Talk:Acacio Valbuena Rodríguez

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

Is Fr. Acacio Valbuena Rodríguez Spanish? Redking7 (talk) 22:12, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure He is certainly an expatriate Spaniard from the Spanish Sahara days and not a Sahrawi. I don't know the man, but between his name, demographics, and history, I feel confident in my conclusions. -Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:05, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
He may be Spanish. It seems more likely to me that he is (also) Sahrawi/Moroccon. We need to be careful when we apply an ethno-centric approach to nationality and citizenship. I accept that Fr. Rodríguez is most likely of Spanish ethnicity and background (and quite possibly a Spanish citizen) - but that is not what governs Sahrawi (i.e. SADR) nationality or Moroccon nationality and citizenship. Notably for the purposes of determining whether he is 'Sahrawi', Article 104 of the Constitution of SADR provides that the National Council of SADR can make laws concerning nationality, the right to citizenship and civil status. I do not know if they have done so. However, even if they have not, relatively few countries treat people who have lived in their state for 50+ years as foreigners. Furthermore the SADR constitution upholds various international treaties on human rights. It seems likely that its committment to these treaties would preclude excluding the good Father from SADR nationality. Finally, the SADR government accepted some years ago the right of many Moroccon 'settlers' (who have been in the territory of 'SADR' for far less time than Fr. Rodríguez) to vote in the self-determination referendum (a concession that they must be treated as citizens of SADR). In light of the above and having given it some thought, I am going to add the good Father back into the Sahrawi people category. The evidence that he is most likely a Sahrawi citizen seems convincing to me. Of course, another category - e.g. Ethnic Sahrawis - could be created but that could lead to all sorts of ambiguity. While laws can be fairly unclear - bloodlines are almost always so! Regards. Redking7 (talk) 20:27, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Citizenship and nomenclature I agree that flippant categorization of ethincity is to be avoided. If that is true, why would you apply Category:Sahrawi people to this article, when there is no proof that he is ethnically Sahrawi (and it is extremely unlikely) nor any proof that he is a citizen of the SADR (equally unlikely)? The notion that he is a Moroccan citizen is outlandish. "Sahrawi" only refers to an ethnic group - they are Hassaniya Arabs from southern Morocco, Western Sahara, and Mauritania; it does not apply to citizens of the SADR except to the extent that it is a nation-state (I found it doubtful there are many, if any non-Sahrawi, non-Haratin citizens of the SADR, and even more doubtful that any of them are Spaniard priests living in occupied Western Sahara.) Fr. Rodríguez is likely not considered a foriegner, national, or citizen, but a resident - again, this is guesswork, but i feel pretty confident about it. Bearing this in mind, I am removing that category and re-alphabetizing the existing ones. Thanks for your time. -Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:30, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a long post...but only because it deals with imporant and complicated subject matter. It appears we both agree on the following:

  • it is unlikely Fr. Rodriguez is ethnic Sahrawi;
  • it is likely that he is ethnic Spanish and has Spanish nationality and citizenship.

It appears we both disagree on the following:

  • his Morocco nationality and citizenship;
  • his 'SADR' nationality and citizenship;

My view is as follows: Moroccon (and 'SADR') nationality and citizenship is purely a question of domestic Moroccon (and 'SADR') law (and has nothing to do with any territorial claims as such). Morocco (and SADR) claims the people of Western Sahara are its citizens. I also believe that (see below) Fr. Rodriguez must be considered one of the people of Western Sahara.

  • normal laws on the acquisition of nationality

I set out a range of reasons (in my second post above) why I believe it is highly likely Fr. Rodriguez would be regarded in Morocon and 'SADR' law as a citizen. I can't see how this is outlandish. I note again here that Fr. Rodriguez has lived in the territories both Morocco and 'SADR' claim for 50 years +; that few countries exclude such persons from their nationality; and further at least in the case of 'SADR' its committments to international treaties and its willingness to regard 'settlers' as citizens indicates that 'SADR' would very likely treat Fr. Rodriguez as a citizen.

