Posted on

On the Ground: Gibraltar and the “Brexit” Referendum

This is the first installment of PolGeoNow’s On the Ground, a new series of exclusive photo essays on what political geography looks like in the real world. Whether it’s borders, nationalism, or other geopolitical phenomena, we’ll bring the on-the-ground situations to your screen in vivid detail.

Update 2016-06-24: Gibraltar on Thursday voted in favor of the UK staying in the European Union, by an incredible margin of  96% to 4%. However, the UK as a whole voted to leave the EU, meaning that Gibraltar can expect to get pulled out with it, against the wishes of the Gibraltarians.
 

Photo of the Gibraltar Stronger in Europe campaign office on the British territory's main street. Gibraltar's population is overwhelmingly against a so-called Brexit, or departure of the UK from the European Union.

Subscribers click here to view this article in the ad-free members area. Not a member yet? Learn about PolGeoNow subscriptions!

Map of Gibraltar and its location in Europe relative to the UK and Spain
Right: Map of Gibraltar by Eric Gaba (source; CC BY-SA)
Left: Gibraltar’s location in Europe (based on this Wikimedia Commons map by TUBS; CC BY-SA)

Gibraltar prepares to vote on whether UK should leave European Union
Last month, PolGeoNow’s Evan Centanni and Meihsing Kuo visited the small British territory of Gibraltar (pronounced “jih-BRALL-ter”), one month ahead of the UK’s referendum on whether to leave or remain in the European Union (EU).

Gibraltar, a tiny peninsula connected to Spain – and claimed by the Spanish government – is the only British overseas territory that’s part of the EU. It’s also the only external territory whose residents are eligible to vote in the so-called “Brexit” referendum without living in the UK proper. (“Brexit” is an abbreviation for “British exit” from the EU.)

Photo of the European Union (EU), United Kingdom (UK), and Gibraltar flags flying side by side. Gibraltar is the only British territory that's also part of the EU.
Gibraltar flies the European Union flag (left), the flag of the United Kingdom (middle), and its own flag (right)

Gibraltar is a short walk from the Spanish town of La Línea, whose name means “the line” in Spanish – a reference to the line of fortifications Spain built along the border in the 18th Century, when it was still trying to capture the peninsula from Britain by force. (The town’s full name is La Línea de la Concepción, a reference the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, a central tenet of the Spanish forces’ Roman Catholic religion. Incidentally, most Gibraltarians are also Catholic.)

Because Gibraltar and Spain are both part of the EU, residents of both are free to live or work in the other. Thousands of people live in Spain, where food and rent are cheaper, and commute to work in Gibraltar, where wages and employment are higher. Gibraltar residents also rely on the semi-open border for access to affordable goods from Spain. But that could all come grinding to a halt if the UK decides to leave the union.

Aerial-style photo of the entire border between La Linea de la Concepcion, Spain, and the British territory of Gibraltar, as seen from atop the Rock of Gibraltar. At front and center is the Gibraltar Airport and runway.
The entire border of Spain (background) and Gibraltar (foreground), as seen from the Rock of Gibraltar. The border runs approximately along the far edge of the airport facilities. Click to see the picture at full size. (Photo by Meihsing Kuo)

Gibraltar is a special EU territory that’s outside the Customs Union and the Schengen Area, so there are still passport and customs checks at the border (though they seemed pretty lax to us). But in pre-EU days, Spain closed the border altogether as a way of protesting British control of the peninsula.

Photo of the border crossing facility between La Linea de la Concepcion, Spain, and the British territory of Gibraltar, including everyday vehicle and foot traffic.
Crossing the border from Spain into Gibraltar. In the background is the Rock of Gibraltar.

As a funny side-effect of Gibraltar’s position on a tiny peninsula, all traffic across the border has to cross the runway of the Gibraltar airport. There are only five or ten airplane takeoffs and landings each day, but each time there is one, cars and pedestrians have to wait for it to finish before they can go from Spain to Gibraltar or back. A planned traffic bypass is years overdue.

