MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Falklands welcomes UK/Argentina future cooperation agreement, which leaves sovereignty discussions out
The Falkland Islands Government (FIG) welcomed the UK/Argentina future cooperation agreement to remove all obstacles limiting the economic growth and development of the Falkland Islands and points out it will be represented at future discussions on these matters, the removal of sanctions on hydrocarbons, fisheries, shipping and tourism, and underlines that “sovereignty of the Falkland Islands will not be part of these discussions”. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesFalklands welcomes UK/Argentina future cooperation agreement, which leaves sovereignty discussions out for the time being....
Sep 14th, 2016 - 06:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0When is Hell due to freeze ?
Sep 14th, 2016 - 06:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Err… I Think it leaves sovereignty discussions out. Period!
Sep 14th, 2016 - 07:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 01. FIG will be represented at any future discussions.
Sep 14th, 2016 - 07:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 02. “sovereignty of the Falkland Islands will not be part of these discussions”
3. Economic value to both the FI and the UK increases to unimaginable levels, ensuring forever the voluntary affiliation of the islands with the UK.
Así de simple. Hasta un pibe argentino podría entenderlo. Mientras tanto la Argentina vende el resto de su patagonia a los chinos.
Think, perhaps you need new glasses. That is twice today you have added words to statements that never existed, just to save face. Is that a common Argentinian trate or just particular to you.
Sep 14th, 2016 - 10:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0To be fair - it's a common Argentine trait
Sep 14th, 2016 - 11:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Well, Argentina completely capitulated, gave the UK everything they wanted in exchange Argentina gets nothing. Not good at all. And I'm not talking about the Falklands, which are British.
Sep 15th, 2016 - 12:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0I understand that the negotiation of a new stop-over flight is totally within the remit of the FIG and they can veto any airport if they do not agree with it.
Sep 15th, 2016 - 02:11 am - Link - Report abuse 0I am as yet to establish whether the new air link ( and the corresponding charter flight freedom) is dependant upon Macri coming up with the oil deal through Congress.
It will never pass because there was no negotiation here. Argentina gave to the UK everything they wanted, Argentina gets absolutely nothing whatsoever in exchange. No wonder the UK accepted this so happily. No one can name one solitary thing they had to give in or up.
Sep 15th, 2016 - 02:33 am - Link - Report abuse 0It is dead in the water until either the sovereignty question is on the table (never will happen, we know), or alternatively as Macri HAD PROMISED, and I have advocated for years, the question of Antarctica would be put on the table, and have the UK defend its position as to why in the year 2020 they still feel it is legitimate to act like it is 1799 and lay claim on land that lies 15.000 kilometers away, two oceans in between and two continents distance away.
@9 Perhaps it is Argentina that should explain why it should be colonising an overseas territory so far from its shores, a territory to which it has no nexus and is unrelated to its geographic nature, a territory that was previously claimed by a number of others, including its immediate and more proximate neighbours, as well as those who charted the region long before Argentina was capable of even approaching the area. Is it not Argentina, in its display of characteristically cowardly behaviour, that placed its claim on that British territory in 1943, while the UK was at war with the Nazis that Argentina was so brazenly supporting?
Sep 15th, 2016 - 03:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0All you mentioned applies to Chile as well, so you would lose. “Claiming” land is no basis for sovereignty in the 21st century, even though the Europeans would love to go back to that as the rapacious pirates they are. Stick a flag somewhere and it's yours right? The cultures and people that may exist there already be damned. Typical EUian.
Sep 15th, 2016 - 07:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina has had people in the continent since 1904, everyone else at some point or another vacated the continent. Of course you always gloss over that small detail.
Personally I advocate Antarctica be administered in “co-sovereignty” between the 7 legitimate contenders for stewardship: South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, Namibia. Each country gets a “portion” to administer, but all portions are equally co-sovereign, meaning all other seven nations have equal rights everywhere. Nations outside those 7 have no business claiming any land, but should be free to establish scientific bases anywhere in the continent in coordination with the nation administering that portion.
All else you mention is utterly irrelevant in the 21st century, and it is fully in concordance to the colonialist attitude you so openly blast Argentina about. When the UK does is fine I guess.
