Falkland Islands voters send a clear message
The Falkland Islands election of 5 November presented a clear and stark message. The tiny electorate was fed up with those whom they felt represented them in a cavalier fashion over recent years, and they were being punished.
Not one of the old council survived the cull. Through the ballot box, people said they were fed up with the men and women who decided almost everything, from parochial domestic issues, through the multi-million pound budget and administration, to foreign relations. As a result, the Islands are now facing one of their most interesting political periods for many years.
The election results show that the old days of councillors assuming adequate consultation meant no more than occasional public meetings in drafty halls are over. Now, the electorate expects their leaders to be good communicators who are up to speed with the latest technology and transparent in their work. Even in the Falklands, the information revolution has changed the way people think. They expect to be informed, consulted, kept in the picture and listened to.
As is the way with hubris, it brought the old guard down. They thought they could operate in isolation while they made major decisions about controversial expenditure (the ferry and the abattoir come to mind). They also thought they could give the green light to a Chief Executive who had obvious disdain for the local system of administration and the local people who had staffed it, an had begun introducing new appointments which – according to the views of many in Stanley – heralded a return to the old days of colonial rule.
Now it seems likely that eight new sets of eyes will go over recent major items of expenditure and the plan to change the government system. They may well indicate displeasure. That would be interesting, to say the least. However, they will have to be strong. There are some local government virgins in the new council, and some others whom the senior administrators will consider light-weights. They will attempt to baffle and scare these councillors with management-speak and dire warnings.
The old guard lost because they did not show adequate respect for the electorate. So the new councillors need to learn that lesson, and start blogging, twittering, facebooking, and running websites that keep the voters up to date and allow a two-way flow of views. On-line opinion polls should be embraced. If the newcomers don’t see that people expect a more interactive government, they too will eventually be given their marching orders.
However, nothing changes the only real foreign policy issue – Argentina. Islanders see themselves as tolerant and cooperative with that country to a certain extent, and such issues of Argentine next of kin visits are not particularly controversial. But when it comes to the sovereignty issue, the line in the sand remains clear: no negotiations.
By Graham Bound – London
32 comments
Note: Comments do not reflect MercoPress’ opinions. They are the personal view of our users. We wish to keep this as open and unregulated as possible. However, rude or foul language, discriminative comments (based on ethnicity, religion, gender, nationality, sexual orientation or the sort), spamming or any other offensive or inappropriate behaviour will not be tolerated. Please report any inadequate posts to the editor. Comments must be in English. Thank you.
Newsflash, its the islanders who decide their own future, this is called self-determination. The UK is committed to respecting THEIR wishes.
The islanders have offered talks with Argentina. Talks do not have a pre-determined outcome. Argentina will only talk where the outcome is pre-determined in its favour. Something the islanders will not accept.
But you illustrate Argentina's agenda, talks will only be about one thing and that is everyone giving in to Argentina.
Sovereingty has been a stone in the shoe for the past 100 years. It must be recalled that it was not the British that pushed Argentina off the archipelago, but an act of sheer piracy by an US Captain, Silas Duncan, purportedly "in defence of US commercial interests" (those of the whalers and hunters of the local wolves for their skins), who used the cannon of USNavy Lexington to defeate the practically unarmen Argentinian government, destroyed all installations and declared the islands "Free for all". Only a year after this, and while the mainland country was in the middle of one of its "normal" political strifes, the English dropped a number of families, whose descendants gave a stunning democratic boot to their LegAss people last thursday.
Argentine naiveté lost the golden opportunity when it was offered her and she rejected, in 1982, a coalition tripartite government under three flags (UK, UN & Argentine) with sovereingty to be discussed, and eventually ceded, in some not too distant future.
Perhaps, after these K people leave, and if reasonable substitutes are sworn in, a light may appear on the horizon. Not to jump into a clear-cut arrangement, but something that would give the two positions a reason to keep discussions, find common interests to seriously work on them and, after one or two generations, reach a healthy agreement for co-existence, patience and mutual respect which, why not, might one day consider a re-uniting policy. This is something which, unfortunately, I'm old enough to never see. Cheers.
Actually the damage done by Silas Duncan was greatly exaggerated by Vernet for his own purposes. Duncan destroyed the powder store and spiked the guns but that was it. He did not as claimed raze the settlement to the ground. Nor did the British drop families off in 1833, the British didn't in fact send any settlers till 1841. The people living there were the remains of Vernet's settlers.
And to correct you, Britain didn't offer to cede sovereignty in 1982.
Other than that, to be honest all the Falkland Islanders want to reach a healthy agreement for co-existence, patience and mutual respect. Shame that after making progress the Kirschners have pissed away the good will of yet another generation of Falklanders.
But let's leave past where it is.
Things are now what they are, and I take this opportunity to congratulate the victors & at the same time warn them about the ideas the losers may have in mind to make hell of their government. Bear in mind that the umbilical cord to too many personal interests and future prospects has been severed...
Sad to see you revert to type and resorting to yet more empty threats, so much for a "healthy agreement for co-existence, patience and mutual respect".
Never lasts long does it.
You should also take the time to review all UN SC and GA resolutions regarding the Falkland Islands. Not a single mention of Argentina's right to sovereignty is has ever been made or even implied. That's because it does not exist. The UK and Argentina are "invited to settle their differences". Thing more and nothing less. The decolonisation of the Falklands is frankly no business of Argentina's and morally Argentina lost any right to comment when you invaded the islands militarily in 1982. You should mind your own business...