Photo of an airplane landing at the Gibraltar airport, crossing the only road that passes between Spain and the British colony, and temporarily stopping all cross-border traffic.

Photo of cars and other traffic crossing the runway of the Gibraltar airport after having waited for a plane to land. The road crossing the runway is the only land route in or out of the British territory which borders Spain.

Photo of pedestrians and a cyclist crossing the runway of the Gibraltar airport. The road crossing the runway is the only land route in or out of the British territory which borders Spain.

Photo of a motorcycle crossing the runway of the Gibraltar airport. The road crossing the runway is the only land route in or out of the British territory which borders Spain.

Photo of the Gibraltar Parliament building, headquarters of self-government in the highly-autonomous British territory.
The Gibraltar Parliament building

Unlike British colonies of the past, Gibraltar is almost completely self-governed by its own elected parliament. For internal matters, the Gibraltar parliament doesn’t even legally answer to the British parliament in Westminster. But although Gibraltar’s not considered part of the UK, its land officially belongs to the UK, and it can’t have its own military or international relations. That means if the UK cuts ties with the EU, Gibraltar is along for the ride.

Photo of a yellow vehicle registration plate (license plate) in Gibraltar, showing the pan-European plate design and GBZ country code designation.
Gibraltar vehicle plates have their own country code – GBZ.

Photo of a bring-out-the-vote poster in a window in Gibraltar, posted by the territorial government to remind residents to vote in the upcoming Brexit referendum on whether Britain should leave the European Union (EU)
Gibraltar government promoting voter turnout in the “Brexit” referendum

Gibraltarians are able to vote in EU elections through a special arrangement that treats them as constituents of southwestern England, and the same arrangement will allow them to vote in the “Brexit” referendum. Though the territory’s 23,000 registered voters are just a drop in the bucket compared to the 45 million or so in the UK, this referendum might come right down to the wire, so it’s not out of the question that they could make a difference.

In any case, Gibraltarians want to be heard, even if only as justification to demand help from the UK if they do get pulled out of the EU. Because of the Gibraltar’s heavy dependence on the border, all three of the territory’s political parties are campaigning for the UK to remain in the union. And what about regular voters? A local newspaper poll found that 88% of people who planned to vote supported staying in the EU.

Photo of the Gibraltar Stronger in Europe campaign office on the British territory's main street. Gibraltar's population is overwhelmingly against a so-called Brexit, or departure of the UK from the European Union.
The Gibraltar chapter of Britain’s anti-Brexit “Stronger In” campaign has a prominent office on the town’s main street.

Photo of a shop window in Gibraltar, prominently displaying a sticker that reads I'm In, indicating that the business supports voting for the UK to remain in the European Union (EU) in the upcoming Brexit referendum.
Continued EU membership is uncontroversial in Gibraltar. “I’m In” stickers show many local businesses’ open support of the campaign to vote against leaving the EU.

It’s hard to say exactly what will happen to Gibraltar if the UK does choose to quit the European Union – and that uncertainty is part of what most Gibraltarians are trying to avoid. For now Gibraltar seems content to be a British territory: residents have already twice voted against joining Spain. But if they feel betrayed and abandoned by a UK that wants no part in the EU, could demands for greater autonomy or even independence be around the corner? Only time will tell.

Photos and text by Evan Centanni, except where specified otherwise. All rights reserved.

Posted on

Map: Peru & Chile’s Sea Dispute Settled in Court

Two weeks ago, the International Court of Justice released a long-awaited ruling on Peru and Chile’s disputed maritime boundary. Many headlines claimed that Peru “won” the case, but in fact it was not a full victory for either country. Below is our detailed map of Peru and Chile’s seas and of the dispute, followed by an easy-to-understand summary of the case. 

