MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, December 8th 2021 - 02:43 UTC

 

 

Malvinas: Argentina understands UK's insistence on tripartite talks, “but UN resolutions prevent it”

Thursday, March 20th 2014 - 03:28 UTC
Full article 64 comments

The Telegraph published a long interview with Daniel Filmus recently appointed to head the Argentine government newly created Malvinas Islands Related Issues Secretariat in which he repeats many of the arguments of the Cristina Fernandez administration campaign referred to the Falklands sovereignty claim, using such words as 'colonialism' and 'militarization', and attacking UK's refusal to sit and dialogue as indicated by UN resolutions. Read full article

Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • Marcos Alejandro

    Oil province update
    Closer and closer(100p) but will it stop there?
    RKH
    105.00
    ↓ -3.75 (-3.44%)

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 03:49 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Monkeymagic

    Lol...ruptured territorial integrity.....hahahahahahaha

    Dear Denmark

    Please can we have the Faroe Islands (180 miles from our coast) as you holding sovereignty ruptures our territorial integrity.

    Ta

    Uk

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 03:59 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • La Patria

    The way Filmus goes on, it makes you think he, Timmerman and the rest of the Cfk pirate crew would crap themselves if they ever found themselves in the same room as an islander. They use any excuse to avoid it.
    Come on islanders, what are your secret powers that the rest of us don't know about but cfk et al obviously do?

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 05:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Think

    Turnip at (2)

    Dear Denmark

    Please can we have Rockal Island as your spurious territorial claim over it ruptures our territorial integrity.

    Ta

    F0, Dk & Is

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 05:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • JollyGoodFun

    Dear UN

    Please can the Patagonians who were and still are a victim of Spain's past colonialism have their lands back.

    Ta Argentina.

    P.s. My government openly lies.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 05:57 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Anglotino

    Incompetent at (4) stuffed up me thinks.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 06:11 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Boovis

    CFK's just peeved all the time because (to quote Bettlejuice) someone dropped a house on her sister. “I'll get you my pretty Falklanders, and your little dog, too!”

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 06:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • LEPRecon

    It's obvious that Mr Filmus hasn't actually read UN resolution 2065. Nor does he understand that UN resolution 2065 was invalidated by Argentina's illegal invasion of the Falkland Islands on 2 April 1982.

    It's obvious that Mr Filmus is an imbecile.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 08:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • JollyGoodFun

    Talking of Toto (indirectly), Filmus looks like the little pup. Nooooo Christina already has the Dog!!

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 08:13 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • AzaUK

    well it might be a technicality but doesnt Argentina consider all the people on the FI to be UK citizens? so formally wouldn't the “talks” between Falklands and Argentina , be considered UK with Argentina?

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 08:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Redrow

    Apart from Argentina's friends on the C24, has anyone at the UN ever expressly stated that the islanders must not be involved in negotiations (even if the UK and Argentina both want them there) and that their wishes can be completely ignored? It seems quite a stretch to get to that obscenely imperial position from what is largely a sympathetic qualification to the resolution that the islanders interests should be respected during negotiations. Perhaps Argentina should go back to the UNGA and ask for clarification on this as it would strengthen their hand considerably. Yes, I'm being ironic.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 08:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • golfcronie

    @1
    Nows the time to buy because you will not get those prices next year. Only down 3.44%, now remind me, was it January that the peso lost 18% ( yes 18% ) of its value against the US$? I know where my money is going to be invested. And it is not Argentina, it is a group of small islands called the “ FALKLANDS” where the oil companies WILL be drilling in 2015.
    Filmus as ALL ARGENTINIANS are HYPOCRITES

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 08:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • HansNiesund

    If all the Victim-in-Chief has to rely upon is an unfounded interpretation of a 50 year old resolution which Argentina itself broke by launching a war of aggression, then it's no surprise he needs a think tank of seven universities to come up with a clue.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 09:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • CaptainSilver

    Filmus starts from the wrong place. Sovereignty of the Falkland Islands is NOT up for discussion because the Falkland Islanders have expressed that clearly in the recent referendum. Its a lost cause, try again in about 300 years.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 09:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Room101

