MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, March 22nd 2023 - 21:44 UTC



Falklands airbridge working; no reply from Argentina on a second flight

Thursday, April 27th 2017 - 23:44 UTC
Full article 46 comments

Falkland Islands lawmaker, MLA Mike Summers apologized on behalf of the UK Ministry of Defense (MoD) for the disruption that the flight diversion from Ascension Island had caused, but said he knew they were working hard to ensure proper arrangements were in place for the continuation of the air bridge with the UK. Read full article


Disclaimer & comment rules
  • gordo1

    Are there any other examples of Argentina NOT complying with agreements with other nations?

    Apr 28th, 2017 - 05:17 am - Link - Report abuse +2
  • golfcronie

    Too many to mention

    Apr 28th, 2017 - 07:48 am - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Brit Bob

    On the subject of an additional flight MLA Summers noted that it was six months since the signature of the joint statement in Buenos Aires by the UK Minister and Argentine Foreign Minister and none of the issues in respect of the Falklands had been honored by the Argentine Government. But, he said, the planning for a second flight will continue.

    Perhaps they still regard the islanders as second class citizens?

    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:

    Second class politicians?

    Apr 28th, 2017 - 09:19 am - Link - Report abuse +2
  • pgerman

    I have been double checking and, as far as it was published, the mentioned agreement doesn't mention that Argentina must promote a second flight.

    In addition there is no clear evidence that the current argentine government is obstructing any civil regular flight between the islands and Brazil.

    It seems to me that nobody is comercially interested in a second flight and the islandres are not willing to publicly accept that. What's more they are not accustomed to make bussines as any regular people and they must be awaiting for the economic assitance of the UK, or Argentina, for the operation of the second flight.

    Blaming the argentine government for any project failure is the easiest way to avoid accepting any local politician responsibility. At this point some of the islander lawmakers seems to be peronists...

    Apr 28th, 2017 - 12:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Think


    Once..., every muerte de obispo..., you say something right...
    This is one of those rare ocassions...

    May the great architect illumine you...
    El Think...

    Apr 28th, 2017 - 12:42 pm - Link - Report abuse -4
  • pgerman

    It is the first time I read that a peronist recognizes that “blaming others for any own failure is a regular peronist behaviour”.....nice !!

    We might start discussing about the responsibility of peronist party and peronist presidents for the Argentine failure as a country....after 70 year of being the hegemonic political force.

    Apr 28th, 2017 - 12:51 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Think

    We might but... for fairness sake..., we should include a peronist in the discussion...
    What do a mason or a socialdemocrat know about Peronism...?

    Apr 28th, 2017 - 01:18 pm - Link - Report abuse -4
  • pgerman

    If you know about Mussolini and Francisco Franco you know about Peron...

    Apr 28th, 2017 - 01:39 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Think

    I don't believe you do...
    Ya evidently know nowt about Argie history...

    Apr 28th, 2017 - 02:05 pm - Link - Report abuse -3
  • Roger Lorton

    Seems to me that many Islanders will be quite happy for there not to be a second flight. They see more than enough nuisance Argies with the existing arrangement.

    Apr 29th, 2017 - 12:16 am - Link - Report abuse +2
  • DemonTree

    Haha, how unfair. Argentina has done something: they've authorised some dodgy low cost airline to fly from Comodoro Rivadavia to the Falklands. It's too bad the airline hasn't tried to get permission from from the airport they want to fly into yet.

    More seriously, didn't the Brazilian foreign ministry say that the planned commercial flights between the Islands and the continent, will only be allowed to operate in Brazil, if Argentina agrees? That sounds rather like Argentina has not agreed yet, but who knows?

    Apr 29th, 2017 - 09:36 am - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Islander1

    Pgerman/Think. Actually MLA Summer is right-neither Brazil nor Chile has had any indication from Argentina that they will not be diplomatically and politically hassled if they authorise a direct commercial flight to the Islands. Without Argentina giving Brazil the quiet “ok” or quietly advising Chile the overflight would be granted - No Flight. So thus todays Argentina has not honoured its commitment and has 100% the same attitude towards the Islands that the Kirschener Govt had.
    Your current Govt still even makes the 3rd country flagged cargo vessel that operates between Stanley and Montevideo steam right out around the Arg 200 mile passage limit- they know it costs and extra half day steaming each way- and that is a lot of fuel oil and thus more expensive freight.
    But we are used to it and work around it and live with it and still grow our economy- just one of the many reasons why we dislike Argentina!
    Next summer there will be more room for genuine tourists and visitors to fly in on the weekly flight from Chile as looks like we will be insisting all Argentines have to apply in advance for a Visa(so we can check if that one is undesirable and refuse entry) - and limit it to 25 or so per week. Would not apply of course to shipborne daytrippers.