Map of Chile and Peru's territorial waters and exclusive economic zones (EEZ), plus the details of their territorial dispute at sea and disagreement of the land border. Shows the results of the Jan. 27, 2014 ruling by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) settling the dispute.
Map by Evan Centanni (country coastlines and land borders from Natural Earth)

Premium members click here to view this article in the ad-free members area. Not a member yet? Subscribe now!

Article by Evan Centanni

Disputed Territory
Chile and Peru have just settled a decades-long dispute over the location of their maritime boundary (the border between their sea zones). A large wedge of sea off the countries’ coast was claimed by both sides, in part because of its high value for the fishing industry. In 2008, Peru took Chile to court over the dispute. Their disagreements would be resolved by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), a United Nations body in the Hague founded for the purpose of settling differences between U.N. member countries.

Peruvian and Chilean Waters
The international Law of the Sea entitles every coastal state to extend its territory out to 12 nautical miles (NM) from the shore, making these “territorial waters” fully part of the country but requiring that foreign ship traffic be allowed to pass through. The law also allows the country to regulate economic activity out to a distance of 200 NM, within what is called an “exclusive economic zone” (EEZ). Lakes, rivers, and bays (as well as coastal areas hemmed in by islands) are known as “internal waters,” where the country has absolute authority just like on its land territory.

Flag of PeruCountry Name:  
• Peru (English)
• Perú (Spanish)
• Piruw (Quechua, Aymara)
Official Name:  
• Republic of Peru (English)
• República del Perú (Spanish)
• Piruw Ripuwlika (Quechua)
• Piruw Suyu (Aymara)
Capital: Lima

As a country with an unusually long coastline and possession of several offshore islands, Chile has a long strip of territorial waters and a huge EEZ. But Peru is a bit of a special case: it never ratified the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), and instead of an EEZ proper, it claims something called a “maritime domain” out to a distance of 200 NM.

Because the Peruvian constitution claims “sovereignty” over this domain, it has always been interpreted as equivalent to other countries’ 12 NM territorial waters. However, during the court case against Chile, Peru’s government declared that its declaration of the maritime domain “is applied in a manner consistent with the maritime zones” in the UNCLOS.* This implies that Peru’s “maritime domain” is now to be considered equivalent to an EEZ rather than to territorial waters, thus curtailing any potential accusations of clearly excessive territorial claims by Peru.

*Source: ICJ judgement, p.61

The Dispute
Since the dispute began some decades ago, Chile claimed that the boundary between the two countries extended due west from the end of the land border. To Chile this meant that it could it extend its own EEZ out to 200 NM directly west from its northernmost coast, but also that the line would keep going from there, cutting off any part of Peru’s maritime domain that might wrap around the outside of Chile’s (the Chilean government noted that Chile itself had made a similar concession on its sea border with Argentina). This is not one of the recommended ways of drawing a boundary under the UNCLOS, but that would all be moot if, as Chile claimed, the two countries had already agreed to it by treaty.

Peru felt differently. It argued that the treaties cited by Chile never explicitly specified a border, and that it therefore was still entitled to negotiate one from scratch. Because Peru’s coast is oriented at an angle to Chile’s, drawing a straight line west would give Chile quite a bit of sea that was actually closer to Peru. So in an official government map from 2007, Peru instead showed the boundary running southwest at an angle of more than 50 degrees from Chile’s line.

In court however, Peru made a more modest claim, choosing an “equidistant line” as recommended in the UNCLOS. This meant carefully calculating a path for which every point would be exactly the same distance from the closest parts of the respective Peruvian and Chilean coasts. The result was a not-quite-straight line running southwest at an angle of about 30 degrees from Chile’s border claim. The area between these two lines would become the officially defined disputed zone. Another large area west of this chunk was within 200 NM of Peru’s coast, but beyond 200 NM from Chile. This zone was claimed by Peru but considered by Chile to be neutral “high seas” (a.k.a. international waters).

