MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, November 19th 2018 - 14:37 UTC

For the Falklands in 1982 the only opinion that mattered was that of PM Thatcher

Sunday, January 22nd 2017 - 08:06 UTC
Full article 92 comments
“The only opinion that mattered was that of PM Thatcher and the only people who “underestimated” HM Forces were the Argentine Junta and, seemingly, the CIA”. “The only opinion that mattered was that of PM Thatcher and the only people who “underestimated” HM Forces were the Argentine Junta and, seemingly, the CIA”.
MLA Dr. Elsby said “the idea that Islanders would give up their homes and way of life for money simply shows how little people understood the Islanders” MLA Dr. Elsby said “the idea that Islanders would give up their homes and way of life for money simply shows how little people understood the Islanders”

For the Falkland Islanders the only opinion that mattered was that of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and believing that Islanders would give up their homes and way of life for money, shows how little people understood the Falklands.

 The comments belong to lawmaker Dr. Barry Elsby, the elected Falklands legislative assembly spokesperson, in reply to the recently released documents indicating that following the Argentine military invasion of the Falklands, the CIA favored handing the Islands to the Argentines, and Islanders seemingly would agree to move to Scotland if offered US$ 100.000 each.

“The recent articles in the UK press regarding suggestions the CIA might have had in response to the Argentinian invasion of our country in 1982 are now, of course, academic”, pointed out MLA Dr. Elsby.

Furthermore it was reported the CIA thought the British Government had “underestimated” the Argentinian military capabilities and were unlikely to win a war 8,000 miles from home. The CIA also thought Islanders would agree to move to Scotland if offered US$ 100,000 per person.

However none of this happened, rather the contrary, the Falklands have experienced a spectacular development since 1982, and the defeat of the military helpéd Argentina return to the democratic and institutional path.

“I am sure there were many opinions on all sides at that time as to what might happen but the only opinion that mattered was that of Prime Minister Thatcher and the only people who “underestimated” Her Majesty’s Forces were the Argentine Junta and, seemingly, the CIA”.

Likewise “the idea that Islanders would give up their homes and way of life for money simply shows how little people understood the Islanders at that time”.

MLA Dr. Elsby added that due to the war in `82 and development since then, “the world now sees the Falklands as we really are, a modern democratic country, self-financing and self-governing in all matters apart from defence.

”A situation most acceptable to Islanders as shown by 99.8% support in our Referendum in March 2013.

For more information on the Referendum, please click on the following link: http://www.falklands.gov.fk/results-of-the-referendum-on-the-political-status-of-the-falkland-islands/ , concluded MLA Dr. Elsby.

Top Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • downunder

    “However none of this happened, rather the contrary, the Falklands have experienced a spectacular development since 1982, and the defeat of the military helpéd Argentina return to the democratic and institutional path.”

    Ironically Argentina benefited from the Falkland’s war insofar as its humiliating defeat prompted the people of Argentina to rise up and get rid of the military junta paving the way for a democratic government.

    It’s a pity Argentina doesn’t show a bit of gratitude towards Britain and the Falkland Islander’s for facilitating this transition.

    Jan 22nd, 2017 - 10:17 am +10
  • Brit Bob

    The American's never accepted Argentine ownership of the Falklands:

    In 1886 the Argentine government asked the United States to apply the ‘Monroe Doctrine’ to Britain’s presence on the Falklands and were told by the US Secretary of State that, ‘the resumption of actual occupation of the Falkland Islands by Great Britain in 1833 took place under a claim of title which had been previously asserted and maintained by that government. It is not seen that the Monroe Doctrine which has been invoked on the part of the Argentine Republic, has any application to the case. By the terms in which the principle of international conduct was announced, it was expressly excluded from retroactive operation.’ ( Report of Foreign Affairs submitted to the National Congress in 1887, Buenos Aires, 1887, p193-201).

    (the Monroe Doctrine was US Foreign policy applying to Latin American countries that stated that the US would view any attempts by European powers to colonise or interfere with states in South America as aggression requiring US intervention).

    Time for Argentina to drop the mythical Malvinas claim and move on.

    Argentina's Illegitimate Sovereignty Claims: https://www.academia.edu/27599163/Argentinas_Illegitimate_Sovereignty_Claims_V2

    Jan 22nd, 2017 - 10:26 am +10
  • Marti Llazo

    Fidelito is as his usual confused best, in denying the monumental nature of the role of the Falklands war defeat in hastening the end of the Argentine military government, as if that event were a mere coincidence. Fidelito also forgets that the legitimacy of the junta was enormously bolstered by the illegal invasion and that had it produced an outcome in some way favourable to Argentina, that military government would likely have continued for some time on the coat-tails of its little military adventure.

    The game-changing impact of that ignominious defeat as the determining factor is not only taught that way in Argentine schools but reflected in the histories written in the Spanish-speaking world, and even in the more civilised nations.

    One of the better expressions of the impact of the defeat was that it was “decisive” in ending the military government. That notion of being decisive was reflected in an enormous amount of material in the argie press, including this one

    “El final del conflicto cerró el capítulo de la dictadura y fue un factor decisivo para la reinstauración de la democracia....”

    And here

    “La derrota de Malvinas fue la derrota de la dictadura, le mostró al mundo a lo que podía llegar una dictadura que ya no sabía que hacer para mantenerse en el poder....la guerra fue la jugada final de la dictadura”

    “...la derrota en la Guerra de Malvinas, fue el producto que sirvió para el derrocamiento del gobierno militar, acelerando se [sic] desgaste y llevando a Galtieri a renunciaren Julio de 1982...”

    The defeat “accelerated” the fall of the junta:

    “La derrota en la Guerra de Malvinas aceleró la caída del gobierno militar y la recuperación de las instituciones democráticas.”

    In Spain we consistently see the same recognition:

    “Malvinas: la guerra por unas islas que provocó la caída de la dictadura argentina”

    Jan 22nd, 2017 - 01:14 pm +5
Read all comments

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!