands is one and the same with that of the Argentine people over the entire Argentine territory including the archipelago, they are limited to participating of the democratic life of the Argentine Republic, but they are not entitled to serve as arbitrators in a territorial dispute of this nature where usurpation is present, that would not only deprive an entire people of its territorial rights, but it would establish dangerous precedents for the mechanism of international law.
If you are going to do a video that has this kind of topics, then at least try to make it accurate, please. This case is a manifestation of colonialism and the United Nations has compromised to erradicate that evil from the world. By not explaining the correct functioning of self-determination you are just spreading British propaganda to your audience and thus supporting colonialism.
Argentina annexed its territory from the natives, so you guy's should maybe go back to Germany, Italy etc...
@@Spartan-jg4bf That's an extremely weak argument that, moreover, has no place in a juridical discussion. Spain gained the territory from conquest, not Argentina. Argentina, as well as every state in Hispanic America, is the result of the efforts of a creole people, this is, a people birthed from European and precolonial American metissage, fighting together against its colonial captor. Saying that Argentina has no right to its territory because it was a Spanish colony is like saying that African, Asian and Oceanian states do not have a right to their territory because they were colonies. The truth is that the only difference between these is that Argentina freed itself from colonialism through might, while African, Asian and Oceanian states freed themselves from colonialism through right, thanks to the decolonization process started by the United Nations.
The case of the Falkland Islands is not comparable to that of Argentina. There is a crucial difference between both. Spain gained the territory by colonialism, Argentina regained the territory from Spanish colonialism. On the other hand, British colonialism gained the territory from Argentina, thus, comparing both colonial situations is not comparable in the least, in fact, it is absurd.
You also mention German, Italian and other European descendants that live today in Argentina. This is completely irrelevant for international law because the same does not depend on ethnicity, that would certainly be controversial to say the least. However, if that means so much to you, then you need to know that the Argentines that founded Argentina were a creole people, meaning that they were a new people birthed from European and precolonial American metissage, as well as most peoples in Latin America, from Mexico to Chile, the fact that Argentina has more European population is not due to colonialism, but to the massive immigration wave that did not become part of the picture until the first half of the 20th century, an European immigration that was second only to the United States of America. So, again, there is simply no comparison there.
@@Spartan-jg4bf the original would be the British. Technically the French but they didn't document/claim it.
@UCWYRYL_E2tLPB7_HeXJs3UQ Simple fact is Argentina was established on land obtained by conquest even after independence from Spain you continued to steal native land in Patagonia, it a country that harboured Nazi war criminals, killed tens of thousands of its own citzens and defaults on its national debts every few years. Maybe you should focus on organising the territories you have already stolen into a successful state, rather than trying to steal more? The bottom line is no British government will ever had the Falklands to Argentina after all the blood and treasure spent on defending them and recapturing them..
@@Captain_Yorkie1 He is not referring to the Falkland Islands themselves, he is referring to the entire Argentine territory, but that's correct. The first civilian population of the Falkland Islands were French, then they left the territory when France ceded its rights to Spain and then the islands were populated by Spanish authorities only. The next civilian population of the islands was the one placed there by Argentina. Half of this population fled due to the American attack of 1831 and the other half was criminally evicted by British authorities or had no other choice but to leave the territory when the British took control of the Falkland Islands that same year in 1833.
I remember hearing that Ecuador was once a much larger country with access to the Amazon rain forest before Peru stole their land. Not sure how true this was but they almost had a war back in the 90s.
Yea they had a war in the 40s
Ecuador was not a larger country, it was part of a larger country.
Gran Colombia comprised Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador and Panama.
However TLDR big territory horrible geography and poor government communication (due to horrible geography)made Venezuela and Ecuador peace out of Gran Colombia, so Gran Colombia was no more.
Apart from that, the only major loss was when daddy Roosevelt decided he wanted a canal. Colombia didn’t want one or _something_ so the US said “fuck isolationism, fuck you Washington” and invaded the territory, ‘liberating’ it and voilà the birth of Panama, which was technically going to happen anyway (probably) because the government wasn’t doing such a swell job administrating Panama _(due to horrible geography)_ so they just made it happen quicker.
Unless something else happened that I’m blindly unaware of, it was poor geography, bad luck and nationalism that made Ecuador lose access to the Amazon.
