Buenos Aires only accepts one outcome of talks: “turning Falklands into an Argentine colony”
Following the article published in “The Independent” dated 22nd December 2011, entitled “Time to talk about the Falklands”, the people of the Falkland Islands would like to make the following response.
The Mercosur statement banning legitimate Falkland Islands flagged vessels from using their ports came as no surprise to the people of the Falkland Islands. We have seen Argentina pressuring their neighbours into lending verbal support to various pronouncements, all of which are aimed at putting us under pressure and disrupting our way of life. We are well aware of their wish to force us to discuss the sovereignty of the Islands from which they would only accept one outcome, turning our home and country into a colony of Argentina.
We are very appreciative of the strong support from the UK for our right to self determination under the UN Charter. We are equally disappointed that countries in the region with which we've had a long and mutually beneficial relationship seem ready to join Argentina in ignoring this right. As a people we have the right to determine our own future, and we have made a choice – to maintain our relationship with Britain. It is this right, and this choice that we have made, that is being ignored.
In an ideal world, of course disputes should be settled by talking. Unfortunately the only talks of interest to Argentina are those which have only one possible outcome; namely the hand over of the Falkland Islands against the clearly expressed wishes of their people.
Suggested Stories
-
May 23rd 2013
Cristina Fernandez administration limits overseas dollar extractions to a minimum
-
May 20th 2013
Brazil trapped by Argentina and Venezuela economic mismanagements
-
May 23rd 2013
Falkland Islands wish for normal neighborly relations with all South American neighbors
-
May 22nd 2013
Uruguay joins the women’s presidential club: Mujica flies to China and Astori to Colombia
105 comments Feed
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.
The only colonial status of Malvinas is the one it has had ever since 1833.
To Argentina it´s part of Tierra del Fuego... that´s a PROVINCE not a COLONY. You tricky liers.
And @1 we deffenetly want the oil. It´s ours.
Absolutely correct! Well done! However, to EVERYONE else its the Falkland Islands (whatever some Spanish-speaking countries might want to call it) and a British Overseas Territory.
There´s even a request for the EU Parliament to recognize the real situation of Malvinas, a territory in dispute and not an over seas territory. If the EU considers that, you´ll loos the best support you have sofar...
Everyone in the Uk, you mean?
Please provide one shred of evidence showing that any country in the world (other than Argentina) says that the Falkland Islands are a part of Argentina.
Many might say they are a territory in dispute, but ALL countries recognise that thay are currently a British Overseas Territory (that is indisputable, because the UK currently administers the Islands and Argentina doesn't).
Evidence please?
Brazil: ”What´s the geographical, political, economical explanation for the UK to be in Malvinas (Note they say Malvinas)? What´s the political explanation for the UN not to have determined and affirmed yet that there´s no other possibility than Argentina being the owner of Malvinas, instead of a country 14.000 km away? Is it perhaps that the UK permanent membership of the Security Council that allows the UK to do whatever the UK wants and the rest can do nothing?”
Just one single example... If you want more, you can open you eyes.
crackpot I quote
“To everyone else its the Falkland islands whatever some Spanish speaking nations might want to call it”
Well you are a contradiction all right crackpot
A lot of people around the world in different countries and several continents agree with this positions. It is very known that the arguments of UK are too week. However, as in most of other situations, sooner or later the truth will prevail.
He is just reiterating that a dispute exists. His personal opinion is simply that they SHOULD be part of Argentina (show me official goverment policy recognising Argentinian sovereignty over the islands). There's a very good reason why the UN has not determined that the Islands are part of Argentina - that is not their job. The UN decolonisation committee's job is to decolonise and not to dictate transfer of terriory from one state to another. Decolonisation = either full independence, free association or intergration (but critically, this is the choice of the population and not some aggressive third party).
