MercoPress, en Español
Get our news on your inbox! Suscribe x
Montevideo, February 29th 2024 - 18:32 UTC
The US will remain on the sidelines in the dispute between the UK and Argentina over the Falkland Islands sovereignty, said President Barack Obama on Sunday at the conclusion of the Summit of the Americas in Colombia. Read full article
It's not really surprising that a load of Hispanic and related countries are ignoring their own colonial history to criticise other countries' settlements. I guess the Spanish and Portuguese dictionaries have no word for Irony or Hypocrisy. If the Falkland's issue had support from countries outside South AMerica, with a decent human rights record and democracy, then maybe people would start thinking that their argument is supported by normal, clear thinking people, but it isn't, so they don't.
“The great majority of countries called on both sides for a peaceful resolution of the controversy”. Columbia
Yes, agree with that.
“of the lack of support for the Argentine sovereignty claim over the Malvinas”. Brazil
Yes, agree with that too.
So, rather than outrage at British colonialism (sic), it seems that most want a peaceful settlement (I.e. Argentina not to attack again) or are not that interested at all.
Looks like Queen Botox has been overplaying her hand a little.
If non democratic Cuba gets an invite to the 7th conference, how about an invite for the democratically elected FIG?
Let's face it, she's getting nowhere with this and an issue she might have hoped would define her premiership has now just looked like fiddling while Rome burns. She really has no options left on this subject. The level of support hasn't changed, the UN seems a closed door to her, the UK and the Islands won't discuss sovereignty, she's stuck.
@2 I said this before. It's a lot hypocritical of the Bolivian poison-dwarf to say 'why no cuba?', when there is apparently no FIG invite for similar reasons. I guess the Falklands are geographically, politically and culturally NOT a part of South America, meaning the Argentinian argument falls apart, again.
Santos: Blah blah blah blah blah blah cuba isn't democratic blah blah, the end
KFC: “your forgot to mention the Malvinas issue”.
Santos: Oh shut up you boring monomaniac, no one cares about you and your pathological neo-fascist expansionist doctrines
*KFC storms off home taking pills*
Thew majority called for a peacefull resolution to the dispute - yes totally agree - that is what the Islanders want , just that CFK insists there can only be one result regardless! She- and Argentina - are the problem to any peacefull solutions!
@ 1 Boovis
The EU support us and that largely comprises sensible clear thinking people. They just don't feel the need to trumpet their views on a daily basis. I could make a longer list of sensible countries that support us but I've only had one cup of coffee this morning and so am not fully up to my factual incisive best. We don't stand alone in this issue and it is only Argentina that feels the need for a dramatic production over it. The good news is that they seem to have given up on sending us mobs of belligerent thugs accompanied by tv crews but I guess that might be due to the weather having turned a bit cold for camping.
Is Obama tacitly invoking the Monroe Doctrine (1823)? I wonder.
Most Argentines believe that the Falklands/Malvinas problem will never be solved, at least during their lifetime.
@7 Invoking the Monroe Doctrine would involve telling the French, Dutch, and English in that geographic proximity based order to get their pesky fingers out of the USA-is-America pie. That's quite a election statement to make when you've just gone and made some of the major players in the EU very upset.
Obama is playing this exactly as expected. Basically it has nothing to do with the USA, especially in an election year, when voters don't want to see their president bogged down with niff-naffing triva that has nothing to do with them.
However, if the Argentinians were stupid enough to try and re-invade the islands, Obama, like Reagan before him would have to decide whose side the USA is on even if they don't give assistance overtly:
1. Their long time allies, who have the legitimate and moral claim on the islands, both historically and within the UN charter.
2. A bunch of whinning people who constantly ally with enemies (or at least not friends) of the US, who have no legal or moral claim to the islands and who owe the USA lots of money.
I'll bet that'll be a difficult decision to make. :-)
@9 It's nothing to do with anyone. It's just some nonsense-filled harridan banging on about some islands she wants.
I wouldn't be surprised if he'd have said 'you mention the islands, and this meeting is over'.
@10 - Agreed, the only people whose opinion matters is the Islanders themselves. And like I said, this stance by the US is not a surprise, at least to everyone except CFK and her cronies.
Well, I'm stunned and shocked. Who would have thought it, Obama confirms US neutrality. Didn't see that coming....................... MUCH!
So mush for Cameron beggin Obama a few weeks ago in Washington to change his neutrality to support Britain.
In the Americas 32 of the 34 countries support Argentina, 2 are neutral, not bad at all.
What catches the eye is that there is a group of Brits, who do not know anyone, as Lord ton, Deanstreet, Justin Kuntz and others, and some people say that Argentina never had rights to Falkland, where there is sufficient evidence that many British professionals and renowned foreign professionals and serious studied, researched and analyzed the files on Falklands and never have reason to Britain.
