MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Hague warns on Brexit impact for UK foreign influence, including protecting Falklands
Brexit will “undoubtedly” harm the UK’s ability to work with other EU countries on foreign issues and its influence in the world, warns former Conservative foreign affairs minister William Hague, including protection of the Falkland Islands, and ensuring solidarity among 28 countries. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesEuropean countries were no help in 1965 - and that year marked the peak of Argentine diplomacy. Been downhill ever since.
Jul 07th, 2017 - 09:35 am - Link - Report abuse +2Roger, that was 8 years before we even joined the EEC! The point is they have been a lot more helpful since we joined; remember it was the EEC who forced Spain to reopen their border with Gibraltar, and the other members - especially France - gave substantial support to Britain in 1982.
Jul 07th, 2017 - 10:16 am - Link - Report abuse -3I understand that most people who voted for Brexit did so for domestic reasons, but that doesn't mean you can ignore the foreign policy implications now it has happened.
Spain reopened its border with Gibraltar? Sometimes it is hard to tell.
Jul 07th, 2017 - 12:08 pm - Link - Report abuse +4My point is simple enough. The lack of support in 1965 made no difference to the situation and the Falklands remain British. Any future lack of support at the UN is doomed to fail in a similar manner. Neither the UN nor the EU are relevant to Britain's sovereignty of the Falkland Islands.
Taking into account the clear threat of Islamic fundamentalism, that is regularly hitting the capitals of European nations, against the individual rights and freedom that are part of the Western way of life, it is strange to see that some people still consider the FI and Gibraltar issues “a threat” against the United Kingdom.
Jul 07th, 2017 - 12:20 pm - Link - Report abuse -5It would be better to start identifying who the true enemies of freedom and the Western way of life are.
Argentina, Spain and the United Kingdom should work together in defense of individual rights and freedoms that are a fundamental part of our Western lifestyles.
Clearly, the dispute between Gibraltar and FI is a “child's play” comparing the Islamist threat. The true threats must be clearly identified by those involved in these “small” and insignificant conflicts.
Pgerman
Jul 07th, 2017 - 12:47 pm - Link - Report abuse +3I'm not entirely sure what you mean by the 'clear threat of Islamic fundamentalism'.
It seems to me, as someone who spent the whole of his early years under terrorist threat that most of the 'terrorists' in European capitals are 'lone wolves' or 'lone wolf packs', often claimed as 'their soldiers' by ISIS but are patently not so. What we have are (mostly) converts to Islam and as we all know it’s converts who are the most adamant whether it be simple things like the smoker who no longer indulges or recent converts to Veganism.
I suspect that there is far more danger to ‘western liberalism’ from the hysterical reactions to ‘terrorist attacks’ from the media and particularly social media.
Of course, one of the dangers of ‘terrorists under the bed’ is it gives the forces of repression (if they really exist) the opportunity to arm police, put soldiers on the street, increase surveillance (camera and electronic) etc Anybody with half a brain cell knows full well that no matter how many armed police, soldiers, traffic wardens you put on the streets the terrorists will get through. I think it was Gerry Adams or one of his orcs who said something like “the security forces have to be lucky all the time but the terrorist only has to be lucky once”.
A passing thought; last year 15,000 Americans were killed in gun crime incidents and another 15,000 died as a result of gun related suicides and accidents – maybe that is the ‘real’ terrorism…
Finally a quote from the great American reporter Ed Murrow:-
“No one can terrorize a whole nation, unless we are all his accomplices”
Kind regards
@Roger Lorton
Jul 07th, 2017 - 01:44 pm - Link - Report abuse -3The 12,000 workers who currently cross from Spain to Gibraltar would beg to differ. You may think the EU did not do enough for Gibraltar, but soon we'll find out how much worse things are when it is acting against them.
For all you know, if we had had more support in 1965 we might be in a better situation today. Sure the Falklands are still British, but maybe they would have those extra flights they're wanting, and be cooperating with Argentina on fishing data. Maybe 900 people would not have died fighting over them.
And how would the Falklands war have gone if France had agreed to sell a bunch more Exocets to Argentina? Sometimes that support does make all the difference.
@Darragh
I totally agree. Often the (over) reactions to the terrorist threats are worse than the threats themselves. The government should take all sensible precautions but not use it as an excuse for repressive measures.
I see the economic problems in Europe and America as a bigger threat than Islamic extremists. When people watch their lives getting worse and don't feel they have any chance to better themselves, they start searching for answers, any answer, and there are always people willing to offer one, whether it's Chávez or Putin or Erdoğan.