And to refresh your mind, Argentina had NO BUSINESS in world war II, we supported neither side. Ideologically there was a significant segment with the Axis, but trade wise it was with the allies. I don't see you blasting Sweden or Switzerland for their neutrality, both nations that had far more of a duty to get involved in the war than Argentina, a far away land from Europe, did. As usual your double-standards betray your spite.
The UK & Argentina previously had agreements in place in repect of fisheries, flights & hydrocarbons (Madrid Agreements). These were voided by the Nestor Kirchner government in 2007. One thing remains – Argentina's mythical Malvinas claim: https://www.academia.edu/17799157/Falklands_-_Some_Relevant_International_Law
Sep 15th, 2016 - 09:11 am - Link - Report abuse 0Time for Argentina to move on.
@7 “Well, Argentina completely capitulated, gave the UK everything they wanted in exchange Argentina gets nothing. ” You seem to be overlooking that the measure the K's took against the Falkland Islands were aggressive and in some cases illegal. It was done to stir up the masses and distract them whilst the K's were stealing from the country.
Sep 15th, 2016 - 09:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina will benefit, as they did from the joint fisheries programme that Nestor tore up in a pink fit. The Argentine squid industry has suffered from low stock due to the ridiculous management under CFK. Working together with the FIG will restore stock and be financially beneficial to both.
Argentina will benefit from the additional flights and from trade with the Falklands. Trade = wealth.
Argentina will benefit from redirection of finds wasted on the silly and stroppy campaign against the Falklands. All those expensive trips and money wasted on a fools errand.
The Falklands will benefit from no longer being an isolated and irresponsible backwater but a possible investment opportunity in the future.
“rapacious pirates” Haha. Don't forget it is 'International Talk Like A Pirate Day' on Monday. Aaargh, avast me harties and prepare to be boarded.
#11
Sep 15th, 2016 - 09:55 am - Link - Report abuse 0Explain 7 “legitimate contenders”. I presume this is a Trollism.
Whatever you want is not going to happen. You think the USA will say...fine by us and the Russians?
@11
Sep 15th, 2016 - 10:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0Another fine Tobysim :
1. ”Claiming” land is no basis for sovereignty in the 21st century .. stick a flag somewhere and it's yours right?
2. Argentina has had people in the continent since 1904
3. Nations outside those 7 (including of course guess who) have no business claiming any land
Quiz: Speaking of rapacious pirates, which is the only country to have ever opened fire on the Antarctic continent?
@13
Sep 15th, 2016 - 10:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0Those sanctions should have been unilaterally lifted, as a sign of Argentina's independence. Certainly not done so in a bilateral meeting because the optics are atrocious and it is seen as a complete capitulation with nothing garnered in return.
Any “benefit” of increased trade with an outpost of 3.000 souls on an economy of 450 billion or 700 billion depending on what GDP system you use, will come up as blip on an vast sea... pointless to put your diplomacy in the gutter for it.
The sanctions should have been lifted before, and then negotiations should have dealt with substantive issues. Since sovereingty was a non starter for one of the parties, the next logical big fish was the Souh Pole.
Macri completely botch it, it is a complete win for the UK and Falklands. Which is why everyone on the British side here is hailing the process. If the Anglos say it's one thing, you can be assured it is 98% the exact opposite.
@14
Then let them show their imperialist colonialist stripes, at least the exercise wil prove the crooked duplicitous liars they (and you) are. Calling Argentina colonialists and you all do even worse. Pathetic and typical of people with no moral center. Get off your high horses, you are worse pigs than us.
@16 CapiTrollism_is_back!!
Sep 15th, 2016 - 10:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0May we, please, have your enlightened comments about the myths, fairy tales, lies and mistaken interpretations of historical events which comprise the Argentine nonsensical claim to the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands?
This is the beginning of the end, within 30 years Argentina will be part of the UK.
Sep 15th, 2016 - 11:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0@18
Sep 15th, 2016 - 11:52 am - Link - Report abuse 0Now with the UK out of the EU straightjacket, I have no doubts it is a distinct possibility the UK will return to it's default MO: conquest and bloodshed.
