How does American land become the property of a foreign government, and, vice versa.
In the city for which I worked, there were three foreign embassies. Uganda and Sweden come to mind, but I have forgotten the third. These huge family homes and the property that the house sat on, were all surrounded by tall iron fence, armed men manned the gates, and the respective flag of that country flew when the Ambassador was in residence.
I had incidents during my career, when we were summoned by automatic fire alarms, and we had to wait at the entrance for permission to enter the area. We always were met by super polite people and were allowed to some degree, full access to the house to check on the alarm. More than once we were directed away from certain areas, and my orders from the City were to not push it. International incidents were mentioned.
So how does a foreign country take over a plot of American earth and claim it as their own, and, how do we Americans claim land in a foreign country for the same purpose of establishing an embassy?
Usually the government just buys the land or property. Once they own it, they can put your embassy on it and, once recognized as such, it becomes “foriegn soil.”
It works both ways.
I should add that the embassy could also rent space in a building and that space would be their own soverign soil. For instance in Washington, DC, the Embassy of Qatar is a suite of offices in an office building.
There is also the case of the US Military renting or purchasing land for use as military bases. The land is still the territory of the host nation.
Strictly speaking, embassies remain part of the host country’s territory. They are, however, exempt from the host country’s laws.
Which leads me to a trick question I thought of - if you stand in the centre of London (England), how far are you from United States territory? To the nearest, oh, ten miles.
Is it the bit of US territory at Runnymede? About 30-40kms or so from London?
I was under the impression that the host country’s laws remained in force as well. The only difference is that the host country usually chooses not to exercise them for fear of an international incident.
It’s not foreign soil. It merely benefits from many immunities.
By agreement with the host country. Country A can’t just buy any building and states “this will be our embassy” though in practice there rarely is a good reason for country B to be opposed to this choice.
Bah, yes it is. But please tell me that if this hadn’t been a thread about embassies you would have said “Ha! It’s the US embassy, barely a mile from Charing Cross, the traditional centre of London!”, and I would have triumphally have told you that you were wrong.
Anyway, yeah, the site of the JFK memorial at Runnymede in Surrey was given to the United States in 1965.
Nope. It’s not an arbitrary choice by the host nation. It’s regulated by treaties.
'Fraid not. Even if merely owning the land turned it into US territory, it’s quite well known that the Duke of Grosvenor has always refused to sell the freehold of the embassy site to the US.
That should have read Duke of Westminster, of course.
The decision to give grounds diplomatic stature is a mutual agreement between the host country and the representing country. It’s not irrecovable - the United States could declare that a foreign embassy is no longer diplomatic ground. But doing so is the equivalent of declaring that the United States no longer recognizes the country diplomatically, so it’s a major step just short of a declaration of war.
Heh, I would have said a couple hundred feet. That is the distance to Trafalgar Square and the Statue of George Washington we sent over with a bunch of dirt to put under it so Washington wouldn’t have to stand on British soil. I guess it isn’t really ours anymore though.