    Apr 29th, 2017 - 09:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • monxus

    If the English are so attached to the rules, they should comply with the great number of UN Resolutions calling to discuss the issue of sovereignty between Argentina and the United Kingdom. In fact, kelpers should be grateful to Argentina because they have not yet cut off the only flight that authorized to the islands. Kelpers are going to have to use the rafts as if they were Cubans ... ha ha!

    Apr 30th, 2017 - 09:37 am - Link - Report abuse -5
  • Islander1

    Care to list please Mandatory Security Council resolutions that say this?
    There are Three international flights into the Islands a week - not one.

    Apr 30th, 2017 - 11:17 am - Link - Report abuse +2
  • monxus

    Of course. United Nations Resolution 2065 (1965), 3160 (1973), and a lot more General Assembly Resolutions, and much others from the Special Committee on Decolonization. Last one in 2016. Refering to flights, you can tell that to your Representatives, that went crying about flights to the UN, last week... At least you have yellow fever vaccines to go thru Africa.... or may be you ja ja!!!

    Apr 30th, 2017 - 12:24 pm - Link - Report abuse -4
  • Islander1

    Mionxus- Suggest you need to learn a bit about the UN. I asked for and Mandatory UN Security Council resolutions. They are the only ones issued by the UN that have any International Requiremnt for the party to adhere to.
    All those from the General assembly let alone some to of the less than democratically run sub committees are irrelevant to the world.
    I would refer you to the only UN Security Council Resolution on the Islands - the one in April 1982 ordering your Govt to withdraw its forces after its invasion of 2nd April. They one Argentina blatantly ignored - and thus gave the UK full UN right to use its force to evict the Argentine forces.
    No MLAs have been to the UN as you suggest, its not an issue, and No we do not need Yellow Fever vaccines to travel through West Africa.

    Apr 30th, 2017 - 04:18 pm - Link - Report abuse +3
  • Hepatia

    You Brits need to understand that if you want to keep your empire going then, at the very minimum, you need to learn how build runways.

    England will return the Malvinas within 25 years.

    Apr 30th, 2017 - 07:29 pm - Link - Report abuse -4
  • Pete Bog


    There is no longer a British Empire because unlike Argentina, we don't need an Empire.

    We are great as we are, that's why we're called Great Britain.

    Apr 30th, 2017 - 08:30 pm - Link - Report abuse +3
  • Islander1

    The Runway on Ascension Island is not British- its USA built and maintained. the apron on front of the terminal- yes that bit is Brit.
    How could England return anything to anyone? - its not an independent country -hasn't been “England” for about a 1000 years- that's why its called UK!

    Apr 30th, 2017 - 09:53 pm - Link - Report abuse +4
  • DemonTree

    310 years exactly, not 1000. It was an independent country until the union with Scotland in 1707.

    Apr 30th, 2017 - 11:04 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Roger Lorton

    Last I heard, the Ascension facility is now a joint operation and it'll be the RAF repairing the runway.

    May 01st, 2017 - 01:02 am - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Tarquin Fin


    “If you know about Mussolini and Francisco Franco you know about Peron...”


    May 01st, 2017 - 01:07 am - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Islander1

    Demon Tree - I was allowing for about 11-12th century when England more or less took over Wales and thus the 2 became joined.

    May 01st, 2017 - 03:19 am - Link - Report abuse +2
  • monxus

    Dear Islander1: Security Council functions are limited to recommendations concerning cases of threats to peace, breaches of peace or acts of aggression.
    Are funny your arguments against “democracy” in General Assembly, which is an organ represented by ALL countries with equal rights, while emphasizes the role of the Security Committee, which has no incumbency in this matter, and even more so, which has the veto right of UK, which is one of the interested parties…. Your arguments are really funny ....
    You assume that UN General Assembly Resolutions do not generate International Law which is certainly nonsense. Even non-binding Resolutions contribute to the creation of international custom (which is a source of law) and interpretive practices of the UN Charter.
    Moreover, the case of the Falkland Islands has been extensively dealt by the specific body of the UN which is the Decolonization Committee, which ANNUALLY issues Resolutions to finish the colonial situation of the Islands, reiterating the calls to UK to negotiate SOVEREIGNTY of Malvinas Islands, with Argentina.
    Refering to the vaccines to travel via Africa, you will need them and in great quantity, it seems. Ha ha!!! If you want flights to the mainland, first UK should complies with the UN Resolutions about sovereignty negotiations. If not, you better have to think about build big stores, because you wil need them to gather goods .... LOL!