At least a significant part, because even today they still have (though limited) parts of the forest in the country.
Bolivia lost a lot to Chile, Argentina, Paraguay and Brazil as well
@@General.Knowledge Paraguayan here, Bolivia never had effective control over the Chaco region, they only based their "claim" over old maps.
Paraguay won the war, but ended-up giving an small portion towards the north for some reason (which I assume was to grant Bolivia access to the Paraguay River).
In our country is taught that there was a war with Peru back in the 40s, but a clear border was not settled, then in the 90s Peru's military invaded the territory and a conflict was started. During this war, the president of Peru, visited the zone and the forces of Peru told us that if something happens to the president, they will bomb out capital, Quito. At the end of the war, there were more Peruvian casualties, but international courts decided that the territory belongs to Peru. Now we kinda hate those guys.
Brazil kept a good chunk of Uruguay’s original territory, at that point called Provincia Cisplatina after it was let be independent.
Do this for EVERYWHERE! :-) As for USA, do realize that there have been and currently are border disputes between the states. You could do a whole video about just them. An old one was "The Toledo War" between Michigan and Ohio. Another is the Missouri Bootheel. New York State vs New Jersey over the Statue of Liberty.
This is a great idea!
CGP Grey already did a video on the NY and NJ Statue of Liberty territorial dispute.
All of south America is a huge dispute
There is a brazilian island in the middle of the Atlantic calls "Trindade e Martim Vaz", it's the "brazilian falklands": The United Kingdon had tried to stole the island, but Brazil kept the sovereignty and today it's brazilian and belongs to Espírito Santo, a brazilian state.
I never knew about that so I guess I learned something new today. I wouldn't say there the Brazilian falklands though since Brazilian sovereignty was recognised by the british. Thanks for this fun fact from Canada.
Can't wait for Africa man like it's going to be a two hour long
Also Bolivia landlocked lawl
“Lawl”? You do realise that thousands of people are suffering because of this? Of course, “map nerds” will perpetually view geopolitics as a sports game and a joke.
@@the8thgemmer467 Lawl
@@the8thgemmer467 Lawl
@@the8thgemmer467 Lawl
@@the8thgemmer467 Lawl
0:34
Between Peru and Ecuador, having both two wars and a small one, but nowadays relations between the two countries are good.
The first war was during ww2 (1941) which was seem very bad by the US because both countries were in the allies.
Soy de Ecuador y como chucha sea vamos a recuperar lo nuestro hpt
Ahi traduce la huevada
@@jonathanlucero6445 Nunca fue de ustedes. Perú antes que Ecuador existiera ya tenía tumbes, jaen y maynas bajo su control.
Y que chch
Peleando por selvas donde viven pocas personas. Mejor que trabajen juntos como hermanos en vigilar tus costas antes que los cientos de barcos de pesca de la China dejen tu costas vacio de pescado.
Venezuela open back the claim on 2/3 of Guyana because Guyana discovered oil there
Dang, Venezuela ain't that much different from their imperialist rival, the U.S.
I have a feeling the people living in those disputed territories, don't want to become Venezuelan citizens...
@@mrbisshie because they are not.
@@lovelybridge546 I have to agree, I'm Venezuelan and the government doesn't care about them nor give them any right as citizens born in Venezuela (as how our constitution consider the territory)
What are you talking about? The dispute has more than 120 years
Love the video, I just wish it didn't make it out to be Chile immediately declaring war and steamrolling Bolivia out of the coast. Chile occupied one port on the border to stop Bolivia from auctioning off properties they seized from the chileans they exiled. This lead to a brief period of negotiations that ended when Bolivia declared war first and peru was obligated to join them due to a secret military alliance. At the time the allied countries were expected to win the war due to having a larger combined force, however this force was inexperienced and mismanaged while the Chilean forces were more experienced and competently managed. I don't mind people supporting Bolivia's claim to the coast, I just wish they'd acknowledge Bolivia started the war
The hard thing for an outsider to figure is why the Portuguese part of South America remained a single country on independence, while the Spanish part fractured into a host of often mutually-hostile countries. Why no United States of New Spain?
@Conrad Bröeder I was puzzling more about why the Spanish empire broke apart, rather than why the Portuguese one remained intact. As an Australian, it's as if the six British colonies in Australia refused to federate in 1900 and remained six independent and possibly hostile countries.