    All this has been covered before: a Plethora of backwards-and-forwards pseudo reasonings from Argentina and ignoring the basic principles that protect the rights of self-determination. The Argentinian government will on knock on many media doors and windows to keep the Falklands issue going. In fact our blogs help them to do this. but that's human techno-nature these days; we're caught up in it.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 09:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • lsolde

    Good old “carbon copy” Think,
    We can always rely on him to twist & mimic some other poster's efforts.
    lts called “lack of imagination & original thinking”, Think.
    Argentina is lying again(when do they NOT lie?), Rivero did NOT “lead an uprising against the British in 1833”, instead, him & his cronies murdered some other settlers because they had not been paid in silver, just worthless paper currency.
    But thats Argentina for you:-
    Lie, lie, lie, lie & lie again.
    They're getting quite good at it, but……they're still just liars.
    (Aren't you Think?)

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 10:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Idlehands

    This new “argument” must take the prize for this years “who can make stuff up and repeat it no matter how stupid it is” awards.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 10:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • GALlamosa

    Is this guy really a complete idiot, or does he just pretend to be to hide how clever he is ? The UN prevents dialogue. I don't think so.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 10:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Gordo1

    @18 GALlamosa

    No, he is not a complete idiot - he is simply a “boludo”!

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 11:12 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    “Film-me while I am still in charge” needs to keep onside with TMBOA.

    This idiot couldn't even get elected (pot banging clearly worked) and now he fawns at the nude crutch of TMBOA (I apologise for the mental picture) just to keep him from being chucked out altogether.

    I hope he stays in post, we don't want anybody with even a modicum of intelligence involved do we? WTF am I saying? NOBODY in TMBOA's “government” has any.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 11:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Benson

    “find it inconceivable – at this stage in the 21st century – that a portion of their territory should be in the possession of a colonial power.”
    I find inconceivable that Argentina is trying to become a colonial country in the 21st century.
    I see that he is another beliver that two wrongs make a right. What you did to Diago Garcia was wrong so you should do the same to the Falklands. In what universe does this make sense.
    “the United Nations resolution which he claims actively prevents tripartite talks.”
    Please Mr Filmus provide the UN document that specifically prevents tripartite talks or I call liar on this.
    “”The actions performed by the United Kingdom in the area, without Argentina's consent, especially military actions and actions that involve plundering natural resources in the disputed area, are aggressive moves“.”
    No the military actions are defensive moves. Since MPA was first built the armed forces there have been reduced to an eighth of their original size.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 11:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • darragh

    I quote the UN Secretary General Ban-Ki-Moon on Wednesday May 19th 2010 when speaking at a forum on de-colonization in Noumea, New Caledonia -

    “The world’s 16 remaining territories that still do not govern themselves must have complete freedom in deciding their future status”

    He didn’t say “with the exception of the people of the Falkland Islands’ .

    http://www.speroforum.com/a/33140/Remaining-nonselfgoverning-territories-must-have-full-freedom-of-choice-Ban-says

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 11:37 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • JollyGoodFun

    It's amazing how Argentina are now trying to play the we obey the UN games.

    We can't talk to the Falklanders because the UN forbids it. Ha ha ha ha ha.

    The guy has nothing but lies in his eyes. They say it's the window to the soul.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 11:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Britworker

    So by his logic, the UN are going to create a huge fuss, bypassing all the problems in Libya and the middle east and Afghanistan, not to mention Crimea. Make a public announcement that Argentina talking to the Falkland Islanders would be illegal.???????

    The problem with Argentina is that when they make ridiculous statements like this, they take the whole thing right back to square one and make any possibility of better relations completely impossible.

    The current Argentine governments policy on the Falkland Islands has failed, spectacularly failed. Their reign of incompetence is nearing an end and they are now trying to salvage something by trying to appear all nice and reasonable all of a sudden. It wont wash and it wont work.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 11:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Martin Woodhead

    Its not a stalemate the UK won jog on argies.
    You cant threaten us
    You cant bribe us
    So you get nothing thats unfortunatly the level of international law the junta would have taken the islands and expelled disappered the islanders if it could.
    They would not hand the islands back the uk wont hand them over without the islanders consent because your weak and you have nothing we want or need.
    Hong kong handed over as leased and china too big to fight hong kong chinese wishes ignored. Chagos islanders solf out for a discount on nukes.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 11:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Conqueror

    Dear Islanders. Please note that this may be viewed as STEP TWO. Following on from the recent ravings of Garcia Moritan.