@15
Which is the only country that has opened fire on every continent and most islands of any significant size?
@17
I have no such tales because I don't think the Falklands are a part of Argentina, culturally or demographically.
@16 Capi
Sep 15th, 2016 - 12:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0From what I have seen, Argentina has agreed to remove some mostly-ineffective sanctions that the government wanted to get rid of anyway in return for cooperating on oil exploration, and to allow flights to a third country in exchange for extra flights to Argentina. Doesn't seem that bad a deal, and also smooths the way for the more important trade and investment. And we don't know what was agreed about Malcorra's UNSG bid.
If Argentina wanted to talk about Antarctica, the UK would expect something equally big in return, not a few flights and removal of minor sanctions.
It is important to read the full joint statement, not just the piece on the Falklands in isolation. Argentina actually gets a lot out of it.......that is why they agreed to it.
Sep 15th, 2016 - 12:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I think the first thing that should have been agreed, before any deals started ,
Sep 15th, 2016 - 12:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0should be the removal of the sovereignty claim that is part of argentines so called constitution,
this would have been a great compromise from the argies,
it seems Argentina is again being rewarded basically if they behave themselves,
they will now receive help with trade and investment without make any commitments to the will, freedom, or indeed existence of the islanders.
that's just my humble opinion.
Can't be trusted:
Sep 15th, 2016 - 01:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Deputy Foreign Minister Carlos Foradori defended last night before Clarin the agreement reached in the last hours with the UK , and said this “ will allow closer to the goal of State made to recover the exercise of sovereignty over Malvinas”.
19 “Now with the UK out of the EU straightjacket, I have no doubts it is a distinct possibility the UK will return to it's default MO: conquest and bloodshed.”
Sep 15th, 2016 - 03:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Nostrils - Care to let us know where you are so we can come and get you? Oh! Southend, how convenient, be along in a minute...
“...it seems Argentina is again being rewarded basically if they behave themselves,...”
Sep 15th, 2016 - 03:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It is for interim appearance only, a provisional act. Everyone knows it's a Trojan Horse, err, Donkey. You can dress them up in Armani but they are still Argentines and fooling no one.
While the civilised world is not deceived by this newfound guile, Argentina has at least acknowledged its descent into greater depths of hopeless economic weakness, and the need to delay its inevitable next default by looking as though they were comporting themselves as potential adults on the world stage. Think of this agreement as something of a leaky condom over Argentina's perennially syphilitic member.
it seems Argentina is again being rewarded basically if they behave themselves, which is a good thing, in fact. The better Argentina behaves, the more they are rewarded and the more they risk losing if they start misbehaving. The fact that Argentina claims the Falklands wouldn't be very important if so many of them didn't think it is important. Concentrating on other matters means that the claim for the Falklands will become less important as part of Argentine identity. With luck, one day it will be as significant as Jacobite claims to the throne of Britain.
Sep 15th, 2016 - 08:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Brit Bob and others- don't over-react to internal pr satements of senior Arg Govt Ministers. They have to say some things to their public that they fell the public wants to hear - what they may then actually do is maybe at times slightly different.
Sep 15th, 2016 - 08:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0same with Macri- he says to Arg population- all things will be discussed at new York - well some big ones like fisheries co-operation can be - and those are the bits he will then perhaps report back publically - and maybe say the others need more time etc.
No trade with Arg likely in forseable future- Arg Customs and other Govt departments cannot do the necessary paperwork- remember - we do not exist- difficult to sign off export documents to a place that does not exist to them!
Their problem entirely! Up to them to decide to recognise we exist!
They are Politicians after all!
@26
Sep 16th, 2016 - 02:13 am - Link - Report abuse 0That carrot /stick approach has a absolutely dismal track record in world geopolitics. Look the the UK, now behaving like the full-fledged rogue nation it always was, even as the EU, USA, China, Japan, ASEAN, MERCOSUR, even others in the Commonwealth all warned the UK it would be worse for them to leave the EU and they would not get special treatment, nor would the UK by any means be placed ahead of the queue and the likes of the Euro Zone, NAFTA, etc.