However, while I disagree strongly on all your legal interpretations of nationality and citizenship and suggest you give this more thought - I think perhaps, I made one mistake: In my analysis above, I accorded equal weight and legitimacy to Spanish, Moroccon and 'SADR' (i.e. Sahrawi nationality and citizenship - Sahrawi being the adjective which [if 'SADR' is accepted as a state] would describe its citizens, just as Nigerian and French describes citizens of Niteria and France). 'SADR' is indeed not accepted by the UN and most countries as a state and therefore internationally, most would not regard 'SADR' as capable of having citizens or nationality. This, I think, you may consciously or not have pointed out when you noted "it does not apply to citizens of the SADR except to the extent that it is a nation-state". Clearly, you are correct there. By most 'SADR' is not regarded as a nation-state and so my original contention that the term 'Saharawi' must include 'SADR' citizens regardless of their ethnicity may be wrong. Though that open a whole can of worms on whether it is even correct to refer to there bein a 'SADR'.

Where does this all leave us? In a real muddle so far as Wikipedia categories are concerned. If international acceptance of the 'SADR' state is the crucial test, then the 'SADR' article and many 'SADR' categories may have to be revisited and renamed.

Essentially, to summarise, when I think 'Sahawari', I think of 'SADR' and all pertaining to it (including its 'citizens') as well as ethnic Sahawari today and over the centuries. You on the other hand seem to take 'Sahawari' as relating only to ethnicity, not a state.

I haven't thought through all the implications of your interpretation. If yours is accepted, I think for starters we should change the category Category:Sahrawi people to Category:Sahrawi indigenous people or something to that effect? Of course, my preference remains that we should interprete 'Sahawari' as including things relating to the 'Sahawari Arab Democratic Republic' as well as 'Sahawari' ethnicity. Both viewpoints are legitimate. I take the inclusive interpretation. I also think it accords with existing categorisation of 'SADR' and 'Sahawari' topics on Wikipedia.