But where do the lines start?
In fact, Chile and Peru were not even able to agree on exactly where the maritime boundary should start. The land border between the two countries had been agreed upon in the 1929 Treaty of Lima, and precisely marked on the ground with actual physical pillars. However, the last of the pillars was not right on the shore. Known as Hito 1 (Spanish for “Marker 1”), it was placed on dry land a bit inward from the beach, to ensure that it wouldn’t be washed away.

Peru argued that the border continued, in principle, in a slight curve southwest from Hito 1, following the same circular arc that was used to place the last several border pillars. The treaty apparently wasn’t drafted with this extreme degree of accuracy in mind, and was worded in a way that suggested Hito 1 and the shoreline were the same thing. Chile used this to argue that the sea boundary should be measured along a line drawn from the pillar itself (but not starting until the line reached the seashore), and not from a point to the southwest as Peru claimed. This was taken by many to mean that Chile claimed a land border continuing west from the pillar, but in court Chile’s lawyers argued that there simply was no legally defined land boundary beyond Hito 1.

Flag of ChileCountry Name:  
• Chile (English, Spanish)
Official Name:  
• Republic of Chile (English)
• República de Chile (Spanish)
Capital: Santiago

The Judgement
After years of waiting and over a year of deliberation, the court finally released its ruling on January 27, 2014. Media headlines declared the judgement a “win” for Peru, but in fact it was a complex compromise arrived at through a step-by-step examination of each country’s claims.

The Starting Point and Land Border
The court first needed to decide where the maritime boundary should start. Although Peru argued that it was impossible for a land border to just end without reaching the coastline, the court found that before the dispute began, the two countries had consistently used Hito 1 to define where their respective waters met. This was a small win for Chile, meaning that the maritime boundaary must indeed be drawn from the marker itself rather than from the end of an arc as claimed by Peru.

However, defining the land border itself was not on the court’s agenda, so the disagreement over its course technically remains standing. The court noted that the land border does not necessarily have to end at the same place the sea border begins, meaning that Peru’s claimed land border extension could still be valid even now that it’s irrelevant to the course of the sea boundary.

The Course of the Sea Border
To examine the history of Peru and Chile’s claims, the court examined a series of declarations and treaties published by the two countries in the 1940s and 1950s. It found that both countries had indeed declared jurisdiction out to 200 NM, but that they initially didn’t have any particular border in mind. Instead, their early declarations were intended to protect their waters from foreign whaling and other exploitation, not from each other.

With each treaty they increasingly implied that there was a border running straight west from the coast, but never seemed to say it explicitly. It seemed that perhaps an informal agreement had been made and never put on paper. However, the last treaty referred clearly enough to a straight-west boundary that the court decided it was a done deal. The maritime boundary between Chile and Peru would be line running straight west from Hito 1 – a win for Chile.

But wait – it wasn’t as simple as that. Although the court agreed that Chile and Peru had fixed their straight-west border by treaty, it argued that they had never intended for it to run all the way out to 200 NM or beyond. The agreements referring to the border were only concerned with defining where local fishing boats were allowed to cast their nets, and back then these small boats wouldn’t have ventured out past about 80 NM. The court’s decision, then, was that the boundary should run straight west only to a point 80 NM from the shore – beyond that, there was no line legally agreed upon by treaty.

Beyond 80 NM, the court ruled that Peru indeed had the right to a boundary calculated from an equidistant line out to the farthest point within 200 NM of both countries’ coasts. But since this line started from the end of the 80 NM straight-west line, it ended up quite a bit farther north from Peru’s claimed boundary, giving Chile nearly half of the disputed zone. However, it was still seen as a substantial victory for Peru, since Chile had been seen as controlling the entire zone up until then.

The court also ruled that Peru was indeed entitled to any area of sea within 200 NM of its own coast but beyond 200 NM from Chile. This means that the area previously considered high seas by Chile will indeed become part of Peru’s maritime domain, and even after drawing the equidistant line, a bit of this zone still wraps around the outside of Chile’s EEZ, adding one more segment to the maritime boundary between the two countries.

