MALTA'S PERMANENT NEUTRALITY

in The Italian Yearbook of International Law Online
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

MALTA'S PERMANENT NEUTRALITY

in The Italian Yearbook of International Law Online

References

  • 1 As will be detailed later, the object of the Exchange of Notes (the text of which is reproduced in the present Yearbook) consists of two instruments: a) the first is closely connected with Malta's neutrality - i. e. the Declaration concerning Malta's neutrality, issued by Malta and the Italian Declaration recognizing and guaranteeing the Island's neutra- lity ; b) the second is related to cooperation between the two countries - i. e. the Protocol relating to financial, economic and technical assistance. This research, being related to the neutrality of Malta alone, will not deal with the Protocol, except in as far as it is connected with the problem of neutrality. The content of the Protocol is worth briefly summing up. It envisages three forms of economic help by Italy to Malta: i) 12 million U S dollars in aid, yearly, and for a period of five years as from 1979; ii) a concessionary financial credit of 15 million U S dollars "to be utilized in development projects to be identified by agreement" between Italy and Malta; iii) "an amount of not less than four million" U S dollars "per annum, to be utilized before the end of 1983" and assigned to programmes of economic, social and technical development. � Obviously no account is taken of the demilitarization of territories, such as the Dodecanese Islands (see DRAKIDES, "Le sort actuel des delimitarisations en Mediterranee - Italie, Grece", 30 RHDI (1977), p. 43 ff.) or of special statuses - such as Cyprus - which cannot be equated to permanent neutrality (see LAVROFF, "Le statut de Chypre", 65 RGDIP (1961), p. 544).

  • 3 Of the Mediterraneean States, only the following took full part in the negotiations and signed the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe: Cyprus, Greece, Italy, Malta, Monaco, Spain, Turkey and Yugoslavia. The Mediterranean region is dealt with in the Helsinki Final Act both in the Document on Confidence - Building Measures, and in "basket" II (Co-operation in the Field of Economics, of Science and Technology and the Environment: Questions relating to Security and Co-operation in the Mediterranean). The link between European security and security in the Mediterranean area is specified in both documents. On the problem of the extension to the Mediterranean area of the principles governing European security, see FERRARIS, Testimoniarze di un negoziato, Helsinki - Ginevra - Helsinki T972-75, Padova, 1977, p. 500�'f. BLACK, FALK, KNORR, YOUNG, Neutralization and World Politics, PrlriCetOri, 1968, p 67ff.

  • 5588 UNTS, p. 55. 6588 UNTS, p. 125. 7 See MALLIA, "The Development of Malta-EEC Relations", in The Mediterranean Po- licy of the EEC (Atti del Convegno Internazionale organizzato dal Seminario di Studi Po litici e Sociali dall'Istituto Universitario Orientale, Napoli, 28-29 marzo 1980), Napoli, 1981, p. 170 off. See also VELLA BONICI, "Malta's Position and the EEC's Mediterranean Policy", ibidem, p. 293ff. 8 On this and the following events, see the analysis by MICALLEF, "Mediterranean Maverick, Malta's Uncertain Future", The Round Table, 1979, p. 238 off. Cf. also STERPEL- Loc·rE, "Orientamenti e azioni dell'Italia nel campo internazionale", 25 Arnuario di politica internaxionale (1972), pp. 34-37; ibidem, 972-974.

  • 9 See MICALLEF, "Gli accordi tra Italia e Malta per la sicurezza nel Mediterraneo orientale", Politica internazionale (1981), No. 3, p. 34. According to Micalllef, neither agreement has been published. It is worth noting that during the debate in the Maltese House of Representatives on the Exchange of Notes between Malta and Italy, both the Prime Minister and the Opposition leader referred to such an agreement between Malta and Libya. Nevertheless, the agreement seems to have been just a pactum de contrahendo concluded on 29 May 1977 and repudiated in 1980, following the Medina incident: Malta, Debates Tal-Kamra Tad-Deputati (Rapport Ufficjali mhux Rivedut) Ir-Raba' Par- lament, LEwwel Sessjont, Seduta Nru..192, 1,-jErbgha, 15 ta' April, ig8i, Stampat R-Uf fic- eju ta' L-Iskrivan Kamra tad-Deputati, Malta p. 21 f. and 71 (hereinafter quoted as Malta, Debates Tal-Kamra Tad-Deputati). See also UN Doc. S/PV 2246 (4 September 1980), p. 11. lo Keesing's, 1973, p. 26118. 11 For the three stages relating to the negotiating history of the Treaty concerning Malta's neutrality, see: Camera dei Deputati della Repubblica Italiana, Atti Parlamentari,

