
Belgium and the Netherlands Swap Land, and Remain Friends - ALee
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/28/world/europe/belgium-netherlands-land-dispute.html
======
pavel_lishin
There's a really interesting bit at the end:

> _Norway was considering an unlikely birthday present for neighboring
> Finland: an Arctic mountain peak on Mount Halti, the highest mountain in
> Finland, whose 4,478-foot summit is in Norway._

> _To mark the 100th anniversary of Finland’s declaration of independence from
> Russia, a group of Norwegians was urging the government to move a point on
> its border with Finland about 490 feet to the north and 650 feet to the
> east._

> _But that ran afoul of an article of the Norwegian Constitution that states
> unequivocally that the Kingdom of Norway is “indivisible and inalienable,”
> and the friendly gesture was called off, at least for now._

The constitution is available online, and has other interesting bits in it,
especially as a contrast to the US Constitution:
[https://www.stortinget.no/globalassets/pdf/english/constitut...](https://www.stortinget.no/globalassets/pdf/english/constitutionenglish.pdf)

> _The King shall at all times profess the Evangelical-Lutheran religion._

There's also a repealed Article 10, but the English-language Wikipedia article
doesn't say anything about it.

~~~
ptaipale
The repealed Article 10 simply says that "The King is of age, when he turns 20
years. As soon as he enters the 21st year, he declares himself publicly to be
an adult."

[https://lovdata.no/dokument/HIST/lov/1814-05-17-18140517](https://lovdata.no/dokument/HIST/lov/1814-05-17-18140517)

I don't quite see why that was repealed, though. Some Norwegian might tell.

As a Finn I sort of appreciate the gesture of proposing moving border to bring
the hilltop of Halti to Finland, but I don't really think it is that
significant.

The main issue I know about is an old confusion in schoolbooks. The highest
point in Finland is 1324 meters above sea level, on the Norwegian border, on
the slope of Halti near the top. The top is on Norwegian side and its height
is 1328 meters. Someone writing a schoolbook long ago found out that Halti is
1328 meters high and put that as the elevation of highest hill in Finland,
without considering that this highest point is actually in Norway.

[edit: typos]

~~~
martey
I'm not Norwegian, but I think the confusion is because the numbering of the
Articles has changed. Your "Article 10" is now Article 8. [1] The repealed
Article (originally Article 12, now listed as Article 10) concerned
coronations. [2]

[1]: [https://www.stortinget.no/en/Grunnlovsjubileet/In-
English/Th...](https://www.stortinget.no/en/Grunnlovsjubileet/In-English/The-
Constitution---Complete-text/)

[2]:
[http://www.royalcourt.no/artikkel.html?tid=35248&sek=35247](http://www.royalcourt.no/artikkel.html?tid=35248&sek=35247)

~~~
ptaipale
Ah, right. Thanks.

------
hetman
The comment at the bottom of the article reminds me why secession is virtually
impossible in most places in the world. Any such attempts falter because
they're instantly declared unconstitutional by the parent country.

The global community encourages this kind of status quo because many countries
worry their ethnic minority will be next.

The only way sadly still seems to be decades of bloodshed before the host
population gets fed up enough to let them go.

I don't only mean developing countries like Sudan either. It took until 1998
for the Belfast agreement to be signed over Northern Ireland for example.

~~~
mmanfrin
I don't think this is always true. Scotland was given its referendum. Britain
voted on secession from the EU. Northern Ireland is talking about unification.

There are certainly places like Spain which have been beating the drum of 'No
Catalan Independence', but there are modern states that do recognize some
uncodified right to self determination.

Some resistance is natural though, and in some cases good -- tribal divisions
can happen on any line. If California seceded, the Jefferson region would want
to secede from that, and no doubt there would be even smaller fractures.

In the end, I think every state has its own gravity and own structural
strength. Grow too big, and you suffer from your own weight, risk fractures.

~~~
hetman
But Northern Ireland _is_ an example of freedom through bloodshed. There was
decades of violence before the UK conceded to give them genuine choice.
Arguably Scotland benefited from this change in the UK's public opinion as a
result of Ireland, without having to go through the same process.

~~~
gsnedders
> But Northern Ireland _is_ an example of freedom through bloodshed. There was
> decades of violence before the UK conceded to give them genuine choice.