Dispute Resolved
Though the course of the land border may remain a small sticking point, the sea dispute between Peru and Chile has now been settled (that is, unless the countries argue over the exact coordinates of the line, which were not explicitly named by the court). The ICJ’s ruling is binding, and both Chile and Peru have agreed to respect the court’s decision. Peru’s president Ollanta Humala said he was “pleased” with the ruling, and that he would act quickly to ensure its implementation. President Michelle Bachelet of Chile, on the other hand, called it a “painfull loss,” even while promising to “gradually” implement it.

Full Text: ICJ Judgement of 27 January 2014 – Maritime Dispute (Peru v. Chile)

Related: Map of the Falkland Islands’ Disputed Seas (Argentina vs. U.K.)

Graphics of the Peruvian flag (source) and the Chilean flag (source) are in the public domain.

Posted on

Map: The Falkland Islands’ Disputed Seas

The Falkland Islands, a South Atlantic territory disputed between the U.K. and Argentina, held a status referendum this week in which 99.8% of voters defied Argentina by choosing to remain British. But it’s not just about the islands – also at stake are legal rights to the sea for hundreds of miles around.

Map of maritime jurisdiction in the seas surrounding the Falkland Islands (Islas Malvinas), including territorial sea, internal waters, and exclusive economic zone (EEZ)
Zones of maritime jurisdiction around the Falkland Islands, highlighting area disputed between the U.K and Argentina. Map by Evan Centanni (country coastlines from the Natural Earth dataset). All rights reserved.

The Disputed Seas of the Falkland Islands
The Falkland Islands are administered by the U.K. as an overseas territory, but are also claimed based on historical arguments by Argentina, which calls them “las Islas Malvinas”. Both countries have signed and ratified the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which defines ownership and legal rights for the waters surrounding coastal countries. According to the UNCLOS, each country is entitled to three basic zones of control in its surrounding seas:

Internal Waters
These areas normally include bays and the water between islands or between the islands and the mainland. With some exceptions, internal waters are considered legally equivalent to rivers and lakes, which means the country has total control here. Both the U.K. and Argentina claim an area of internal waters in the Falklands, though their claims are slightly different. Only the British claim is shown on the map above – the Argentine claim is a bit smaller, excluding the channel between the two main islands but stretching farther out to the most distant rocks.

Territorial Sea
The territorial sea is an area stretching up to 12 nautical miles out from the edge of the land or internal waters, which is considered sovereign territory of the state (i.e. an actual part of the country), though the “innocent passage” rule requires that foreign ships still be allowed to sail there without permission. Both the U.K. and Argentina claim a 12 nautical mile territorial sea surrounding the Falkland Islands. The two countries’ claims are slightly different because they’re drawn from the edges of the differing internal waters claims. The U.K. claim is shown on the map above (the small circle at the bottom is the territorial sea around Beauchene Island).

Flag of the Falkland Islands Territory Name:  
• Falkland Islands (English)
• Islas Malvinas (Spanish)
Claimants: 
• United Kingdom (U.K.)
• Argentina
Actual Control: U.K.
Status: Overseas Territory (self-governing)
Capital: Stanley

Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)
Although the waters beyond the territorial sea are not considered part of the country itself, the country still has some legal rights over the surrounding ocean, up to a maximum distance of 200 nautical miles from the coast or internal waters. This is called the “exclusive economic zone”, and here countries can control the harvesting of resources, scientific research, and environmental protection. When two countries are less than 400 nautical miles apart, they have to come to an agreement about where to draw the border of their EEZs (the default is normally to draw a line halfway between the two coasts).

The Falklands are indeed less than 400 nautical miles from mainland Argentina, but the Argentine government doesn’t consider this to be a problem, because they consider both the mainland EEZ and the Falkland EEZ to be theirs. The U.K. also claims the waters around the Falklands (though it calls them a “fishery conservation zone” instead of an EEZ), but draws its line short of the halfway point between the islands and Argentina. This might be intended as a show of modesty, though Argentina isn’t flattered, since it doesn’t think the U.K. should be there in the first place.