He does not say that he thinks the islands are an integral part of Argentina. If any countries really did think that, then they would give Argentina some more solid support rather than simply pandering to the crazy rantings of Ms Botox.
p.s. According to the Lisbon treaty, the EU considers the FI to be a BOT.
INCORRECT.
Negotiations for certain could lead to an outcome that is mutually beneficial and this could take any number possible manifestations that would insure the uninterrupted continuation of the government of the islanders and their way of life.
What we want, primarily, is a recognition in the form of a bilateral treaty that
1. Clearly and jointly states that the islands were wrongly seized by the British on the grounds of indefensible historical claim, (which Britain has already done as much in changing the basis of their claim from historical grounds to prescription),
2. Jointly recognizes a dispute exists where both nations have valid points,
3. Britain agrees to legally empower the FIG to represent themselves in the matter, and
4. Britain and Argentina agree to enter 3-way discussions with the FIG to find mutually-agreeable solutions.
Right now all sides are so polarized and hardened that no one even knows what each side really wants or how much they're willing to give to compromise and reach a peaceful conclusion. Refusing to sit down and discuss is a continuation of the same failure of diplomacy that led to war in the first place, a tragic and illegal war that could have been prevented. I disagree that an outright handover is the only possible outcome Argentina would accept from the process I stated above. Possible options could include:
- Transfer of sovereignty with leaseback.
- Recognition of RG sovereignty with Brit land purchase back-dated to 1833.
- Partitioned jurisdictions where some areas will be british and some will be argentine
- Recognition of mutual sovereignty through independence and joint free associated state status
There are so many options for peaceful resolution. None can happen without honest discussion between the three parties.
Act your lines in another article, you treat enemies of humanity to the entire MERCOSUR.
Do you realize that you've spent 62 years and the rest of your life, full of hatred and bitterness? What would the Argentines had four British invasion? In 1806-1807-1833 and ”Forced Return of the November 20, 1845.
What would the rest of the world in the UK in 500 years of history, their stories of colonialism, genocide, liberalism and imperialism?
Give yourself a chance to yourself, leave the hatred and bitterness.
With your way of thinking, all humanity is against you.
There is another betting humanity to peace and harmony, human rights and are just beside you, and you have not noticed with your 62 years of life. Confuse weakness with caution.
I recommend the following article.
www.serpaj.org/
www.adolfoperezesquivel.org
www.cuestionmalvinas.com.ar
observatoriomalvinasunla.blogspot.com/
22 Hermes1967
Good proposal. A good start. The world is demanding a dialogue. This action can implement resolution 2065 (XX) of 1965, ratified by later resolutions 1973 (3160, XXVIII) 1976 (31/49), 1982 (37 / 9), 1983 (38/12) 1984 (39 / 6), 1985 (40/21), 1986 (41/40), 1987 (42/19) and 1988 (43/25). All United Nations and annually dictates the decolonization committee, also United Nations.
IF everybody knows the Malvinas are Argentine as Argentina claims and IF the burden of proof supports Argentina as Argentina claims and IF the burden of proof cannot be substantiated by the British counterclaim and IF the UN Treaty does not cover the case of the Falkland Islands as a Non-Self-Governing-Territory as Argentina claims, then Argentina need negotiate nothing and Argentina wins everything
I admit, that's a lot of IFs! - Apologies if I left any IFs out - Then perhaps the Argentina's claims are as certain as Argentina would like?
The lady doth protest to much, methinks
England will never accept the International Court of Justice because doing so will automatically recognize that there is a sovereignty dispute with Argentina.
The International Court of Justice shall immediately send the proceedings of the Committee on decolonization conflict the United Nations, which is the most appropriate body for interpreting and understanding the concepts of colonization and imperialism, its historical contexts and social processes, and has already studied and reviewed extensively and bought the arguments of both Argentina and the UK finally failed and it is a sovereignty dispute and self-determination. Just note that in the Malvinas Question General Assembly of the United Nations included this doctrine - the principle of territorial integrity by referring to the interests and NOT the wishes of the population of the islands - in its resolution 2065 (XX) 1965, later confirmed by other resolutions 1973 (3160, XXVIII) 1976 (31/49), 1982 (37 / 9), 1983 (38/12), 1984 (39 / 6), 1985 (40/21) 1986 (41/40), 1987 (42/19) and 1988 (43/25). They all declare the existence of a sovereignty dispute and reaffirm resolution 2065 (XX) Parties (Argentina and the United Kingdom).