The files that exist on Falklands in France, Spain, Britain and Argentina are the same, there is nothing that is out of this world and all renowned experts have researched and have come to the conclusion that never belonged to Great Malvinas Britain. And this small group of Britons who as I said, do not know anyone, and do not know what to do to versear people and to become victims to seek support from countries that are neighbors and friends in Argentina.
The funny thing is, Argentina did more to defend the Monroe doctrine in the 1800s than the USA ever did. Heck, they allowed the French to take over their (at the time) only neighboring new world republic in Mexico and impose a European monarch on the population. That's one heck of the defense for their sphere of influence against European powers... not.
The USA were utter cowards, they did nothing during the Spanish retakings of Caracas and Mexico City after they had revolted. Did nothing with the French in Mexico, did nothing about the British in Canada. Argentina was the only one who fought all three (Spanish, English, and French), for the cause of republicanism in the Americas against Royalism and Royal tyranny.
Please can you provide the source of your 32 countries support Argentina and 2 are neutral claim. Ideally not an Argentine source but something verifiable from a neutral source.
From the information I have seen, no poll was taken, and many leaders were reluctant to discuss, let alone offer support. The Canadian position is also not one of neutrality either.
Thanks in advance.
Why would Mr C beg Mr O to support the UK, he is not supporting Argentina is he? that seems politicaly acceptable.
'Santos' forgot to mention the Malvinas issue because 'he like other South American leaders doesn't give a damn.' Perhaps he understands that it isn't an issue with anyone except Argentina. After all, it's not an issue with the UK nor the Falkland Islanders.
I would suggest that it's better to have a few friends of good standing than a mob of dubious character. Of the, say, top 20 countries in the global transparency index (top 20 meaning least corrupt), 16 support the UK on the Falklands issue and the other 4 are neutral. Of those 20, 7 are in the Commonwealth and one other is the UK itself. I could list the standings of the countries that support the Argentinian claim but I wouldn't want to embaress them in public, they do well enough by themselves. *cough*Argentina's in 100th place*cough* Having said all that, more countries globally support the UK position than the opposite, and the rest of the majority i.e. those not originally of Hispanic origin, are neutral. I really don't know where this global support network I've heard so much about is supposed to be.
@16 - USA is neutral (shouldn't be, but Obama is an idiot)
- Canada is definitely pro-self-determination
- Antigua&Barbuda most likely pro self-determination
- Dominica most likely pro self-determination
-Honduras is unclear, but after kicking Zelaya out, I wouldn't be surprised if they remain neutral.
-Jamaica very likely to be pro self-determination.
Marcos continually proves he's an idiot.
CFK is now finished as for as the British Falklands are concerned,
Forget them, and concentrate on your own country, it needs you,
Leave the Falklands alone.
I have a fancy that this has a while to rumble on yet. there will definitely be a conflict over this as the RG's get egged on by loud mouths such as morales, who will then run for the hills when the UK start dropping the bombs.
there will be another very unhappy ending for the RG's again over the islands which they have no claim to.
just how many times do they wish to be humilitated .
@23 four hundred and seventy three times.
If I remember my school history correctly, the USA (1861-1865) was involved in a bitter civil war and were not in a position to do anything. The Union and Confederates were too busy killing each other over the slavery issue and the South wanted to break away from the union.
Napoleon III was trying to get into the good books of Austria. When the war ended Napoleon III was told to removed the Foreign Legion from Mexican soil or be forcibly removed. Not wishing to fight a war thousands of kilometres from Europe he complied with the US ultimatum. The unfortunate Maximilian, brother of the Austrian emperor Frans Josef, was captured and shot by the Mexicans under Juarez in 1867.
This was certainly a case of the Monroe Doctrine being invoked.
There is a lot of information on this topic on the web.
Hillary: Please write 100 times special relationship.
#2 But its my Queen who wants a peaceful solution. Cameron's position is for no solution at all
so queen CFK has a new owner then B.K
Well, the support to CFK is falling down because is not a multilateral problem the Falklands Island sovereignity, just a bilateral issue.....Argentina vs F.I.
No others countries must intervene there....and at a table talk you can't go with an irrevocable position if not what about the talk will be ?? Flowers and birds ?? Or what was first, the egg or the hen....???? Both sides must be open to give up some to reach a consensus....that be accomplished and respected for ever, of course........not other way is available to get peace between both of them.
#28 I don't know what you mean
Do you own a house or a car?
Well I want them! Please give them to me.
no? Ok well we need to reach a consensus.
Please give me half the value of your house and car, then we can have peace forever...