I think that's an oversimplification; the intent was there to give Ireland
self-governance from the 1880s (initially as a single, unified area). Notably,
the Government of Ireland Act 1914, better known as the Third Home Rule Bill
(the prior two had failed to pass through Parliament) would've led to a
unitary Ireland, though this led to the Home Rule Crisis (though there had
been some rioting going back to the 1880s) and was ultimately never
implemented due to the outbreak of war.

The real fatal errors in the case of Ireland were the handling of the Easter
Rising of 1916 and the coupling of implementation of Home Rule with
conscription in Ireland, along with many more errors during the guerrilla war
that followed.

Had WW1 not happened when it did, who knows what would have happened in
Ireland.

~~~
Spooky23
That's a pretty charitable assessment.

The 19th century saw England enact a policy of near genocide, mass deportation
and political/economic oppression.

Ireland was little different than any other third world colony.

~~~
gsnedders
Oh, the UK completely fucked over Ireland, there's little doubt about that,
despite _legally_ being in a far better place than the colonies (they actually
had representation, most obviously) they practically weren't.

The question is whether bloodshed was inevitable in the path to independence,
and I don't think it's reasonable to call the actions of the state bloodshed
on that path except when it was in direct suppression of it (and I don't think
there was any of that prior to the Easter Rising, unless one considers the
rebellion of 1798 when Ireland was still legally a separate country, though
had had the same ruler as England since the 12th century, albeit with a
separate political structure).

Certainly the blood on the UK's hands led to many of the calls for
independence, but if independence had been granted in, e.g., 1886 (i.e., the
First Home Rule Bill) would it be freedom through bloodshed, or would it be
freedom through wanting to do better yourselves? I'd definitely say the
latter.

------
colanderman
Surprisingly this is not an exclave swap:
[http://www.amusingplanet.com/2012/11/the-curious-case-of-
baa...](http://www.amusingplanet.com/2012/11/the-curious-case-of-baarle-
nassau-and.html)

~~~
herge
Well, it's un-inhabited, so it's a lot easier to swap, as opposed to exclaves
who usually have inhabitants who would not be too happy to switch nationality.

~~~
fs111
You would not switch nationality, just the country where you live. If I move
to another country, my nationality stays the same.

~~~
ptaipale
However, if another country moves to you, it makes several things awkward.

There are plenty of exclaves with country borders out there. For instance,
here's a bit of Germany inside Switzerland:

[https://goo.gl/maps/bw3PwD19JhR2](https://goo.gl/maps/bw3PwD19JhR2)

The village is called Büsingen.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%C3%BCsingen_am_Hochrhein](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%C3%BCsingen_am_Hochrhein)

In United Arab Emirates there is an Omanian exclave called Madha, which in
turn contains a UAE exclave called Nahwa:

[https://goo.gl/maps/REXtsfb3gHs](https://goo.gl/maps/REXtsfb3gHs)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nahwa](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nahwa)

And there's even one third-order enclave.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahala_Khagrabari](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahala_Khagrabari)

Dahala Khagrabari is a piece of India, surrounded by Bangladesh, surreounded
by India, surrounded by Bangladesh.

And things stay this way because it is quite awkward to change places where
people live to belong to another nation - however impractical these exclaves
may be.

~~~
caf
Dahala Khagrabari is no longer an exclave. India and Bangaldesh executed a
wide-ranging land swap in 2015 to resolve a large number of these tiny
exclaves.

~~~
ptaipale
Ah, thanks for information. So, border adjustments are possible there as well
(India and Bangladesh are on friendly terms, unlike India and Pakistan).

------
ptaipale
It's interesting that so close to the heart of European Union, the police and
judicial authorities needs special permits to enter through the area of
neighbouring country, even if they won't do any official business there, they
just pass through. Anybody else can move about freely, no questions asked.

Between Finland and Sweden, the police forces on both sides of the border have
an agreement so that they can move about, even in official business. A pursuit
of a criminal can be extended across border, and e.g. ambulances are shared.
The crew is bilingual or works in Finnish (the population in the border area
is traditionally mostly Finnish-speaking even in the Swedish side).

The countries each have a nation-wide public safety digital radio network
(TETRA) and while the networks are strictly distinct, the police cars or
ambulances in each country may have a radio unit from the neighbour so that
they can connect to the neighbour network when they need to, or their radios
can be roamed to the neighbour network through ISI interface.