First comes Just in: Your second para on above message #15, beginning with 'Sad...' has no factual basis. It is either an unfortunate misconception, a veritable lie, or you simply have misunderstood me, perhaps because English is not my mother's tongue. I should think it is the latter. I'd never dare to threat the islanders because I've always admired their valour and resilience, to the point of being consider a 'traitor' to some of my co-nationals whose position is the opposite on all lines, whenever they read me on threads as this. To be the ham in the sandwich is nothing a vigorous community who needs help from no one, can stand for long before doing something. The islanders fought first with the merciless weather to create a perfect democratic community, then they had to fight for self determination which they've got albeit partially, and have recently written a Constitution. They are moving slowly to independence and, to my view, they're not far from it. Their only real, undecipherable, unfathomable problem lies, unfortunately, a few hundred miles to the West.
Then comes J.A Roberts. I may accept that you are partially right in what you meant; however not in the tone you use. I'm not of the hawkish type, and have never been, in respect of any rights that the islanders had or have or might have in future. That is why I'm afraid that when writing in these threads I'm minding my own business and, if you don't think so, I sincerely believe that you're nofleetingbody to tell me (or anyone else here) where those 'businesses' should fleeting begin, nor where they should fleeting end.
Take care and be happy. Life is short. A Dieu.
Well despite being an ''argie'', as you choose to all yourself, I have now ''known'' you for many years and can certainly vouch for your total honesty and good intentions. Of course you cannot help your beliefs and nor should you deny them and certainly not abandon the fight for the sake of a misunderstanding in this thread.
I understand 'Anglo' speak reasonably well (not at all to insult your near perfect grip of English technically) but the phraseology has clearly mystified one or two here. They probably only speak 'estuary English' vernacular!
<<Things are now what they are, and I take this opportunity to congratulate the victors & at the same time warn them about the ideas the losers may have in mind to make hell of their government. Bear in mind that the umbilical cord to too many personal interests and future prospects has been severed...>>
I understood perfectly to whom you were referring here and that it was not any sort of threat whatsoever, nor ever was intended to be......
Un abrazo,
It was quite clear to me that you
Well if I misunderstood, then I apologise profusely. I can honestly say I totally misinterpreted the above paragraph.
Regards,
Justin
A poor choice of words on my part, and also change from the third person to the second person probably did not help. Nothing personal, I assure you.
Let me rephrase:
"...when it invaded..."
"Argentina should mind its own business!"
To the Legislative Assembly newbies
A new Summer's coming
with new faces and broad smiles.
Old Summers' now far back,
at least for a long while.
Argie, Buenos Ayres, 10-11-2009
You've just lied!! Did you read the article above???
The last line says "But when it comes to the sovereignty issue, the line in the sand remains clear: no negotiations."
SO, OPEN TALKS????
J.A. Roberts said, "it has only been a "stone in the shoe" since the 1940s when the fascist dictator Juan Peron revived the claim on very unsafe and frankly pathetically weak grounds."
To say that Peron was a dictator is like to say Churchill was a dictator.
Before Peron Argentina has never recognize British Sovereignty there, so it is not an invent and fortunaly each time more countries are getting that. So, Don't be riculous or at least hide it!!!
"The decolonisation of the Falklands is frankly no business of Argentina's and morally Argentina lost any right to comment when you invaded the islands militarily in 1982. You should mind your own business..."
It is our business and it will always be!!! We didn't lose any right and we will keep pressure and our claim will be harder than ever. Without weapons from us you'll see that you will not know peace until sit down to negotiate. It's a shame has to be that way, but it's your fault.
Remember the Beagle Channel dispute? That Argentina lost when Chile produced Argentine maps that showed the islands as part of Chile. Those same maps show the Falklands are not part of Argentina. Up till the 1930s Argentine text books referred to Las Islas Falklands. Argentina did recognise British sovereignty, with the 1850 Convention of Settlement.
To describe Peron as a dictator is appropriate, he seized power in a coup and held on to it with populist measures that ruined Argentina. Churchill on the other hand was elected, then kicked out after the war. The comparsion is frankly ridiculous.
And Jorge, the offer was for open talks not to negotiate terms of capitulation.
"you will not know peace until sit down to negotiate"
As my granny used to say, you catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar. You really just don't get it do you, the more that Argentina approaches the islanders in an overtly aggressive manner, the increasingly irrelevant Argentina becomes. One should never underestimate your ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Pls do continue with the bigoted racist taunts, can't say I'm impressed with the pathetic attempt to make a pun from my name. Nothing like being completely unoriginal is there.
It's incredible how you just don't get how Argentina's violence and aggression in 1982 denies Argentina any moral right to comment on the Falkland Islands. And if you think that Argentina never acquiesced in British sovereignty over the Falkland Islands before the 1940s then you are sadly wrong. This happened many, many times...
hello autumm
beware of winter
WELCOME SPRING!!!
Disgusting churchil believe Peron was a fascist. He was judging Peron with his own standarts. When you say Peron or argentines are fascist, you are actually looking at the mirror.
So, wash your dirty mouth when you talk about him or any internal affair!
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!