    I am sure that you are aware but, just as a reminder, ALL UN general Assembly resolutions are NON-BINDING. Therefore the suggestion that a UN General Assembly resolution precludes discussions with yourselves is a blatant LIE!

    The real reason, of course, is that the argie government doesn't want to be seen talking to the ordinary people of the country they want to steal. It would have to admit that you Falkland Islanders exist. It would have to listen. There would be articles and reports.

    I see this as another attempt to drive a rift between the UK and the Falkland Islands. It's a typical convoluted argie “plan”. The UK is holding back resolution of the matter by refusing discussions. It doesn't matter who that is aimed at. It could be aimed at the UK, other countries, even yourselves.

    How come that right now, at the same time, one argie is suggesting better relations with the UK while another says that the UK cannot hold negotiations because of a UN resolution? And note this, the blame is placed on the UK. No mention that YOU have insisted that there be no negotiations.

    Don't be concerned. It's a trick. The UK IS on your side. The UK government will not be permitted to abandon you. Not that it shows any sign of doing so. WE have our very own specific interests. You are OUR people. WE fought for you. WE gave 255 British lives. WE respect the 3 Falklanders that were regrettably lost through argie war crimes.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 11:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • St.John

    Filmus seems to be an even greater idiot than Timerman.

    Blabbering about UN General Assembly Resolution 2065 from 1965 is like talking about a treaty with the Russian Czar - cancelled by a war.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 12:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Monkeymagic

    @4 Stink

    Exactly....Rockal and Faroe Islands and “mature” agreements between mature nations. Nobody in Britian thinks island groups hundreds of miles off the coast are “integral territory” least of island groups that have NEVER been part of ones territory.

    The territorial integrity arguement is pathetic.

    Cuba disrupts US territorial integrity
    Argentina disrupts Chiles

    it is a made up argument, and would only be relevant if the Falklands were post 1945 an indisputed part of Argentina recognised by the UN.

    Which they are not.

    Thank you for highlighting this in your own attempts to look stupid..in which you succeeded.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 12:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Xect

    And the comedy roadshow continues picking up a head of steam!

    Seriously this used to annoy me because of the arrogance and ridiculousness of the Argentine position but now it makes me laugh. It's so bad its actually very comical.

    I mean who in their right mind is going to believe this?

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 12:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • toooldtodieyoung

    But surely, three months into his freshly-created role, he cannot seriously believe that Britain's position on the Falkland Islands will change?

    “Yes,” he replied, in a series of emailed responses. “The history of humankind has shown that the trend is for colonialism to disappear off the face of the Earth.

    I love the way this all about the British position on the Falkland Islands and nothing at a change in attitude of argentina...

    So we have to dance to their tune?

    So they think that they can steal our land and just walk away?

    So they think that they can just keep ignoring the Islanders?

    Oh, Daniel Filmus!!! You are a prize “Turnip” You are about as wrong as you can be.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 01:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • GFace

    What a joke. The UN loves it when people talk under their umbrella. They don't need resolutions. And really... The UN says we can't talk to them? Real diplomats aren't afraid to talk and be seen talking to people., especially when it shows them breaking ice and other breakthrough-y sorts of things...

    I guess we have another sniveling lie of a “diplomat” too afraid to be in the same room as a couple of democratically elected people who he claims he wants to rule because he's too much of a coward to be seen herring them say NO! to him (for the umpteenth time). A fascist is one thing. A coward is another. A fascist coward is just too much for evan a 1000 Jerry Lewis Telethons to help.