  • VIII Legislatura - Disegni di Legge e Relazioni - Documenti, Doc. No. 2020 (hereinafter quoted as Camera dei Deputati, Doc. No. 2020) pp. 1-2 (Introductory Report on the draft bill concerning authorization of the ratification of the Exchanges of Notes); ibidem, Resoconto stenografico (Edizione non definitiva), Doc. No. 295, Seduta di martedi To marzo T98l, pp. 47-49 (hereinafter quoted as Camera dei Deputati, Doc. No. 295): Introductory statement by Foreign Minister Colombo, p. 47 ff.; MICALLEF, "Gli accordi tra Italia e Malta", cit., p. 34 ff. 12 Let us quote Micallef's article again: "The Italian Government attempted to engage Mr. Mintoff in a dialogue, but meanwhile refused to commit itself to his security pact. Confirmation of the Italian position came in early October 1977 during a meeting of the Council of Ministers to the Council of Europe. Arnaldo Forlani, Italy's Foreign Minister, acknowledged that 'there is a proposal by the Government of Malta... in respect to a unilateral proposal which the Government of Malta will make on neutrality'. 'The pro- posal had not been completely defined', added Forlani, 'however, the proposal cannot involve initiatives of a military nature since we [Italy] form part of a military alliance to which we naturally have to refer' ("Mediterranean. Maverick", cit., p. 244).

  • t3 See the statement by Italian Foreign Minister Colombo before the Italian Senate: 2620 Resoconto sommario, 9 aprile 1981 (hereinafter quoted as Senato della Repubblica, 262° Resoconto), p. 9. See also the Maltese Prime Minister's statement in the House of Representatives: Malta Debates Tal-Kamra Tad-Deputati, pp. 57-58. 14 See Corriere della Sera, 25 August 1980; ibidem, 26 August 1980; Relaxiont internazionali, 6 September 1980, nn. 35/36, p. 575; Keesing's Contemporary Archzves, 1981, pp. 3o7y-3o7m. See also the letter from the Permanent Representative of Malta to the President of the Security Council dated i September 1980 (U N Doc. S/14I40) and the statement by Gauci, Malta's representative to the United Nations, before the Security Council: UN Doc. S/PV 2246 (4 September 1980). ls Corriere della Sera, 29 August 1980. ls Corriere della Sera, 3 September 1980; ibidem, 4 September 1980; ibidem, 5 Septem- ber 1980. 1� Corriere della Sera, 10 September 1980. 18 See the statement by Italian Foreign Minister Colombo before the Italian Senate: Senato della Repubblica, 262o Resoconto, p. 9.

  • 19 See the opening statement by Prime Minister Dom blintoff before the House of Representatives (Malta, Debates Tal-Kamra Tad-Deputati, p. 4). His view was not contested by the Opposition. 20 The iter has been the following: the Italian Government introduced the Bill before the Chamber of Deputies on 24 September 1980. The Bill was scrutinized by the following standing Committees: Defence (19 November 1980); Constitutional Affairs (25 November 1980); Foreign Affairs (10 December 1980). The Chamber discussed the Bill in the plenary sessions of 10 and 11 March 1981. After approval by the Chamber of Deputies, the Bill was introduced before the Senate and scrutinized by its Foreign Affairs Committee (8 April 1981). The Senate discussed and passed the Bill in the session of 9 April 1981. The law authorizing the ratification of the Exchange of Notes entered into force on 15 April 1981. 21 See MnLirrTOrrr, "Ritardi belle procedure di stipulazione e di attuazione dei trattati: adempimenti amministrativi e adempimenti politic!", 50 Rivista (1967), p. 84ff. 22 Cf. the article by the former Ambassador Roberto Ducci, published after an inter- view with Maltese Prime Minister Dom Mintoff: Corriere della Sera, 5 January 1981.