~~~
Someone
_" A pursuit of a criminal can be extended across border, and e.g. ambulances
are shared"_

The examples you mention all involve cases where one cannot reasonably wait
for permission to pass. Those are handled similar between Belgium and the
Netherlands and, I guess/think (there may be exceptions for cases like
Switzerland and Norway, who are in the Schengen area but not in the EU),
everywhere in the Schengen area.

This case was different, though; the victim was clearly dead, so there wasn't
much of an urgency. If there is no urgent need, would Sweden allow armed
Finnish police officers to enter the country or vice versa? What if it were a
few heavily armed SWAT teams in armed personnel carriers?

~~~
ptaipale
The police in the border region in both countries is currently being trained
for patrolling in the other country (there are some differences in legislation
and operational procedures). So not just pass-through but actual law
enforcement work.

After WW II, when Finnish Lapland's roads were largely destroyed by retreating
Germans, Finns used the roads on the Swedish side of the river to get up
north. Today it is perhaps the other way round; the Finnish side has more
population and the roads up river are bigger so it might be feasible for the
Swedish to use Finnish roads even if the destination is again across river on
Swedish side.

SWAT teams no, not without urgent need and/or official request, and people
would rise eyebrows also for SWAT teams driving around _in their own country_
for no reason.

------
lucb1e
I got an apartment a few kilometers away. It's on the outskirts of Maastricht
and to properly enter Belgium, you need to cross the Maas first (or Meuse I
think the article called it?). Everyone there speaks Dutch, works in
Maastricht, shops in Maastricht... It's the same city but officially you're in
a different country. And so I'll be missing out on 291 euros a month in rent
subsidies... But it was the only thing available and reasonably priced so
better than nothing. I just wish they'd swap more land where it makes sense :/

~~~
ThrustVectoring
In all likelihood, your landlord is missing out on 291 euros a month in rent
subsidies.

~~~
lucb1e
Nah it's not that cheap. This is not a normal price lowered by 291, though
maybe half.

------
patmcguire
How do countries usually handle rivers moving around? It looks like in the US
for state borders they go with where the rivers used to be. Makes for some
messy borders

[https://www.google.com/maps/place/Louisiana/@32.2167684,-91....](https://www.google.com/maps/place/Louisiana/@32.2167684,-91.0512079,11.94z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x8620a454b2118265:0xc955f73281e54703!8m2!3d30.9842977!4d-91.9623327)

~~~
dnautics
in the US whether the state border changes depends on the specific agreement
between the states, which may in some cases go back to the colonial era (for
virginia vs. maryland, along the potomac, it's the low tide mark on the
virgina side except for tributaries - so if VA builds out into the river it
doesn't become part of maryland). It gets quite difficult to amend these
because both states have to agree, plus congress, for any revision of borders.
It's usually just not worth it.

One well known dispute was between new jersey and new york, over ellis and
liberty islands; the supreme court had to intevene on that one and I think
currently both states have jurisdiction.

~~~
uiri
In the 19th century, New York was given jurisdiction over the original land
and New Jersey had jurisdiction over the surrounding waters. As the island was
expanded through land fill, the newly created land was treated as part of New
York until the Supreme Court ruled that the original agreement between the
states gave the filled in land to New Jersey which is most of the island
today.

[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
srv/national/longterm/supco...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
srv/national/longterm/supcourt/stories/wpellis052798.htm)

------
elihu
Perhaps CGP Grey will add a footnote to his "Holland vs the Netherlands"
video:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eE_IUPInEuc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eE_IUPInEuc)

------
vacri
I don't understand. Given Schengen and free movement, why couldn't the legal
team from Belgium just 'freely move' through the Netherlands to get to their
area of jurisdiction?