The Continental Shelf
Beyond the end of the EEZ, countries are also allowed to claim economic rights to the seafloor (but not the water above it), if it is part of the “continental shelf”. The legal definition of this term is a bit different from the way geologists use it, but the basic idea is that if the continent or landmass extends out a ways underwater before giving way to the deep sea, the shallow area is the continental shelf.

This is limited to 350 nautical miles from the shore, as well as detailed rules defining the required depth and slope of the sea floor. But since the U.K. and Argentina both also claim South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands (not to mention parts of Antarctica), their conflicting continental shelf claims continue southeast from the Falklands EEZ for hundreds of miles. If you’re interested in this extended disputed territory between the U.K. and Argentina, check out this excellent online map made by Durham University’s International Boundaries Research Unit.

Who Really Controls the Seas of the Falkland Islands?
Actual control of these seas follows the U.K.’s claims, since that’s the country that actually controls the islands. Argentina insists this is illegal, and even temporarily occupied the islands in 1982; but it’s unlikely control will change any time in the near future, since the U.K. insists it won’t go against the will of the islanders (most of whom are proudly British, and many of whom have bad memories of Argentina from the 1982 war).

Graphic of the Falkland Islands flag is in the public domain (source).

Posted on

Puerto Rico: 51st State of the U.S.?

[This article was written after Puerto Rico’s 2012 status referendum. In June 2017, Puerto Rico voted in another controversial referendum, again technically in favor of statehood. Most of this five-year-old article is still accurate after the 2017 vote. -Editor]

Earlier this month, papers reported that Puerto Rico had voted to become a state of the U.S. – but will it really happen? What does it take to become a state, anyway? Last time, we explained Puerto Rico’s current status – now for answers about the territory’s future….

Flag of the United States with a new star added (total of 51 stars) for a hypothetical new state of Puerto Rico
A possible 51-star U.S. flag. Since each star on the flag represents one state, a new one would need to be added for Puerto Rico (public domain; source).

Why would Puerto Rico want to become a state?
Puerto Rico’s current situation leaves it disadvantaged compared to the states. It has its own constitution and government, but the laws establishing them are subject to approval by the U.S. Congress. And despite the fact that most federal taxes and other laws apply to Puerto Ricans, residents have no real representation in Congress and no say in the presidential election. (For more details, see What is Puerto Rico?)

Is statehood the only option?
No – in Puerto Rico’s November 6th referendum, voters had two other choices besides becoming a U.S. state:

1. Full Independence – This would mean cutting all territorial ties to the U.S. and becoming the world’s newest country. However, this option is unpopular in Puerto Rico, because locals are taught from a young age that independence wouldn’t be feasible (a questionable claim).

2. Sovereign Free Association – In fact, this option would also officially make Puerto Rico an independent country – but it would be allowed to keep U.S. military protection and some other government services on a voluntary basis. Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau currently have this status.

A fourth possible option – continuing as a U.S. territory but under modified terms – was controversially left off of the ballot.

What would a State of Puerto Rico look like?

In terms of population, Puerto Rico’s 3.7 million people would make it a medium-sized state, with two senators and about five representatives in the U.S. Congress (and therefore about seven electoral votes for the president). Economically it would be the weakest of the states (though still stronger than most countries). But what it would lack in economic power, it would make up for in cultural and historical uniqueness, as the only state with a Spanish-speaking majority and the only state ever visited by Christopher Columbus. Geographically, it would be the third smallest of the states by area, and would contain both the new easternmost and the new southernmost points in the 51 states.

Flag of Puerto Rico Territory Name:  
• Puerto Rico (English, Spanish)
Official Name:  
• Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (English)
• Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico (Spanish)
Capital: San Juan

How can a territory like Puerto Rico become a state?
The U.S. Constitution only specifies that new states can’t take territory from existing states without their permission, so the procedure is based largely on the Northwest Ordinance of 1787. That law set up the first organized American territory, in what’s now the Midwest, and defined the process for admitting new states.