    And how stupid do the rank-n-file Argentines have to be to swallow that and why don't they call out this useless “window worker” to be a real man, get some balls, have his Nixon Goes To China Moment and talk the FIG or get a real job and so the government can spend his wasted office's tax money where it will do more good than perk up the current government with parachute jobs? No. Rerall. Why aren't the Pauls and CDs and pgermans of Argentina showing the rest how its done. If the moderates outnumber the Malvanistas and Malvanazis, this would be a golden time to come out of the closet.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 01:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • kingsterj

    I think Mr Squire of the FCO had it spot on when he said that it is no longer worth even responding to or paying attention to these people, better to wait for a more mature and visonary adminsitration to come along in Argentina and when their male population finally manages to grow a set!

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 02:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Monty69

    The problem with the bearded wonder's position is that it is based almost entirely on lies:
    There is no 'militarisation' of the South Atlantic.
    The status of the Falklands as a British OT does not disrupt Argentina's territorial integrity.
    The UN does not 'prevent' the inclusion of Falkland Islanders in any talks.
    The Falkland Islanders are not indistinguishable from other British people and have their own history and culture.

    These facts are verifiable and obvious to anyone who has an active interest in the subject.
    If he continues to approach this issue through such blatant strawman arguments, then he can expect to continue to get precisely no-where. Promoting a falsehood as fact and then arguing against it might make him feel like he's doing something, but it doesn't advance his cause one bit.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 03:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Philippe

    It is most important not to forget that behind the inflation of Argentinian bla, bla, bla, about the so-called “Malvinas” there is an all too clear MILITARY THREAT TO THE FALKLAND ISLANDS, and to all British South Atlantic territories!

    Philippe

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 04:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Condorito

    Why doesn't the UK remove all these BOTs from the “non self governing” list by giving them the same status that say France gives to Guyana?

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 05:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Wireless

    Was there a UNGA Resolution in 2003 on the Falkland Islands then?

    Since its only after the Kirchner Dynasty came to power that Argentina has taken up the policy of not recognising the Falkland Islanders or their freely elected Falkland Islands Government.

    Before the Kirchner Dynasty the Falkland Islanders were included in all talks.

    Any RG able to quote me or give me a reference or weblink to this ground shaking UNGA or UNSC Resolution that prevents the Falkland Islanders from being present at any talks?

    No I thought not.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 05:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • GFace

    @34, There are also more independence-oriented models compared to what France has done such as Micronesia where they are sovereign in all afairs and if someone were to mess with them, they're still directly under the US defense/deterrent umbrella, as much as Hawaii and Cleveland. But I don't think even full independence would satiate the Malvanazis and the various Argentine mis-governments. They've fed generations of their people too long on a promise to plant their flag through the islanders to distract them from their own incompetence.

    At the end of the day, it's up to the islanders but I'd prefer it if the UK, the FI and other BGSTs that are “independent in foreign affairs and defense only” were to implement a model that would “satisfy” on paper what the Great Blue Father... uh... C24 pretends to want. But that would further push the Falklands and Gibraltar forever away from Argentina and Spain and currently C24 needs those bogus disputes (that Spain and Argentina daren't take to the ICJ because they have no hope) to give C24 and wannabe colonialists in Madrid and Buenos Aires mutual validation. But it WOULD put the lie to C24. And watching them impotently hem and haw in the face of their mission and the reality they desperately blank out is rather funny in a reality train wreck TV kind of way.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 05:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    One Word.

    BRAINWASHED.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 07:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Steveu

    It does sound like they are now making up the excuses as they go along - next excuse will be that they refuse to talk if there is an “R” in the month.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 08:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • rupertbrooks0

    In truth there will be no discussions since there is nothing to discuss. The Argentine claim is thin to the point of actually being bogus. The British claim indisputably dates from January 1765. It has never been formally rescinded. . There is the Arana-Southern treaty of 1850, which was ratified by the Argentine Senate. The islanders have the right of self determination under the UN Charter, under their own constitution and (as an associate member of the EU) under European human rights laws.

    The UK government itself does not have the legal or constitutional power to transfer sovereignty. Only Parliament does. Parliament will never agree to this without the consent of the Falklands government and people. I am not a constitutional lawyer but it is possible, since the British Crown-in-Parliament has transferred the right of self determination and the right to elect a legislature to the people of the Falklands, only the Falklands can reverse it.

