MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, October 6th 2022 - 03:07 UTC



Argentina to strengthen fisheries patrolling in the South Atlantic

Saturday, March 14th 2020 - 09:46 UTC
Full article 12 comments
ARA Bouchard is a French refurbished Gowind Class Ocean Patrol Vessel, that includes a helicopter and was recently incorporated to the Argentine navy ARA Bouchard is a French refurbished Gowind Class Ocean Patrol Vessel, that includes a helicopter and was recently incorporated to the Argentine navy

Argentina is going to strengthen control over its EEZ, to protect resources, and quite soon the recently acquired “ARA Bouchard” will be setting sail for its first patrolling, according to Argentine fisheries and navy officials.

Carlos Liberman, Fisheries Under Secretary met with top brass from the Navy, the head of the Fisheries Department Alejandro Gottifredi; the head of Maritime Interests and the director of Fisheries coordination and inspections, Luca Pratti.

ARA Bouchard is a French refurbished Gowind Class Ocean Patrol Vessel that includes a helicopter and was recently incorporated to the Argentine navy. “She's the first of four units, which are expected in the coming years”.

In a recent speech Argentine president Alberto Fernandez anticipated he would be sending a bill to congress to increase fines of those vessels and companies involved in illegal fishing in the country's EEZ. Likewise a bill helping to clearly outline the borders of Argentina's continental shelf which according to the Law of the Sea for coastal states can extend until mile 350.

The Argentine foreign ministry has also been active and recently hosted “2020, the super year of the Oceans and advancing on negotiations for a new biodiversity treaty referred to waters outside national jurisdiction”

The agenda of the meeting included negotiations for Marine Protected Areas, and Global Fishing Watch technology which is used to keep track of fishing fleets activities. Two of the strongest Argentine private fisheries lobbies participated in the conference.

According to participants the idea is not only to protect national jurisdictions, but also regulate operations in the adjoining mile 201, following on international rules on the issue. Argentina argues that the South west Atlantic is the only ocean which lacks a fisheries ruling outside the EEZ. This is particularly serious since several migratory species such as hake and squid are exposed to the consequences, and could easily lead to an over exploitation scenario in the South Atlantic

Top Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • Islander1

    Well Argentina- WHY is there no agreement measures outside the 200mile EEZ inn the SW Atlantic?
    Answer is very simple- its because your side will not agree to work with and talk to our side to co-operate on one!
    And don't anyone come back with the crap about FIG being an illegal Govt etc! No it is not - it happens to be the legally elected Govt of these Islands - yes there is a Sov disputes but it is just pathetic and childish to just refuse to accept reality.
    There used indeed to be a simple agreed system where talks took place on areas of mutual interest - and that any agreements on a way forward had no bearing on the Sov position of either side.
    Your side tore it all up!

    Mar 14th, 2020 - 12:08 pm +3
  • Terence Hill

    “You are...fooling yourself in those beliefs” On the contrary it is you who presents your beliefs. While I have presented only ascertainable facts.
    The UK after two diplomatic protests, moved to effect the only legal remedy open to it. Which was Argentina's eviction. They can point to at least two Anglo-Spanish treaties that exclude any possibility of an Argentinean legal claim. So the UK has a peace treaty that legally recognises that Argentina has no claim, and additionally a right of conquest that was lawful at that time.
    “In the 19c international law allowed states to acquire territory by conquest ...
    It is therefore not surprising that 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'. Siehr, Conflicts, Indian ”
    Akehurst's Modern Introduction To International Law Seventh Revised Edition, Peter Malanczuk
    There was a peace treaty, which was acknowledged as such in both the Argentine and the UK in their own archives, the Convention of Settlement, 1850. This is how legal scholars of the day and therefore nations viewed the effects of such a peace treaty to wit:
    § 12. Principle of uti possidetes. A treaty of peace leaves every thing in the state in which it finds it, unless there be some express stipulations to the contrary. The existing state of possession is maintained, except so far as altered by the terms of the treaty. If nothing be said about the conquered country or places, they remain with the possessor, and his title cannot afterward be called in question. ... ...Treaties of peace, made by the competent authorities of such governments, are obligatory upon the whole nation, and, consequently, upon all succeeding governments, whatever may be their character.

    Mar 14th, 2020 - 08:18 pm +3
  • Pugol-H

    Liberato/ Trimonde

    Conquest is not part of Britain’s claim to the islands, correct.

    Although we have had to re-capture them a few times.

    However part of Argentina’s claim is proximity to Patagonia/TDF.

    Which are claimed/occupied by Argentina on the basis of conquest, some 50 years after the British re-capture of the Islands in 1833, some 190 years after the British first planted their flag on the Islands.

    The other part is inheritance from Spain, however the treaty of 1771 (81 years after the British first planted their flag on the Islands) proves the British rejected the Spanish claim 45 years before Argentina existed, in any form and some 109 years before Argentina reached the shores of the S. Atlantic.

    Argentina only has a claim to the Falklands if you completely ignore the British history of the S. Atlantic, and doesn’t have a claim to anything else in the S. Atlantic/Antarctic whatever you do.

    That is the “uncomfortable truth” of history for you.

    Mar 15th, 2020 - 01:31 pm +3
Read all comments

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