India on Friday reiterated support for international negotiations on the Falklands/Malvinas sovereignty dispute between Argentina and the United Kingdom in the Southern Atlantic, according to the Indian media.
Visiting Buenos Aires as part of his three-country tour (Brazil, Paraguay, Argentina), in Latin America, External Affairs Minister Dr. S. Jaishankar held official discussions on a wide range of topics including the Falklands/Malvinas sovereignty dispute, and also expressed India’s interest in exploring payment through local currencies. The two sides also held talks for enhancing military exchanges and trade in the strategic sectors.
“India reiterated its support to the resumption of negotiations to find a solution to the sovereignty issue related to the Question of the Malvinas Islands in accordance with the Resolutions of the U.N. General Assembly and the Special Committee for Decolonization,” a ‘Joint Statement’ issued by India’s Ministry of External Affairs declared at the end of Mr Jaishankar’s visit to Argentina.
Jaishankar's presence in Argentina, was a reciprocal gesture by the Government of India following the visit of Argentine Foreign Minister Santiago Cafiero in April this year. India’s support on the Falklands/Malvinas Question, ahead of next month’s session of the U.N. General Assembly indicates at greater India-Argentina synergy across global platforms.
During his visit to India, Mr. Cafiero had launched the Commission for the Dialogue on the Question of the Malvinas Islands in India. The ongoing bilateral visits and exchanges are significant as these are taking place on the fortieth anniversary of the 1982 Falklands war between Argentina and the United Kingdom.
Argentina maintains that the issue of sovereignty of the Islands was not settled by the war that led to the strengthening of UK’s control over the region. India has traditionally supported a negotiated settlement of the territorial issue that Argentina is expected to highlight in the coming multilateral events including at the United Nations.
During Mr. Jaishankar’s talks, the two sides “agreed” to explore possibilities for the development of a payment mechanism in local currencies. The move is being viewed as an outcome of the current volatilities that emerged out of the six-month old war in Ukraine. The Joint Statement said such a mechanism would be aimed at “providing companies with an instrument to facilitate bilateral trade, in a framework of mutual benefit.”
Both sides also planned to promote exchange of visits between the armed forces, enhance defense training and “collaboration for joint production of defense related equipment”. Mr Jaishankar acknowledged Argentina’s interest in the “Made in India TEJAS fighter aircraft for Argentine Air Force”.
The delegations also reviewed the ongoing bilateral projects in the sectors like defense, nuclear energy, and space. The official discussion covered the area of cooperation between the two countries including the Human Rights Council (HRC) where Argentina is the chair for 2022. The exchange over the HRC is well-timed for India as the country will face the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) next winter.
During the interactions with the senior Indian minister, the Argentine side expressed “strong support” to India’s campaign for membership at the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!
Bras, you are talking nonsense, all they do is call for talks. nothing more, so what will talks achieve, a big fat nothing, remember what the Brazilian government said, Britain is an important partner,Aug 27th, 2022 - 01:18 pm +1
BrasileiroAug 28th, 2022 - 07:35 pm +1
The resolution tabled by Argentina through the C24 sought to add the words where no sovereignty dispute exists to the General assemblies position that all Non-self governing territories have the right to self determination.
Britains ammendment removed the added words, so the UN position remains that the NSGTs have the right to determine their own future,
Quite clearly, the vote went along Partisan lines the 20 Latam countries voted with Argentina, and then a number of other countries who wish to steal lands (Russia:Ukraine, China:Taiwan, India:Kashmir, Vietnam:Paracel islands, Spain:Gibraltar and a few rogue states Iran, North Korea etc Its hard to see a sensible country voting with Argentina.
The UK had support of North America, Nearly all of Europe, Far more African countries than Argentina, More Asian countries and most of Australasia.....completely the opposite of your original post.
So, no negotiation is necessary, the UN GA position is clear, it is up to the Islanders to choose what they want, and outside of Latam and a few rogue states everyone agrees.
Please feel free to withdraw your ascertain that the world supports the Argentine position and the 5-eyes are isolated. Otherwise you will find yourself in the same category as trimonde.
MalvinenseAug 30th, 2022 - 12:22 pm +1
You are wrong. In 2008 the UN General Assembly affirmed without amendment, that self determination was the ONLY method of bringing an end to colonialism. Not any special cases not where no sovereignty dispute exists nothing.
The islanders are either a separate people, or their is no colonial position. Both cannot be true. Neither way does Argentina get their hands on the islands.
With no due respect. You are also wrong.
The UN sub-committees don't handle anything, the UN General Assembly does. The sub-committees put forward advice, which the GA can choose to vote on.
The sub-committee suggested there was a Special and Particular colonial case and the General Assembly disagreed. I am sorry if this is too complicated for you to understand, and you find anyone who pints out facts you dont like or are too dim to comprehend as haughty.
The C24, full of Latam countries, countries who wish to steal other territories, failed states and corrupt militias mostly vote with Argentina, together with others it made 40 votes in 2008.
Britains position got 60 votes in the General Assembly. Why if theonly body in the UN associated with decolonisation is the C24 as per your FACT, why does the GA vote on their proposals....surely the GA have no say?
Or perhaps you are talking shiite...