    The Queen has no right to abolish parliament. Only Parliament itself has this right. It is probable that under British constitutional customs and precedents only the Falklands assembly can abolish itself. The Falklands assembly gets its law-making authority from the British crown. This cannot be taken away without their consent. This constitutional precedent dates to the 1640’s and the long Parliament.

    The UK government can enter talks with Argentina on any matter they like. However when it comes to the Falklands the UK government can only negotiate on their behalf. They cannot negotiate over their heads and effectively expel them from the jurisdiction of the British crown commonwealth against their wishes.

    Mission impossible? Yeah I’m afraid so. Not even Tom Cruise can rescue this one.

    Mar 20th, 2014 - 09:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    39
    The UK can do a lot of things with BOTS......
    The United Kingdom suspended the Turks and Caicos Islands' self-government after allegations of ministerial corruption.

    After Allegations....that's all it takes...

    Turks and Caicos Islands
    On Monday, 16 March 2009, the UK threatened to suspend self-government in the islands and transfer power to the new governor, Gordon Wetherell, over systemic corruption.
    On 18 March 2009, on the advice of her UK ministers, Queen Elizabeth II issued an Order in Council giving the Governor the power to suspend those parts of the 2006 Constitution that deal with ministerial government and the House of Assembly, and to exercise the powers of government himself.
    On 14 August 2009 after Misick's last appeals failed, the Governor, on the instructions of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, imposed direct rule on the Turks and Caicos Islands by authority of the 18 March 2009 Order in Council issued by the Queen.

    The Queen did it...not Parliament....

    Mar 21st, 2014 - 12:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • JollyGoodFun

    @39 - Whereas in Argentina if allegations for corruption are made, you're promoted and told to look after the tax revenues.

    Mar 21st, 2014 - 12:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • GFace

    @41... in bags of money hidden in the lavvie... no less.

    Mar 21st, 2014 - 12:50 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • rupertbrooks0

    The Governor of the Turks and Caicos Islands has reserve powers which include the power to suspend the elected government in the case of mal-administration, or for the “maintenance of good governance”. The Governor, like the Governor of the Falklands is the effective Head of state and represents the Queen in her absence. The Governor of the Falklands also has such reserve powers. These are written into the constitution. The Governor-General of Australia also has such reserve powers and exercised them in 1975 to sack the then Prime Minster Gough Whitlam, without consulting the Queen.

    The Governor of the Falklands can also exercise such powers, but only under the reasons given in the Falklands constitution, which include national emergencies such as war or revolution.

    The “order-in-council” gave the Governor the right to suspend those parts of the constitution (and thereby to act in the Queens name) suspected of significant levels of corruption... You can find a government briefing paper here:

    http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CEgQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.parliament.uk%2Fbriefing-papers%2Fsn05038.pdf&ei=p5IrU-f4FIu3hAeF0YCQBA&usg=AFQjCNFToAd8Y6u7GcDF-Kv3ndWpb1rlKQ&bvm=bv.62922401,d.ZG4

    There is of course a radical difference between using reserve powers granted under the constitution to suspend parts of the constitution for reasons of good governance and abolishing the constitution totally and handing powers from Crown servants to those of a foreign power.

    Mar 21st, 2014 - 01:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ynsere

    Is it true that “UN resolutions prevent tripartite talks”? I don't think so.

    Mar 21st, 2014 - 03:52 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • downunder

    “Argentina understands UK's insistence on tripartite talks, “but UN resolutions prevent it”
    These people are just abusing the UN, they miss-interpret UN resolutions to suit their twisted logic and they abide by them when it suits them and ignore them when it doesn’t.
    Let us imagine a (very unlikely) scenario where the Falkland Islanders decide they want to become part of Argentina. (A case of collective insanity sweeps through the Islands). So what does Argentina do then? According to Filmus, they can’t accept the Islanders application because the UN won’t allow them to talk to the Falkland Islanders!
    This guy is an idiot! Unfortunately as far as the Argentine side goes, he is not Robison Caruso.