In addition, every year, the Committee of the United Nations decolonization finds a resolution applying the criteria of Resolution 2065 of 1965 and it clearly states that sovereignty dispute. NO self-determination
The International Court of Justice is based on their judgments of the Decolonization Committee of the UN. Remember that the international court of justice and decolonization committee United Nations is supranational. Both have a lot of international prestige and complement each other.
thanks
Your problem, Raul, is that our interests and our wishes are the same thing.
We know this, the UK recognises it too. How can it be in anyone's best interests to be colonised against their wishes?
As far as I'm concerned, you can have talks tomorrow. We could all turn up, say our piece and go away again. It wouldn't get you anywhere though, would it.
You're all completely full of nonsense. I keep asking you how you plan to subdue an unwilling population and not one of you can come up with any kind of answer.
And you can keep your 'peace and harmony' speech- utter hypocrisy.
“In an ideal world, of course disputes should be settled by talking. Unfortunately the only talks of interest to Argentina are those which have only one possible outcome”. This is nothing but an apologetic statement of war, of colonialism, of invasion. If We are gonna wait for the world to be IDEAL to do things right we are certainly not gonna live in a better world.
And if the world is not IDEAL it is in part because of the grabbing of natural resources by neo-colonialism.
Who can believe that Brazil, Uruguay and Paraguay are acting under pressure? I see COOPERATION there, for a common cause, and under real convictions.
Who can believe that the presence of the UK authorities at the Malvinas is because of protection? This is colonialism, and not even a modern one. This makes me laugh.
Argentina will GO ON claiming, and doing it in a PACIFIC way, exposing serious fundaments, and this is what will go on driving mad the little group of lazy bankers and oil distributors that are making money of colonialism. They do not care about flags, they do not even care about british or argentinian. They do not even care about the pounds that common people use for exchange every day. They get gold, lands, shares at companies...
Argentina will go on claiming in a DIPLOMATIC attitude, even when conditions are not FAIR at the UN itself. All this self-determination fairy tale is like trying to hide the sun covering it with just a finger.
''This is nothing but an apologetic statement of war, of colonialism, of invasion.''
No it isn't, you ignoramus.
This is referring to the fact that your constitution has a piece in it about your 'rights' to the Falkland Islands, and therefore predetermines the outcome of any negotiations.
This is not a 'diplomatic' attitude. In fact it precludes any attempt at diplomacy. It's a bully boy tactic and it won't work.
I love point number one and the request for recongnition of wrongdoing and Briatin admitting an indefensible claim - absolutely hilarious. Sounds like some pathetic macho face-saving exercise to me.
I notice that you don't consider full independence to be one of the possible options. That really shows that you have no consideration for the rights of the Islanders whatsoever.
Just trying to provide you with a few options that might actually work, because the current track being followed by Argentina is just a road to nowhere. At the end of the day, it's all down to the Islanders' wishes and ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WILL CHANGE until you appreciate that. You really do need to think outside of the box a bit if you do want to make any progress. Any suggestions involving partial or full Argentinian sovereignty that do not include the islander's wishes will NEVER work. Full stop, end of story. If you want to carry on pissing in the wind, then fine, but why bother.
All the historical arguments are really pointless, because many of them are so vague (and I'm including both sides there) and have become distorted over time.
www.expatdailynewslatinamerica.com/2011/12/mercomess-in-montevideo-and-president.html
As you well know, that was a competely different situation. Most of the territory of Hong Kong was on a 99 year lease and is was not viable to retain the bit that wasn't leased when it expired.