  • 3 See, for example, the statements b�- Spataro and Giuliano in the Foreign Affairs, Committee of the Chamber of Deputies: Bolleiiino Jelle Ca··;>nissior.:. III Corri'iissione Permanents (affirm EsteriK Mercoledi 10 dicembre 1980. pn. z+-=5. Jt See Camera der D2pdi:.ai, Doc. No. 295. p. 56. 25 Ibidenl. 26 camera Jet Deputati, della Repubblica L'j/M'M, Atti Par!a"tentari. VI J Lc'��.'��r�. Discussioni, Seduta deli'11 nsarzo I9BI, Resoconio stenograiico (Ej'f��oMt' nor. det.'1i:it'J). Doc. No. 296 (hereinafter quoted ;3_ Camera dei Deputati. Doc. No. 296 pp. 3Q-33. J7 The secret voting had the following score: the Bill �-as parsed b�- the Chamber of Deputies with 2S1 for and 25 a,-°�3inst. There were 158 abstensions. coming from MPs belonging to the Communist Party, the PDUP (the Party of Proletarian Unity for Com- munism) and Sinistra Indipendente (Independent-Left): cf. op. ult. cat.. pp. 3-)-�*. The Communist Party and Sinistra Indipendente also abstained when the Bill was passed by the Senate (262- Resoconto. p. S and p. 10). Before the vote Senator Granelli (Christian Democratic Party) warned that "opposition ' to ratification would cast "a shadow over the Agreement" (ibidc'''1, p. 8). 25 Camera dei Deputati, Doc. No. 296. p. 18 (Ba-�lin:): dGd,3etfl, p. 38 (Sp.ltJI'01. 262° Resoconto so'!l":J1'io, 9 aprile 1981, p. 7 (La Valle).

  • 2<1 S"IItO �/t7/t/ Repubblica, 26.�" Resoconto, p. 5 (Granclli). x Camera del Deputati, I3nllettirro commissions, Mercoledl 19 novembre 1980, \' II Ctwtmissione PO'! "<111 l'fI/(' (Difesa), p. 57 (Milani); Cumora dcí Deputati, Doc. No. 295, p. 55 ((;illliaIH»); ibidem, 66 (l3crnini); /7'/</<'w, Doc. No. 2�('. p. 41 (Spataro). .\1 Camera dei Deputati, Duc. No. 2')5, p 60 ((Cianni). .\2 ('f. the Statement he Undersecretary Speranza before the (.ommittce on Foreign Alf,�ics: Camera dci Deput.iti, Bollettino clalla Cornmissioni, 11I Commissionc Permanents (/l//jr/ ct/f/7�, l1lerrolcdl 10 clicutttbrc 1980, p. 25. •y Senate dclla Rvpubbhca, Giflllte e Commission, Fst(,ri ,"), 8 aprile 1981, p. 17 (Cmnelli) (hereinafter quoted ;is Scnato della Repubblica, Giunte c Commissioni). J4 1(-i Deputati, Doc. No. 295. p. 54 (Ciiulinno). Cf. ;ils�,, ibidem, Doc. No. 296, P. ;o (Spataro). 15 Scnato d,'I/.1 RcplI¡'¡'¡icú, 1(,20 Resoconto, 9 aprile 11),Sl, p. 7 (La Valle).

  • � Cf. The Times, 27 January 1981, p. 5; ibidem, 12 February 1981, p. 8; RousSEAU. "Chronique des faits internationaux", 85 RGDIP (1981), p. 589 f. The Soviet fleet, unlike that of the United States, has not many naval facilities in the Mediterranean. 3� For the last remark, see M. G., "Neutralita double-face di Malta?", It Popolo, 17 October 1981. See also RousSEAU, op. ult. cit., p. 589. � Camera dei Deputati, Doc. No. 295, p. 58. 39 Senato della Repubblica. Giunte e Commissioni, p. 17; ibidem, 262° Resoconto, p. 6. 40 See the statement by Undersecretary Speran�a: Seiiato della Repubblica, Giunte e Commissioni, p. 19. The problem of the consistency between the Exchanges of Notes of 15 September 1980 and the Malta-USSR Agreement granting oil facilities to Soviet ships has again been raised within the Italian Chamber of Deputies: see the question to the Minister of Defence by Pozzo and other MPs (Camera dei Deputati, 305° Resoconto sommario, Allegato alia seduta No. 305, 23 settembre 1981, p. r5), 41 The Parliamentary Records are printed in the Document Malta, Debates Tal-Kamra Tad-Deputati, previously quoted. A summary of the debate in English was published by the following Maltese newspapers: The Times, 16 April 1981 and Daily News, 16 April 1981.

