MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, November 29th 2022 - 11:53 UTC

 

 

Argentine officials question city status awarded to Stanley, Falklands capital

Monday, May 23rd 2022 - 10:55 UTC
Full article 16 comments
Santiago Cafiero said the “decision has no effect but confirms UK does not respect international law”, insisting that Malvinas is “Argentine territory” Santiago Cafiero said the “decision has no effect but confirms UK does not respect international law”, insisting that Malvinas is “Argentine territory”
Carmona underlined that “what really matters is the British reticence to resume negotiations with Argentina over the sovereignty question, which is central”. Carmona underlined that “what really matters is the British reticence to resume negotiations with Argentina over the sovereignty question, which is central”.

Argentine Foreign Minister and the head of the Malvinas, South Atlantic Islands and Antarctica Office strongly questioned the Queen's decision to award city status to the capital of the Falkland Islands.

Santiago Cafiero said the “decision has no effect but confirms that the UK does not respect international law”, insisting that Malvinas is “Argentine territory”, and the capital of the Islands is Puerto Argentino.

“The announcement from the British Crown on Puerto Argentino simply exposes the colonial character of the illegal and illegitimate occupation by the British of our Malvinas Islands”, pointed out Cafiero. He added “the territory was usurped from Argentina 189 years ago with a military invasion”.

“It is Argentine territory and we will continue acting peacefully and through diplomacy in defense of our sovereignty,” concluded Cafiero in the hash tag #MalvinasNosUne.

Gustavo Carmona head of the Malvinas Desk also criticized the regal decision. “The announcement from the British crown regarding Puerto Argentino, once again reveals the colonial character of the illegal and illegitimate British occupation of our #Malvinas”.

“It's an anachronic display that only shows a long expired imperialist pretension”, added Carmona. “The decision has no international meaning although it confirms that UK does not respect international Law, by insisting in a colonial approach by retaining part of Argentine territory”.

Carmona underlined that “what really matters is the British reticence to resume negotiations with Argentina over the sovereignty question, which is central”.

Puerto Argentino will continue to be Argentine, “in spite of the royal graces out of time and belonging to long gone imperial ambitions”

Last week it was announced that the Queen as part of the Platinum Jubilee celebrations had granted city status to eight locations, six in the UK, plus Falkland Islands  (Stanley) and Isle of Man (Douglas). It was the first time that such civic honors were open to British Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies.

Top Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • Terence Hill

    The decision has no effect but further confirms that the UK is in complete compliance with international law.
    While none of Argentine claims have ever been compliant with any international law. In particle this current claim that ignores the Islanders Referendum, which is an act of legal decolonisation.
    ”Decolonization (American English) or Decolonisation (British English) is the undoing of colonialism ... The fundamental right to self-determination is identified by the United Nations as core to decolonization, allowing not only independence, but also other ways of decolonization. The United Nations Special Committee on Decolonization has stated that in the process of decolonization there is no alternative to the colonizer but to allow a process of self-determination.”
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decolonization
    “UN Charter; DECLARATION REGARDING NON-SELF-GOVERNING TERRITORIES; Article 73; Members of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for ..peoples have not yet attained ..of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, ..b. to develop self-government, ...”

    May 23rd, 2022 - 01:16 pm +6
  • Falklands-Free

    Fact is the British were removing an illegal occupier in 1833. The Argentines left knowing that they had already been warned on at least two occasions they were on British crown territory. If they felt they had a case then, why did they not resist the British when they asked them to leave. They did not because they knew they were on the islands illegally.
    For nearly 200 years Argentina had been griping about that day. They have been indoctrinating their people ever since. That in itself surely is a crime against humanity.

    May 23rd, 2022 - 11:06 am +5
  • Rufus

    This surprises me somewhat, not the perpetual hurling from the pram of Argentine toys, I mean that's an everyday occurrence, but I was under the impression that at the time of Stanley's formation having an Anglican cathedral was enough to be a city?

    May 23rd, 2022 - 11:41 am +5
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!