As an independent State in the nineteenth century, the Hawaiian Kingdom maintained treaties with the Austro-Hungarian Empire, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, the United Kingdoms of Sweden and Norway, Portugal, Russia, Spain, Switzerland, and the United States.
Despite the unlawful overthrow of the government of the Hawaiian Kingdom by United States forces on January 17, 1893, international law provides for the continued existence of the Hawaiian State even when the United States unilaterally annexed the Hawaiian Islands on July 7, 1898, by a congressional law during the Spanish-American War. For information of the American occupation, see chapter 21 “Hawai‘i’s Sovereignty and Survival in the Age of Empire” in Oxford University Press’ publication of Unconquered States: Non-European Powers in the Imperial Age. Because the Hawaiian Kingdom continues to exist so do its treaties.
After the American overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom government, States were led to believe that the Hawaiian Kingdom had ceased to exist and became a part of the United States in 1898. Shattering this narrative was the Permanent Court of Arbitration’s recognition of the Hawaiian Kingdom’s continued existence as a State and the Council of Regency as its restored government, in Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom, in 1999.
The 20th century ushered in new States as successors to their predecessor States where the number of States in 1893 that numbered 44 would exponentially rise to 193 States that are members of the United Nations (“UN”). These successor States arose because of the First and Second World Wars and through decolonization of former colonial and trust territories.
When a successor State is established, the question arises regarding treaties of the predecessor State with a third State and whether it is binding or not on the successor State. For example, in June of 1961, New Zealand and Great Britain entered into a treaty that concerned air services between the former and the British territories of Western Samoa and Fiji. When Western Samoa became a successor State to Great Britain on January 1, 1962, the 1961 treaty remained binding on Western Samoa after its independence from Great Britain. In 1997, Western Samoa officially changed its name to Samoa.
According to the 1978 Vienna Convention on Succession of States in respect of Treaties, Article 24 states:
1. A bilateral treaty which at the date of the succession of States was in force in respect of the territory to which the succession of States relates is considered as being in force between a newly independent State and the other State party when: (a) they expressly so agree; or (b) by reason of their conduct they are to be considered as having agreed.
2. A treaty considered as being in force under paragraph 1 applies in the relations between the newly independent State and the other State party from the date of the succession of States, unless a different intention appears from their agreement or is otherwise established.
The successor States of the Hawaiian Kingdom’s treaty partners, were not aware, at the time of their independence, that the Hawaiian Kingdom continued to exist as a State, therefore, neither the newly independent States nor the Hawaiian Kingdom could declare “within a reasonable time after the attaining of independence, that the treaty is regarded as no longer in force between them.” Until there is clarification of the successor States’ intentions, as to a common understanding with the Hawaiian Kingdom regarding the continuance in force of the Hawaiian treaty with their predecessor State, the Hawaiian Kingdom will presume the continuance in force of its treaties with the successor States. The majority of Member States of the United Nations are successor States to treaties with the Hawaiian Kingdom.
The Hawaiian Kingdom has treaties with 154 Member States of the United Nations. 14 treaties with original States and 140 treaties with their successor States.
HAWAIIAN-AMERICAN TREATY: Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Palau, and the Philippines.
HAWAIIAN-AUSTRO-HUNGARIAN TREATY: Austria and Hungary
HAWAIIAN-BELGIAN TREATY: Burundi, Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Rwanda.
HAWAIIAN-BRITISH TREATY: Afghanistan, Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, The Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Bhutan, Botswana, Brunei Darussalam, Cameroon, Canada, Cyprus, Egypt, Eswatini, Fiji, Gambia, Ghana, Grenada, Guyana, India, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kiribati, Kuwait, Lesotho, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Myanmar, Namibia, Nauru, Nepal, New Zealand, Nigeria, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Qatar, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Vanuatu, Yemen, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.
HAWAIIAN-DUTCH TREATY: Indonesia and Suriname.
HAWAIIAN-FRENCH TREATY: Algeria, Benin, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Côte d’Ivoire, Djibouti, Gabon, Guinea, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Madagascar, Mali, Mauritania, Morocco, Niger, Senegal, Syrian Arab Republic, Togo, Tunisia, Vanuatu, and Viet Nam.
HAWAIIAN-ITALIAN TREATY: Libya and Somalia.
HAWAIIAN-JAPANESE TREATY: Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and the Republic of Korea.
