Timeline for Is the UK’s claim over the Chagos Islands valid?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Oct 9 at 3:07 | history | bounty ended | JonathanReez | ||
| S Oct 9 at 3:07 | history | notice removed | JonathanReez | ||
| Oct 3 at 5:41 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | What are the consequences here for ignoring an UN resolution is in general impossible to answer without speculation. Now maybe it is because the question is already a bit older but then it wasn't. | |
| Oct 2 at 9:16 | comment | added | Stuart F | Putting a bounty on something doesn't make it a factual question. But you should certainly clarify which of the 4 or so questions above you want an answer to. | |
| Oct 2 at 1:59 | answer | added | JonathanReez | timeline score: 2 | |
| Oct 2 at 1:19 | comment | added | JonathanReez | Related: politics.stackexchange.com/questions/89274/… | |
| S Oct 2 at 0:35 | history | bounty started | JonathanReez | ||
| S Oct 2 at 0:35 | history | notice added | JonathanReez | Canonical answer required | |
| Nov 23, 2019 at 9:06 | vote | accept | CDJB♦ | ||
| Nov 23, 2019 at 1:38 | comment | added | JJJ♦ | @Jontia that could be a separate question, I think. Seeing how long the situation has been this way and seeing the controversy, it's probably a question some in the UK and internationally will have looked into. | |
| Nov 22, 2019 at 22:06 | answer | added | JJJ♦ | timeline score: 13 | |
| Nov 22, 2019 at 20:33 | answer | added | Sjoerd | timeline score: -3 | |
| Nov 22, 2019 at 10:28 | comment | added | user19831 | Wikipedia makes the history fairly clear. | |
| Nov 22, 2019 at 10:16 | comment | added | Steve Melnikoff | Note that the decisions of both the UN General Assembly and the International Court of Justice are advisory, and so not binding. Nonetheless, this does not lessen the political pressure on the UK. | |
| Nov 22, 2019 at 9:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackPolitics/status/1197802011040858112 | ||
| Nov 22, 2019 at 8:47 | comment | added | Jontia | It's probably also worth pointing out that the entire place is a US military base, and honestly if anyone can make sense of why the UK still makes the place its problem that'd be really useful. | |
| Nov 22, 2019 at 8:30 | comment | added | GeoffAtkins | It should be pointed out that the UK, as a permanent member of the security council and therefore with a veto, is quite different to any member which does not enjoy that privilege (or has a close ally which does). So any consequences for the UK could be very different compared to how it would be if the situation were reversed and it was Mauritius ignoring the resolution. | |
| Nov 22, 2019 at 7:30 | history | asked | CDJB♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |