MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Lord Cameron 'not welcome' in Tierra del Fuego
Gustavo Melella, Governor of the Argentine Province of Tierra del Fuego and the South Atlantic Islands -to which the British Overseas Territories in the region technically belong- Monday declared British Foreign Secretary and former Prime Minister David Cameron “persona non grata” after the latter landed in Stanley for a series of engagements. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesLord Cameron is not welcome on the Malvinas Islands of Argentine Patagonia, occupied by his country since 1833. It is a shame that the British government, which claims to defend freedom, justice and democracy, refuses to enter into negotiations on a territorial dispute that is two centuries old.
Feb 20th, 2024 - 11:55 am - Link - Report abuse -7Malvi
Feb 20th, 2024 - 12:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0when are you going to grow up.
Nobody gives two funkies mucks what you or 'deadbeat gustavo' think.
I think the same as you, my question is when is the UK going to grow up...
Feb 20th, 2024 - 12:37 pm - Link - Report abuse -6Malvinense,
Feb 20th, 2024 - 12:42 pm - Link - Report abuse +4Get real - Your Govt in its Constitution claims that the Islands are your sovereign territory- that thus automatically means that the ONLY thing Argentina can talk about with the UK would be a date for you to take us over- ie COLONISE the population of the islands against our freely expressed democratic wishes.
Now that would be totally against the Charter of the UN where it states that the people of a place/country etc have the right to determine their own political future.
Many of us lie myself can trace out families bac to the 1840s and some to the 1830s - and there never were any indigenous native inhabitants here(unlike your country)- and all bar 2 families of those settlers here when Britain came and forced out your illegal small militia(who had recently murdered their leader anyway)- volunteered to stay on in the Islands of their own free will and accept British Rule and British Law.
Check you facts- the lists of names of civilians who voluntarily stayed and who left of their own free will are in your own naval Archives , same as in the Royal Navy Archives of the time.
The last lady of Argentine origen died in 1865 and you can find her grave in Stanley Cemetery.
Malvi, FFS you do need to grow up, every case you have ever put forward has been debunked and defeated, and yet you keep repeating the same fanatical crap, get a life and move on, the Falklands are here to stay,
Feb 20th, 2024 - 12:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0A ten-bob politician from Narnia says: “No colonial representative of a State that attempts against our territorial integrity by sullying the memory and the eternal sacrifice of our Malvinas Heroes will be welcome in our province,” he also noted.
Feb 20th, 2024 - 12:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Ah the ridicule cometh....Falklands - Argentina’s Skewed Interpretation of Territorial Integrity (1 pg): https://www.academia.edu/44219603/Falklands_Argentinas_Skewed_Interpretation_of_Territorial_Integrity
Another year has passed, and still Malvi still posts childish nonsense, ignoring the true historical facts of the islands, Malvi, no usurping, no eviction, no inheritance and no Argentine settlement, just lies, a myth and a fantasy, as 2 other posters have said you need to grow up,
Feb 20th, 2024 - 01:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“refuses to enter into negotiations on a territorial dispute.”
Feb 20th, 2024 - 02:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Which is devoid of any and all legitimacy.
”Assessment of the Totality of Argentina’s Claim to Sovereignty
Argentina failed to submit the dispute to a body capable of adjudicating the competing claims … One
must conclude that Argentina failed to do so through neglect. ... However, … Great Britain acquired definitve title to the Islands by prescription before 1982.”
...But, over critically reviewing the bases for Argentina's claim to sovereignty, one must conclude that Argentina never developed definite title to the Islands. None of the bases argued by Argentina are conclusive in establishing sovereignty.
Applying the rules concerning the mode of extinctive prescription to Great Britain's claim results in a different conclusion.
Evidence of prescription involves possession... one could conclude under general principles of international law that this was a sufficient to extinguish Argentina's claim.
Regardless of the conclusion reached above, however, the establishment of the world courts changed the situation so that diplomatic protests were no longer sufficient to keep Argentina's claim to sovereignty alive.
To avoid losing her claim by extinctive prescription, Argentina should have submitted her claim to the international court ... For over 50 years prior to 1982, Argentina failed to submit the dispute to a body capable of adjudicating the competing claims.”
The Falklands (Malvinas) James Gravelle
MILITARY LAW REVIEW CONTEMPORARY INTERNATIONAL LEGAL ISSUES
Pamphlet NO. 27-100-107; Washington, D.C., Winter 1985
In the same fashion as Argy foreign minister Davino: Lord Cameron must be truly gutted to learn he is unwelcome in TDF. Something he is bound to keep in mind if ever he goes there.
Feb 20th, 2024 - 09:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“... to which they technically belong...” Since when? The Falkland Islands have never been a part of TdF. No governor from there has ever visited, despite being asked. The Falklands have been British since way before there was ever an “Argentina”.
Feb 21st, 2024 - 09:01 am - Link - Report abuse 0Malvi
Feb 21st, 2024 - 12:52 pm - Link - Report abuse +1When will Argentina enter into discussions with the UK to hand over Buenos Aires? There is no moral, legal, historic or other reason why they should, but I want it.
‘the struggle to “legitimize Argentine sovereignty over the island territory” will continue.’
Feb 21st, 2024 - 02:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0An admission no less, that Argentina does not currently have ‘legitimate sovereignty’ over the Island territory.
Malv
A dispute that was settled, once and for all, 40 years ago.
There is nothing to negotiate, the fact is Argentina doesn’t have a valid claim to anything in the S. Atlantic/Antarctic, possibly not even to large parts of what today is called Argentina.
Now, no one expects you or the current Argy Gov to accept that position, however Argy Gov has agreed to disagree, politely, in matters of sovereignty, while moving forward on other fronts of mutual interests.
And for a fanatic like you that has got to hurt, the worst of all outcomes, progress and business as usual on all other matters, while sovereignty is ‘parked’.
This is moving towards Argentinian acquiescence to British sovereignty over the territory, as happened in the 1850 South Aran Treaty.
Ultimately the only way it was ever going to go.
@Islander1
Feb 22nd, 2024 - 11:56 am - Link - Report abuse -3What the Argentine Constitution expresses is a consequence of the United Kingdom's persistent refusal to dialogue from the moment of the invasion. He only engaged in dialogue for a few years during the 20th century.
Argentina does not try to colonize the islanders, it tries to recover its territory. The only colonizing country is yours, which expelled the inhabitants of Puerto Soledad even if you deny it.
Before the small illegal militia as you mention, there was already a population destroyed by the Lexington warship and previously there was a Spanish population. In this case, curiously, there were no British protests or expulsion of any population, nor an illegal militia.
The British families you can trace correspond to the 1840s after the British invasion and if you can trace families from the 1830s they correspond to the families who arrived with Governor Vernet. This does nothing to favor the British position.
The people of Malvinas achieved self-determination in 1810 and formally in 1816. Recognized by his country in 1825.
Happy New Year to the people who live in the Malvinas/Falkland Islands and the United Kingdom.
Also for all of you Pugol-H and your family.
Malvi,
Feb 22nd, 2024 - 12:44 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Where do we start?
Well in 1810 there was Nobody living on the Islands- the small Spanish militia withdrew from Port Louis then up to Montevideo to help defend the old Spanish South American Empire.
So if any South American nation really wants to try and claim,they took over the Spanish claim- it would be Uruguay.
as for who was removed by the British om 3rd Jan 1833 and who voluntarily agreed to say- please check the lest of names of all who left and those who stayed as they are in the log of your ARA Sarandi and in your Navy,s Archives- same as a copy exists in the British Royal Navy Archives of that date.
Its just that Argentine Governments prefer to keep that information hidden from you I suspect- but go and ask anyway. Shall I email you the gravestones photos of some of those- Argentines- who did stay on and became British of their own free will?
Before the 1960s it had been about 80 years since Argentina had last raised the Sov question.
Colonialism- Taking over a land against their will that has been populated by a people for generations is very much good old fashioned Colonialism- of the worst type.
1825 the recognition of Argentina as it was then by Britain and signed by both- made no reference at all to the Islands.
Malvi
Feb 22nd, 2024 - 02:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I despair of you. Will you just get over it. The Falkland Islands belong to the islanders and no matter what did or didn't occur 210 years ago is totally irrelavent.
Nobody cares about you and Argentina whinging
@ Islander1
Feb 22nd, 2024 - 02:50 pm - Link - Report abuse -21- You recognize that until 1810 the islands were occupied by Spain, not by the United Kingdom, so how can they be British?
2- The islands were empty so how can they be British?
3- Uruguay was part of the Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata, a Spanish province. Administratively the islands depended on Buenos Aires. What can the British Isles be like anyway?
