MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency

Uruguayan concern with Argentine interception of vessels bound for the Falklands

Former Foreign Minister Guido Di Tella: the original key to the River Plate belongs to Argentina, Uruguay has a copy

Uruguay’s leading newspaper dedicated its Sunday’s editorial to the recent incident when the Argentine Navy, in shared Uruguayan-Argentine waters, forced a small merchant vessel linked to the Falklands/Malvinas Islands to identify itself and provide all the information related to cargo and destination.

“It must be most uncomfortable for a merchant vessel or its maritime agent, that a Navy ship from a country appears and matches at close distance and begins asking for identification, details of the cargo, destination and many other things. This is what happened in shared Uruguayan-Argentine waters” and seems a new ingredient to the conflict situation (with Argentina) initiated in 2006 says the editorial from El País, under the heading of “Another stone in the path”.

The comment refers to 2006, considered the starting year of the Uruguayan/Argentine conflict over the pulp mill built on the Uruguayan side of a shared river (apparently en route to a solution), and to the latest chapter of the stormy relations between the two neighbouring countries: the interception and questioning, --only a few miles away-- by the Argentine Navy of vessels leaving the port of Montevideo and heading south, “particularly Port Stanley and the Malvinas or vice-versa”.

“The case of the small container vessel ‘Anja’ intercepted close to the Banco Inglés was what triggered repercussions in the Uruguayan parliament, although apparently there have been other similar situations”, says the editorial.

The origin is Argentine Decree 256, drafted with the purpose of increasing control over vessels heading south because British companies have begun oil exploration in Falklands/Malvinas waters, where apparently there are huge deposits of hydrocarbons. (‘Hearsay is 60 billion barrels and to assess the significance of those reserves, the UK has 3.6 billion barrels and Argentina 2.6 billion’), says the editorial.

El Pais then complains that not much is known about the Argentine proposal to solve the pulp mill conflict and the joint monitoring of the river Uruguay to ensure any possible contamination can be prevented or comes under control, “be it not for the very obvious mocking remarks from the Argentine Foreign Affairs minister who said science will play a crucial role” in that task.

The editorial insists that the Uruguayan government should inform the opposition of the Argentina proposal for the joint monitoring of the river Uruguay so as to ensure the defence of Uruguayan sovereignty, interests and rejection of any foreign interventions, plus equally important showing a solid, united front in the issue.

Nevertheless El Pais points out that the Argentine pickets blocking since 2006 the international bridge linking the neighbouring countries have been lifted and transit is absolutely normal and hopefully so are prospects, even when the conflict has not yet been solved. Pickets were sponsored by the Kirchner administration to protest the construction of the Uruguayan pulp mill across the river.

Therefore when there’s light at the end of the tunnel, concerns are born out of a situation which in normal circumstances would be minor but given the current background can become “another irritating chapter, as is the interception of vessels leaving Montevideo by the Argentine Navy, and must be addressed strongly”.

Finally El Pais refers to a quote from former Argentine Foreign Affairs minister Guido Di Tella, ‘a gentleman and a good friend of Uruguay’ which helps to understand the Argentine attitude towards the River Plate Statute and the Limits Treaty, promoted back in 1973 by then ailing President Juan Domingo Peron and ‘his understanding of a country’s sovereignty’ which has nothing to do with the current paternalistic attitude of the neo-Peronist Kirchner governments.

According to Di Tella “Uruguay has a copy of the key to the River Plate and the original key belongs to Argentina”, and this was said by a gentleman and a great friend of Uruguay. Therefore these (Argentine Navy) inspections are of great concern, besides being potentially harmful for the economy of Uruguay.

For the copy to have the same force as the original key, “Uruguay must be present in the zone, with its Navy and naval aviations. We’re not talking about showing the flag: the concept of sovereignty as we understand it is not picking a fight with someone, but rather all efforts directed to preserve those resources which belong to us, And that is what we must defend”, concludes the editorial.