  • ai Malta, Debates Tal-Kamra Tad-Deputati, p. 19 f. For the Italian Foreign Minister's statement, see infra, para. 6 v). 43 Op. ult. cit., p. 22 f. Colombo's reply is quoted below, para. 5 iii). 44 Op. ult. cit., p. z5 f. 45 Op. ult. cit., p. 38 f.

  • 46 Op. ult. cit., pp. 62-64. 47 Op. ult. cit., p. 40. 48 Op. ult. cit., p. 75. 49 Op. ult. cit., p. 76.

  • 50 On the meaning and form of "notes verbales", see WEINSTEIN, "Exchanges of Notes", 29 BYIL (1952), p. 205. 51 RoussEAU, "Chronique des faits internationaux", 85 RGDIP (1981), p. 411. s� See GU No. 112 of 23 April 1981, p. 267o ff. 53 An amendment proposed by the Leader of the Opposition was defeated, as 24 votes were cast in favour and 27 against: Malta, Debates Tal-ICumra TaalDeputati, p. 78 f.

  • 54 See the announcement by the Italian Foreign Office in GU No. 143 of 27 April 1981, p. 3402. 55 Statement before the Chamber of Deputies: Camera dei Deputati, Doc. No. 295, p. 46. See also ibidem, p. 57 (Sedati). It is worth emphasizing that Switzerland, a State which follows a strict policy of

  • permanent neutrality, is not a member of the Non-Aligned Movement. Switzerland attends the meetings of the Movement as a "guest" without having speaking and voting rights. According to the Swiss Federal Council, full membership of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries would be improper for a State that abides by a policy of permanent neutrality (see the Report of the Swiss Federal Council replying to a written question submitted to the National Council: "...Nous avons montre clairement que le Conseil federal n'a aucu- nement en vue un rapprochement de notre politique exterieure de celle des Etats non-alignes et par la une reorientation de notre politique exterieure de celle des Etats non�-alignes, voire un abandon de notre politique de neutralite" - 36 SchweizJIR (1980), p. 235). As is well known, Non-Aligned Countries follow (or should follow) a policy of neutralism: see BEDJAOUI, "Non-Alignment et Droit International", 151 Hague Recueil (1976), III, p. 3<19. Yet permanent neutrality and neutralism are not synonymous and it is a moot point whether the former is consistent with the latter. On this point, see BINDSCHEDLER (Rudolf L.), "Standige Neutralitat und Neutralismus (Blockfreiheit)", in Volkerrecht und Rechtsphilosophie - Internationale Festschrift fiir Stephan Verosta zuna 70 Geburtstag, Berlin, 1980, p. 313 ff. and bibliography quoted therein. 56 See Political Department of the Swiss Government, "Conception officielle suisse de la neutralite", 14 SchweizJIR (1957), p. 195ff.; ScHiNDi.ER, "Aspects contemporains de la neutralite", 121 Hague Recueil (1967), II, p. 308; VERDROSS, The Permanent Neutrality of Austria, Wien, 1978, p. 41. � See the Austrian Federal Constitutional Law of 26 October 1955, Art. i (repro- duced in WHITFMAN, Divest of International Law, I, p. 348); para. 4 of the Declara- tion on the Neutrality of Laos of 9 July 1962, ibidem, p. 356.

  • 58 Even in the case of armed attack, the right of a neutralized State to call for outside assistance is not free from limitations. The assistance must not conceal a covered adhesion to the block-system: see, for example, Sico, "Neutralizzazione", 28 EdD (1978), p. 223 f. s9 Camera dei Deputati, Doc. No. 296, p. 25 f.

  • 60 See CONFORTI, Le Naxioni Unite, 3rd. ed., Padova, 1979, p. 26 ff. and bibliography quoted therein. 61 For example, according to The Times (4 December 1980, p. 7), Malta employs six North Koreans to train its armed forces.