Nonsense -- Britain leaving the EU should have no effect on relations with individual European states, unless they choose to distance themselves from the UK. Nor should Britain take part in EU military and security agreements -- this is what NATO is for. The EU intends to replace NATO, and by incrementally assuming the powers of the various national governments (many of which it has already taken), become the government of Europe. This is a dangerous organization, and the UK is right to leave before it becomes nothing more than an administrative division of the EU. Hague is a fool for wanting to remain attached to this organization, and give up British sovereignty to bureaucrats in Brussels.
Jul 07th, 2017 - 01:49 pm - Link - Report abuse +4Bisley, you are claiming in the same comment that the EU is a dangerous organisation that has already assumed many of the powers of the various national governments, and that leaving the EU should have no effect on Britain's relations with individual member states. I'm sure anyone reading can see the contradiction there.
Jul 07th, 2017 - 02:27 pm - Link - Report abuse -5If you are right that the EU intends to replace NATO - and I can't exactly blame them given the current unreliability of the biggest NATO partner - what we will end up with is a united European army which Britain is not part of and has no control over. Does anyone really think that's a positive outcome for us?
I don't support Hague but he's no fool to want us to keep our influence in this area.
I doubt that French support in 1982 had much to do with the EU and it has long been rumoured that French engineers continued to assist Argentina throughout that period. There's a lot of nonsense talked regarding French help. You'll be telling me that they gave us the 'codes' for the missiles next.
Jul 07th, 2017 - 03:12 pm - Link - Report abuse +7In reality the only assistance that the EU gave was in the application of sanctions against Argentina and reluctantly at that. The whining by both Ireland and Italy was appalling for supposed allies. Ireland was also a major pain in the rear at the UN in 1982, constantly threatening British diplomacy there.
If you think we won in 1982 because of the EU then you seriously need to think again.
I have it all here - https://falklandstimeline.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/11-1982.pdf (search on Ireland for example)
More support in '65 wouldn't have had any effect on the current flights arrangements and it's just a little barmy to suggest that it would.
Some of us are looking forward to exiting the EU, assuming it happens and fully recognising that there will always be implications for the future. There will be effects on all the BOT's too, not just Gibraltar and the Falklands but they were all British before we joined the Common Market and I have no doubt that they'll remain British long after.
Here's to Brexit
@RL
Jul 07th, 2017 - 04:45 pm - Link - Report abuse -6“You'll be telling me that they gave us the 'codes' for the missiles next.”
No. But as I said they could have sold Argentine more Exocets, which in the best case would have meant more British soldiers and sailors being killed, and in the worst case us losing the war.
And the fact those countries supported us reluctantly shows they only did so because of the EU. If we hadn't been members they may well have aided Argentina instead. Most likely it wouldn't have made any difference to the eventual outcome but you never know what will be the deciding factor. And these days we have little enough support from the rest of the world.
You don't think that if we had had more support at the UN, they might have given self determination a higher priority than they did? Argentina surely wouldn't have accepted it, but if they didn't think other countries would recognise their possession of the Falklands the Junta might never have invaded.
“Some of us are looking forward to exiting the EU, assuming it happens and fully recognising that there will always be implications for the future.”
I have seen more people who are in denial about the implications for the future. You seem unwilling to admit there could be downsides to losing the automatic support of 27 other countries, even if Brexit gives us other advantages.
I don't believe that we've ever had 'automatic' support from the EU countries. It was always qualified. It was certainly qualified in 1982. Today isn't any different. Sovereignty of the Falklands does not rest with either the UN nor the EU. We are quite capable of ignoring both.
Jul 07th, 2017 - 06:16 pm - Link - Report abuse +4Of course there will be downsides, as there will be upsides. How many, and what will have to be seen. Exciting, isn't it? :-)
Lord Ton
Jul 07th, 2017 - 06:38 pm - Link - Report abuse -3........“Some of us are looking forward to exiting the EU”
From Thailand...
Lord save us from Ex-pats...
Ex Pats?
Jul 07th, 2017 - 08:14 pm - Link - Report abuse +2I'm in London
Yeah, I'm sure it's very exciting to watch it all happen from half a world away. Thanks a lot.
Jul 07th, 2017 - 08:17 pm - Link - Report abuse -7Come off it Roger...we all know you retired to Thailand...
Jul 07th, 2017 - 10:18 pm - Link - Report abuse -3You must be just visiting the UK...
I think it's laudable how you fight the British cause...from Thailand...
...not...
England will return the Malvinas within 25 years.
Jul 08th, 2017 - 12:21 am - Link - Report abuse -7DT
Jul 08th, 2017 - 03:34 am - Link - Report abuse +3“... what we will end up with is a united European army which Britain is not part of and has no control over.”