    May 01st, 2017 - 05:56 am - Link - Report abuse -3
  • The Voice

    Decolonisation Committee! Bunch of despots, criminals and failed nations. Who takes any notice of this lunch club?

    Anyway, when the Argentine Colonialist army invaded the Falklands the UN issued a BINDING resolution to leave which the colonialists failed to comply with. The result? The colonialists were handed their arses on a plate and got thrown out by British forces. Get real!

    May 01st, 2017 - 11:54 am - Link - Report abuse +3
  • gordo1

    monxus - the decolonisation committee is nothing more than a “talking shop”. It makes announcements about the Falkland Islands but it is curious that the committee has never visited the islands to consult the islanders.

    So it means nothing! And no notice should be taken of its determinations.

    May 01st, 2017 - 05:18 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Islander1

    Do you know both current and previous Decolonization Committee Chairmen have been invited by the Falkland Islands Govt to come to the Islands top meet people and gather information themselves.
    All have refused each and every time.
    Yet the last one visited Argentina in his capacity as Chairman!

    Answer me this- you can you call it “Decolonisation” when you would have Argentina taking over the Government of the Islands against the democratic will of the Islanders - who have lived here for up to 180 years- some 9 generations - and never forced any civilian population out when they first came- nor exterminated any indigenous civilian population?
    What your side want to do is called 18th Century COLONIZATION! Luckily the rest of the world has moved on since those days- sadly Argentina has not.
    Africa- sorry you are wrong.World Health Org has confirmed- no vaccines required. Just same as many many hot countries-if there at night protect against mosquitoes or take an anti malaria course- bog standard international commonsense!
    By the way- if you reckon you can threaten by cutting the one little airlink we have with mainland S America- Nothing comes on that flight that we cannot produce here or import from elsewhere by air and sea.
    Big Loosers - Argentine next of kin families of those killed here in 1982 who wish to visit the graves of their loved ones, and of your Veterans who want- and NEED to visit at times to get their own mental peace of mind - its called Post Traumatic Stress Disorder- guess you have not got a clue have you!

    May 01st, 2017 - 08:38 pm - Link - Report abuse +3
  • monxus

    Surely, kelpers dont like General Assembly or the Decolonization Committee. Neither OAS, Mercosur, UNASUR, CELAC, the Group of 77 and China, ASPA (Arab States), Non-Aligned Countries, Central American Parliament, etc, etc... (list continue..) and the mayority of coutries of the world that have make calls to UK to negotiate with Argentina about SOVEREIGNTY of MALVINAS. Even more, most of them, have supportted the sovereign rights of Argentina over the archipelago.
    Surely, when the Brexit process will be over, to all this International Organizations and Countries, surely the European Union will join them ....
    Perhaps you, kelpers, should begin to think that you are living in a land that was usurped by FORCE by the UK in 1833, and that you are the descendants of the settlers transplanted to the Islands, and that your legal position is certainly very weak.
    Just to clarify to you, I inform you that Argentina formally exist as a Nation since 1816, (informally since 1810), and that many Argentine governors and Argentine population lived in Malvinas before the English expelled them by force and established English settlers.

    May 01st, 2017 - 10:32 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • Pete Bog


    “ the Decolonization Committee”

    Whose remit is NOT to transfer territories like the Falkland Islands to a would be coloniser like Argentina , but to encourage INDEPENDENCE for all NSGT's on the C24 list.

    Question. Have the Falkland Islands progressed further toward Independence under the UK ?

    Yes, because each change of the Falkland Islands constitution has given the democratically elected Falkland Island Government more autonomy from the UK.

    For example, the Governor(The Queen's representative in the Islands), used to have a vote on the Falkland Islands Legislative Council, over Falkland Islands law.

    Now the Governor does not. Therefore the Islands are moving closer towards Independence, not further away from it.

    However the C24 have forgot what their remit is, and as they DO NOT act within that remit, which includes visiting the NSGTs on their list, and promoting the Independence of them from former colonial owners, then WHY should the UK take any notice of their skewed pronouncements?

    The UK have said that if the Falkland Islands wished independence, the UK would not stand in their way.

    Argentina do not wish the Islands to become Independent.

    Therefore it is Argentina and the C24 itself that act against the remit of the decolonisation committee, not the UK.