This article answers that same questions, you can translate this with Google, from the BBC: www.bbc.com/mundo/noticias-america-latina-45439574
I'm trying to translate a video about it:
1. Cities in hispanic-america were too far from each other, unlike Brazil, they were closed and were mutually dependent, economically and culturally
2. Brazil didn't have any single university, they had to study in Portugal, in hispanic america there were 23 universities, so, every city developed diverse ideologies.
3. The independence was different, Brazil was a kingdom in the Portuguese empire, they were about to be separated and they fought to keep together, not to be independent, their war lasted two year, meanwhile in hispanic america when Napoleon defeated the king of Spain there was no power over the colonies, so each major city formed temporary governments, one independently from the other, the wars of independence in these countries lasted +20 years.
This is the video I translated: th-cam.com/video/Wh-rizIpB3Y/w-d-xo.html
There's a more detailed video from the latin american BBC: th-cam.com/video/W3yHdmZ_rF8/w-d-xo.html
@@allenjenkins7947 Bolivar predicted 'Tyrants will rise from my tomb.', i.e. those who sought power in South America were too power-crazed for an Australian-style federation to emerge, but it looks like in Victoria, things have finally turned out as Bolivar feared for South America.
There are many reasons.
1. The territories were divided into different vice royalties under the Spanish Empire. The distances from Colombia to say Argentina or Chile are huge, specially in pre-steam powered times.
2. As those territories population evolved, there was mixing between Spanish, criollos, natives and freed slaves.That mix happened differently in each place.
3. The independence wars did happen in a short time period, but not simultaneously. So, when a territory was liberated, another one was under Spanish rule. Also the movement started due to the collapse of the Bourbon dynasty in Spain. While some territories declared outright independence, others claimed they were still loyal to Supreme Central Junta or Cortes. While the Independence national heroes are some in Argentina or Chile, there are others in Venezuela or Colombia.
4. Geographic boundaries. Aside from being a vast territory, the continent's geography doesn't help to connect a single goverment institutions. The Andes are a high wall which slows down human movement. There also are dense jungles, large deserts, wide rivers. The first road to connect the entire continent was finished in the mid 20th century.
5. British intervention. The UK was the hegemon of the period. It didn't fancy having another US sized non-European ruled country to deal with near its colonies (British Guyana, the Caribbean, etc). So they provided funds, weapons and encouragement to each state that wanted to secede from another.
6. Local ruling classes. A large part of South American elites weren't that nationalistic. Once they didn't have to pay taxes to the Spanish, they showed no problems in trading food produce for consumer goods and manufactures with the British and fitting into their schemes for the region.
Because the Portuguese lands were less settled, the population was centered on the coastal regions, so it was culturally cohesive. rainforests don’t dispute anything-So upon independence Brazil was united culturally which allowed for political unity-Unlike Spanish America.
Spanish America gained its freedom by war, Brazil gained its by a slight of hand, a switch of crowns, and a benign treaty with Portugal 🇵🇹 🇧🇷
Brazil has no border disputes, other countries are the ones that have disputes with us.
corretíssimo
I don't think you know what dispute means
The argentinian claim of the Malvinas/Falklands is based on the fact that, after the independence, the United Provinces asserted sovereignty by founding a settlement that was then taken by the british in 1833. This claim is backed by historical documents such as letters between the government of Buenos Aires and Vernet, the appointed governor in the Malvinas. There's aswell a formal petition made by an english whaler to the government of Buenos Aires asking for permission to fish in the island waters in 1813 and so. I don't mean to settle an issue which i'm obviously biased about, but rather to correct the information given in the video.
Old treaties and political gymnastics does not change the fact the people living on the Falklands wish to remain British and probably will for a long time
@@reddyshreddy5050 again, i'm not trying to start a debate over here, but, since you mention the right of selfdetermination guaranteed by the UN, that right isn't applied to "implanted population", such as the one in the Malvinas/Falklands. This is not my opinion, but rather a ressolution of the UN committee regarding the situation of the Malvinas/Falklands.
Why don’t you people just grow up and move on? Pathetic.