And, of course, the environment was totally different. China had always been far more reasonable in recognising the legitimacy of Hong Kong compared with Argentina's attitude to the FI. Maybe Argentina should take a leaf out of their book.
Here is a You Tube addicted again.
Where did you find this name from ?
Florance Nightingale was famous English nurse's name.
No, I have no any interest for nurses.
Diplomacy is not something to solve problems that are already predetermined to be solved, it is a community to solve problems in a way a little bit more pacific and respectful for HUMAN RIGHTS than war. But I guess the UK doesn't have a long history of solving problems in a pacific way.
What should the UK expect to leave the armed position? An expression of recognition on the “self-determination” from Argentina? What would diplomacy be useful then?? That is what you would expect to start diplomacy? FUNNY! :D
So in stead of calling me ignoramus look at yourself in the mirror. The government of the “Falklands” is illegal, is disrespectful for the UN resolutions and it is not interested in discussing anything that compromises the grabbing of natural resources. This has nothing to do with protecting anything but the few families that assure the local colonial order at Malvinas.
The wishes of the islanders are the wishes of colonialism! because they are part of it.
They are as british as a londoner, so what are British doing in this side f the world if not grabbing resources??
What is this crazy idea about british islanders being something different from the ones in the North?
The UK is DISRESPECTFUL for International Cooperation, the UN every year is establishing that there has to be a dialogue. This IS being NOT DIPLOMATIC. So saying that the Argentina is not well... it is really mental. At least accept that the position os the UK is really based on weapons of war.
DIPLOMACY does not suit a warrior colonial power, even if it is in decadence.
Are you actually frothing at the mouth as you're typing? Because it sounds like it.
You don't know anything at all about Falkland Islanders, our government or our way of life, and parading that ignorance makes you look like a complete tool.
Argentina does not recognis the FIG so how can it be resposible for not discussing anything?
FIG is not illegal in any way. If it were, the UK as administering power would have something to say about it. Either way, it's none of your business.
And Falkland Islanders are not the same as 'ones in the North' and a cursory glance at the census, or the fact that some families have been here for 150 years, would tell you.
''As British as a Londoner''???? .....good grief
The position of the UK is based on defending British citizens from alien domination and subjugation. End of.
Can Argentina say the same? Not thinking of any paper mills in particular...
www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/feb/25/falklands-britains-expensive-nuisance
@ 43: Your soberb shows the level of self-esteme you have. In stead of going on and on pointing at me as a tool/fool/ignorant play fair and show facts!
The ignorant position is the british one, ignoring the argentinians, the LatinAmericans, the UN resolutions... That is IGNORANCE, to ignore what the International Community is saying.
The self-determination is like wanting to be british but not completely so that there is no official colonialism.
Colonialism is not ok. And I would like you Monty to say something about colonialism, to talk about REAL problems in this world, not about fairy tales that have nothing to do with the interests and the desires that move the governments, the societies and the world.
I would like to know what you think about the neo-imperialist rightwingers in London, about their story in the UK and their past. Because the ones in London supporting self-determination are not the ones who care for human rights/peace/diplomacy/workers/public education/etc.
Have you got any answer that doesn't go like “we are self-determinating ourselves and we do what we want”?
Argentina just claims these islands are the part of it's own ,not colony.
Colony is a term of British sub-consciousness.What a faux pas.!
That's a lot of IF's, and they all happen to be substantiated with the facts. No empty claims here. The lady doth protest indeed - and hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.
@Monty your rights and interests are one thing, but your right to determine your political future does not grant you the right to distort your political PAST. That is what this is about. The international right to self-determination is equally valid to you whether you are a dependent territory of Britain or Argentina; it makes no difference, you have that right to self-determination either way. If you read the constitution closely it clearly states that recuperation is limited in scope, namely, that it must be done in a way that complies with international law - and self-determination is one such right. The constitution also provides for any territory seeking independence from Argentina to exercise that right. We do not seek to quash islanders' rights to determine their own future - we only seek to redress the wrongs done to us in the past.