Consensus is only the right solution when both parties have a just claim. The Argentines don't have a just claim, just a made up version of events from 1833 which propaganda they feed to their schoolchildren, and a ridiculous notion that island groups 300 miles from the mainland automatically belong to the nearest country (despite there being dozens of cases where that is not the case).
So, unless you are prepared to give me half your house and car, and then half of what's left to the next person who makes up a claim...etc etc, the consensus argument doesn't work.
30 Argentine_Kirchnerist (aka Think)
You are a total fucking prick.
There is an old saying “He who lives in a
glass house shouldn't throw stones”.
You live in a country governed, run and owned
by European's who took the land of the native
peoples under the force of a gun. There have
been no land redistirbution. The native people
of Argentina are amongst the poorest in the
world, acording to Amnesty International 95%
of native American's in Argentina live below
the poverty line and struggle to feed their
families, depending on aid handouts.
Your country talks about colonialism yet has
the largest number of outstanding border
disputes of any nation in the world. Many of
these with Chile, Paraguay and Uraguay have
been put on hold, under signed treaties but as
we all know too well, Argentina only complies
with a treaty while it serves her to.
Argentina claims that Britain stole the
Falklands from her in 1833, yet Britain's
claim to the Falklands dates back to 1591 when
we discovered the Falklands and became the
first nation to set foot on the Falklands, the
first nation to name the islands and the only
nation to PERMANENTLY settle the islands.The islands already beonged to us.
As if this was not enough, Argentina claims
S Georgia, the S Sandwhich islands, S
Orkney islands, S Shetland Islands and the
whole of Br Antartica! Yet Argentine does not
claim we stole these lands from her! She just
claims them anyway!
Like Argentina continues to claim the Chilian
Andes Ice Shelf and Martin Garcia Island in
Urguay which Argentina occupys as a form of
Guantanimo Bay within Uraguayan borders.
On the 30th Anniversary of a war started by a
fascist military junta, that had spend the
previous years raping, torturing and
slaughtering 100,000 Argentine children & young people, your government and large numbers of your people are burning flags, rioting and proclaiming your rule over other peoples islands. IT IS A FU
Amen perhaps .
@ 32 Antin-Facist (#)
You have to accept the facts that aborigines of north, central and southamerica don't want civilization. If you drive around the aborigines reservations in the US you will see that the aborigines want to remain the same: uneducated and living on goverment assistance for the next generations. This is a fact.
Their lands taken by the US goverment had one purpose: to accept civilization.
You know that if the US goverment did not take their lands because belongs to aborigenes we all here in the US we will wearing a feather on our heads and living in their type of primitive housing, dying of starvation due to the lack of farming, no grooming, no healthcare, etc.
Aborigenes are very difficult to understand.
Aborigenes don't want civilization.
They want to remain the same foverer.
The aborigenes in the US don't want to celebrate the discover of America on October 12 of each year because they blame Spain of killing the wild aborigines.
The aborigines here in the US wants to be called native americans after bleaming Spain for the killing but they accept the name of america in HONOR of Americo Vespuccio. You see, they don't make any sense.
This is a fact, like it or not.
Your continued blaming of the argentine leader and my country history will do any good. The worst economic times are found here in the US with a 15 trillon national deficit. The US might default for paying their foreign debt to foreign countries.
The US is grabbing any dollar offered by foreign goverments like Bangladesh. It takes my attention that Bangladesh do not invest their dollars proving food for their starving population. I was there. In Argentina I have not seen the same level of starvation.
So get lost!
#34 If you think your doing Argentina or the US a favour by racist attacks on aborigines, you've got another thing coming. All countries have murky pasts, why I like Cristina is that she is rectifying the mistakes of the past, such as the privatisation of the oil
This is a fact.
Read the Comparison of the Australian aborigine with the American Indian by Dawn Hawkins.
American Indian and Australian Aborigenes by Tim Giago.
Sir, the YPF and the AA was sold to Spain by C.Menen.
The argentine goverment bought back Aerolineas Argentinas from Spain and now is buying Yacimientos Petroliferos Fiscales. YPF was the place my mother's family work for many years. Senor, por que es tan testaduro?
#36 I remember in Oliver Stone's film on the Latin American left, South of the Border, Cristina gave an interview in which she said that for the first time Latin America countries had leaders who looked like their people, ie indians like Morlaes, and obviously she ment that as a good thing. So thankfully I don't think your leader is as bigoted against aboriginals as you are, Sussie
Interesting that President Obama apparently said that he wasn't taking sides when he met PM Cameron not long ago, and seems that he might have reiterated the position as being neutral at the Summit?
However, if he were really trying to be neutral, wouldn't he have absented himself from meeting briefly enough so that his lack of support for an anti-Falklands consensus would not have been recorded?
Commenting for this story is now closed.If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!
Get our news on your inbox!