@@spidos1000 having read (I assume) that I don't wish to start a debate in the comments, why do you instigate? Why do you feel the need of insulting? I just need to clarify the information given in the video, because It's not right. For Argentina, the Malvinas/Falklands issue is a major historical injustice. And, moreover, It's unresolved. Every single supranational organism said "Argentina and the UK MUST talk in order to get a solution". This has not happened, due to the fact that the UK doesn't have the will to talk. For the last time, I don't have the right to say who is correct and who isn't, my possition on the issue is super biased. And, for that, I don't wish to start any debate.
I'd just like to say, also for the sake of adding information:
The British were the first to discover the uninhabited islands, and the second to set up a settlement after the French. The French handed their settlement over to Spain, and eventually both Britain and Spain had to leave the islands, but Britain left behind a plaque with their claim on the islands. So that's all the basis for our claim on the islands.
And about Vernet's settlement: It was originally set up as a business venture to fish and farm on the Falklands, it had the permission of both the Argentinians and the British, Vernet even asked the British for protection if they decided to re-settle the islands. But later, the Argentinians appointed Vernet as the governor of the islands, thereby claiming possession of the islands, which actively went against Britain's existent claim on the islands. Then Vernet used his position to stop American ships from fishing in the area, capturing three ships, which caused the Americans to attack the settlement in retaliation and clear the islands of Argentinian control, until they returned later to set up a garrison. 80% of that garrison's soldiers were British mercenaries. When Britain decided to take control of the islands again (which, to them, was their right, as they had the oldest existing claim to the islands. And because the settlement had been going against both the British and the Americans), the British garrison refused to fight the British soldiers, which resulted in a surrender, and a bloodless capture of the islands. It's also worth mentioning that the remaining Argentinian settlers weren't expelled, only the soldiers, in fact the settlers were encouraged to stay, even paid to.
Also about the "implanted population" of the islands. It's worth keeping in mind that the islands were uninhabited when they were discovered, they had no natives, and the British were the second nation to make a settlement there in recorded history. Unlike Australia which was settled around the same time, the Falklands had no natives, so it's hard to say that the Falklands had an "implanted population". Plus, implanting a population is the same thing that the Argentinians were trying to accomplish when they built settlements.
Of course I'm biased too, but I just wanted to add the other side of the story, as it were
Actually, us, argentinians, also claim the South Georgian Islands
I will never get them. Even if we went to war again. It will be shorter. Lol
Why?
@@joshuaosullivan2761 They claim they inherited it from their former colonial governors, Spain because Pope Alexander VI issued the Papal Bull inter Caetera in 1492, dividing the globe up between Portugal and Spain. It is the same reasoning they use for their claim to Antarctic.
We had many border disputes with Chile but most of them were resolved in the 90s, I was not aware that the "hielos continentales" region was still in dispute, but I guess that as long as both leave it alone there's no reason to do nothing about it. Really, I mean, it makes to sense to struggle for something that no one really even has the intention to use or populate.
Ya está resuelto según rumores y no es que se tenga que dejar por dejar. Hay muchísima agua congelada ahí. Según los mismos periodistas (respetables) de Chile ya el asunto está zanjado con un 80% para AR y el resto para los chilenos pero nadie dice nada xq el pueblo chileno explotaría con ese resultado y el gobierno de Chile le pidió discreción a Argentina. El tratado le da la razón a nuestro país mayormente.
How did Alexander Iii of Russia 🇨🇿 get involved in a territorial dispute between the Dutch and the French over a River in South America. But then again, I'm not surprised, between him and Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany, those two always found someway to involve themselves in European affairs when the affairs didn't necessarily have anything to do with them
Kasier and Czar= Monarchis
Hitler vs Stalin= Dictators
Why has the flag of Czechia been used when asking about the Tzar of Russia?
@@Eurobouy Must've accidentally hit the Czech flag emoji without realizing it. It may have been next to
The Russian flag emoji. I do know the two are different and similar in color.
@@danielleporter1829 easily done x
A video about South America?
Impossible
As a chilean I must say, excellent video. Thank you. First of its kind I see from an aglosaxon.
My grandfather founded the "Chilean Institute of the Ice Fields" (Instituto Chileno de Campos de Hielo), and built an outpost in the mountain ice there. Last time he climbed and went there he was more than 80 years old. Nowadays the outpost is used and maintained by the chilean government.
His name was Horacio Toro Iturra.
Hay alguna forma de contactarte?
