Insulza hopeful OAS assembly will reach a consensus on the Malvinas issue
OAS Secretary General Jose Miguel Insulza said he expects a consensus is reached on the Falklands/Malvinas issue next week when the Organization of American States general assembly, following the lack of agreement at the last Summit of the Americas in Colombia.
At a press conference on Wednesday in Washington Insulza said he trusted the Foreign ministers summit next June 3/5 in Cochabmaba, Bolivia can end with the consensus that could not be reached at the VI presidential summit last April.
“In Cartagena the main difference among countries was that the issue should be addressed at the Summit when it had already been discussed at the Assembly, but I can’t prejudge what the Foreign ministers are going to decide”, said Insulza.
However, he denied that the sovereignty dispute over the Falklands/Malvinas claimed by Argentina will have a greater impact than in previous OAS annual assemblies.
“The resolution is the same as approved in other general assemblies” assured Insulza who added that the agenda is “the same” as last year in El Salvador, with the difference of the debate on the reform of the Inter American Human Rights Committee.
The decision on the IAHRC reaches the assembly still open and “the assembly must take position regarding the recommendations to strengthen the committee”, which some members such as Ecuador, Venezuela and Bolivia, want to mandatory impose while others prefer “an invitation to adopt” the reforms.
Insulza recalled that the report through which OAS members approved recommendations last January “is the minimum common denominator for all” and therefore he trusts that decisions will be taken from that point and not try to expand them or reduce them.
He also said he was confident that the “language issues” which so far have impeded a consensus resolution can be overcome and is hopeful that the reform process with the subsequent evaluation by the IAHRC is closed in a year’s time.
“It will last the time that it needs to last, but one year is a reasonable timetable”.
Contrary to the Falklands/Malvinas issue the ministers won’t be able to include resolutions on another highly controversial issue: Cuba’s aspirations to attend the regional meeting since the issue does not figure in the initial agenda of the General Assembly.
Suggested Stories
-
May 17th 2013
Uruguay’s José Mujica lauds booming Brazil ties
-
May 16th 2013
Falklands’ war: Defense releases stats on deaths of military personnel
-
May 14th 2013
New WTO chief says it’s time for ‘modulating’ ambition and pushing protectionism back
-
May 13th 2013
Falklands: MPs blast Spanish MEP for comments on the Islands sovereignty
43 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.
It'll be the usual “bilateral dialogue” statement.
Britain can only observe at the OAS General Assembly in Cochabamba, so the Falkland Islands will not be represented by their own voice. Hopefully, same as at Cartagena, Canada and US will thwart any consensus against the Falklands when discussing item 9,“The Question of the Malvinas Islands” [sic].
Undoubtedly, Britain will be observing at the Cochabamba OAS General Assembly meeting and emails from commenters who wish to show solidarity for Falkland Islanders right to self-determination could email to Rachel Edis, listed as the UK Permanent Observer to the OAS, at: rachel.edis@fco.gov.uk
Reference:
Agenda item 9, “The Question of the Malvinas Islands” [sic], page 4 of Draft Agenda of Forty-First Regular Session of the General Assembly:
scm.oas.org/IDMS/Redirectpage.aspx?class=AG/CP/doc.&classNum=794&lang=e
OAS 2011 “Malvinas” [sic] resolution on page 6:
CP/RES. 1002 (1852/12):
www.oas.org/consejo/resolutions/res1002.asp
Correction: the Agenda item 9 link to OAS 2012 GA agenda is at:
scm.oas.org/IDMS/Redirectpage.aspx?class=AG/CP/doc.&classNum=796&lang=e
OAS What we do: www.oas.org/en/about/mechanisms.asp
(i) Argentina has no legal or moral right to the Falkland Islands
(ii) Argentine demands for decolonization are at odds with the principle of self-determination
Argentine claims are based solely on geographical nearness only and are therefore irrelevant.
Perhaps as I have said before,
The British should fully integrate all bots into great Britain,
As whilst all this is going on, you aint going to get anywhere .
You know these committees have zero value when they allow themselves to be continually derailed by the crazy one rather than tackling the important issues that could make a difference.
Besides these committees as ever are a bunch of countries playing you scratch my back and I will scratch yours as opposed to a serious and respectful group of countries trying to achieve a meaningful outcome.
Seems to have been self-determination path chosen, perhaps as a result of many decades of British experience with “de-colonizing” the old empire, whereas French and Spanish appear to opted for complete integration of their overseas territories, to become totally part of the continental nation (with exceptions such as New Caledonia). Probably not impossible for the Falkland Islands, if they so chose, and if Britain agrees, to go with the French “collectivité” model of full integration:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overseas_collectivity
The idea is very good and relevant in the current situation,
How much crap do you hear about the French or Spanish, and others, [nil zilch zero?]
