World Succession Deed 1400/98
State Succession Charter 1400/98
Podcast Show - Season 1
(only in English)

00:01 

OK. Listener name. You really threw us a curveball this time with these documents you sent over. 

 

00:07 

Yeah. Some legal paperwork. And OK, well, let's just say this isn't your typical property dispute. 

 

00:12 

Yeah, this one is pretty captivating because we're looking at the sale of a former NATO property. 

 

00:18 

in Germany, governed by the State Succession Deed 11098. 

 

00:23 

Sounds pretty standard, right? 

 

00:25 

But here's where things take a turn. There are some really unusual clauses in this deed. 

 

00:32 

When you consider this whole network of international agreements, well, there's an argument to be made that this sale could have implications far beyond just a single property in Germany. 

 

00:32 

Waz. 

 

00:45 

So what are we talking about here? 

 

00:46 

Like, what's the what's the core of this argument? 

 

00:49 

Well, the crux of it all revolves around what you might call the domino effect. 

 

00:53 

or a chain reaction triggered by the sale of this property as a unit. 

 

00:58 

It all comes down to connected networks. 

 

00:59 

Connected networks. Okay, I'm listening. 

 

01:01 

So imagine, you know, those domino rallies. 

 

01:03 

You tip over one domino, and it starts this whole chain reaction, bringing down the entire line. 

 

01:09 

Okay, I get the domino analogy, but how does a real estate sale in Germany turn into a global domino rally? 

 

01:15 

Well, this particular NATO property was tied into the German public utilities grid. 

 

01:20 

The sale, with its development as a unit clause, basically extends ownership along those connected networks. 

 

01:27 

Wait, hold on. Are you saying that whoever bought this property might also own a piece of the German power grid? 

 

01:34 

That's exactly what some are arguing, and it gets even more complex because that German grid is linked to neighboring European countries. 

 

01:43 

Like the European electricity grid, for example. 

 

01:46 

So the ripple effect just expands outward domino by domino. 

 

01:49 

Okay, so from one property, we're potentially talking about a big chunk of Europe. 

 

01:54 

But how does that cross continents? 

 

01:55 

That's where submarine cables come into play. 

 

01:58 

those underwater information highways that connect continents. 

 

02:01 

The argument is that the sale of the property and its connected network 

 

02:06 

could potentially extend ownership to these cables. 

 

02:09 

So that's how we jump across the Atlantic. 

 

02:12 

Okay, my brain is starting to hurt a little bit here. 

 

02:14 

You're saying that owning a piece of land connected to the grid could lead to owning cables running under the Atlantic? 

 

02:21 

I mean, how is that even remotely possible? 

 

02:23 

Well, the sources we're looking at present a pretty compelling case. 

 

02:27 

They argue that this whole domino effect is amplified by NATO's integration with the UN. 

 

02:33 

Now, I remember reading about that integration, but how does that make things even more complicated? 

 

02:37 

Well, think about it as the domino effect captures NATO countries. 

 

02:42 

It automatically captures UN countries. 

 

02:45 

Because NATO acts on behalf of the UN, it's deeply integrated into the UN's structure. 

 

02:51 

So it creates this chain reaction across a whole web of international agreements and treaties. 

 

02:56 

Okay, so let me see if I've got this straight. 

 

02:58 

We've got the sail as a unit spreading through interconnected networks 

 

03:01 

like power grids, maybe even submarine cables. 

 

03:04 

And then NATO's connection to the U.N. adds another whole layer of complexity. 

 

03:09 

Exactly. And there's another fascinating deal. 

 

03:11 

Oh, there's more. 

 

03:12 

this development as a unit clause. 

 

03:15 

It isn't just limited to directly connected networks. 

 

03:18 

Wait, what does that even mean? 

 

03:20 

So imagine a gas pipeline. 

 

03:22 

that doesn't physically touch the power grid. 

 

03:25 

But it overlaps in an area that's been sold as part of this network. 

 

03:29 

Guess what? It becomes part of the deal too. 

 

03:32 

So even if something isn't directly plugged in, if it's in the same geographical area, it gets swept up in this sail. 

 

03:39 

It's like a legal black hole or something. 

 

03:41 

That's a great way to put it. 

 

03:43 

I mean, this is this level of complexity is what makes this whole thing so mind boggling. 