    Mar 21st, 2014 - 04:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • toooldtodieyoung

    40 Thinks sock puppet

    Still on about the Caicos Islands.......?????

    YAWN.................................

    Mar 21st, 2014 - 08:49 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • golfcronie

    Try and look at this from Mr Filmus's point of view. If you do not tow the party line, you most likely will not have a job. This is what is holding Argentina back. How many times have we heard on this forum that if you speak ill of the Government you are thought a traitor. Until this thought is eradicated then there will be no credible opposition. Tell me who in the opposition is likely to put their head in a noose?

    Mar 21st, 2014 - 11:59 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • GeoffWard2

    “Come on Sr. Filmus dear, shake the hand of the nice Islander, like the nice United Nations asks you to”

    “No, I won't, I won't, I won't. I'll cry, and I'll cry, and I'll cry”! he lithped (with apologies to Violet Elizabeth Bott and Richmal Crompton)

    “Aww, why not, little one”?

    “Because, because ... one of my hands is holding the other one behind my back, and it won't let go. So there”!

    Mar 21st, 2014 - 12:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • GFace

    (@48.. Likewise mystified ;-P )

    Mar 21st, 2014 - 05:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    Daniel Filmus

    His mother was an English language teacher of Polish descent,
    His father a Jewish immigrant from Moldova who arrived in Argentina in 1928
    Daniel Filmus was Born in Buenos Aires.
    He was briefly involved in the Communist youth wing as a teenager,
    And helped establish an office of the Permanent Assembly for Human Rights
    Two children by two different women, never marr.
    Became a secondary school teacher
    ,,,,,,,,,,
    shame then he never practiced what he was taught,
    A teacher, that ignores and abuses the rights of the islanders,
    .

    Mar 21st, 2014 - 07:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • golfcronie

    @50
    He is only following the party line otherwise he would be out of a job. No ethics or integrity. Just about sums up the entire Argie Government methinks.

    Mar 21st, 2014 - 07:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pete Bog

    “, but, what's the impediment? the United Nations resolution which he claims actively prevents tripartite talks.”

    The resolution also states Independence as the preferred option and in accordance with the UN Charter which foregrounds self determination.

    It would be interesting though, how the UN define the interests of the Falkland Islands, as excluding them from talks on their future doesn't appear to be in their interests?

    “And he accused Britain of making ”aggressive moves“ in the South Atlantic.”

    The only reason that any country could consider weapons for the purpose of self defence only aggressive, is if they plan to be aggressive themselves.

    And he's an ex-academic?

    Mar 21st, 2014 - 07:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    Agree with you both..

    Mar 21st, 2014 - 08:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Monkeymagic

    I am trying to follow Filmus logic.

    He states that the Falkland islands are an example of colonialism.
    He states that the Falkland islanders are NOT victims of colonialism.

    So, who are the victims of the colonialism?

    It cannot be the remnants of the Vernet community that stayed on the islands and lived with the new arrivals.

    Because, as we know...the Amerindians in Argentina are not victims of colonialism, they are one big happy family with the new arrivals.

    So, yet again, we fall back to the only possible victims...the 50 militia who first arrived on the islands in November 1832, mutineed, raped and murdered and were evicted in January 1833.

    It does seem extraordinary that the vast majority of the foreign policy of a 21st century country is obsessed with such a trivial event....

    Perhaps this has nothing to do with 19th century colonialism....but everything about an attempt at modern day land grabs

    Mar 21st, 2014 - 08:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Stevie

    Veneto (Italian region) wishes independence. 90% of them voted for it.

    Self determination applies?

    Every man and his kingdom!!

