MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Falklands/Malvinas: Solá meets with UN chief Guterres ahead of the C24 conference
Argentine foreign minister Felipe Solá requested United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to intercede before UK so that the British “consent to resume discussions” over the Falklands/Malvinas Islands. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesUtter Farce! Since Argentina now has their Sovereignty Claim written into their constitution- there can be No - meaningfull & peacefull & democratic discussions on the future of the Islands.
Jun 23rd, 2021 - 10:48 am - Link - Report abuse +4Argentina has already predecided the only outcome it can accept- a full handover of our Sovereignity regardless of what we the people who live here actually want.
Thus any such Sovereignty talks would actually be going totally Against all the principles of the UN and its Charter!
But the Argentine Govt being interested only in good old 19th century imperial colonial expansion against the wishes of the people - does not even begin to understand the reality of the 21st century.
So they will never ever happen- unless we- the people of the Islands ask for them Simple as that.
The Secretary General should re-direct Sola to the relevant UN Department - the UN ICJ
Jun 23rd, 2021 - 11:39 am - Link - Report abuse +2Is Argentina afraid that her Falklands claim will be exposed?
Argentina’s Failure to Present Its Falklands Case to the International Court: (2 pgs): https://www.academia.edu/44992287/Argentinas_Failure_to_Present_its_Falklands_Claim_to_the_International_Court
eneral, with the purpose that Argentina and UK resume sovereignty negotiations over the South Atlantic islands.
Jun 23rd, 2021 - 12:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0All
Islander1, your excuse of our constitution transitory disposition is rubish. Britain dont want to negotiate and thats ok, but dont blame argentine constitution for it.
Jun 23rd, 2021 - 03:24 pm - Link - Report abuse -3With all due respect, the islands “written constitution” says that Queen Elizabeth is their head of state and for Argentina it is no more than toilet paper made in the foreign office. But we dont used it as an excuse. No matter your “constitution” or our constitution, no matter your position or mine. Nobody and nothing can prohibit both sides to negotiate or get arbitration or what ever to find a lasting solution.
“Thus any such Sovereignty talks would actually be going totally Against all the principles of the UN and its Charter!”
ALL resolutions made at the UN regarding the islands recognize the special and particular colonial situation, the existance of a sovereignty dispute and a call to both sides to negotiate. So What you think about the Charter or the UN principles is what you think apply to your case. IT is your interpretation. But again, all resolutions regarding the islands recognize those three things.
Argentina, the “imperial colonial expansionist”. It is really interesting that the biggest imperial colonial expansionist citizens are the only ones calling argentina in that way. Amazing.
Brit Bob hi, The UK refused to recognize any jurisdiction over the ICJ in cases like the Malvinas and already told several times they will not talk about sovereignty. Anyhow, Argentina have already suggested to Britain to get Arbitration in 1885 if my memory doesnt fail.
Islander 1. What totally ... and interestingly, BLIND hypocrite you are. What could be more “19th century imperial colonial expansionist” Than a world power country blocking all sensible talks at the level of equality among nations against a country that can only hold the virtue of diplomacy civility and respect to stand up in its denouncement, with the bogus inapplicable and evasive strategy claim of “islander rights”, when those people not only came after the dispute with Argentina was already active for some 11 years, but came to the islands KNOWINGLY they were attempting to settle islands in favor of Britain's fight against Argentina to keep the islands. MOREOVER, never consolidated or even initiated any form of political or social free thinking, rather stayed dependent and obedient to London, never developing any form of independence. AND YET NOW ( roflmao lol lol rofl and laughing and laughing and laughing) would have the lunatic pretension, EVEN AFTER SIGNING A REFERENDUM SUBMITTING THEIR WILL TO BRITAIN'S MONARCHY AND LONDON, they ' ' ' somehow ' ' ' by the act of some political miracle, they would have the self holding right and privilege of deciding over a sovereignty dispute between two nations that started forming a century before their residence on those islands, which by the way has always been under the tutelage of one of the litigants, as I mentioned before. It holds absolutely ZERO critical sense or any logic at all. It is however an clearly though LIE, which attempts to use the United Nations to avail London's will through them.
Jun 23rd, 2021 - 03:47 pm - Link - Report abuse -3Regarding Argentina's Constitutional law, and this constantly resurfacing idiotic childish attempt at building a valid point about it. That article changes absolutely nothing the appropriateness of a political dispute. All the contrary, all such disputes must stand on the premise of each country possessing validity and worth to their position. Only from an integral position can any negotiations have a frame of reference.
Liberato
Jun 23rd, 2021 - 03:47 pm - Link - Report abuse +2May 30 1884 (p.72). Talk of “it would be a suitable case for arbitration”. There was no firm offer as such.
Argentina is not listed amongst the states that have made declarations recognizing the jurisdiction of the International Courts of Justice as compulsory. (Declarations recognizing the jurisdiction of the Court as compulsory, icj-cij.org).
The UK’s ICJ Declaration
The UK signed up to accept the jurisdiction of the ICJ but stipulated that it withdraws its consent to jurisdiction over any dispute arising before 1st January 1987. (Declarations recognizing the jurisdiction of the Court as compulsory United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, icj-cij org ,22 February 2017).
Common Practice Regarding Declarations
It is common practice for states to restrict declarations by date.(Handbook on International Law, Aust, A. 2010, p419). Regarding this, 68% of nations using the common law system have made reservations to the ICJ in respect of exclusion dates. (Legal Systems & Variances in the Design of Commitment to the ICJ, Mitchell, S.M. 2006).