Now the UK is brazenly and purposefully HARMING the EU by taking its sweet time to invoke article 50, which the EU has begged the UK to implement by now (September). I think the UK thinks they hold all the cards but as some astute people have finally pointed out they are gravely mistaken: If you take your time now to invoke article 50, then you can be assured the EU will have no pity and only give negotiations the two year window. If you then claim you need more time, too bad, off to the WTO you go. Then the old farts that voted for it will actually get to reap the rewards of their vote. Too bad they will also take with them millions of young people whose jobs and travel / relocation opportunities will be destroyed.
Brexit reminds me of WWII, people were scared to death before it began, then when it did and not much happened, they called it the Phony War. They made the call too soon, and so they are again with this.
Mr “Nostrils”
Sep 16th, 2016 - 04:59 am - Link - Report abuse 0You make it clear that you hate the British.
At the same time, you repeatedly try to make a case for the UK to stay in the EU.
Seems a tad fishy to me. Now that the British are free to manage their own affairs, you don't like it.
The last time time the British managed their own affairs, from about 1700 to 1945, it did not turn out all that well for hundreds of millions of corpses directly or indirectly: the millions killed by your diseases in all continents, the millions more that died in famines in Ireland, India, Africa... the millions killed in the wars yo initiated or indirectly caused, all the attempts of conquest (including twice into modern Argentine territory), all the animal species that were exterminated from the planet by you, from Stella's Sea Cow, to the northern Alk/Penguin, to the FALKLAND ISLAND'S WARRAH, to the Thylacine, to the North American passenger pigeon, and on and on and on...
Sep 16th, 2016 - 05:11 am - Link - Report abuse 0British self-management is an oxymoron, they have proven incapable in 400 years of self-control.
@Capi
Sep 16th, 2016 - 07:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0Leaving the EU makes the UK a rogue nation? What?
I agree it's a stupid decision, but all the members have the right to leave if they wish.
And the government is not delaying article 50 to hurt the EU, it's because they have sod all idea what to do now that the people have voted for something the politicians neither expected, nor wanted.
@29
Sep 16th, 2016 - 09:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0Tobi holds a Diploma in Anglo-Satanic Studies from the Clown College of Mendoza, with a special mention in hyperbole.
@19
Does this mean that Argentina is not the only country that has ever opened fire on the Antarctic continent, or is this just another instance of the tu quoque logical fallacy (without which no Tobi post is ever complete)?
@32
Sep 16th, 2016 - 10:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0You do the math: Argentina has opened fired on “only” three continents (it's home continent obviously, Antarctica if we include your dubious claim, and by accidents of History it opened fire at several places in North America from San Francisco down to Panama in the 1810s and 1820s). That's still less than the country I won't mention but we don't need to anyway.
It is a typical arguing fallacy to invoke Tu Quoque on the responder to an accusation when it is the accuser itself who originally committed the transgression (you accusing my country on opening fire on X continent... The Tu Quoque'er“ is you, I am the Tu Quoque”ee”.
@31
The British here are the majority nationality insulting Argentina, so of course I will respond in kind. Believe me if it were French, Spanish, German, or Italians here I would also ripped them open on their history. It's not as if all the major EUian nations don't give me enough material to traduce them.
If the UK politicians have no clue what to do, it would be a sign of good faith to invoke Article 50 soon and then ask the EU for extensions to the negoatiation period. Insted of gaining a few months now, you can gain years down the road which is far more useful. Also by then heads will have cool down thus far more amenable negotiating can take place. But by purposefully delaying Article 50 when the feeling in the EU is that the UK wanted to BADLY to leave such a demonic organization, and now they are dragging their feet... it looks bad and is setting up very bad rapport.
@33
Sep 16th, 2016 - 10:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0I don't think you've quite grasped what the tu quoque logical fallacy is. In this case, it's the idea that the UK opened fire, therefore Argentina didn't.
The Hope Bay incident was quite a minor thing in itself, and of course much overshadowed by subsequent Argentine acts of aggression in the region, but it's a good illustration of a colonial settler mentality in action, and it's a shame the warning signal wasn't recognised in time.
@34
Sep 16th, 2016 - 10:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0Kinda like the British in Afghanistan was a warning signal not recognized in time.