@@janitoalevic A mí?
No es anglo. Es portugués. Sobre el area de Hielos Continentales, como lo llamamos nosotros en AR según mismos peridistas de Chile ya está todo cocinado y se supone le corresponde un 80% a AR y el resto a CL pero el gobierno de uds no dice nada xq no sabe que esperar del pueblo en como pueda reaccionar. Pero x el tratado le corresponde eso a mi país según ellos mismos y fuertes rumores de acá también.
@@Diegus- te han mentido tanto
@@Vichikuma Claro, claro me mintieron TUS periodistas (respetados aclaro) la verdad te la contó tu papito, que grandes tus fuentes jajaja. Sorry penca, pero el tratado nos da la razón mayormente. Si se te cae un argumento te leo wn.
I love the fact that my country is relaxing between the territorial disputes
Great lesson! Always learning with you ☺️
Malvinas Islands 🇦🇷
And you forgot about the South Georgias and South Sandwich Islands that are also in dispute with the UK 🇦🇷/🇬🇧
The people want to be British and your government still claims it, like... Why
@@MrCameroncee We don't want the people, I mean if they want to continue being British, no problem with that, we reclaim the land (territory).
@@GUSTA99X so you want some rocks, with very little value, in the middle of the Atlantic, with no people on it?
@@MrCameroncee Yes!
@@GUSTA99X Extraño y malo para la gente. Tendrían que moverse
Perú and Chile still have a minimal territorial dispute between the Triángulo Terrestre, a strip of land of around 300m² in the coast of their border. I don't know if it has already been fixed, but none cares about it so it does not matter that much. Yes 300m²,thats why
Oh I see, thanks for the aclaración compadre
Oh man I've been waiting this video for so long
Big loves from Turkey to all S.American countries!
🇹🇷❤️🇧🇷🇦🇷🇨🇴🇵🇪🇨🇱🇪🇨🇻🇪🇧🇴🇬🇾🇺🇾🇸🇷🇵🇾🇹🇹
*(🇬🇫🇦🇼🇫🇰🇨🇼🇸🇽)*
🇦🇶
When are you leaving Cyprus?
@@peterfireflylund What about never? We gave martyrs & shed blood for saving the pressed Turks in there. Don't look at the topic just from 1 side, read Turkish archives too...
Asia has a LOT. Especially between China and India. Don't forget what happened to Nagorno-Karabakh this year.
12:15 NO, NO, NO! Bolivia does NOT claim any sovereignty or legal right over the lost territory. However bitter they may be about losing it, the 1904 Peace Treaty is too solid to be challenged, even by the likes of Evo Morales.
What they do have is a political aspiration to gain a sovereign access to the ocean. Since there were inconclusive negotiations on that issue more than once during the 20th century (which involved a corridor next to the Peruvian border, in former Peruvian territory), they claimed in court to have a gained "right to NEGOTIATE a sovereign access to the sea"... which is legal nonsense, as the ICJ ruled.
On a side note, Bolivia decreed the expulsion of Chilean citizens the same day it declared war on Chile, so that wasn't a cause of the war. Apart from that mistake, it's a good summary of the direct causes, though.
I think Venezuele also argues that Aruba Bonaire and Curacao should be part of their territory, and not part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Pretty sure the locals would not be a fan of becoming part of a failing state though.
1) Falkland / Malvinas Islands
2) The Lawa River Border
3) The New River Triangle Border
4) The Monroe Doctrine Border
5) Monjoes Archipelago Border
6) Masoller Village Border
7) Isla Suárez Border
8) 24th Parallel South Border
9) South Patagonia Border
Just give Bolivia their coast back smh you don’t need that much coast
There is a dispute between The Netherlands and Venezuela. Venezuela is claiming the ABC island off its coast.
Not True
Venezuela has a historic dispute with Dominica over Bird Island in the Caribbean.
There's information lacking on Malvinas, when the British Empire came to invade our territories (again, after 1806 and 1807) in 1833, THERE WAS AN ARGENTINEAN SETTLEMENT, which was expelled from the islands, then came the british implanted settlers.