A European army ruled by Brussels
with Euro priorities.
Not a British army anymore, and no influence over their own sovereignty.
Voice
Jul 08th, 2017 - 05:38 am - Link - Report abuse +6What you think is based upon assumption, and what you know is very little. I only have a visitors visa to Thailand and the Thai authorities do not consider me to be a resident. The British authorities consider that my domicile is in the UK.
But what has my location at any point in time got to do with me fighting the British cause? Am I any the less British?
Not according to my passport.
is that the same way you write your Falklands history Roger...?
Jul 08th, 2017 - 07:50 am - Link - Report abuse -4Twisting the truth...
YOU LIVE IN THAILAND!!!....and have a damn cheek singing the praises of Brexit whilst living in another country...
Is that so difficult to grasp...?
This is the very reason the Scottish Inderef was for the RESIDENTS of Scotland and not for Scottish Ex-pats...
Why should you have the opportunity to effect the future of a country you no longer wish to live in...?
Anybody who lives anywhere has a right to VOICE an opinion on anything. As for truth twisting - pot, kettle, black...? Sucking up to hostile powers who wish your country ill is far worse.
Jul 08th, 2017 - 09:02 am - Link - Report abuse +6Light bulb was always a disaster area.
@Kanye
Jul 08th, 2017 - 11:08 am - Link - Report abuse -4If there is going to be a European army anyway then I would prefer Britain to be part of it. Same as I may not like the way the EU currently works, but since it does exist I think we were better off inside it.
@Roger Lorton
Living in Thailand on a tourist visa? Tut tut.
Do you pay taxes in Britain?
@The Voice
Sure they do, and we have the right to take a dim view of it, same as people do of Enrique Massot cheering on the Kirchners while living safely in Canada.
The Falklands will loose EU funding but I was not aware that the defence of the Falklands is currently shared with or depend on the resources of any EU countries.
Jul 08th, 2017 - 01:45 pm - Link - Report abuse +6Hague's another politician after a cushy overpaid EU non job.
DT how about sucking up to various folk especially those who wish Britain ill? You seems to be experienced at that...and denigrating your country quite often too. Hypocrites united...
Jul 08th, 2017 - 02:05 pm - Link - Report abuse +2Sucking up to who?
Jul 08th, 2017 - 03:29 pm - Link - Report abuse -7And it's called honesty, TV. I defend Britain when it's warranted but I'm not going to start whitewashing history in the name of patriotism. There's nothing hypocritical about that.
Simple facts obviously elude you Voice. I am British. I carry a British passport and my official domicile is the UK. That I currently spend time in another country is of no consequence and I am fully entitled to my views on Brexit; and, indeed, Scottish independence (annexed in 1707).
Jul 08th, 2017 - 04:10 pm - Link - Report abuse +5In other words, stick it where the sun don't shine................ :-)
Heh, I see posters here are not big fans of honesty.
Jul 08th, 2017 - 07:11 pm - Link - Report abuse -2Do you pay UK taxes, Roger?
Missed your question before, so thank you for posting and giving me an opportunity to respond.
Jul 08th, 2017 - 08:25 pm - Link - Report abuse +4Yes, Demon Tree, I pay UK taxes. Wouldn't have it any other way
:-)
Then I think you do have a right to comment.
Jul 08th, 2017 - 08:43 pm - Link - Report abuse -4You're still wrong, though. ;)
DT,
Jul 08th, 2017 - 08:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Once again,
“A European army ruled by Brussels
with Euro priorities.
Not a British army anymore, and no influence over their own sovereignty.”
Britain's borders, sovereignty, overseas holdings and interests, will all take a back seat to the priorities of a jealous or disinterested EU.
What will happen to the smaller Commonwealth nations, BOT's, Falklands, Gibraltar?
But I'm sure you realise that, as do your like-minded chums.
It would be a European army in which Britain and France were the largest spenders and therefore would have the biggest say. If it was a replacement for NATO it would probably function like NATO, each country would still have their own armed forces but there would be a lot more cooperation and inter-reliance.
Jul 08th, 2017 - 09:06 pm - Link - Report abuse -4And Britain is far from being the only country in Europe with Overseas Territories, the others would certainly see the utility in protecting Britain's as a guarantee their own would receive similar protection.
As for Gibraltar, it's far fetched anyway as Spain aren't crazy enough to use force. But if Spain and the UK were both members then Spain would be equally as unable to invade as the UK was to defend it. With the UK out it becomes EU army vs UK; how is that preferable?