Yes self determination is /was best, but in the current situation fully integration could and will kill of any claims,
Then just wait for say 50 odd years, and then try again,
The alternative, is the islanders asking for independence, now,, and then what will happen,
Yes the British may defend you [for now]
But as an independent nation, how simple will it be for future corrupt politicians to say, [ect ect ect sorry]
And we both know what that means, you will be fore ever looking west,
British integration at this time, would end it, and perhaps the islanders, should consider it, inherently, and consider the wider complication or the [alternative]
Just my opinion, but if I was an islander, I would call for a meeting / vote, then approach the British government . to end this once and for all, before corrupt politicians and organisations do it for them
You should always be with us ..
May 31st, 2012 - 11:22 pm
I don't think integration is the answer, that would change the Islanders' way of life too much. Think about it: they would have to pay UK taxes, come under UK mailand law, would lose their rights to existing FIG taxes, etc.
In the end I still believe that independence with an inicial agreement between UK and the FIG to continue with existing defense system would be the real answer, even if the Islanders on Mercopress are against the idea because of my country's bullying, I'm sure something of that ilk could be worked out.
Now to have an agreement that stated Argentina would remove the offending article from her constitution , and guarantees the integrity and freedom of independence, and promises never to interfere , sound great, it is probably what they all want,
The Falklands now an independent country,
Argentine now recognises this ,
And great Britain, reduces the military presents, as this would no longer seem irrelevant,
And we all go home to watch east enders ,
[Time rolls on]
What then happens if Argentina changes her mind
What if Argentina renegades on the agreement,
What if after a couple of years, [whack] argie troops thus land on the islands ,
A whole world of what if, opens up,
Now considering all the disgraceful attitude the islanders have had to put up with, the threats the intimidation and the abuse,
We ask you honestly,
Would you trust them?
Would you take independence on a promise?
If you follow history as your guide to the future We say you would not,
But of course I could well be wrong, totally wrong,
But I doubt it.
Thanks
Jun 01st, 2012 - 01:22 pm
As long as there is a British Defense force on the Islands, Argentina will not attack.
This is a fact.
We don't have the ability to achieve a landing on a defended beachhead.
So, I repeat there is no danger to the Island population as long as there is a Defense force on the Islands.
Thus, if an agreement with the British Government could be signed, independence with continued British defense for a specified period of time, perhaps 10, 20, or 30 years, would seem to be a real possibility.
The advantage of independence is that Argentina would have to forget her stupid claim and FI would become a sovereign memeber of the UN. Thus if Argentina ever did attack again, the whole world would fall on her head, not just Think's “sky”.
Anyhow that's the way I see it, but it's not my place to say anything really, it's up to the FIG and the Islanders.
Just out of interest,
Another island [British] was given independence, with the agreement that [3] countries would guarantee their independence,
And after independence was granted, and with TWO British military bases on the island, including [additional] royal navy station,
Consisting of a couple thousand British troops and navy ships,
This island was promptly invaded within 10 years of independence, and
That island is still cut in two today, and it still has two British military bases, and a navy station.
[Any ideas as to this island is]
And we are talking about after 1950s,
And still cut in half today .
.
I like the Cypriots, they have a very varied outlook on sexuality.
@24 Cyprus?
We knew you guys would get it,
As for the islanders,
There decision will be final.
Out of interest, I got this of my other blogg/sites,
BOSSANO REMINDS C24 ECUADOR SEMINAR OF SPAIN’S COLONIAL HISTORY
www.chronicle.gi/headlines_details.php?id=25058
and out of interest.
After visiting the 1897 review, Rudyard Kipling was moved to compose the poem Recessional. The Empire was at its apogee but there were intimations of decline.
Britain, a maritime nation dependent on the sea lanes, has allowed its blue-water navy to melt away. The reckoning awaits.
“False Falklands History at the United Nations: how Argentina misled the UN in 1964 and still does”: falklandshistory.org/sites/default/files/false-falklands-history.pdf
have you been using ever ready batteries again.
CYPRUS, is an independent country, and has been for decades.
Gibraltar, wishes to remain British [freely
Hawaii, is NOT a British colony, it is an American state,
Marshal islands, freely wish to remain who they are .
There is no such pigs called colonialist,
bye
Also @29 courtesey of @30 John N = falklandshistory.org/sites/default/files/false-falklands-history.pdf
as we can clearly see , they are getting more and more desperate .
And as different from the Falklands as chalk and cheese,
.
And we did give you back what was yours after 1982,
We gave you your military and equipment back, did we not ,
Sadly the islands we could not give back, as they were not yours in the first place,
.
You can take , remove destroy buy and sell everything within the landmass of argentina,
Sadly you will observe that Chile brazil and the British Falklands, are NOT argentine .
Thanks
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!