MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Falklands' Prado stand: Argentina puts pressure on Uruguay and UK embassy
Nin Novoa revealed that the Argentine embassy in Montevideo did not contact the ministry directly, but through a phone call to Uruguay's embassy in Buenos Aires 
”Today (Tuesday) we have addressed the issue. We have contacted the UK ambassador (Ian Duddy)”, said the Uruguayan minister (Pic file)
The Falkland's Stand at the Great Britain Pavillion in Montevideo Expo Prado Rural Show Uruguay has requested that the Falkland Islands stand at the Great Britain pavilion in the country's main agriculture and industrial show, Expo-Prado, be withdrawn, following an emphatic statement and disappointment from Argentina regarding the Falklands/Malvinas question dispute.
The low profile Falklands stand at the pavilion promotes trade and mainly tourism, with leaflets and information on how to reach the Islands and enjoy its unique protected wildlife and environment.
The withdrawal request was announced by the Uruguayan foreign minister, Rodolfo Nin Novoa, who nevertheless expressed it was a private sector issue, but given Argentina's insistence he had contacted the UK embassy in Montevideo on the issue.
Argentina had informally contacted Uruguayan officials but on Monday the San Martin Palace made an official announcement, asking for collaboration and understanding from Uruguay.
However minister Nin Novoa revealed that at no moment did the Argentine embassy in Montevideo contact the ministry directly, but rather through a phone call to the Uruguay embassy in Buenos Aires.
”Today (Tuesday) we have addressed the issue. We have contacted the UK ambassador (Ian Duddy)“, said the Uruguayan minister, who according to recent conferences sounds as a convinced anglophile.
But Nin Novoa also underlined that ”this is a private sector issue, among private actors“, and the Uruguayan government ”has nothing to do with it“.
The minister pointed out that official policy is that ”the Malvinas Islands are the Malvinas (not Falklands) and Uruguay supports the Argentine nation's claim over the Islands“.
Nin Novoa mentioned that this kind of public expressions obviously can hurt feelings.
The Argentine communiqué regretted the UK's action, which it continues to reiterate since 2015 and appeals to Uruguay's collaboration and understanding to that there is no repeat of the situation in future editions of the event”.
Top Comments
Disclaimer & comment rules-
-
-
Read all commentsThink...,old man...
Sep 19th, 2017 - 12:18 pm +5I have told you before and I'll repeat it... yet again just for your benefit...:
It wasn't the FCO or the FIG that broke the Falklands Fishing Agreement (aka SAFC)...
It was the Argies that broke the Falklands Fishing agreements ...
By creating a new Argie fiction about 1 year licences in 2006...
Thereby creating a whole new class in other Argie parts - the squirmers and liars
All of the above... absolutely correct...
Get over yourself Think, no part of the agreements were broken by the FIG. If they had been you would have some proof. As it is, you have just made yourself look intransigent and daft.
Well done, for a 1st generation Argie, you now look like an Argie
You dicks still cannot grasp that a contract is determined by its words. If there was “no benefit” to you, then why did you sign it?
Sep 19th, 2017 - 03:26 pm +5And we do not 'avoid' discussing sovereignty Malvinense 1833. We swapped positions in 1833/34. We argued in 1884 to 1888. We negotiated 1966 to 1982. Then Argentina chose trial by combat as an alternative to talking. You lost.
Now there is nothing left to be said.
We do not 'avoid' discussing sovereignty. WE have merely finished talking.
Perhaps Argentina should not have chosen trial by combat.
The matter is settled.
Take some advice - either learn to negotiate better, or don't sign agreements that you are incapable of honouring.
Last I heard, the Uruguayan Minister had telephoned the British Embassy in Montevideo to ask them to remove the stand at Prado, only to be told that it was nothing to do with the UK, but was a private arrangement between the FIG and the organisers who had invited them.
Sep 13th, 2017 - 01:49 pm +4Whose court is that ball in now?
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!