  • 62 There is some doubt, however, as to whether only the use of port facilities by ships of the two superpowers is forbidden or whether the construction of military vessels for the USA and the USSR is also included. According to Prime Minister Dom Mintoff, the clause in question does not forbid the building of military vessels for the two super- powers. Indeed, he stated that this point was discussed during negotiations with the Italian government, which did not insist this should be specifically forbidden in the text of the Agreement: Malta, Debates Tal-Kamra Tad-Deputati, p. 6z. � See Hague Convention VII of 1907 on the Conversion of Merchant Ships into Warships; Art. 8 para. 2 of the 1958 Geneva Convention on the High Seas. It is worth specifying that not even auxiliary military vessels belonging to the superpowers are permitted to use Maltese shipyards. This was confirmed by Prime Minister Dom Mintoff in his speech before the Maltese Parliament: Malta, Debates Tal-Kamra Tad-Deputati, p. 61. 64 In the Italian text "like declarations" is translated into "dichiarazioni analoghe". During the debate before the Chamber of Deputies, Giuliano pointed out that "like dec- larations" could have a different meaning from "dichiarazioni analoghe" According to Giuliano, like declarations means that declarations issued by other guarantor States have to be identical to the Italian declaration, while from the wording of the Italian text one

  • might deduce that the declarations of the other guarantor States are to be similar but not necessarily identical to that made by Italy (Camera dei Deputati, Doc. No. 295, p. 55). During the debate before the Maltese House of Representatives, the leader of the Oppo- sition, quoting the Maltese government's version in Maltese of the Treaty presented to the House, employed the term "simili", which in Maltese is closer to the English word "like" than to the Italian "analogo": Malta, Debates Tall28. 65 It appears an invitation was extended to Greece, during the visit there by the Italian President Pertini, as well as to Tunisia (La Repubblica, 1 September 1981, p. 11). 66 PERASSI, Lezioni di diritto internazionale, Padova, ig6i, p. 89 f. "Recognition" is employed here in a non-technical sense, as this is not the proper place to discuss the meaning of the so-called recognition of permanent neutrality: i.e. whether it is an element of an agreement between the neutralized State and the recognizing one or a unilateral act. On this point see VERHOEVEN, La reconnaissance internationale dans la pratique con- temporaine. Les relations publiques internationales, Paris, 1975, p. 220 off. and the biblio- graphy quoted therein. ANZILOT'TI, Corso di diritto internazionale. 1929, reprinted in Opere di Dionisio Arzilotti, Padova, 1955, p. 217; SERENI, Diritto internaziotaale, II, Milano, 1958, p. q.q.9; McNAIR, The Law of Treaties, Oxford, 1961, p. 23� ff.; IvIORELLI, Noxioni di diritto inter- nazionale, 7th ed., Padova, 1967, p. 169; VERHOEVEN, op. cit., p. 228, note 32.

  • 68 On the contrary, neutralization is sometimes not a free choice but a step that a State is obliged to take. Neutralization is virtually forced upon a State by the dominant actors involved in a competitive intervention. In such a case, the goal of neutralization is the removal of the neutralized State from the contention, so that outside intervention is put to an end or at least lessened. This was the purpose of the Geneva Agreements of 1962, which led to La.otian neutralization: see Dupuy, "Le Laos, temoin de la coexistence pacifique", 8 AFDI (1962), p. 3 ff.; CZYSAK and SALANS, "The International Conference on the Settlement of the Laotian Question and the Geneva Agreements of 1962", 57 AJIL (1963), p. 30o ff.; NGUYE�uoc-DiNH, "Conflit ideologique et controle international au Laos", 10 AFDI (1964), p. 64ff.; BLACK, FALK, KNORR, YouNG, op. cit., p. 88ff. 69 Text in WmTEMAN, op. cit., I, p. 355 ff.

  • 70 Statement by Giuliano: see Camera dei Deputati, Doc. No. 295, p. 5 f. 71 Op. loco ult. cit. 72 Op. loco ult. cit. �3 Camera dei Deputati, Doc. No. 296, p. 26. See also ibidem, p. 3q..

  • 74 A plot organized by a Maltese citizen and aimed at overthrowing Dom MintofE's government with the help of 300 British mercenaries was discovered last summer in London: see The Times, 3 August 1981. 75 For a similar formula, see the Declaration whereby the 13 States recognized the neutrality of Laos: WHITEMAN, op. cit., I, p. 357.

  • 76 This last remark is obviously based on the traditional theory of recognition of neutrality, formulated at a time when the threat and use of force were not completely banned or not banned at all. Now that the threat and use of force are prohibited, reco- gnition of neutrality - in so far as it comes down only to the obligation to respect the sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity of the neutralized State - is a mere restatement of principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations and in customary international law. T� Camera dei Deputati, Doc. No. 296, p. Zq..

