The Border Change Kept Secret For 10 Years 

"Straight line?" "Straight line."

Why do you assume that?

@@kozmoo9188 thats something that i would do tbh

Maybe you are from Iraq and maybe now you live in Europe

​@Mr_Sapphire This happened while his country was still an authoritarian regime (which are known to suppress information from their citizens *even* when there is no reason to do so) *and* it happened over 4 *decades* ago. It's perfectly reasonable to suppose that this might not be common knowledge in Iraq.

Idk username looks iraqi

Well since you are behind a bit on the news, allow me to pass a message on from my former President because I don't know if you've heard, but, uh, heh-heh, uhhh Mission Accomplished. You see we were fighting terror, and we won, but the fight on terror is never-ending, so we need to still fight.

​@@jeffbenton6183 First, cheers for being reasonable and chill. Have a good one. For what it's worth, I live relatively close to these border changes. Tribes across the divide share a very distinct accent, costumes, traditions. (You even get to hear about Kuwaitis and Saudis inheriting land in Iraq, and vice versa, lol.). So I naturally assumed these borders were a contingent imposition by a post-colonial state, rather than some organic extensions of ethnic realities or whatever. But now, thanks to EmperorTiger, I have some interesting tidbits to share with friends. :)

Lazy bureaucrats lol

Probably the most logical explanation

No way. All treaties & agreements in all countries are subject to periodic (prob annual) reviews where new relevant developments are discussed and actions are planned. So a country simply “forgetting” to file an agreement is just not a thing.

Moat of our deals in gulf is between the governments in the region and you will find many cases like this between Saudi Arabia And UAE and Qatar

yes let's ignore isn'treal expanding and erasing Palestine's legal borders.

Yeah there is two different treaties, both giving one side Bir Tawil and the other the Halaib triangle, the Halaib triangle is more valuable than Bir Tawil so both sides only recognise the treaty that gives them the Halaib triangle and Bir Tawil to the other country.

Yeah, big mistake. Neutral zones are explicit areas where two or more nations both agree not to settle and control; it is a closed issue essentially. Terra Nullius is land neither nation _wants_ to own, and usually is not predicated by a formal agreement but arrives from some sort of dispute creating their existence, which is an open issue that would in theory need to be solved. Bir Tahwil is the most famous region, as deeznoots said. There are also four pockets of Terrae Nullius on the western bank of the Danube River between Serbia and Croatia. Since both nation's borders were defined in very explicit terms in relation to the flow of the Danube River, when that river slowly changed over time it led to both sides disputing certain regions on the Eastern side, and thus consequently ignoring land on the Western bank for a similar reason to Bir Tahwil. Finally the largest Terra Nullius is Marie Byrd Land in Antarctica, which is the largest piece of unclaimed land in the world and is about the size of Iran or Mongolia. MBL is unclaimed for two reasons: One, it is _incredibly_ remote and hard to reach, even by Antarctica's standards, as there are no nations nearby and directly north of it is Point Nemo, the most isolated point in the Pacific Ocean. Two, international treaties from the UN prevent any nation from making further territorial claims or disputes on Antarctica, as the continent is deemed the "Common Heritage of Mankind" (with the exception to the US and the USSR's successor Russia should either ever feel like making a claim. Had to placate the dominant world powers somehow I guess).

i mean to be fair he does say its not claimed by either country it's rly just a small typographical error

It's also not really UNclaimed. Instead, they both claim it's the other country's.

Like Danzig?

​@@SuperValue350I remember hearing something like: -> If Danzig was made German, the Poles would be angry, but the Germans would be happy. -> If Danzig was made Polish, the Poles would be happy, but the Germans would be furious. -> So to stop that, a free city was made. As a result, now both the Germans and Poles were angry!

@@QingChina1 exactly 💯

>"it isbetter to solve territorial disputes through negotiations than war" >indian pfp oh you sweet summer child...

