This is an excerpt of Burnham's interview with Venezuela's El Nacional on March 1, 1985:
PEÑA: But right now the question is being raised - that same kind of proposals that were raised under the Perez government - of a solution; that is, Venezuela's exit to the Atlantic. Foreign Minister Morales Paul has said that Venezuela would have to have a portion of land and sea for itself.
BURNHAM: We can discuss it. But having an entry into the Caribbean is quite different from owning the land bordering the Caribbean.
Seems like Mr. Burnham was willing to discuss a passage to the Atlantic. Any agreement would have to be set in stone with Venezuela agreeing in writing that this would permanently settle the border issue. Maybe I am missing something, but it seems to me that if a right of passage can be a solution to the border issue then that should be undertaken. I am not sure what Mr. Ramkarran is talking about the Law of the Sea Convention, this is not a Sea we are dealing with and surely Burnham would have known about it.
The whole interview is here:
The access in this context is through the 12 mile maritime territory of Guyana. That is not even required today, because the UN maritime law permits the innocent passage of traffic through sovereign territorial sea lanes. How does the Orinoco come into the conversation?
- VVP Keith Williams • 20 hours ago
So what was Burnham discussing? Would that have been covered by the UN maritime law? Just asking, this thing is not my forte.