The UK claimed the Falklands before that they even had a plague on the islands saying they're British territory
Bolivia: I WANT SEA
Peru: Here you go pal. -lends a lil bit of sealine-
Bolivia: I mean I WANT CHILE SEA, not your stupid sea
Chile: Mmm...Chill out Bolivia
Bolivia:No, Imma gonna take U to court
Peru: Bolivia, Chill out
Bolivia: Shut up Peru, See you in court Chile
Chile: How can you live with that Peru?
Peru:🤷
International Court: Chile is not forced to return any land to Bolivia
Bolivia: F U C K
Chile: uwu🌸
@@felipeoyarzun5424 hahahah so true, still Bolivia be like :I still want sea...
The border dispute beetwen uruguay and brazil on the mainland ended like 2 years ago now its uruguay agreeing everything that is across the uruguay river was uruguay's property but the brazilian island is still disputed so yeah a little correction there
Can you show me the source of this information?
@@henriquem.9763 metrocosm.com/disputed-territories-map.html Interactive Map showing all border disputes as of it you click on uruguay and it doesnt appear just brazilian island appears
@@hitlers_grandson Interesting, but how accurate is this site? They could have missed it.
Ehm Uruguay and Brazil do not have a border *over* the Uruguay river, both are on the same side of it
@@henriquem.9763 They update it when news come out because its easy to add one. Basically its just some clicks so yeah expect after 1 day to maximum one week off the new border dispute.
La votación no es relevante si el pueblo de las Malvinas no es legítimo
Igual, nunca volverán a manos argentinas lol
Please keep these going , they are very interesting and open your eyes to what a troubled area South America is.
As an Argentinean i approve the fact that the UK (One of my favorite countries) rule the Islands. They are better with you than with us.
Also i expect that nothing wrong happens between Chile and us. We are Brothers since ours independents and we have to work and progress together.
@@zaikolebolsh5724 I know right?
Las Malvinas son argentinas traidor vende patria! VAMOS ARGENTINA CARAJO (?
@@pecadodeorgullo5963 i said it ironically, im not that much of a zealous patriot.
@@nyft3352 oh sorry, I can't tell when someone is being sarcastic in spainsh since its not my mother tongue.
@@pecadodeorgullo5963 dont worry, distinguishing irony in spanish can be as hard as in english and i didnt want it to be too obvious.
General: você é português?
There was another dispute between Chile and Argentina over Tierra del Fuego. I can’t remember if it was the pope or the president of Notre Dame that mediated that one.
Queen Elizabeth II (and a panel she appointed) arbitrated it in 1978, the Argentine Junta rejected it and nearly went to war. The USA told them to stop it or else, and got the then Pope to intervene as a 'peacemaker' to save the Junta's face. The Pope had virtually jack to say when Catholic Argentina was killing non-Catholic British.
Not directly related, but Guyana is the worst trade in history. See, the part of the USA called New York was actually owned by Dutch, and was called "New Amsterdam", the Dutch actually traded Guyana for New York basically, because they believed that plantations and such would be the future of business. The USA is mostly all one joined country because of how smart they were with trading land.
The Dutch weren't daft to make that trade. Plantations were where the big money was at back then. For instance, during the American Revolution, Britain sent a big chunk of its military power to the Caribbean rather than to America. That today seems like lunacy, but back then the Caribbean was a money making machine of far more value to the 18th century UK economy than the 13 colonies. Britain's primary fear was the French or Dutch pinching them!
Just as the British had no way of knowing that retaining the 13 colonies should have been the higher priority, the Dutch had no way to know that New Amsterdam would one day become one of the world's most important cities. And since we're into alternate histories with these speculations, even if New Amsterdam had remained Dutch, it's quite possible that it would never have become anything like the metropolis we know today.
You forgot the most devastating dispute of all:
Who invented pisco?
It’s Chilean and that’s a fact.
Last update I had, the oldest letter talking about the drink was found near North of Santiago
Peru
Who cares? Is just a drink.
El pisco, ceviche y la wea son argentinos, no jodan!
In 1833 the British invaded the Malvinas islands, deposing a governor, destroying your capital and exile 300 people.
In fact, they have committed a war act against a country that not on war with they!
Erm.........never mind not worth it.
Britain was retaking there claim. From a country that thought it was theirs because Spain bought Port Stanley from France.
@@Captain_Yorkie1 Did they buy just the port or Frances side of the islands?
@@_su0p Mainly the Port, i think since France didn't document claiming the whole island.
