MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency

Foradori/Duncan deal ignores Argentina: only reflects British interests in Malvinas, claims minister Taiana

“Of what I am certain is that this deal in the conditions outlined is not beneficial for the national interest. It has been totally negative”, underlined Taiana

Argentine Defense minister Jorge Taiana said that leaving aside former Deputy Foreign minister's alleged conduct during negotiations with British diplomats, --if proven true would be “shameful”--, what is really “serious, negative and disturbing” is that the joint communiqué put an end to Argentine sanctions on foreign companies involved in illegal fishing and oil exploration activities in Malvinas Islands with the authorization of British authorities.

“You always have to give the benefit of doubt when dealing with the British,” said Taiana in reference to statements in former Foreign Office minister Ian Duncan's book on memoirs in which allegedly Foradori was 'drunk' when he agreed to lifting Argentine sanctions on British companies 'illegally' operating in Falklands/Malvinas waters.

But besides the episode being 'shameful' if proven true, what is really disturbing and serious are the negative conditions imposed on Argentine sovereign rights on the Islands and its resources, in the joint communiqué of 13 September 2016.

“Of what I am certain is that this deal in the conditions outlined is not beneficial for the national interest. It has been totally negative”, continued Taiana, also a former foreign affairs minister, during an improvised media conference at the Buenos Aires naval base on the departure of the school frigate ARA Libertad, on its fiftieth instruction tour.

Taiana recalled that the joint communiqué Foradori/Duncan was never sent to or considered by the Argentine congress and “certainly does not reflect the national interest, but rather the British interest and repeats almost to the text of the letter sent by then prime minister Theresa May to ex president Macri thanking him for his good wishes at the commencement of her mandate”.

“What Foradori signed in 2016 and was later countersigned by then foreign minister Susana Malcorra and president Macri implied the abolition of Argentine laws imposing sanctions on companies illegally operating in the Malvinas Islands, authorized by the British government in fisheries and oil exploration”

Taiana insisted “this is far more serious and negative that whatever happened with deputy minister Foradori” at the wine cellar of the UK embassy in Buenos Aires.

Ian Duncan's book revelations of a night of drinking wine while drafting the joint communiqué have become a major scandal in Argentina and are seen as an attempt to torpedo the deal.

In effect the ten point communiqué in point 10 referred to the South Atlantic states that “In a positive spirit, both sides agreed to set up a dialogue to improve cooperation on South Atlantic issues of mutual interest. Both governments agreed that the formula on sovereignty in paragraph 2 of the Joint Statement of 19 October 1989 applies to this Joint Communiqué and to its consequences. In this context it was agreed to take the appropriate measures to remove all obstacles limiting the economic growth and sustainable development of the Falkland Islands, including in trade, fishing, shipping and hydrocarbons. Both parties emphasized the benefits of cooperation and positive engagement for all concerned.

”In accordance with the principles set out in the 14 July 1999 Joint Statement and Exchange of Letters, both sides agreed that further air links between the Falkland Islands and third countries would be established. In this context they agreed the establishment of 2 additional stops per month in mainland Argentina, one in each direction. The specific details will be defined.

”Both delegations expressed their full support for a DNA identification process in respect of unknown Argentine soldiers buried in the Darwin cemetery. Discussions on this sensitive humanitarian issue will be taken forward in Geneva on the basis of an International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) assessment supplemented by bilateral discussions as required. Both sides agreed that the wishes of the families concerned were paramount.

“Both sides agreed to establish a date for a fuller meeting as soon as possible”.