 

03:48 

And potentially so far-reaching. 

 

03:51 

Like, we're talking about a game of legal dominoes, 

 

03:53 

but the entire world is the playing field. 

 

03:56 

You know, speaking of networks, I found the role of telecommunications in all of this to be especially interesting. 

 

04:03 

The sources mentioned a 1995 license agreement with a company called TKS Telepost. 

 

04:10 

Write TKS Telepost as subsidiary of Vodafone. 

 

04:13 

They provided services to military bases all over the world. 

 

04:16 

And this is where things get really interesting, because it potentially brings those global military communication networks into the mix. 

 

04:25 

So it's not just physical infrastructure like power grids and cables, but also communication lines. 

 

04:30 

I mean, the scope of this is just incredible. 

 

04:32 

And there's another detail that really stood out to me. 

 

04:35 

The sale happened before Germany's telecommunications privatization. 

 

04:39 

Right. And that's a crucial detail because the sources raise the question, were state owned telecom networks essentially sold off before they were even private? 

 

04:49 

It adds a whole other layer of legal complexity to the situation. 

 

04:52 

Okay, so we talked about submarine cables connecting continents. 

 

04:55 

How exactly do they fit into this potential global sale? 

 

04:59 

Well, the theory is that this domino effect could potentially transfer ownership along any connected network. 

 

05:05 

And submarine cables are essentially the backbone of global communications. 

 

05:11 

They would physically link the continents together through this vast network under the ocean. 

 

05:16 

So owning a piece of land connected to this vast network 

 

05:20 

could theoretically give you a claim 

 

05:22 

to parts of the network itself. 

 

05:25 

It's like owning a piece of the internet. 

 

05:26 

It's a bold claim and one that raises some serious legal questions. 

 

05:31 

No kidding. It's like each network connection triggers the next one, expanding the reach of this sail further and further. 

 

05:37 

I'm starting to see why you called this a domino effect. 

 

05:40 

It's a chain reaction with potentially global consequences. 

 

05:44 

And there's another crucial piece to this whole puzzled NATO's status of forces agreement or SOFA. 

 

05:51 

This agreement grants NATO some unique privileges. 

 

05:55 

things like the right to determine the location and size of military bases, 

 

05:59 

and control over critical communication infrastructure. 

 

06:02 

Wait, are you saying that the sources are suggesting that these rights might have been transferred to the buyer of this property? 

 

06:10 

That through the sale of the property and the connected networks, the buyer potentially gained control over military networks all over the world. 

 

06:18 

It's a pretty audacious concept. 

 

06:20 

Okay, I think I'm starting to grasp the sheer scope of this. We've gone from a seemingly 

 

06:25 

straightforward property sale to a scenario where potentially the entire world was sold. 

 

06:31 

all because of this chain reaction across connected networks. 

 

06:35 

But what does this actually mean from a legal standpoint? 

 

06:38 

That's where things get really fascinating. 

 

06:40 

Let's dive into some of the potential legal ramifications, starting with the 12-month 

 

06:45 

no-objection rule from the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. 

 

06:49 

OK, break that down for me. 

 

06:50 

What does that rule mean in plain 

 

06:53 

Essentially, under international law, countries have a specific window of time to formally 

 

06:58 

object to a treaty or agreement. 

 

07:00 

If they don't object, within that time frame it's considered tacit agreement. 

 

07:05 

They've essentially agreed by staying silent. 

 

07:07 

So are the sources arguing that by not formally objecting to this sale, countries around the world might have tacitly agreed to the sale of, well, everything? 

 

07:17 

It's one of the arguments they're putting forward. 

 

07:19 

And it leads to some really interesting legal questions. 

 

07:23 

Did countries fully comprehend the potential ramifications of this sale? 

 

07:28 

Did they even know about this 12-month window? 

 

07:31 

And what about the buyer? I mean, what kind of legal power could they potentially have if this theory is actually true? 

 

07:37 

Well, the sources suggest that by owning these global networks, the buyer could gain jurisdiction 

 

07:42 

over international telecommunications disputes. 

 

07:45 

Whoa. You mean they could potentially control who gets access to the Internet, what data is shared and how international communications are regulated? 

 

07:55 

It's a possibility, and it raises serious concerns about censorship data privacy and the very future of the Internet. 

​.. .