@32 of course I consider full independence (from Argentina) as an option. I think it would be a step forward and something I would actually welcome - kills 2 birds with one stone.
i see a picture beneath of yours which says “” the true story from titanic”
written by S.Millar...describes you ??
THEN
i do want to write a true story from History
-- 1776/ British expelled from the region
-- 1806/ British attack on to invade La Plata
--1807/ British are expelled from this region again
--1811-15/ Spaniards withdrawn from the region
-- 1831 / British uses US warship to destroy the islands
--1833 / British invade the islands the revenge of 1806/07 .
47- Redressing wrongs in the past (whether real, percived or imagined) is a very 2 edged sword, look @ argentinian history since 1833.
you didn't like the History Science ?
THEN
i advice to you the Economy Science ....!!
We are yet to see the full picture of the “Economy Science”, but so far so good and still a long way to go.
The UK attempted to take Argentina to the ICJ over the Antarctic territories, South Georgia etc, but Argentina refused to recognise the jurisdiction of the ICJ.
Argentina's record at accepting the decisions of arbitration is not good.
Neither the UN, nor its sub-sub-Committee, the C24 ,has any authority to resolve matters of sovereignty.
Argentina will not go to arbitration, and the UN cannot assist. Argentina has nowhere to go.
come the new year it will re-start all over again,
and the falklands are still british.
Ms Cheek
If only you could hear yourselves. YOU COLONIZED a third of the planet. You have no rights over anywhere, you own noyhing. Even the unfortunate countries stuck to you i.e Scotland and Wales dont want to be part of your (once upon a time) empire anymore. GET OVER YOURSELVES and keep your nose out of everybody else's business. As individual's im sure some of you are fine but as a collective nation, your despised around the world!
#59 - don't exaggerate, we only colonosied 25% of the planet. We left 75% alone, but hey .... there's still time :-)
You are having a tantrum crying crocodile tears with faux rage about hundreds of years of history, where many European empires acted in the same or worse ways, not least the Spanish and Portuguese Empires and then you use your own stereotype to confirm your rage. Get over yourself Marcos and be nice - it is Christmas. Try some goodwill for once in your life. You could even try forgiving your enemies but perhaps that is all too Christian for you?
@47: From what you say it sounds that CFK has a win-win situation in making Argentina's claim at the UN International Court of Justice. If Great Britain refuses then Argentina wins the moral authority in terms of attempting to settle the dispute but if Great Britain agrees then Argentina wins the case anyway.
Sounds like win-win for Argentina to me. I can't see the downside. And all this achieved within international law and without political and economic persecution of the innocent Falkland Islanders
It's almost as if the people who wrote the UN Treaty knew what they were doing. Amazing.
Just a thought. And here's another one: feliz Natal to one and all
I can quite clearly see the major down side. When the case goes to court and sides with the islanders(The ICJ is not going to forcibly subjugate these people, it's just not going to happen. Ever.). This is why Argentina won't take it to court. It would be final - something they can't accept. So there current tactic is to just make loads of noise and hope that this will make the UK change it's mind. Which it wont. Ever.
You may well be the greatest self imposed expert in the world,
But sadly not with the truth, ?
Kiplin, you are perhaps another troll, impersonating another person,
We are not fooled, and the CIA are watching you, and your cakes.
[johnfarrel2050]
We much be weary of this indocrinaught,
, ,, he may well be a Korean indoctrinated argie student,
Just out of brainwashing school, his brain is confused with deluded thought of granular,
If you pass this human, please do not feed,
Thank you,
64 FViera sadly argentina could never be trusted, they have re-peatedly shown that they know not, how to honour and agreement,
as Elaine - says, it best be left alone .
do you read the these comments ... don't you ??