Argentina and the ICJ
Although Argentina is not listed among the States that recognises the jurisdiction of the ICJ it has previously accepted the courts arbitration and petitioned the court to arbitrate in disputes and has also hinted that it will utilize the court, namely:
On 13th July 2006 Argentina presented a complaint to the ICJ against Uruguay regarding the environmental impact of pulp mills on the river Uruguay. On 20th April 2010 the ICJ ruled that the pulp mills in Uruguay can keep operating. (ICJ Pulp Mills on River Uruguay, Argentina/Uruguay 20 April 2010).
Regarding Falklands oil exploration, Argentine Foreign Minister Jorge Taiana stated in February 2010, that his Government would take 'all measures necessary to preserve our rights' and also reiterated that Argentina had a 'permanent claim' on the islands, saying B.A. Might take the claim to the ICJ.
Argentina has no legal case.
What does any of that have to do with the moral, plain and simple truth of the matter and of all the historical real events that define the conflict “Brit Bob”??
Jun 23rd, 2021 - 06:34 pm - Link - Report abuse -2What's wrong, the Tin Man has no brain to talk about things clearly before him, and must shield behind convoluted highly imperfect systems and methods than are in any case corrupt and manipulated by NATO ?? Oh no... it was the heart that was missing in the Tin Man, not the brain. 'That' he did have! He could think about and calculate everything and anything.
Trimonde
Jun 23rd, 2021 - 08:10 pm - Link - Report abuse +2Is Argentina frit to take her mythical Malvinas case to court? Ja ja
In the case of
Jun 24th, 2021 - 12:10 am - Link - Report abuse +1the Falklands, the current population has its origin not in the occupation of a terra
nullius but in an armed aggression by the United Kingdom that displaces the Argentine authority from the islands and expels its inhabitants to replace them with a
foreign population, imported from Great Britain.
After the war of 82, the English story was modified focusing rather on the supposed “right to self-determination”, Of course, not putting this to evaluation before an international court or an arbitral tribunal (because they would lose).
The only thing we know in these last 200 years is that Great Britain changed its version of history several times, while Argentina maintains the same claim.
The Falkland Islands are considered an integral part of Argentine territory, under occupation by an invading power.
We consider having precedents to prove this before an international court. Mainly we can prove that the invasion of 1833 is not an isolated case, but that it is coupled with the attempted invasion in Buenos Aires in 1807 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_invasions_of_the_River_Plate)
During which the United Kingdom occupied Buenos Aires for 6 months trying to colonize it as they later did in the Falklands.
and he cared very little about the right of self-determination, which in that case if it was real.
Of course we are not stupid and we understand that this UN thing is a circus, and that the world is still ruled by arms.
We only make sure to keep the sovereignty claim open, so that your children, grandchildren and future generations are born under the shadow of a nation that maintains an open sovereignty dispute.
And with the risk of being under constant threat forever, until the conditions of international power change one day. Which may be 50, 500, or a thousand years from now
Repetition, repetition, repetition.
Jun 24th, 2021 - 12:12 am - Link - Report abuse +2I suppose the Decolonization Committee will fail to recommend its Falklands resolution to the UN for adoption AGAIN, this year. As every year.
Repetition, repetition, repetition.
Waste of time - https://falklandstimeline.wordpress.com/united-nations-documents/
@Roger All these comment sections are just repetition repetition repetition… Everyone arguing in circles and then going into personal attacks as if that wins arguments.
Jun 24th, 2021 - 02:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I’m not going to add to the argument when all that should be said is treat people like human beings even if they have different views to you.
How could there be any “discussion” or “a peaceful solution to the sovereignty conflict”? Argentina has only one solution (full Sovereignty over the Malvinas and also other territories) written in its very Constitution. Every compromise is against the Constitution of the country and is of course impossible to accept for every Argentine negotiator. So they could only discuss technicalities (date and procedure for the handover and such things). On the other hand, the U.K. has promised not to abandon the Islanders and not negotiate the sovereignty. So the situation will be a “status quo” and the F.I. must have a strong military defence. Even if Argentina drops its claim it will take a generation to build confidence between the islands and Argentina.
Jun 24th, 2021 - 02:45 pm - Link - Report abuse +1There's nothing “mythical” Bobo Brit, about real flesh and bone official representation by a country's government moving rock and building, working live stock and land with their own sweat and tears, birthing babies and hosting international dignataries under the Argentina flag YOU BIGOT. And I say bigot, because I know very well what lurks behind your condescension and mocking attitude Roger Lorton. British forces took the islands from the Argentinians when the Argentinians had been settled for several years officially on the islands, only because you had to no avail disputed the islands against Spain 60 years before. ... There's nothing “mythical” about any of this you cold stone faced cheating liars.
Jun 24th, 2021 - 05:30 pm - Link - Report abuse -1And Swede; Argentina's constitutional articles regarding Malvinas, needs in no way to interfere with any eventual Argentine concessions on negotiations, and whatever type of solution is found for ending the dispute. It simply serves as a base reference on which to better stand the rights it states having to the islands. No different to how England would attempt to stand on sighting the islands, or building Fort Port Egmont as its own arguments. Argentina has legal ties dating back to 1776 when the islands were put in Buenos Aires's jurisdiction and administration by the Spanish, which segways to it incorporating the islands in the new nation through a process that started in 1820. Constitutional article in the context of negotiations would serve for the bases of comprehensive arguments that could potentially lead to yielding part of its claim or forms of sharing. The only country that feels they are endowed by their written documents with authority over other nations rights in negotiations is your country my friend. Not Argentina.
Calling someone a bigot doesn’t win arguments
Jun 25th, 2021 - 12:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!