@@MugroofAmeen ok now I remember about india,s territorial disputes😅

and ontario

@@popeo1973 damn i wouldve thought Ontario wouldve had newer maps, are you in north ontario

@@ChanceKearns no south part of Ontario

@@popeo1973 oh

Neat! I guess that makes some sense as a geopolitical power move

That makes sense considering the Arab states didn’t recognize the UN’s partition of Israel and Palestine.

@@greasher926 Yeah maybe but I made it up

​@@cutebabbymanYou lied on the internet?! Simply monstrous, how could you >:(

@@heinzaballoo3278 You know how to pronounce "lawyer", right? "Lie yer ass off" but they're shy and leave off the cussing.

By the 1980s when the netural zone was divided between the two countries, almost all Bedouins have already settled in the cities, towns and small villages. And with the advancement in technology, they became able to extract water from the ground in huge quantities in their area, which made it unnecessary for them to move to different areas to get water and food for their cattle. Also the government started to give Bedouins free land and zero interest loans via the Real Estate Development Fund (REDF) which helped them settle by making building new houses easy.

@@abdullahibrahim8938 what country did they become citizens of? Did it depend? Which government?

@@holdenennis Good question At that time they already have Saudi citizenships so they settled in Saudi Arabia. It's worth mentioning that those Bedouin tribes are originally from Arabia (not Iraq) and they have an old allegiance is to the royal family of Saudi Arabia.

So , where did those citizenless Bedouins come from ? Are they from these zones?

@@Kamalib05 that's even a better question Those Bedouins that you are referring to stayed most of their time outside Saudi Arabia and did not show up when the citizenships were distributed by the goverment. So they belong to Saudi tribes and sometime their brothers and cousins have the Saudi citizenship, but them in particular do not have it because they were not interested in getting the Saudi citizenship at that time out of unawareness. And some of them decided to get an Iraqi or Syrian citizenship, anyways those people are recognized to be originally from Arabia therefore they are not considered foreigners and they are given some government papers to help them live in Saudi Arabia but they don't have the Saudi citizenship since they returned to Saudi Arabia from Iraq and Syria later on and especially after the government ended distributing citizenships.

how is that different?

Oman was a British protectorate like how it was a Saudi vassal in the early 1800s

Wow that makes a ton of sense!

Why didn't I think of that? Damn

May I introduce you to the Aouzou Strip between Libya and Chad. No natural resources, yet the two fought so hard and Chad ended up isolated from the Arab League, all for a piece of useless sand!

Some of this sand contains natural resources, and if not, it contains villages and towns or even just small communities of Bedouins, so countries fight over it as a kind of proof of sovereignty. There are good examples of demarcating borders between Arab countries in a peaceful manner, such as the strange Omani-Emirati border, which, despite its strangeness and complexity, the borders were demarcated completely peacefully and did not result in any problems

Considering it's worthless desert, I am more surprised that the Omani border was finalized than the other two remaining undecided lol

We Defined our borders in the 200os in Taif, probably minor disputes since you mentioned the UAE

Hawaili

Ain't no way

Imagine if Maduro invades Guyana and gets clapped like Saddam did

@@IzzetSuleimani pretty likley

Only difference is that Maduro is fatter lol

Its uruk

EE-rock

It's EE RAK

Thank you. Pretty basic thing to look up if you're gonna make a six minute video on it.

Yeah my bad. It's hard to un-learn "eye-rak" when you heard it that way for decades lol.

To be fair it was never Terra Nullius like the Bir Tawil. Plus it was specifically left for the Bédouins to live in and buildings were forbidden You'd have more luck setting up a new country in the Cypriot DMZ

@@aidenbooksmith2351 Yeah, but Bir Tawil is also in a similar limbo and I doubt either side would recognize a country there as it wouldn't solve their disputes at hand and in fact, it would probably create conflict if either side favored recognizing the other.

The border they agreed on in the treaty stands to this day.

🇵🇸

I prefer Persia and Babylonia

Because King Khalid did not bury his own people in mass graves, and saddam did.