    Check out the stated aims of the Decolonisation committee for yourself.

    “Perhaps you, kelpers, should begin to think that you are living in a land that was usurped by FORCE by the UK in 1833”

    You call the issuing of a letter to Pinedo, an act of force?

    The military that Great Britain had protested about, was asked to leave in 1833, the majority of which were BRITISH sailors.

    The settlers were ASKED TO STAY in 1833 including ANTONIO RIVERO who agreed to live under British rule. In fact, 11 of the 22 settlers who chose to STAY on the Islands were from the River Plate region. Another 4 were Uruguayan Indians.

    NO British people were' transplanted ' off HMS Clio and Tyne in 1833.

    May 01st, 2017 - 11:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Kanye

    Oops, somebody drank the Koolaid...

    May 01st, 2017 - 11:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • monxus

    @PeteBog: According to Public Intl Law, the term “people” or Nation doesnt apply to any group of people, nor the concept of “self-determination” is unambiguous. Malvinas Islanders clearly dont fulfill any of the requirements to be a people, namely their pre-existence to the formation of the National State in which they reside, territorial permanence and historical and cultural continuity; and that possess a ethnic, cultural and organizational characteristics that differentiate them from the other national societies.
    Islanders are a population transplanted in order to create a colony. Therefore, the population was never subjugated by a colonial power as required UN Res 1514.
    Not only islanders are not a “people” in the legal sense, they are a British population in a overseas territory. It doesnt prevent that in a process of negotiation with Argentina, could be recognized some elements of internal self-determination, in terms of autonomy and guarantees for the respect to their way of life and language.
    In addition, UN Resol 1514 states that “any attempt to disrupt part or all of a country's national unity and territorial integrity is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the UN”. Refering to this, UK occupied Islands by force in 1833, expelled its population and its authorities, not allowing their return and violating the territorial integrity of Argentina, who was a free country, as I said, since 1810/1816.
    General Assembly has accorded ”self-determination” a predominant state over that of territorial integrity, BUT EXCLUDING special class of colonies, plantations, where residents are not indigenous.
    According to Public Intl Law, the conditions for the right of self-determination and status of Nation definitely are not applied to kelper population of the Malvinas, and would be even less accepted by almost any country in the world. Incidentally, the entire population of the Islands is not even enough to fill a single theater in Buenos Aires.

    May 02nd, 2017 - 01:13 am - Link - Report abuse -2
  • Islander1

    Monxus- do learn to read what others write;
    Go to your own Argentine Navy historical Archives.
    There you will find the ARA Sarandi and the list of names of the Arg militia and their families who were indeed expelled by the British.
    And you will find then names of the 2 civilian families who left voluntarily AND the names of all the civilian settlers who freely agreed to STAY in the Islands and accept British rule.

    Then if you still do not like the truth- fly to England and go and see the Royal Navy Archives for the 2 British vessels that arrived in Port Louis in1833 - you will find the same matching lists of names.

    Do please quote that part of the UN Charter that quotes that selfdetermination does not apply to us Islanders?
    Read my question first.

    By your own words you have stated that the 30 million or so Argentines of European origen also thus have no rights to be in Argentina- you all need to leave and give Argentina back to its rightfull indeigenous peoples.

    May 02nd, 2017 - 03:39 am - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Marcelo Kohen

    Now freely available in English: The Malvinas/Falklands between History and Law.

    May 02nd, 2017 - 08:43 am - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Roger Lorton

    Now freely available: the truth

    Lawyers eh? Lying for a living. Who needs 'em :-)

    May 02nd, 2017 - 11:47 am - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Think

    Mr. Lorton...
    Sorry..., but Sr.. Cohens' material looks much, much better than yours...
    Lots of pretty nice pictures and colorful old maps too...!
    Take it easy insulting other professionals..., laddie...
    Nobody has written 1212 against you in here..., have they...?

    Sr. Cohen...
    With your permission..., I would like, when right or appropriate, to reference to your excellent Malvinas work in my humble posts...
    Source citation and linking are, of course, a given...
    Mil gracias por su dedicación...
    El Think...

    May 02nd, 2017 - 01:15 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • James Marshall

    Pretty pictures, colorful is the words that count Think, you can dress the lies and rhetoric up all you like in a pretty book, doesn't make it correct though....I take it we will find this in the fiction section on Amazon will we....

    May 02nd, 2017 - 03:44 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Voice

    He kind of blows it at the end...Mr. Think...
    By implying that Britain took possession by the use of force...
    ...a very common and apparently acceptable method of acquiring territory at the time...