What 'like-minded chums' are you referring to? I seriously doubt that anyone on here agrees with me on this.
Naive or just thick? Thank goodness people with views like this are an insignificant minority. Neville Chamberlain springs to mind...
Jul 08th, 2017 - 09:14 pm - Link - Report abuse +3Yeah The Voice, if you're not smart enough to think of any counter arguments, you can always attack the messenger...
Jul 08th, 2017 - 09:34 pm - Link - Report abuse -5I think it's common sense to want to be part of a EU army especially when the UK has probably been at war with every member of it at some point...
Jul 08th, 2017 - 10:24 pm - Link - Report abuse -4All your enemies in one army and...on your tod...let me think about that for a minute...
DT
Jul 09th, 2017 - 12:33 am - Link - Report abuse +2“It would be a European army in which Britain and France were the largest spenders and therefore would have the biggest say. If it was a replacement for NATO it would probably function like NATO, each country would still have their own armed forces but there would be a lot more cooperation and inter-reliance.”
Well, as long as we have your assurances on that, I suppose it's ok then.
BTW,
Your likeminded chum “voice”, seems to be in full agreement with you.
Big surprise.
Roger Lorton,
Jul 09th, 2017 - 03:46 am - Link - Report abuse +2It seems that both “voice” and “Demon Tree” are curiously aligned, castigating you for being 'not British'. They both seem to insist you are not a resident, or for some other reason, taxes or whatever, you are not 'qualified' to disagree with them about Brexit, nor entitled to offer an opinion.
It's becoming very apparent that the once very confrontational and prolific “voice”, has given way to the equally prolific and exclusively entitled mouthpiece, “Demon Tree”.
Curious, what?
Funny, that seem to turn up at the same time much more frequently now...
DT smart enough never to have to work in a call centre and to have visited 45 countries ... Arguing with naive snowflakes is a waste of effort because they simply cannot understand, why even bother?
Jul 09th, 2017 - 10:53 am - Link - Report abuse +1@Kanye
Jul 09th, 2017 - 03:51 pm - Link - Report abuse +1“Your likeminded chum “voice”, seems to be in full agreement with you.”
So that's what you were getting at. And you seriously hauled out your sockpuppet Troy to suggest that I am Voice? Does the hypocrisy not bother you at all?
As for saying someone is not qualified to comment when they live in a different country, how about these?
“Ideology before people, right Mr. Massot?
Easy, when you don't live there.”
“Waiting for the next Pearl of Wisdom from the economic refugee at the Lazy K Ranch, in Canada.”
“It must be heartening to comfortably watch the noble Noquis on your big screen somewhere in Canada”
Not much difference between that last one and this, is there, Kanye?
“Yeah, I'm sure it's very exciting to watch it all happen from half a world away.”
Funny how there was no outrage when you said those things to Enrique, eh?
And finally, your arguments against Britain being in the EU army are as feeble as The Voice's. No doubt you both dislike the idea on an emotional level, and you haven't tried to think it through in order to work out what is really best for Britain. If you did that you might still come to the same conclusion, but you'd be able to explain why it's a bad idea instead of resorting to insults and bluster.
Silly old Canuck Troy Tempest is the second person to use the term “prolific” in reference to “voice” in the last few days...
Jul 09th, 2017 - 04:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0...now who else was it?
I remember....
Silly old Canuck Kanye...
http://en.mercopress.com/2017/06/24/un-c24-calls-for-negotiations-over-falkland-islands-sovereignty-between-argentina-uk-yet-again/comments#comment469500
Oh dear... ;-)))
Mr. Lorton...
Jul 09th, 2017 - 08:28 pm - Link - Report abuse -1You say...:
《“My official domicile is the UK. That I currently spend time in another country is of no consequence ”》
And further...:
《”Yes, Demon Tree, I pay UK taxes. Wouldn't have it any other way :-) ”》
I say...:
Smart little cookie you are..., Mr. LORTON... I can see why you are smiling... ;-)
By keeping your UK address..., you keep that expensivo NHS coverage...
By keeping your UK address..., you avoid that expensivo State Pension Freeze for Ex-Pats...
By keeping your UK address..., you keep the front door open for your sweet extended Thai family...
By keeping your UK address..., you lose nothing 'cause you had to pay UK taxes on your State Pesion anyway...
”Wouldn't have it any other way :-)” You say...
I reckon...
Chuckle, chuckle...
Suggesting a military alliance with less trustworthy EU countries in preference to our NATO alliance with the US and Canada is the product of a feeble mind.