English will accept , .......as you wish / left alone ....!!
And will you except when Argentina breaks up into little pieces
absorbed into parts of Chile and brazil
no ! i don' t expect... !
BECOUSE
America ( new) continent is not Europe..
These countries almost all migration countries have melting functions
don't have seperated settled ethnical regions..
Perhaps Argentina should put differences aside,
And join with the British, and become
British Argentina, think of all the benefits,
And no baggage .
but a christmas cracker perhaps,
they have good jokes inside,
lt's been suggested before, but:-
Do we really want to inherit all their problems?
after all it would be a step backwards, would it not .
It's ironic to hear a Brazilian spouting about colonialism when they have the French colony of French Guiana 0 miles from Brazil.
never trust the french, they keep turning arround .
We noticed your bad attitude, in 1982. We don'r care.
The Islanders' ahve the right to choose.
Nothing Argentina can do.
falklandstimeline.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/falklands-history.pdf
you look apon it as a british colony
but you would like it as an argentina colony,
hypercrite to the last .
The argentines are white europeans who invaded south america to steal the land and resources of the brown indigenous native americans.
And they won't be allowed to steal the land and resources of the Falkland Islanders.
It has always been a wonder to me that the Falkland Islands if they are so British and within Britain's sphere of interest should not long ago have been incorporated into the county of Hampshire.
One final point on this matter of proximity. The people of the Falklands should they have no say in any negotiations. They are not full British citizens, they are mere colonists. In the 19th century, Britain conceded the point to Germany, when returning the island of Heligoland to the Germans, that the proximity of the island to Germany was such that conflict was eventually bound to arise between Britain and Germany over the island. The same argument applies to the Falklands, and the Heligoland solution is the best for the majority of people involved in this long drawn out conflict of interests.
Unfortunately it is now the wealth of the islands which endear them to the British Government, not the inhabitants.
The Falkland Islanders have the UN right if self determination and “by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development” and they freely choose to retain the links with the UK as is their right.
Proximity, island of Trinadad is 6 miles from the coast Venezuela, but its not part of venezuela or south america, its the carribean. The issue is not goegraphy or geology it is geopolitical.
The Falkland islands are not 'so British'; we're just not Argentine. We don't have the same language or culture and we just don't want you, sorry.
We are full British citizens.
What is a 'mere colonist' anyway? Eeew, more slightly sicky racist rhetoric from the Argentine camp. Merry Christmas to you too.
Get lost, silly malvinista. Sort out your own mess before trying to tell other people what to do.
ldiota. You just want our resources & can't get over your DEFEAT in 1982.♥
thats if any argies even know where it is .lol
There is not the shadow of a doubt of everything you say!
God save the Falklands from Argentinian nazi-fascism.
Philippe
MORE: www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/nov/14/falklands-economic-crisis-politics-argentina
You posted an old anti-Falklands article by a left wing anti British writer in a left wing anti British newspaper.
Be aware that minority opposing views are allowed in a democracy like the UK.
But if you read the comments - you will find that even the left wing anti British Guardian readers totally support the Falkland Islanders and their UN right of self determination.
Own goal!
Having this chat in a pub somewhere would be much more fun
New Year's Resolutions.
1)Try not to swear at stupid malvinistas.
2)Ooops, don't call them stupid, even though they are extremely stupid.
3)Tell them again & again,
THERE WILL BE NO NEGOTIATIONS ON SOVEREIGNTY.
Happy New Year, All♥♥♥♥
alas your silly blogg gets deleted,
wolf in sheeps cloathing, springs to mind.
baa.
You could not persuade us in 1982 what makes you think you can change our wish now.
And wishes the British to consider an apology,
They now admit it was all lies, Argentina want no trouble,
Her bloggers are dreaming again,
Rack it up
.
But are not South Americans,
No more than South Africa or NZ or Australia are.
I think you will find this correct,
No doubt I will be corrected if im wrong.
.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!