  • 78 See also the report on the draft bill authorizing ratification of the Exchange of Notes, presented to the Chamber of Deputies' Camera dei Deputati, Doc. No. 2020, p. 2. 79 Ross, The United Nations Peace and Progress, Totowa, 1966, p. 190 f.

  • � Camera dei Deputati, Doc. No. 296, p. 25. 81 See the statements by Italian Foreign Undersecretary Speranza, during the debate before the Italian Parliament (Camera dei Deputati, Bollettino delle Commissioni, III Commis- sione Permanente - Aftari Esteri -, Mercoledl 10 dicembre 1980, p. 25) and by the Foreign Minister Colombo (Camera dei Deputati, Doc. No. 195, p. 51; ibidem, Doc. No. 296, p. 25; Senato della Repubblica, 262° Resoconto, 9 aprile 1981, p. 9).

  • � Camera dei Deputati, Doc. No. 295, p. 51. In the same vein, see also the statement by Baslini, ibidem, 11 marzo 1981, Doc. No. 296, p. 18, and the statement by Fenech Adami in the Maltese Parliament, quoted in para. 3.

  • 83 Atti parlamentari, Camera dei Deputali, VIII Legislatura, Discussioni, Seduta dell'z ottobre T981, Resoconto stenografico, Doc. No. 384, p. 33551. 84 See 31 Agence Europe (AGI, Italian Edition) (1981), No. 234, p. 4. Cf. also Le Monde, i October 1981. � Il Popolo, 10 October 1981; Avanti!, 11-12 October 1981; La Repubblica, 11-12 October 1981; La Stampa, 14 October 1981; Corriere della Sera, 29 October i98r. � Corriere della Sera, 24 September 1981. 87 The Agreement is unpublished. The relevant clauses are mentioned in M. G.'s article, quoted supra in note 37. The Agreement refers only to the recognition and not to the guarantee of Malta's neutrality by the Soviet Union. Before its conclusion, rumours were reported in the Italian press about a treaty whereby the Soviet Union would guaran- tee Maltese neutrality. This was the subject of sharp criticism from Mr. Piccoli (Christian Democratic Party), in the Chamber of Deputies during the debate on Italian foreign policy: Atti Parlamentari, Camera dei Deputati, VIII Legislatura, Discussioni - Seduta dell'z ottobre ig8j, Resoconto stenngra�tco, Doc. No. 384, p. 33605. After the conclusion of the Agreement with the USSR, Dom Mintoff met the Italian Prime Minister in Rome. The Italian press did not report that the Italian government expressed concern about the Agreement between Malta and the Soviet Union (see for example La Stampa, 14 November 1981, and Il Popolo, 14 November 1981).

  • BEDJAOUI, op. cit., pp. 364-365, 379. s9 It cannot be denied that the above remark is questionable from a strictly legal point

  • of view. Certain authors point out that neutralized States do have a few common obliga- tions (such as the duty "to abide by the classical rules of neutrality": SKUBISZEWSKI, "Use of Force by States. Collective Security. Law of War and Neutrality", in SOPENSEN, (ed.), Manual of Public International Law, London, Melbourne, Toronto, New York, 1968, p. 843), while others maintain that the status of permanent neutrality of the various neutralized States is not identical, since the agreements setting up neutralization vary, even if they have, in fact, certain features in common (see PERASSI, op. cit., p. 88). According to this second school of thought, it may be argued: a) that Malta's permanent neutrality is an example of "neutralization based on principles of non-alignment"; and b) that the problem as to whether neutralization is consistent with non-alignment, has no "raison d'6tre", since the duties connected with neutralization stem from the agreement estab- lishing it, not from general international law. In strict legal terms, this means: a) that Malta cannot join in inter-state armed conflict, but is allowed to help liberation movements within the limits permitted by general international law, since its neutrality is linked to the principles of non-alignment by which a State is duty bound to give such help; b) that neither Italy nor any State recognizing Malta's permanent neutrality can complain if Malta supports liberation movements, since both Italy and the other recognizing States have agreed to the Island's permanent neutrality within the terms laid down in Malta's declaration: i.e. permanent neutrality based on non-alignment. BEDIAOUI, op. cit., p. 349. 91 See the joint statement made by Malta and the USSR issued on 10 October 1981, at the end of a visit to Malta by the Soviet Deputy Foreign Minister: Il Popolo, 12 Octo- ber 1981.

Index Card

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 11 11 3
Full Text Views 34 34 0
PDF Downloads 0 0 0
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0