The British didn't destroy the Capital. The Americans destroyed it in retribution for the three of their whaling ships that been illegally confiscated.
1820 - 1832
Argentina time of control of the islands
1833
England occupies the islands
(Argentina due to its era of civil wars and reforms, added to the fact that Uk was a military power, is forced to let this go)
During the Perón era, they seek to negotiate sovereignty, taking good steps, but when an investigation discovers oil, all that diplomatic advance goes to waste, a coup in Argentina and war.
quick summary.jpg
Venezuela is claiming more and half of Guyana😪.
Everybody here in Suriname knows that tigri belongs to Suriname and the esequibo belongs to guyana
@@apeman9238is something wrong with your head? Some of my family and relatives live in suriname and they damn well know that Tigri belongs to Guyana. Venezuela can carry their hungry belly skunt. Y'all need to start building houses and city in yall hairy country and leave Guyana alone.
Because those regions are not of Guyana,it never was!
i wonder who is the 3 person that voted to be an indpendent falkland.
edit: also imagine if you live in a country which most of the area are just disputed.
One of them voted for independence
Well, they voted against the "Falkland Islands to retain their current political status as an Overseas Territory of the United Kingdom". As far as we know, they could've voted to change that status for further integration with the UK.
Downed argie pilots who are stuck there 😂
Brazil should lose all its claims, they're way too big. C'mon!!!
These claims are all going to Brazil!!!
@@mrgeez1 nooooo
USA is a BIG BOI... But still with the Puerto Rico territory tho
@@vininassau4656 - Did someone mention the island of Reggaeton Puerto Rico. Even in Spain they are singing and dancing to Reggaeton. See for yourself - th-cam.com/video/K_4aTJXuRws/w-d-xo.html - Ha Ha.
But it is the only Portuguese speaking country in South America! Holy #InriCristo would be pissed, too!
About Uruguay: Portugal and Spain had a dispute over the portuguese settlement called Sacramento. Because of the wars in Europe, Portugal occupies in 1817 the whole region known today as Uruguay, but called Cisplatina in the past. In 1822 Brazil becomes independent but Cisplatina province stayed loyal to Portugal. Portugal and Brazil make peace and Cisplatina is incorporated in Brazil. In 1828 Uruguay becomes independent. Sacramento / Uruguay / Cisplatina is also connected to the dispute between Portugal and Spain over Olivença (Iberian Peninsula, Europe) also.
Portugal and Brazil make peace??? wtf Brazil was Portugal at the time and there was no war, so the King of Portugal, Brazil and Algarves give the independence to is Portuguese territory in America and at the time the Cisplatina province was part of this territory. After the independence the province was invaded by Argentinians and the Brazilians lost there first war as an independent country :-(
How much the total land area of the disputed region on southern patagonian icefield where chile and argentina have disputes?
This Video and Taureor's hoi4 video where he takes the Falklands as Argentina released on the same day
Coincidence, I THINK NOT
Yeah,kinda sus
Link?
@@santiagotorrado8012 th-cam.com/video/MMr2iMvH7W8/w-d-xo.html
Fun fact: Everything actually belongs to the natives.
Fun fact: the Southern half of French Guyana is the only place where they actually get to rule themselves.
Ha! No
12:15 Bolivia doesn't claim the whole are they lost, but they ask for some passage somewhere. There isn't a juridical dispute over a determined area, just a political aspiration.
Please do more like these in different continents!!!!!!!!!!
Las Islas Malvinas son 🇦🇷!! You’re brother from Sweden
May the falklands forever fly the Union Jack 🇬🇧
Spain had control of the esequibo then england stole it Venezuela is own of the esequibo
I would enjoy this a lot more if the captions weren't total gibberish and your audio was clearer.
Perú claims a land in the north of Chile the so call "triángulo terrestre"
Brazil: I'm doing nothing, so I'm going to get Acre from Bolivia because yes
You forgot to mention that before 1833 there was an Argentinean settlement and there was an argentinean governor for the island too, and the British came and invaded them throwing out the people that lived in there
Vernet had a trading licence from London and the only people expelled were the military installed by the United Provinces (proto Argentina) and the civillians remained, all but three whom didn't go back to UP. The Argentine state also signed away the rights to the Spanish claim in a treaty with GB in 1850.
More of these would be great!
I like the territorial disputes on the different continents.