You seem in the above to be drawing some distinction between 'nation-state' and 'state'. You might elaborate on how this works in the 'SADR' context and internationally. Who determines which are nation states and what others just states. If that is part of your argument, that 'Sahawari' can't be used to describe things relating to 'SADR', I would be interested to hear your viewpoint and facts and reasons on which you might base it. You might want to review the Constitution of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic which uses the term 'Sahrawi' in so many 'SADR' state contexts etc. first. Regards. Redking7 (talk) 20:51, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreements? I do agree with your first two points and disagree with the latter, two. I agree that Morocco and the SADR can create whatever citizenship laws they want and I will claim ignorance about citizenship laws in either state. I am willing to believe he is a citizen of either, but that is unlikely in my view, we have no evidence of that, and it is certainly not the case that he has dual citizenship with either and Spain or between the two.
I am inclined to believe that Fr. Rodríguez is a resident and would be recognized as such by either state, and until some evidence is offered to the contrary, I feel pretty good about that assumption. I would imagine that he could apply or could have applied for citizenship to either, but I should point out that prior to Spanish withdrawal, Spanish Sahara was a province of Spain - he could reside there as a Spanish citizen on Spanish soil. I find it doubtful that he has given up this status, although I also find it likely that either of those states would accept an application for citizenship.
International acceptance of the SADR is irrelevant in my mind: if they consider him a citizen and he considers himself a citizen, he is a citizen; the readers can make of that what they will.
Your point about ethnic Sahrawis - who hold citizenship in several states - versus citizens of the SADR is well-taken. My guess is: not all Sahrawis are SADRians, but all SADRians are Sahrawi. It would be difficult to create categories for ethnic Sahrawis versus SADR citizens, as there simply aren't sources available in English for most of that information. In a perfect world, that would be available. C'est la vie. I do not know of a precedent for this on Wikipedia and I certainly do not know of one regarding Sahrawis in particular.
The difference between a nation state and a state is that a state is a legal entity with a territory, population, government, and the ability to enter into relations with other such states. A nation-state is a kind of state that is primarily composed along ethnic lines; this is essentially the make-up of European borders: France is populated by French people, Germany is made up of German people. The United States and Singapore are ethnically diverse states that were not created to serve the interests of a single ethnic group, so they are not nation-states. The SADR is a state that has a Sahrawi and Arab character. While citizenship would presumably be open to non-Arabs, the overwhelming majority would be Sahrawis.
May I also say that the English translation of the Constitution of the SADR has also been translated to include the "S" as "Saharan" (e.g. The Historical Dictionary of Western Sahara, 2nd ed.) and that word has been used to describe all persons in/from Western Sahara, including non-Sahrawi settlers. I do not know that the usage is standard, especially considering the very tiny English literature on Western Sahara. -Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:52, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"I am inclined to believe that Fr. Rodríguez is a resident"[What is a resident? It seems to mean you think he is a foreigner and his 50 years+ residency are irrelevant?] "I am willing to believe he is a citizen of either, but that is unlikely in my view, we have no evidence of that..."[He has lived in WS for over 50 years - since before either 'SADR' or Morocco claimed the territory. It is almost certain he would be considered a citizen. I can't bring the argument much further on this - I've pointed to international practice and treaties. I don't accept this at all and don't think you've put forward a reasonable argument.]"I also find it likely that either of those states would accept an application for citizenship" [The residents of WS have been deemed by law to be citizens of Morocco or 'SADR' - they don't need to 'apply']"International acceptance of the SADR is irrelevant in my mind: if they consider him a citizen and he considers himself a citizen, he is a citizen; the readers can make of that what they will"[I agree.]"My guess is: not all Sahrawis are SADRians, but all SADRians are Sahrawi."[Agree with the first part - some Sahrawi ethnics may have been born in America for example, The second part to is simply extraordinary - you are saying 'SADR' excludes all who are not ethnic Sahrawi from its citizenship. This does not tally with their constitution or their inclusive approact to the self-determination referendum. I can't bring the argument much further on this. I strongly disagree.] "nation-state" [As to your discussion of nation-state and state - I find this goes into totally non-legal reasoning. You might also explain why the 'SADR' constitution uses 'Sahrawi' as the adjuective to describe its people and institutions. You might give more reasons for your view on this.]"Saharan" translation point. [Interesting. However, 'SADR' is (in English) the 'Sahawari ADR' not the 'Saharan ADR'. Similarly 'Sahawari' is whats used in the SADR constitution.

You might consider all of the above. We may need to move this discussion. Clearly, I don't agree with your interpretation of 'Sahawari'. Redking7 (talk) 07:16, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huh First off, I suggest you read the article on nation state. I did not come up with this term, and it's not exactly a controversial one. The SADR is a nation state constitutionally and demographically. A resident simply resides somewhere; he may have citizenship to the state that controls that area, he may not. It is not extraordinary that a priest who is in a region as a product of colonialism lacks citizenship in that region. In fact, it's probably to be expected. I live in the United States, and I personally know several residents who have resided here for years without obtaining or even seeking citizenship.
Residents of the former Spanish Sahara in 1976, certainly did get citizenship with Morocco or the SADR, but not at the expense of any prior citizenship - they were colonial subjects. Fr. Rodríguez is certainly a Spaniard and there is no reason to think that he ceased being a Spanish citizen upon withdrawal of Spanish forces. I do not claim that the SADR excludes all who are not ethnic Sahrawi from its citizenship (in fact, I know that there are Haratin SADR citizens), rather, I am claiming that non-Sahrawi (and non-Haratin) SADR citizens are so extraordinary as to be unlikely. Your association with the proposed referenda is confusing at best: the SADR has supported the right of settlers to vote on the ultimate status of the region, but that still makes it unlikely that many non-Sahrawis are citizens of the SADR; those are not related matters.
As far as I am aware, there is no official translation of the SADR constitution into English, and the source I provided that translates it as "Saharan Arab Democratic Republic" is quite literally the book on Western Sahara. If you think that this tempest in a teacup still needs resolution, I suggest you put it up for a RfC. -Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:53, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Acacio Valbuena Rodríguez. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:38, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Acacio_Valbuena_Rodríguez&oldid=1205829862"