Doug Smith W9WI wrote:


In other news, it's been interesting to watch the DX Cluster spot
assault and full-scale war about YU8. With all the hoopla about this
being a new entity, I don't see how this is ever going to happen
considering the criteria:

-------------------------------------------------------------------- An
Entity will be added to the DXCC List as a Political Entity if it meets
one or more of the following criteria:

a) The entity is a UN Member State.

b) The entity has been assigned a callsign prefix bloc by the ITU
--------------------------------------------------------------------


I am not an expert on international politics, but it seems to me that
Russia will veto any attempt to admit Kosovo into the UN, and without
the UN membership, is there a way to get a prefix block assigned by the
ITU (this being a UN agency)?


If you can't get a prefix block without being a UN member, then there's no
point to criterium b)?

I meant the above in the particular case of Kosovo, not in general,
obviously. There have been sovereign countries that existed for
centuries, yet did not seek the UN membership for whatever reason. Their
sovereignty, however, had never been disputed.
The problem with Kosovo is that if the UN does not accept it (due to the
Russian and Chinese veto, or Serbian objection, or whatever else), there
is no legal ground on which it can be assigned a prefix block.

It would be interesting to know whether the membership is granted by the
member-state vote and whether the permanent UN Security Council members
have a veto right in such issues.

E4 (Palestine) would be a good example of an entity that has an ITU prefix
block and is a DXCC Entity but is not a UN Member State.

If you look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_..._member_states
there seem to be some other entities whose prefix blocks predate their UN
membership. Andorra (C3), Tonga (A3), Monaco (3A), and Kiribati (T3)
would seem to fall into that category. There are probably more. Why
those states took so long to join the UN I have no idea.

Yes, even HB9 joined as late as 2002. When you're neutral and serve as
the world's piggybank, there is little need for the UN "protection" (we
all know how effective the UN is in protecting people). HV is not a
member either.



73 .......... WA7AA

On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:17:59 -0800, wrote:
I meant the above in the particular case of Kosovo, not in general,
obviously. There have been sovereign countries that existed for
centuries, yet did not seek the UN membership for whatever reason. Their
sovereignty, however, had never been disputed.
The problem with Kosovo is that if the UN does not accept it (due to the
Russian and Chinese veto, or Serbian objection, or whatever else), there
is no legal ground on which it can be assigned a prefix block.

But isn't that pretty much the same as the situation as with E4? (the
primary difference being which Security Council member would veto UN
membership)

It would be interesting to know whether the membership is granted by the
member-state vote and whether the permanent UN Security Council members
have a veto right in such issues.

I did some digging around and best I can tell, the Security Council *does*
have a veto with regard to new members.

Doug Smith W9WI wrote:

I meant the above in the particular case of Kosovo, not in general,
obviously. There have been sovereign countries that existed for
centuries, yet did not seek the UN membership for whatever reason. Their
sovereignty, however, had never been disputed.

The problem with Kosovo is that if the UN does not accept it (due to the
Russian and Chinese veto, or Serbian objection, or whatever else), there
is no legal ground on which it can be assigned a prefix block.

But isn't that pretty much the same as the situation as with E4? (the
primary difference being which Security Council member would veto UN
membership)

Not really. Palestine has "received a standing invitation to participate
as observer in the sessions and the work of the General Assembly and
maintaining permanent observer mission at Headquarters", i.e. it is as
close as it can get to the full UN membership without the ultimate
solution of its territory, etc. It is a tacit acknowledgment that the
state is de facto there with a future promise of a membership once the
peace process results in the permanent settlement.
Kosovo is a much crazier socio-political situation, if that's even possible.

It would be interesting to know whether the membership is granted by the
member-state vote and whether the permanent UN Security Council members
have a veto right in such issues.


I did some digging around and best I can tell, the Security Council *does*
have a veto with regard to new members.

So much for a new one, eh? In the meantime, the ARRL DXCC manager issued
a clarification on the YU8:

"The 'Event Date' will be either the date Kosovo became a UN member or
it receives its prefix from the ITU."

Which, as things stand right now, means never. Either way, the present
YU8 operation can only ever count as YU.


73 ..... WA7AA