Jul 09th, 2017 - 08:55 pm - Link - Report abuse +1@The Voice
Jul 09th, 2017 - 09:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Better, although you could stand to leave out the 'feeble mind' part.
Why would it have to be in preference to Nato? Countries can be in more than one military alliance. For example, the US is also part of the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance and ANZUS, and has defence treaties with Japan and a bunch of other countries. The UK signed a defence and security cooperation treaty with France in 2010, despite both being Nato members.
Considering the not-at-all-trustworthy attitude of the current US President towards Nato, having an EU alliance as a backup seems like a pretty good idea.
Trump is a temporary phenomenon. Most of Europe are part of NATO anyway as is Canada. This alliance has served us well but as Trump has pointed out some notable countries aren't doing their bit. With 7 million troops a substantial part of which are located outside Europe it's a formidable defence force where any attack on one will be resisted by all, a great deterrent.
Jul 10th, 2017 - 06:49 am - Link - Report abuse +2Personally I do not trust our European neighbours totally. An EU army is part of their strategy for a united Europe and we have all seen that that concept doesn't work. Our security depends mainly on our English speaking cousins, a concept no doubt alien to Europhiles. The leaders of our Armed Forces think the same way and I trust their judgement. They know better than anyone who our steadfast friends and dependable allies are.
@The Voice
Jul 10th, 2017 - 05:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Trump is a temporary phenomenon.”
I sincerely hope you are correct. Even so, he is going to be in power for the next 3.5 years. That can't be ignored.
It's true there is a big overlap between EU countries and Nato members, which is why I find it surprising that people are so opposed to a military alliance of the later. Having partners outside Europe is a double edged sword; it means help is available from outside, but the US (and Canada) are not directly threatened and COULD choose to sit out a war if it suited them. This is not true for most of the European countries as they would be directly at risk themselves. Also the US's humongous military budget allows the other countries to act as free riders, I think this would be less of a problem in an EU force.
When you say you don't trust our neighbours, is it because you think they are pushing for a 'United States of Europe', or you think they'd refuse to give the military help they promised, or because you think they wouldn't put in the funding they agreed?
As for the Anglosphere, I think it depends on circumstances and who is in charge. For example, Reagan gave Thatcher significant help in the Falklands war, but if it had happened last year do you believe Obama would have done the same?
But I would take the opinions of our armed forces more seriously, can you tell me where you read that?
Blast...!
Jul 10th, 2017 - 06:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The magnificent Engrish press has ruined the devious Argentinean cunning plan...
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/826396/falklands-secret-plan-argentina-flag-spark-chaos
So is this totally made up or are your military really that stupid?
Jul 10th, 2017 - 06:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Also didn't someone already post it yesterday?
If it is in the Mail... it must be truth...
Jul 10th, 2017 - 07:02 pm - Link - Report abuse -2http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4679614/Argentinian-generals-plant-flag-Falklands.html
Engrish brainwash..., anybody...?
Chuckle..., chuckle...
Oh, well, if it's in the Daily Mail...!
Jul 10th, 2017 - 08:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Here, Stoker beat you to it: http://en.mercopress.com/2017/07/08/macri-may-meeting-in-hamburg-suspended-rescheduling-under-consideration/comments#comment469985
Apparently Clyde15 doesn't think it's too feasible either. But to be fair, Argentines have pulled some pretty stupid stunts in the past.
Doh! You obviously haven't noticed that North America has massive Oceans both sides of it! Strategically a good position to be in and an ideal ally to have.
Jul 11th, 2017 - 08:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0Are you trolling? That just confirms what I said. They are good allies because they are in no danger themselves from a war in Europe, and they are also bad allies because they are in no danger themselves.
Jul 11th, 2017 - 10:13 am - Link - Report abuse 0Why do you think the US was late to both world wars? They didn't join in either until they were directly threatened.
Shouldn't you be answering those calls? Business slow today? And they are good allies as they proved in the past and they didn't join the Waffen SS and try to resist the invasion either...
Jul 11th, 2017 - 01:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What on earth are you on about now?
Jul 11th, 2017 - 01:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Without the internet you are stuffed aren't you?
Jul 12th, 2017 - 02:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No, I just don't feel like playing guessing games because you decided to be needlessly cryptic. If you want me to reply to your point then you can spell it out.
Jul 12th, 2017 - 10:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I told you why I think the US is both a good and bad ally and you haven't addressed that at all. Before WWII the USA was very isolationist, hence it refused to get involved until it was attacked by Japan. Afterwards it took on it's current 'World Police' interventionist role. However I think you will agree recent interventions have not gone well, and isolationism is becoming more popular again among ordinary Americans.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!