@35
Sep 16th, 2016 - 10:51 am - Link - Report abuse 0Tu quoque. No Tobi post complete without it.
#30
Sep 16th, 2016 - 12:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Sloppy research as usual. The Passenger pigeon was exterminated in the USA, by the Americans...not the British. This can be easily documented if you got off your obsessive anti-Anglo high horse.
The Great Auk...not alk. Last pair exterminated in Iceland despite the British giving it protection in 1794. It's stronghold was in the eastern coast and islands of the North Atlantic. So the British were responsible for it's demise.?
Steller's Sea Cow. Found in the N.Pacific between Russia and Alaska mainly.
So, again the British were resposible for hunting it to extinction. Your proof please.not your unsubstantiated opinion.
The Thylacine yes. It was a threat to sheep farming. Did Argentine cattle breeders welcome the puma on their cattle ranges. I think not.
I could draw up a list of Argentine flora and fauna on the endangered list due to the action of your people. As to conservation of animal and birds, Britain has been a world leader. Our ex colonies in Australia and New Zealand .Anglos as you would call them...are vociferous in trying to create sanctuaries for whales in the ANTARCTIC seas. Britain has led the world in trying to protect the Albatross from long line fishers.
As to your nonsensical claim that Britain exported it's indigenous diseases to other parts of the world in order to wipe out populations...utter nonsense.
So typhoid, typhus ,diptheria, malaria, yellow fever, smallpox and tuberculosis were diseases only known in Britain.
Yes some disgraceful things were done to purposely spread diseases among native populations but others were accidental. What to a European was a mild illness was fatal to many aboriginal peoples as their immune system was practically non-existent.
As to Brexit. it will sort itself out sooner or later. Germany, France and the Netherlands have a sizable minority who are not happy with the EU and it's proposed enlargement of control and setting up an EU army.
For your Nostradamus pronouncements,who cares !
@33 Capi
Sep 16th, 2016 - 12:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Argentina has opened fired on “only” three continents”
Didn't Argentina also help out in the first Gulf war, during one of its periods of being friendly with the USA? But really any country that takes part in UN peace keeping forces has probably opened fire on most continents, technically. What is it supposed to prove, exactly?
“The British here are the majority nationality insulting Argentina, so of course I will respond in kind.”
You believe attack is the best form of defence then?
“it would be a sign of good faith to invoke Article 50 soon”
Maybe, but I think that's outweighed by the probable disaster of starting talks with no plan and no negotiators. And a few months guaranteed are better than years you may never get. I don't think the EU itself will have much pity anyway; Brexit is an existential threat to the EU, they can't allow Britain to do better outside it.
“the feeling in the EU is that the UK wanted to BADLY to leave such a demonic organization”
After less than half the potential voters actually voted to leave? And the government wanted to stay in, too. As usual it's the craziest people who shout the loudest, but the EU should have more sense than to believe them.
Nostrils, careful posting things like that from the UK MI6 is watching via GCHQ. You could end up in Broadmoor
Sep 16th, 2016 - 02:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0When politicians were discussing Brexit the day after the vote it was made clear that Article 50 would not be invoked before the end of this year and likely not until early next year. Nothing has changed. The right negotiators are still being sought and hired to get the best deals for the U.K. . It isn't dragging heels but ensuring the best for the U.K. in the future.
Sep 16th, 2016 - 03:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I would be surprised if it is all tied up inside of five years.
“Argentina has opened fired on “only” three continents”
Sep 16th, 2016 - 06:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0---------
Since WWII, Argentina is apparently the only country to have “opened fire” and conducted armed hostilities against another country in Antarctica.