@@HistoryOfRevolutions Saddam buried traitors in mass graves. In any other country in the world, treason is punishable by death. Iraq was the target in a war against 34 nations and those traitors were collaborating with enemies of the state. Maybe you should look up what Saudi Arabia did in Yemen recently. Way, way worse than what Iraq did in Kuwait. The West just loves glazing Saudi Arabia because they are puppets to them and keep the oil flowing.

You watch a lot of CNN, the Saudi people united their lands with their king and they pledged allegiance to the ruler and swore to obey him. They chose their king and it was not imposed on them. There are thousands of tribes in Saudi Arabia and they were armed like the Al Saud, but in short they chose to follow him And establish their state with him and they are still doing that to this day. They are basically proud of that. They are proud that their ancestors fought alongside the founding king, and every year they take to the streets to celebrate the founding and unification of their country and their founding king, King Abdul Aziz. If you cannot differentiate between absolute monarchy and dictatorship, then this is your problem, so please be educated on history before you throw your nonsense at us.I mean who is the fool who calls a country that chose its own ruler a dictatorship LOL?

@@kozmoo9188Cool story bro, go out in the street and criticize MBS or King Salman and we’ll see what happens. We all know the current Saudi rulers were originally appointed by the British when they helped them against the Hashemites, and now they are protected by the Americans, who they pay Jizya to.

@@dragon888193ftw cool story bro, but but true history says that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was unified after attempts for 300 years. In 1902, King Abdulaziz saw a golden opportunity for me to regain Riyadh from the rule of Abdulaziz Al-Jalawi. King Abdulaziz, with 100 men, was able to conquer Riyadh and expel Al-Jalawi, after that the tribes began to arrive To show their loyalty to the king. King Abdulaziz’s mandate for Riyadh. In the years that followed, Abdulaziz bin Rashid, the ruler of the Hail region at the time, tried to besiege King Abdulaziz and his army, and the Battle of Qassim took place. King Abdulaziz was victorious and Al-Rashid was killed. In 1913, King Abdulaziz attacked a Turkish garrison in Al-Hofuf in order to open a crossing to the strategic eastern region. The king was victorious, and some of the soldiers were captured, then he allowed them to return to Turkey. Later, the Ottoman rule of the region collapsed, and the king annexed it to the kingdom In the following years, after the increase in the internal problems of the Al-Rashid state, King Abdul Aziz was able to overthrow him, open its cities, and annex them to the kingdom. In the following few years, there were skirmishes between King Abdulaziz And Sharif Hussein, which caused Sharif Hussein to lose a large part of his lands, and he retreated to the lands of the Hijaz. In 1921, the "Asir" tribes went to King Abdul Aziz and complained to him about the rule of a person called Hussein bin Ayed, who was ruling these lands and tribes, and who was under the guardianship of Sharif Hussein, so the king rose. Abdul Aziz sent an army to Ben Ayed and demanded his surrender, but Ayed refused, and the two armies fought, and King Abdul Aziz was victorious and annexed the lands of Asir to the kingdom. In 1924, the Turks ended the Islamic caliphate in the region, and Sharif Hussein saw in this an opportunity to install himself as a new ruler of the Arabs after the Turks. He faced the resentment of the Arabs and Muslims at that time and then King Abdulaziz annexed Taif, then Mecca, and Sharif Hussein besieged and what was left of his army. After that, Sharif Hussein left power to his son Ali and fled to Cyprus and died there. After his son Ali assumed power, King Abdulaziz was able, after battles with Sharif’s army, to annex Medina and besiege Sharif Ali 11 month later, Sharif Ali and his army surrendered, and the lands of Hejaz become lands for the kingdom,He was then called the Sultan of Najd, and in a ceremony in 1926, the title of King of Hijaz was given to King Abdulaziz.were annexedIn the early thirties, the lands of Najran and Jizan were annexed, and in 1935 the unification of the entire kingdom’s lands was announced

Kuwait is sovereign sheikhdom since 1613 centuries before oil discoveries in region just because it’s small & less populated they had to sign treaty with 🇬🇧 better than being swallowed by its greedy neighbors Kuwait lost big chunks of its land check out older maps