~~~
wodenokoto
It's a good question. My understanding is that Schengen doesn't allow for free
movement of police or military. You have to travel as a civilian.

~~~
Someone
There are exceptions for emergencies
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schengen_Area#Police_and_judic...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schengen_Area#Police_and_judicial_co-
operation): _" The Schengen Agreement also permits police officers from one
participating state to follow suspects across borders both in hot pursuit and
to continue observation operations"_), but that's correct.

(And aside: for the Belgian-Dutch border, that has been the case for decades;
border controls in the Benelux
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benelux](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benelux))
were abolished in 1970)

------
OJFord
This story prompted me to wonder [0] how mapping organisations (Ordnance
Survey, Google Maps, et al) are made aware of the specifics of such details.

Grateful to hear from anyone with insight!

[0] -
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13065514](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13065514)

------
maverick_iceman
India and Bangladesh swapped territories in 2015 during which India lost 40 sq
km of land.[1]

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India%E2%80%93Bangladesh_encla...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India%E2%80%93Bangladesh_enclaves)

------
fred_is_fred
Illinois and Missouri need to do this after years of floods and the New Madrid
earthquake have left enclaves on the wrong side of the river in several
places.

------
martinpw
Reminds me of this interesting case of a piece of land between Egypt and Sudan
that neither side wants, because having ownership would mean conceding
ownership of a second larger piece of land to the other country:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bir_Tawil](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bir_Tawil)

~~~
pizza
Oh my god

[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/16/american-
claim...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/16/american-claim-africa-
science-jeremiah-heaton-egypt-sudan)

~~~
mastazi
Similar case:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberland)

------
perilunar
And then there is Liberland [1], a micronation proclaimed on land unwanted by
both sides of a border dispute.

1\.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberland)

~~~
djsumdog
I got to see the border of this country a while back:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transnistria](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transnistria)

Here's a photo:

[http://journeyofkhan.us/photo/transnistria-across-the-
nistru...](http://journeyofkhan.us/photo/transnistria-across-the-nistru-
river/)

[http://journeyofkhan.us/photo/bridge-to-
transnistria/](http://journeyofkhan.us/photo/bridge-to-transnistria/)

~~~
oblio
In case some folks here on HN don't already know it, I like to tell the story
of this "country".

Basically, it starts in the Middle Ages when there are 2 small states under
Ottoman (Turkish) influence: Wallachia and Moldavia. As it happens for all
small states, they get bullied around by their bigger neighbors, primarily the
Ottomans, Russia and Austria. For our story only the Ottomans and Russia are
important.

So the Ottomans and Russia keep fighting over the region and they keep trading
territories here, completely disregarding the history of the region or the
ethnic groups present there. Imperialism at its finest.

Wallachia is left more or less unscathed, but around 1812 Moldova is basically
split in two, Russia taking the less developed Eastern part, called
Bessarabia.

After all this abuse, Wallachia and Moldova decide to unite and form modern
Romania, around 1860. So Moldova basically disappears as a state.

Fast forward to the end of WW1, Romania is getting bigger by incorporating all
the lands around it that are majority Romanian, so Bessarabia becomes a part
of Romania.

Meanwhile, Russia becomes the USSR. It's not hard to guess that Romania and
the USSR are not the best of friends. The Soviets never recognize the Romanian
takeover/reclaiming of Bessarabia, but can't really attack Romania (yet). So
they form a sort of "Moldovan Soviet Republic" outside of the historical
territory of Moldova. Basically "Moldova in exile". I like to compare it to
Mexico creating a "New Texas" state after being kicked out of Texas.

Then, before WW2, as part of the Ribbentrop-Molotov Nazi-Soviet pact, the
Soviets are allowed to attack Romania. They don't attack, instead they send an
ultimatum and Romania is forced to give up Bessarabia, which is incorporated
into the Moldovan Soviet Republic.

So now the new Moldova has both Bessarabia and that extra part that was never
Moldovan. That part is across the river Dniester, ergo "Trans" (across)
"nistr" (Dniester is "Nistru" in Romanian) "-ia" (particle for "land of" in
Romania).

The USSR falls, Moldova becomes independent. Transnistria has Russia armies on
its territory, so it declares its independence. Russia signs an agreement to
pull back its army. 20 years after the agreement, the army is still there...

------
known
Hope India and Pakistan resolve
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmir_dispute](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmir_dispute)
in similar manner

------
rurban
India and Pakistan should have done the same over the sloppy border line in
the north done by the british, crossing natural rivers. A constant source for
terrorism.

------
kabes
Does anybody live on that land? I mean, this would be like a country kicking
its own citizens out. Suddenly your government your house is not in their
country anymore.

~~~
gerty
According to OSM, there are no houses in the swapped areas, so they probably
just swapped some grass, sand and roads.

------
caf
Maybe Canada and the US can come to a similar agreement at Estcourt Station.