Britain will remove itself from the EU as the people have voted for, yes it may well be a bumpy ride and some very rough seas lay ahead, but it was our vote, our future, and we must now live with that decision and back the UK in every way to make it a success,
Sep 16th, 2016 - 07:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0good or bad, it will be a British future,
today the leader [ Junker] is talking about a united states of Europe within nine months, It will take a lot longer that he suggests, but the Lisbon treaty as noted on this site before, has it built into it for a euro wide border force,
and future integration of taxes , military , banking , single market , open borders , Euro money, some of these are already installed , others worked on , and the rest to follow,
Was it the right time for us to leave, you bet it was,
these lunatics in charge will either destroy Europe in its present form , or it will walk itself straight into a conflict ,
it already has the cheek to counter NATO, and it will, and when it is ready, if it actually gets there, it will most likely tell NATO to soddy offy,
but I suspect the UK and the Americans may well be far removed from these fools long before this happens,
their has been rumors that the USA and Britain may well for its own ABACA to counter this, [ American British And Commonwealth Alliance ]
this may well be just rumors and day dreaming, but who knows what the future holds,
but its just my opinion that the sooner we close the door on the European Union the better for all,
EU people, not Europe.
“but its just my opinion that the sooner we close the door on the European Union the better for all,”
Sep 17th, 2016 - 12:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0The hopefully the Russians, Jihadists, and Chinese come and take every little country in Europe, including the UK, one by one.
England will return the Malvinas within 25 years.
Sep 17th, 2016 - 12:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0And as I predicted, it's off:
Sep 17th, 2016 - 06:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/16/bring-back-britannia-to-rule-the-waves-after-brexit/
Next up, get Benjamin Disraeli out of the freezer!
@45 CapiTrollism_is_back!!
Sep 17th, 2016 - 08:34 am - Link - Report abuse 0This is NOT the major proposed event that you seem to imagine.
All that is proposed is the re-commisioning of the Royal Yacht “Britannia” to be used as a “shop” to promote British goods and services world wide after the UK leaves the EU.
You have clearly misunderstood this news item.
#43
Sep 17th, 2016 - 10:13 am - Link - Report abuse 0Then they will start on S.America. They could walk into Argentina,
The Chinese could probably make a success of it. They have an excess of population.
About 250 million immigrants would fit in quite nicely.
You have heard of NATO, haven't you ?
#46
He purposely misunderstands every item.
How am I supposed to interpret the words “RULE THE WAVES”.
Sep 17th, 2016 - 10:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0The last time that pet phrase were paraded as standard policy, it was the direct object of the verb CONQUER, whose grammatical subject was BRITISH EMPIRE.
Ah, Britain after Brexit, boldly paving the bridge over and back to the 19th century.
interpret the words “RULE THE WAVES”.
Sep 17th, 2016 - 10:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0Rule, as it says on the tin
Waves ,When someone says goodbye or hello, simple is it not,
Again you imply that if we [ Britain] does anything the world will collapse, this is surely another Brexit doom mongering
Relax 48, your time is not yet up??
#48
Sep 17th, 2016 - 05:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“back to the 19th century,” who knows. It was a pretty good time for Britain.
As you live in that era, What is it like now?
Ah, Britain after Brexit, boldly paving the way forward to freedom..lol
Sep 17th, 2016 - 07:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0WHEN BUSINESS ARE MUCH MORE IMPORTANT THAN SOVEREIGNTY.
Sep 17th, 2016 - 10:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It's well known that conservatives in this country have never given a shit about sovereignty, in fact, since the birth of Argentina as a nation 200 years ago, there have always been two ideological lines that crossed the life of the country, and both left their consecuences.
The question of the sovereignty was important only when the nation was ruled by popular governments with a centre left ideology, or populist, as many of you say in a very despective way, however, when conservatives were in office, business were much more important, in fact, the actual policy towards the islands, is simillar to the one implemented in the 90's, but without the winnie the pou bears. That's the reason why we don't see that the president brings resolutions from different forums around the world, as kirchnerism used to do in the 12 years and a half it ruled the country, where it was asked a dialogue between Arg. and the U. K. to solve the this conflict.
On the other hand, it's necesary to remind all those cretins who have always pretended to give us lessons of democracy that since the recovery of democracy in Arg., the country has never asked the islanders to leave the islands, or to renounce to their wish of remaining under british government, or to renounce to their british nationality, etc, the nation just pretended to have a dialogue to find a solution. They just complained about the decisions taken by C. F. K's governemnt, but at the same time, they have never had any will of discussing about the sovereignty, in order to find a fair solution, in fact, they celebrate because the sovereignty is out of the agenda.
