MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, May 18th 2022 - 04:00 UTC



Falklands' second flight to South America addressed at talks in London

Tuesday, December 20th 2016 - 07:43 UTC
Full article 19 comments

Argentina and the United Kingdom held in London on Monday the first of a two-day round of talks in the framework of the September joint communiqué with the purpose of improving bilateral relations and cooperation, and advancing in one of the few contentious issues, the Falkland Islands' dispute. Read full article


Disclaimer & comment rules
  • Brit Bob

    Malvinas: Government breaks historic policy and talks directly with the kelpers
    The Government of Mauricio Macri will make a key turnaround in the Malvinas negotiations by incorporating the kelpers in the negotiations on the restoration of flights between the continent and the islands. The kelpers are also interested in moving forward with what the joint statement signed by Foreign Minister Susana Malcorra in September (Politica Argentina 19th Dec 2016)

    Malcorra - Transplanted population MercoPress 10 Nov 2016 Malcorra said that historically the Argentine position was not to acknowledge for this case in particular the “self determination of peoples”, because 'kelpers' (Falkland Islanders) are a transplanted population, not aborigine.

    Hm. Let's see: Falklands – Implanted Population:

    Dec 20th, 2016 - 09:58 am - Link - Report abuse +2
  • gordo1

    The majority of the Islanders can trace the presence of their forbears in the Falkland Islands much further back in time than the majority of the citizens of Argentina - with the exception, of course, of the descendants of indigenous residents. What “implanted” Argentine nonsense! ¡Son nabísimos!

    Dec 20th, 2016 - 11:51 am - Link - Report abuse +3
  • Marc1

    If this second flight is proposed to operate from/to the Falklands to a third party country such as Chile or Brazil, why is Argentina involved in those talks?
    And why do the islanders object to direct flights to/from Buenos Aires?
    I've probably missed something here.

    Dec 20th, 2016 - 12:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • HughJuanCoeurs

    Time for Voice and Think to try and put some negative spin on this story by pretending that the Falkland Islanders were not representing their own concerns but those of the UK government. Bit of a pointless exercise really seeing as it is FIG who will have the final say, no matter what their South American neighbours might want.

    Dec 20th, 2016 - 12:11 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • DemonTree

    The Islanders object to direct flights because they don't want to be dependent on (an often hostile) Argentina for their air link. Argentina is involved in the talks because they want more flights to the Falklands themselves, and because they have threatened to block flights from third countries in the past, either directly by forbidding them to fly through Argentine airspace, or indirectly by putting pressure on the airlines. So they need to get Argentina's agreement in order to arrange anything.

    Dec 20th, 2016 - 03:07 pm - Link - Report abuse +5
  • pgerman

    Will Mike Summer keep on refusing to shake hands with the argentine public servants?...nothing better than extremists people to keep the war alive !!!

    Dec 20th, 2016 - 04:53 pm - Link - Report abuse -3
  • Brasileiro

    I do not agree with the second flight. Not enough islanders to generate demand...

    Dec 20th, 2016 - 05:06 pm - Link - Report abuse -3
  • gordo1

    Vejo que o nabo do Brasil voltou com suas absurdas intervenções.

    Dec 20th, 2016 - 05:19 pm - Link - Report abuse +3
  • James Marshall

    pgerman...I would imagine the Mr Summers will shake the hand of any Argentine public servant if and when the Argentine Government publically recognise the Falklanders, stops claiming his home and the people he represents and acknowledges their right to determine their own future.

    The extremists in this case are the country with a bizarre concept that the Argentine Representative to the Malvinas, Antarctic and South Atlantic Islands actually has legitimacy and the people and government that live there don't. Go figure....

    Dec 20th, 2016 - 06:05 pm - Link - Report abuse +4
  • Marc1

    Thanks for clearing that up. It's a dance, that's for sure.
    But I certainly think the outlook looks more helpful for all concerned now that CFK is no longer the dictator.

    Dec 20th, 2016 - 09:53 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Roger Lorton

    Marc1 - the reason the Argentines are involved in the flights issue is because a majority of destinations require travel through Argentine air-space.

    The FIG release is here -

    I see that the Argentine release concentrates on the identification of unknown soldiers and leaves mention of the fisheries off altogether. Would that be because the Kirchners dropped the fisheries exchanges? I also find it interesting that the ICRC agreement was not signed until after this round of talks was completed - apparently successfully.