    Mar 22nd, 2014 - 05:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Domingo

    This first generation Argentine, Filmus dishonestly misrepresents the facts

    The UN Charter legal requirement for Self-Governance of the Falkland Islands by the people who live there is a separate legal obligation of Great Britain to people living in the Falkland Islands & is independent of the Argentine Republic's pretensions of sovereignty against Great Britain, which is without legal merit due to the March 2013 referendum where the Islanders chose GB

    The entire purpose of Great Britain's listing of the Falkland Islands as a Non-Self-Governing-Territory under UN Charter Article 73 in October 1946 was to acknowledge that Great Britain must free the Falkland Islands people from the politically oppressive “Crown Colony” form of government they were subjected to, which became illegal after the UN Treaty came into legal effect in October 1945

    The reason an imposed “Crown Colony” government by a British Metropole was illegal was because it denied self-government in accordance with the UN Charter Article 1 respect for self-determination of peoples

    The UN formally determined the Falkland Islands to be a Non-Self-Governing Territory in its UN GA Resolution 66(1)

    Filmus is quite wrong to say UN Resolutions do not grant the right of self-determination to the Falkland Islanders because UN Charter Article 73 explicitly grants the right to self-determination for any Non-Self-Governing-Territory and UN GA Resolution 2065 explicitly confirms that resolution 1514(XV) Declaration of the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries & Peoples covers the case of the Falkland Islands & reaffirmed that any settlement of the sovereignty dispute between Argentine Republic & Great Britain must respect the Falkland Islanders right to self-determination under:

    a. the provisions & objectives of the Charter of the United Nations
    b. Resolution 1514 (XV)

    The fact is Great Britain implemented self-government in the Falkland Islands; Filmus's Argentine Republic's position is illegal

    Mar 22nd, 2014 - 09:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    Great Britain is again right,
    and
    Argentina is again wrong,

    Nothing new there them.

    Mar 22nd, 2014 - 06:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • GeoffWard2

    In parliament, the British use the word 'dissembly' to avoid using the word 'Liar!'
    It is frequently too tame a word to describe depths of infamy locked up in an argument - Filmus's argument is best described by the word real politicians try to avoid.

    Mar 22nd, 2014 - 08:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • La Patria

    I'd add deluded to the liar bit

    Mar 23rd, 2014 - 01:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • lsolde

    “But UN Resolutions prevent it”
    Since when has Argentina ever taken any notice of UN Resolutions?
    (only when it suits them???)
    What about UNSC Resolution #502?
    Come, come, please, trolls.
    Try to defend & explain that one.!

    Mar 23rd, 2014 - 09:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pete Bog

    @61 Isolde

    Precisely-Argentina must be rueing the day that they have ignored resolutions on a variety of issues, which means morally that the UK have no reciprocal obligation to obey UN resolutions precisely, because Argentina hasn't.

    If Argentina had been holier than thou in obeying UN resolutions they would not appear so deluded and pathetic.

    But as we all know by the simple act of reading it, resolution 2065 favours independence of colonial countries and is subject to the provisions of the UN charter-not the provisions of the de-colonisation committee. 2065's main problem is being vague-it depends how the 'population's interests' are defined.
    And because the two sides can argue that the Islander's interests are different things, that is hardly the basis for a defining resolution.

    For instance how can the Argentines deny that the Islander's best interests are served by self autonomy?
    How can Argentina claim that self determination is NOT in the interests of the population?

    It does not say, the interests of the Argentine Republic or the UK have to be considered but those of the population.

    And a population IS A PEOPLE unless it refers to the animal or plant population.
    I believe the UN deliberately included' interests', to ensure that what they see as a problem will never be resolved-basically, you two fight it out amongst yourselves=1982.

    To satisfy the 'interest' part in any negotiation, the Argentines would have to prove that they take the Islander's interests into account.

    As they don't, their proclamation that the UK is breaking UN resolutions is farcical, as they have not defined what in their opinion, specifically, what the Islander's interests are.

    Also if the UK disagree with an Argentine interpretation of 'interests' any negotiations could continue for the next 10,000 years in deadlock until 'interest' is defined.

    Mar 23rd, 2014 - 01:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    negotiations could continue for the next 10,000 years in deadlock until 'interest' is defined.,,,

    seems fine to me..

    Mar 24th, 2014 - 08:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pete Bog

    @63 Briton

    And fine by me-you've got to love the UN for creating a situation where stalemate is created because the wording of resolutions are so vague that it ensures that both sides have a cop out.

    During that impass the Islanders go onward and upward. :-)

    Mar 26th, 2014 - 08:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0

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