The desperation that the islanders felt during the 76 days of the conflict, after the invasion ordered by a criminal junta, is the same one that we felt for 7 years and half, and many of our citizens still suffer the consecuences.
The only one positive aspect, is the cooperation to recognize the unkown soldiers.
@52
Sep 17th, 2016 - 11:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“in order to find a fair solution”.
There is already a fair solution in place it's called self-determination.
Statement by 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 (accessed 13/12/13)
@52 Axle: “ [Argentina]....just pretended to have a dialogue...”
Sep 18th, 2016 - 12:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0That's right, Axie: pretended.
Yes, I know what you meant but you're thinking in das argentinische Spanisch and your lack of English skills produced a happy but revealing mistake.
Now, let's observe that democracy that you seem to be fond of, and recognise that the islanders selected a fair solution by practicing some of that democracy, and choosing with whom they wish to be affiliated. Hint: it isn't Argentina.
DARRAGH and MARTIN.
Sep 18th, 2016 - 04:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I can understand that perhaps for many people it's much more convenient to repeat thet british official propaganda, instead of investigating deeply as i did, however, you have to understand that if you want to give an opinion about such a complicated cause like this one, you'll have to investigate. Since 2009 i have explained in many of my comments in mercopress, the strong and the weak aspects of parts of the conflict. On the other hand, when you investigate, you'll know that public international right doesn't apply the right to self determination for absolutely all people under any circunstance. In the case of our Malvinas, it's highly arguable, because while it is true that most of the islanders take many generations living there, it's also true that if those people could remain under british sovereignty only, is because since the british usurpation of 1833, such a powerful nation like the U.K. has always deprived Arg. of exercising it's soverign rights over the territory, that's why, it's not necesary to be too smart to realize that if Britain prevented our country from exercising it's sovereignty on the islands, it was pretty obvious that the islanders were going to choose to remain under british government only, this is the main reason why it's absolutely unfair to pretend to discuss about the sovereignty, only when the islanders wish it.
Although many of you don't accept it, nothing has changed for decades in this cause, all the resolutions have just called both parts to resume the negotiations, in order to find a solution, and none of them say a word about the application of self determination.
On the other hand, if after 1947, neather Arg. nor the U.K. proposed to take the case to an international arbitration, is because perhaps both aren't sure of getting a positive result, if the case is analized before the I.C.J.
1982
Sep 18th, 2016 - 04:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Very clearly, the UN in BINDING Resolution 502 told Argentina to withdraw from the islands and stop exercising sovereignty.
Argentina did not comply and the British settled the issue with the mutual terms of negotiation initiated by Argentina.
55,
Sep 18th, 2016 - 07:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0your opinion,
Argentina has no claim, Fact.
Room 26 is still open,
Brainwashing is still available,
one day you will accept that Argentina would do and be much better respected if she accepted the islanders are British, dropped her silly claim and got on with running her own country and heading upwards, instead of downwards.
And that's just my opinion, not an expert, just an opinion.
#55
Sep 18th, 2016 - 09:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“ In the case of our Malvinas” “ the british usurpation of 1833,” “Britain prevented our country from exercising it's sovereignty on the islands,”
Not really much point in talking with you, is there. Your idea of talks is---give us the islands, and the South Sandwich islands ,S.Georgia and the Antarctic continent for good measure. We will think about our other colonial aspirations and notify you about them later.
55 axel
Sep 18th, 2016 - 09:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Instead of investigating deeply as i did.” Apparently not deep enough, as please explain how the following treaties don't specifically nullify any and all Argentine pretensions. Under Utrecht and Nootka, Spain had promised NEVER to cede any of her territories, and gave permission for the UK to continue further development in Islands, in the event of a third parties' intrusion. Along with shared sovereignty of the islands from the 1771 Declaration. Furthermore, the Convention of Settlement, 1850. But even if these prior conditions didn't exist and the UK simply sailed over the ocean blue and took them, it was perfectly legal in 1833 to wit. Permanent Court of Arbitration at the Hague explicitly recognized the validity of conquest as a mode of acquiring territory when it declared in its decision that: “Titles of acquisition of territorial sovereignty in present-day international law are either based on an act of effective apprehension, such as occupation or conquest, or, like cession,
presuppose that the ceding and the cessionary Power or at least one of them, have the faculty of effectively disposing of the ceded territory.”10
10 Island of Palmas case (Netherlands v. USA) (1928)
@55 Axel
Sep 18th, 2016 - 10:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You say that “public international right doesn't apply the right to self determination for absolutely all people under any circunstance”.