To qualify for statehood, an area must have a population of at least 60,000 (no problem for Puerto Rico – there are over six times that many people just in the capital city). Then the U.S. Congress needs to pass an “enabling act” to get the ball rolling by authorizing the territory to draft a state constitution. Once it’s ready, the state is admitted through a majority vote in Congress and the President’s signature, just like any other law. That’s all.

Then Puerto Rico will become a state now, right?
Not so fast – it’s actually not clear whether the people of Puerto Rico really do want to become the 51st state. Here’s the story: the recent referendum first asked whether Puerto Rico should remain a U.S. territory like it is now, and 54% voted “no” – so far, so good. Then it asked a separate question on what the best option for change would be – on this question, 61% of the votes went for statehood (compared to 33% for free association and 6% for full independence). Statehood it is then, right?

Not quite. The meaning of the results is controversial, because many people left the second question blank, and if you include them, statehood only had 45% support. And even if you don’t count the blank votes, 61% of the people who chose change on the first question would still add up to less than 50% of the total voters. On top of all this, the territory’s pro-statehood governor was voted out on the same day, in favor of a candidate who supports the status quo. And it’s been suggested that even a real 50% wouldn’t be enough to fairly count as a mandate, since joining the union is basically irreversible (the last time any state tried leaving, lots of people died).

So, will it happen or not?

Probably not. In principle, President Obama has said he would support Puerto Rican statehood if the people clearly wanted it, and the opposing Republican Party wrote in their 2012 platform that they would support it too. But since the will of the people is anything but clear in this case, Congress reportedly has no plans to act on the referendum.

A statehood law admitting Puerto Rico might not pass so easily anyway: since the new state might end up voting blue, the Republicans in Congress could be reluctant to admit it after all. And in any case, the process would likely be very slow: the legislators have their hands full with other issues already, and adding a new state could lead to a long process of haggling over how to rearrange the population-based seats in the House of Representatives (they would have to either be added to or redistributed to make room for Puerto Rico).

Nevertheless, Puerto Rico’s pro-statehood movement is still giving it all they’ve got. The territory’s non-voting delegate to Congress, as well as the recently defeated governor, both have pushed forward in asking President Obama to get the process moving. And though it may seem like a lost cause in the short term, sources tell Political Geography Now that many Puerto Ricans are hoping statehood can at least be considered more seriously from now on.

Map of the whole U.S. plus Puerto Rico (red). Puerto Rico would be the southernmost and the easternmost state, and the third smallest. Map by Vrysxy (source; CC BY-SA)
Posted on

What is Puerto Rico? Is it part of the United States?

In 2012 and 2017, Puerto Rico voted on whether to become a state of the US. But what exactly is Puerto Rico now? Is Puerto Rico part of the United States, and can its people vote in U.S. elections? Find all your answers here!

If Puerto Rico’s not a state, then what is it?

map of Puerto Rico's location relative to the U.S.
Location of Puerto Rico relative to the U.S.
Map by TUBS/Wikimedia Commons (source; CC BY-SA)

Puerto Rico is Spanish-speaking region made up of one big island and a few smaller islands in the Caribbean Sea. Since being taken from Spain in the Spanish-American War of 1898, it’s been an overseas territory of the United States (known in U.S. technical jargon as an “insular area“). Internationally, the island is sometimes treated informally as a separate nation, even sending its own team of athletes to the Olympics (See also: Which Countries Are and Aren’t in the Olympics?). However, it’s not an independent country, but a subject of the U.S. federal government.

So is Puerto Rico part of the U.S.?

Technically, Puerto Rico isn’t considered to be a part of the U.S. (though certain laws treat it as if it were). Instead, it belongs to the U.S. as an “unincorporated” territory. Unincorporated territories of the U.S. are places where the country’s constitution doesn’t apply by default, except for in the case of certain “fundamental rights” owed to all Americans. It’s also possible for a territory to be “incorporated” as part of the country, but this status is rare today.