HAWAIIAN-PORTUGUESE TREATY: Angola, Cabo Verde, Guinea-Bissau, Mozambique, Sao Tome and Principe, and Timor-Leste.
HAWAIIAN-RUSSIAN TREATY: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Mongolia, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Republic of Moldova, Slovenia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan.
HAWAIIAN-SPANISH TREATY: Cuba and Equatorial Guinea.
HAWAIIAN-SWEDISH-NORWEGIAN TREATY: Sweden and Norway.
I just love this stuff…especially the 1800s. This is the century where central bankers sunk their teeth into establishing the international order as we know it by setting up central banks in the place of sovereign state banks and government issued money.
By destroying Napoleons State Bank via the Napoleanic Wars and having Bellingham assasinate Percival in order to bring the US under heel and recharter Rothschilds US Bank, the 5 Rothschild sons and the money changers brought all 3 governments into serious debt by floating them loans with exorbitant interests. Thus, the Congress of Vienna.
Alexander the 1st of Russia didn’t go along in the Congress of Vienna which was an attempt to consolidate all governments under Rothschilds rule. Russia was the only country that was not indebted to the Rothschilds. Stalin followed suit in a similar vein when the Soviets acknowledged that Bretton Woods institutions were “branches of wall street.” So they poisoned him and left him to die of a heart attack.
Of course since Alexander the 1st, all of Tsars after him suffered the wrath of the Rothschilds in Talmudic fashion. But for Alexander, he would establish the Holy Alliance with Austria and Prussia allowing Russia to develop into the most resource rich nation, including gold, by the 20th century. Although none of the Tsars lived past the age of 53, they did create a system that was completely independent and honorable that President Taft remarked . Thus, the Russian Revolution was actually a Judeo-Bolshevik revolution disguised as a native Russian uprising where Jews planted themselves in Russian government with the help of Jacob Schiff, an American Jew and front man for Nathean Rothschild. It was basically an asset stripping exercise for Rothschilds where he moved Russina gold into the Federal Reserve via FDR and his counterpart Maxim Litvinov.
The Russian revolution was no less different than the French Revolution which was actually jewish led and Jacobin driven in order to put the 13 Jewish banks in control of France. That was until Napolean came along but I think it was John Law who tried first with the Bank Royale. These revolutions are simply social experiments in population control.
To end my rant, there were only 44 independent and self governing nation states by the turn of the 20th century. About 20 of them were in the hands of central bankers such as the Rothschilds. During the 20th century, state banks re-emerged with enthusiasm and equality for all in the societies of Japan (Imperial Control), Germany (Schacht/Feder) and Russia’s (Stolypin Act). Then the idea of sovereign state banking and government issued money got buried beneath the fervor of war. Today, there are only 8 banks in the world that the Rothschilds have no interest in.
…Taft remarked “the Emperor of Russia has passed workers legislation which was nearer to perfection than that of any democratic country” regarding Tsar Nicholas the 2nds state Bank that created a workers paradise.
Both world wars were orchestrated to destroy the Austro-Hungarian empire and the State Banks of Germany, Italy and Japan in order to establish the BIS so that all governments can be more financially manageable/controlled. All governments are dominated by their central bankers “ability to control Treasury loans, manipulate foreign exchanges, influence the level of economic activity in the country and cooperative politicians.” (C. Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, A History of the World in Our Time, The MacMillan Co., 1966, 324.)
Thus, consider article 10, paragraph 2, Hague Protocol.
Impressive! Truly!
Are there any readers that can confirm & provide any information referencing a treaty signed by Kamehameha & the United States of America prior to the unification of the Hawaiian islands…prior to the Kingdom of Hawai’i. I was told it was signed in the late 1790’s. I am looking for verbage staying “…stand by side with arms” Thank you to anyone who’s able to provide any information regarding the topic stating above
No, sorry, never heard of it, but I’m intrigued now that you mention it, what was the treaty about?
It can’t be an official treaty, that would have required ratification by a two thirds vote of senate, so I’m guessing it’s like the colonial agreements foreigners tried with other polynesian chiefs, which are more like agreements and aren’t really considered legitimate, because if there’s other chiefs/ali’i, they can refute the ali’i who signed its authority to do so.
The first actual treaty we had with the US (meaning it was ratified and therefore official), was in the 1800’s.
Amazing! Insight also coming at a God time; mahalo nui.