So clearly you don't agree with the Secretary General of the UN because you claim you have done 'more research' on the subject than the UN - well you can claim that if you want but that being the case can you please tell me what you consider a 'fair solution' would be but whatever you say you have to realise, whether you like it or not, that the Falkland Islanders as Ban-ki-moon says ”must have complete freedom in deciding their future status”.
@58
Sep 19th, 2016 - 05:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0We would not ask you to give the Antarctic continent, since that would involve some notion of prior possession. And as the world knows, absolutely NO ONE acknowledges British control or ownership in Antarctica, and never has. And never will. Your only hope in the EU backing your claims is now also a bridge burned. They have already hinted they will at best stay neutral, and not map changes anymore for you.
China, Russia, Latin America are certainly not going to back you. So you will be on your own in your colonialist expansionist ambitions.
Funny I have never seen you call the UK's claim in Antarctica as “colonialist” but someone Argentina's is. That is how duplicitious and double-faced you are. You are an exemplary Anglo.
#58
Sep 19th, 2016 - 09:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0“absolutely NO ONE acknowledges British control or ownership in Antarctica, and never has. And never will.” That INCLUDES Britain.
At present, Britain has jurisdiction over a part of the continent.
Unlike Argentina who have a GOVERNOR for Antarctica”....note NOT the Argentine base on Antarctica.
Her title....Rosana Bertone, governor of the extreme south province of Tierra del Fuego, Antarctica and South Atlantic Islands.
An example of the Argentine trait for self-delusion and grandiose colonial ambition.
As usual, you have leapt into conclusions based on your own extremely faulty knowledge and prejudices.
You are an exemplary Argie...colonialist to the core.
“Britain has JURISDICTION”
Sep 19th, 2016 - 10:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0Well... where? And recongized by who?
hahahaha
@61
Sep 19th, 2016 - 11:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0It's probably escaped your attention, but nobody recognises Argentine control or ownership in Antarctica either, despite such curious colonial practices as importing pregnant women to give birth, opening fire on civilians unloading stores, and submitting claims to the CLCS which were bound to be rejected because you'd been told already they would be.
@55 Axel
Sep 19th, 2016 - 12:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Come on Axel - tell us what you consider to be a 'fair solution' seeing as you have researched the issue far more deeply than the UN you must have some idea!!
#63
Sep 19th, 2016 - 05:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0By us idiot. Who else matters ? Would you like to force us out. Fat chance !
Who recognises Argentine's jurisdiction ? hahahaha
66 Clyde
Sep 19th, 2016 - 06:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Re: #63 “Britain has JURISDICTION, Well...recongized by whom”
What is legally binding is the views of nations of 1833. Then, not one nation supported Argentina's claim their “silence” is indicative of support for the UK. Any change of opinion post 1945 is merely a none-binding political vox populi decision. Which in any case can't be applied retroactive to the formation of the UN.
Additionally, “the General Assembly declared in 1970 that the modern prohibition against the acquisition of territory by conquest should not be construed as affecting titles to territory created ‘prior to the Charter regime and valid under international law’” Akehursts Modern Introduction to International Law By Peter Malanczuk
“Customary international law; Silence as consent;
Generally, sovereign nations must consent in order to be bound by a particular treaty or legal norm. However, international customary laws are norms that have become pervasive enough internationally that countries need not consent in order to be bound. In these cases, all that is needed is that the state has not objected to the law....”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Customary_intern...
@55 Axel
Sep 19th, 2016 - 10:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Still waiting......
@CapiTrollism_is_back!!
Sep 21st, 2016 - 07:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0I would remind you that at a time when Britain “ruled the waves” Argentina became one of the most wealthy and prosperous nations in the world - the envy of many countries!
When British influence ceased look and acknowledge what the result became! Just a banana style republic misruled by the Peronistas!
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!