Talk:Protecting power

State department links are broken —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.214.169.254 (talk) 21:40, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Is Germany the protecting power for the United Kingdom in Iran following the storming of the British Embassy in Tehran?
The |FCO travel advice page for Iran just says "British nationals requiring urgent consular assistance can visit the Embassy of any EU Member State in Tehran, or in an emergency call the FCO in London". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rpt0 (talk • contribs) 15:07, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

== is pakistan the protecting power for iran in the united states, and vice versa? thanks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interests_Section_of_the_Islamic_Republic_of_Iran_in_the_United_States

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Protecting power. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www2.canada.com/saskatoonstarphoenix/news/story.html?id=d934cec1-971f-4529-8c11-8a436f942a64

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 17:24, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

is that still up to date ?
"Sweden carries out limited consular functions for the United States, Canada, and Australia in North Korea." - the source is 'dead' (404). https://www.swedenabroad.se/en/embassies/north-korea-pyongyang/about-us/ does not give any information. --Neun-x (talk) 05:22, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

It's still up to date. Here's link to US authorities: https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/international-travel/International-Travel-Country-Information-Pages/KoreaDemocraticPeoplesRepublicof.html Adestro (talk) 18:03, 28 February 2019 (UTC).

obligatory / no requirement
Quote from article: "The appointment of a protecting power had been optional in the 1929 Convention, but the 1949 Convention made it obligatory" jnestorius(talk) 02:09, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Does this mean obligatory when war is declared?
 * Even if the belligerents had no diplomatic relations before the outbreak of war?
 * and a dead letter now that formal declarations of war are out of fashion
 * Conversely, I take it that countries not at war are not required to establish protecting powers just because they lack diplomatic relations
 * Relatedly, is the "Current mandates" table complete? If so it implies there are pairs of countries where one has a protecting power in the other but not vice versa (e.g. North Korea has no protecting powers).
 * In which case this fact might be added to the "There is no requirement..." paragraph