    Now all the FIG and BA have to do is sort out the detail (easy) and sell it to their peoples (harder).

    Dec 20th, 2016 - 10:20 pm - Link - Report abuse +3
  • Fidel_CasTroll

    HughJuanCoeurs are you stupid?

    FIGs have the final say? In what? Take the flights for example, if Brazil, or Argentina, or Uruguay, or Chile say no to the flights, there are no flights!

    It takes two to Tango, or if it was as you say, no matter what “South America” wanted... then why have any negotiations with those pesky South Americans about flights?


    Dec 21st, 2016 - 10:29 am - Link - Report abuse -2
  • Pete Bog

    “the head of the Malvinas Desk ambassador Maria Teresa Kralikas ”

    It must be a little disappointing to think you have jurisdiction over the Falklands, yet nothing AT ALL happens in the Islands that is dictated by her, not even any Malvinas signs! And that the people who live or were born on the islands, are with the............ British delegation.

    Crackers: Hello all, I am in charge of the Falklands , therefore you Islanders should be with the Argentine delegation under me.

    Islanders: Coming to the latest Legislative Council meeting then?

    Crackers: Er no.

    Islanders: So you aren't actually in charge of us then are you. Now are all our official documents stamped with Malvinas or Falkland Islands?

    Crackers: I decree that Malvinas is used!

    Islanders: Well, look at some we have here, no actual mention of Malvinas on them, is there?

    Crackers: Ignoramuses! I am in control of you in my imagination, and that ,as far as we are concerned is de facto occupation, even though we are not in reality, there.

    Islanders : Dream on and make another cartoon of your airforce sinking the Invincible, and while you're at it can you introduce us to the Super Gauchos with the two foot long knives that didn't turn up in 1982?( to counter the Ghurkas, who did turn up).

    Crackers: Everything Korned Beef Kate said was true! The Super Gauchos were there, in our hearts.

    Islanders: Anyhow, we're with the British delegation, so we'll deal with reality and you can have another siesta and dream on.

    Dec 21st, 2016 - 11:26 am - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Fidel_CasTroll

    The reason fisheries and high seas affairs are not in the release is because those are matters the islanders and British are interested in negotiating, but as I have said many a time before, for Argentina there is nothing to negotiate in this field, so nothing this matter simply will not be taken up.

    Argentina already has sovereignty over the vast majority of the shelf beyond F.I. EEZ, there is nothing to discuss and Argentina will do as it pleases in those waters without entering into sovereignty eroding agreements with the UK that would trammle what it can do within its own territory... that would be stupid.

    Dec 21st, 2016 - 01:06 pm - Link - Report abuse -2
  • DemonTree

    @ Fidel_CasTroll
    An agreement over fishing would not erode your sovereignty. You had one before and it never stopped your claims. And why would it be stupid to have an agreement? Just sharing data would be useful, and if both sides agreed a sensible level of fishing to preserve stocks that would also be good for both.

    If you don't like a particular agreement then don't sign it, but that doesn't mean any agreement is bad. You have to give something to get something.

    Dec 21st, 2016 - 01:16 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Pete Bog

    “Argentina already has sovereignty over the vast majority of the shelf beyond F.I. EEZ, there is nothing to discuss and Argentina will do as it pleases in those waters”

    There is no evidence to whatsoever to suggest that the UK/Falkland Islands want any part of Argentine waters.

    Dec 23rd, 2016 - 05:09 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Roger Lorton

    Everything you need to know about the Continental shelf decision & Argentine spin

    Dec 23rd, 2016 - 11:17 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • monxus

    Ninguna autorización de vuelo para los kelpers. Qué se pudran solos.

    Dec 24th, 2016 - 06:07 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • downunder


    “Bit of a pointless exercise really seeing as it is FIG who will have the final say, no matter what their South American neighbours might want.”

    Fidel Castro:

    “HughJuanCoeurs are you stupid?”

    No, he is not stupid, what is stupid about stating the bleeding obvious – that the FIG can veto any second flight agreement from SA that it does not like?

    This is just another example of your contempt before investigation, try reading carefully and with an open mind for a change.

    “Stupid is as stupid does.”

    Dec 26th, 2016 - 03:34 am - 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!