    I might have worded it differently and avoided the whole conquest implication...
    Also if the French settlement was legal to transfer possession to was the British at Port Egmont...
    If the French settlement was not...then Spanish claim is down to a Papal Bull...
    My opinion is the pamphlet is trying to do too much... stick to the facts and less of the opinion..

    May 02nd, 2017 - 06:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Think

    Nobody's perfect Mr. Voice...

    But..., in me humble & slighty biased Patagonian opinion..., Sr. Cohen's pamphlet is far superior than Mr.Pepper & Mr.Pascoes' one...

    And don't get me started on Mr. Lortons' pamphlet...;-)

    May 02nd, 2017 - 07:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Voice

    Mr. Think

    Yeah I suppose....

    I'm seeing a few of my arguments in there...
    ...and a bit of constructive criticism never harms anyone...
    ...well, it must have harmed “hard work never killed anyone”, it must have killed someone sometime...
    ...but you know what I mean...;-)

    May 02nd, 2017 - 07:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Think

    Mr. Voice...

    《“Hard work must have killed someone sometime...”》... you say...

    You don't need to travel far away in time or place... Try the Clydebank in the Patent Asbestos Manufacturing Company time...

    You know what I mean...;-(

    May 02nd, 2017 - 08:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    May 02nd, 2017 - 10:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    “Islanders are a population transplanted in order to create a colony.” Exactly like Argentina, except Argentina has not one scintilla of international law to support her illegal claim.
    Akehursts Modern Introduction to International Law By Peter Malanczuk
    “..It is therefore not surprising that the General Assembly declared in 1970 that the modem 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'..”
    The UK can further rely on the Peace of Utrecht, which explicitly bars any Argentine claim of succession.
    “ is hereby further agreed and concluded, that neither the Catholic King, nor any of his heirs and successors whatsoever, shall sell, yield, pawn, transfer, or by any means, or under any name, alienate from them and the crown of Spain, to the French, or to any other nations whatever, any lands, dominions, or territories, or any part thereof, belonging to Spain in America.”
    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.

    May 03rd, 2017 - 02:13 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Marcos Alejandro

    Roger Lorton
    Now freely available: the truth...get used to it archer :-)

    May 03rd, 2017 - 04:02 am - Link - Report abuse -1
  • Terence Hill

    Marcos Alejandro
    Kohen is a sophist of the worst kind as he continually makes assertions without the backing of legal judgements, simply his own personal opinion, which legally makes such claims worthless.
    For example in the publication Página12 dated Tuesday, March 5, 2013 he writes “This is a plebiscite organised by the British government”. Which is a deliberate lie as many independent publications and witnesses have attested, it was organised by the F.I. government. Then he attempts to discredit the referendum by implying that there is a prerequisite for the UN to be involved, where no such requirement in The Charter et al. Then he carries on stating there are categories of people under international law who are entitled to self-determination, citing the UNGA as his source. With very few exceptions the GA resolutions are not international law, merely advisements.
    It would seem that Sr. Kohen's blandishments have more too do with his continued employment by the Argentine government than with the reality of international law.

    May 03rd, 2017 - 12:12 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Clyde15


    You do realise...or you probably don't that all runways...even those on the USA need repairs
    due to heavy use.
    Of course you are an expert civil engineer, economist, historian and troll

    By the way, the runway was built by US Forces so maybe they need to “learn how to build runways”....Stupid woman !

    May 04th, 2017 - 07:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    “According to Public Intl Law, the term “people” or Nation doesnt apply to any group of people, nor the concept of “self-determination” … “
    Not according to to this lawyer, who won the case against Marcelo Kohen when he argued, the same in the ICJ on behalf of Serbia.

    “2. The Right to Self-Determination Within the UN Legal Framework

    ...Respect for the principle of the self-determination of peoples was first included in UN Charter7 and was later codified in both International Covenants, that on Civil and Political Rights and that on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.8
    The modern meaning of the right to self-determination, as embodied in common Article 1 to both Covenants, consists of the right of all peoples to determine their political status and to freely pursue their economic, social, and cultural
    development. ...

    6. Concluding Remarks

    ...Seemingly, in the Court’s view erga omnes obligations with respect to the right to self-determination include the duty to promote, through joint and separate action, realization of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, in accordance with the provisions of the Charter, and to render assistance to the United Nations in carrying out the responsibilities entrusted to it by the Charter regarding its implementation. ...”

    Self-Determination through the Lens of the International Court of Justice by Gentian Zyberi

    May 04th, 2017 - 08:25 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!