Talk:Community of Latin American and Caribbean States

Untitled
who are the member countries of the community? Here it said "32", but all american countries (not counting territories of UK, France, etc.) are 35. Canada and USA are excluded, thus there remain 33 - so it seems that one is not participating? Alinor (talk) 19:56, 25 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Honduras was excluded from the conference.216.249.42.214 (talk) 13:02, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Map
I understand full well that no accurate map can be made until the organisation actually comes into existance, however the current map is a bit screwed up since it includes many countries that are not going to be part of this organisation-Puerto Rico, Bermuda, Honduras, ect... I just think we should keep this in mind and change the map to reflect reality when this bloc is formally established in 2011.70.240.50.108 (talk) 20:45, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Is there a reason why the countries on the map are all different shades of green? I looked at the information page and it gives no reason. Yongbyong38 (talk) 02:54, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

infobox?
Shouldn't there be an infobox for this bloc, like there is on the USAN (Union of South American Nations) page? Someone else can do that (or can point me in the direction of the templates) as I'm not good at coding and thus can't design an infobox from scratch. --Thehistorian10 (talk) 15:26, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Excluded nations
I read the line that CELAC "consists of all sovereign countries in the Americas, except for Canada, France, the Netherlands and the United States." If France and the Netherlands are listed as exceptions, should Denmark (Greenland) and the United Kingdom (Falkland Islands, Cayman Islands, etc) be listed too? Does the level of autonomy given to Greenland and the British Overseas Territories make a difference to their inclusion in a list of "sovereign countries"? --Wavehunter (talk) 01:22, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * No, they aren't members of CELAC. Greenland may be listed as excluded too. Caymand Islands is not a sovereign country (The Cayman Islands are a British overseas territory, listed by the UN Special Committee of 24 as one of the last non-self governing territories), same with Falklands Islands, but the latter are included as part of Argentina. One of the CELAC initial declarations was its support to Argentine claim on the islands.pmt7ar (talk) 01:49, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if I'm understanding the discussion properly, but if the UK is not on the list because the Cayman Islands are not a sovereign country, then surely France should also not be on the list, given that Guadeloupe and Martinique are not sovereign countries (?). --FormerIP (talk) 02:55, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the replies and the edit. I like it better now: "It consists of all sovereign countries in the Americas, except for Canada and the United States. European countries with dependencies in the the Americas (France, Denmark, Netherlands and the United Kingdom) are also not represented in CELAC." Yes, FormerIP, my point was that if France (Martinique etc) and the Netherlands (Aruba etc) are listed, the UK and Denmark should be too. And Pmt7ar, the Falklands/Malvinas issue is of course contentious, but I note that the map excludes those islands from CELAC. I dare say the map and wording will change frequently in the next few days. --Wavehunter (talk) 04:02, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The difference between France, Netherlands, Denmark vs. U.K. is that the former three claim most of their territories in the Americas to be integral parts of their own sovereign states, whereas the U.K. defines all of its territories in the Americas as dependencies which are not part of the U.K. per se. I think that might be what Pmt7ar was getting at. But I agree that it is much clearer to distinguish between countries entirely primarily located within the Americas from European countries which contain dependent territories or other constituencies in the the Americas. Evzob (talk) 15:37, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It's not only about sovereign states, the name says 'Latin American and Carribean', so you'd have to be either Latin American (i.e. language), or Carribean (i.e. location) and you'd have to be a soevreign state which really goes without saying because if you are a part of something else like the e.g. Falklands or Guayana you're not sovereign. The name was probably chosen because the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation had declined the application by the US to become a member. These things are embarrassing so if you can choose a name that avoids these misunderstandings, that's a good idea. And the OAS has become somewhat weak after not all members signed the conference protocol in Cartagena, so it's not surprising that a new organisation is founded, but there's a nest in Latin America for new organisations it seems, given that they have also created bancosur and mercosur, and who knows what else. It should not be called 'excluded nations' but 'nations not eligible'. 144.136.192.70 (talk) 02:04, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

UNASUL
Does anyone know what the relationship is between CELAC and UNASUL? AndrewRT(Talk) 21:25, 4 December 2011 (UTC)


 * My (limited) understanding is that they are not officially connected - essentially that they are sort of competing for almost the same role (though their areas don't overlap completely). Evzob (talk) 15:38, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Impartiality
At one point in this article, there is a statement made that reads: "The formation of CELAC was largely ignored by press in the US and Canada." There is no citation for this, and largely seems opinionated, and I think should thus be deleted. Especially because during the conference I remember reading about this event in the front section of the WSJ twice I believe. --Rysin (talk) 00:03, 7 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Here in Australia I have not heard or seen CELAC mentioned either, ever. I would have never known it existed if I wasn't a former German and Spiegel reading person. German Chancellor Merkel travelled to Chile for the 2013 conference and seeing that report, I checked it out. The TV correspondent Ben Knight of the (government funded) Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) travelled to Havanna and reported from Cuba - but not one word about the 2014 CELAC conference. I typed CELAC into the search box and there were no hits from all of the ABC. If I hadn't stumbled on the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation on one occasion, I would not know it existed either. That was before CELAC and it said then that the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation was the only international organisation without US membership. It feels somewhat strange that both organisations are never mentioned as if mentioning them would give them undue publicity. I will now check the BBC, the guardian, and ... maybe what else I can think of. 121.209.53.9 (talk) 08:36, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Division on the basis of language
I could not understand the division of member states on the basis of language. Can someone please clarify? Alok Bansal (talk) 15:57, 9 August 2012 (UTC)


 * 'Latin' Languages are Italian, French, Portuguese, Spanish and a few minority languages. So if you speak a language derived from Latin you are eligible. If you do not speak a Latin language but are in the Carribean you are also eligible. 121.209.53.9 (talk) 06:05, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Membership looks wrong....
Membership looks wrong. On this page The only Caribbean Countries are "Aruba, Cuba, Curacao, República Dominicana, Sint Maarten." And therefore the ONLY actual CARICOM full member is Suriname. Therefore that means : "Antigua and Barbuda, Commonwealth of the Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Commonwealth of Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, Montserrat, Saint Lucia, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, and Trinidad and Tobago. Are all non-members too. CaribDigita (talk) 04:06, 25 December 2019 (UTC)


 * I agree with your observation. Maybe you should go ahead and update the page to show the 23 countries. I counted 23 not 33 as the article states. Thanks.--The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 20:16, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Logo changed?
On their official website I can see a new logo on the middle-top, should we upload it on enwiki or Commons? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:08, 15 November 2022 (UTC)