Are Puerto Ricans Americans?

Yes – anyone born in Puerto Rico is automatically a U.S. citizen. They’re also citizens of Puerto Rico – but since this second citizenship “is not the national citizenship of an independent country or state,” they have to use U.S. passports to travel internationally. People born in Puerto Rico are considered “natural-born” American citizens, which qualifies them to run for president – but only after living in the U.S. proper for at least 14 years. They’re also eligible to serve in the U.S. military, and quite a few of them have risen to high ranks within it.

Flag of Puerto Rico Territory Name:  
• Puerto Rico (English, Spanish)
Official Name:  
• Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (English)
• Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico (Spanish)
Capital: San Juan

Can Puerto Ricans vote in U.S. elections?

It’s complicated. Since Puerto Rico has no senators or representatives in the U.S. congress, residents of Puerto Rico aren’t able to vote for legislators. Similarly, since the president of the United States isn’t elected through a popular vote, but by electors from the states and the District of Columbia (D.C.), Puerto Rico residents are not able to vote for president in November.

But that’s not the end of the story: since all American citizens have the right to live anywhere they want in the U.S., a Puerto Rican who moves to one of the states can vote there. And many do – some even serve in congress as representatives of their new states. And it goes both ways…if an American from one of the states lives in Puerto Rico, they can’t vote for congress or president unless they’re still a legal resident of one of the states or D.C. (or if they’re in the military). Former residents of the states who live overseas would qualify for federal absentee voting, but in the voting laws Puerto Rico doesn’t qualify as “overseas”.

All that said, residents of Puerto Rico actually do have a bit of influence over the choice of U.S. president – the presidential primaries don’t require membership in the electoral college, so the Puerto Rican government is allowed to hold its own primary elections for the two major U.S. political parties. In March 2012, Puerto Rico chose Mitt Romney over Rick Santorum and several other Republican candidates.

Does Puerto Rico pay U.S. taxes?

Yes, residents of Puerto Rico are required to pay most types of U.S. federal taxes, and the territory contributes billions of dollars to the U.S. Treasury every year. However, most Puerto Rico residents who make all their money within the territory are exempt from the federal income tax, unless they work for the federal government. All Puerto Ricans still have to pay Social Security and Medicare taxes on their income, though they actually get significantly fewer benefits than residents of the 50 states do. Puerto Rico’s territorial government also levies its own taxes on residents of the island.

What kind of government does Puerto Rico have?

Map of the municipalities of Puerto Rico
Municipalities of Puerto Rico (click to enlarge).
Map by NordNordwest & Kmusser (source). License: CC BY-SA

Officially, Puerto Rico is a constitutional republic like each of the 50 states – however, as an “organized territory”, this government’s authority doesn’t come from the U.S. constitution. The U.S. Congress had to pass legislation specifically allowing Puerto Rico to write its own constitution (and to make Puerto Ricans U.S. citizens), and theoretically could take that privilege away again if it wanted. Because of this, there is still disagreement from the U.N. on whether Puerto Rico should be classified as a self-governing dependent territory or an old-fashioned colony.

Even though Puerto Rico is technically not a part of the U.S., it’s still treated for many purposes as if it were. Federal government offices have a major presence on the island, and its financial, postal, and telephone systems are integrated with the U.S. Although the territory has no voting representation in Congress, it does have a non-voting delegate to the House of Representatives, known as the Resident Commissioner of Puerto Rico.

Like the 50 states, Puerto Rico has its own elections, with a democratically chosen governor, senate, and house of representatives. Any American citizen can vote in Puerto Rico, as long as they’ve lived there for at least 30 days. Federal law also requires that former Puerto Rico residents living in other countries be allowed to vote by mail in Puerto Rican elections.

Part Two: Will Puerto Rico become the 51st State?