4- That some inhabitants have chosen to remain on the islands, after violently expelling others, does not transform the islands into British ones.
The only thing this shows is that the islands were populated by inhabitants under the sovereignty of another country.
In 1825 the islands were inhabited by Argentines, by that time possession of the islands had already been taken, which was reported by The Times, numerous sovereign acts had been carried out. At the time of the recognition of Argentine independence by the United Kingdom there were no claims or protests from your country.
Regards.
“so how can they be British?”
Feb 22nd, 2024 - 04:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Already asked and answered
https://en.mercopress.com/2024/02/20/lord-cameron-not-welcome-in-tierra-del-fuego/comments#comment530197
Malvinense,
Feb 22nd, 2024 - 10:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Above is correct.
Also Islands first internationally accepted sighting and written down in the ship,s log was by by the Englishman Capt.John Davis in 1592. in his sailing vessel the Desire
2nd- first recorded landing was in 1690 by Royal Navy Captain John Strong of HMS Welfare - who circumnavigated and gave the Islands their name in honour of Lord Falkland of the Admiralty in London.
Frensch arrived as st settlers i 1764 buty then left by 1766 due to Spanish pressure.
English arrived 1765 - then withdrew when faced with a large Spanish fleet offshore in a couple of years later but returned in 1770 after the Treaty between Spain and England whereby the Spanish allowed the English to return and settle- fact.
It was only then that the Spanish themselves finally decided they had better come along as well and settled at the old French settlement - thus the 3rd European nation to arrive and stake a claim!!
Dont forget that Pope Alexander in 1492 who thought he had the divine right after Chris Columbus had discovered the new world of North America- to declare that all land in the as yet undiscovered “rest of the world” - if there was any top be found - was split up geographically between Spain and Portugal - had and has no value in Int Law and was declared some years ago by the Vatican as irrelevant.
Was ALL bar 2 couples the civilians in 1833 who volunteered to stay of their own free will- not your idea of a few - go and read your Naval Archives.
@Islander1
Feb 23rd, 2024 - 02:29 pm - Link - Report abuse -2It is well known that States, and the majority of jurists, in the 18th and 19th centuries did not consider mere discovery sufficient to constitute a title of sovereignty. Nevertheless, the British government made its alleged discovery of the islands into one of its main arguments. This argument was made in protest at Argentina’s exercise of sovereignty, and has continued to be raised until the present day. However, discovery only meant an inchoate title, which had to be perfected by effective occupation as long as the region in question was not under the authority of another power. This argument cannot be invoked by the United Kingdom with respect to the Falklands/Malvinas.
Pascoe and Pepper recognise that the Falklands/Malvinas were not discovered by English sailors. Like another pamphlet published by the so-called (British) Government of the islands, they merely maintain that the alleged sighting of the islands by John Davis in 1592 was the first to be published. However, they recognise that many decades before, Iberian sailors sighted the islands, with Spanish sailors spending months in the Falklands/Malvinas, and that the islands already appeared on a variety of maps.
Credits: Kohen-Rodríguez
https://twitter.com/OMPNO/status/897166262660411392/photo/1
On many points we agree, on others not so much. We are not so far.
You have a good weekend.
Regards.
“This argument was made in protest at Argentina’s exercise of sovereignty, and has continued to be raised until the present day. ... which had to be perfected by effective occupation as long as the region in question was not under the authority of another power. This argument cannot be invoked by the United Kingdom with respect to the Falklands/Malvina”.
Feb 23rd, 2024 - 02:59 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Not according to point international lawyer of the US Government.
”Assessment of the Totality of Argentina’s Claim to Sovereignty
Argentina failed to submit the dispute to a body capable of adjudicating the competing claims … One
must conclude that Argentina failed to do so through neglect. ... However, … Great Britain acquired definitve title to the Islands by prescription before 1982.”
...But, over critically reviewing the bases for Argentina's claim to sovereignty, one must conclude that Argentina never developed definite title to the Islands. None of the bases argued by Argentina are conclusive in establishing sovereignty.
Applying the rules concerning the mode of extinctive prescription to Great Britain's claim results in a different conclusion.
Evidence of prescription involves possession... one could conclude under general principles of international law that this was a sufficient to extinguish Argentina's claim.
Regardless of the conclusion reached above, however, the establishment of the world courts changed the situation so that diplomatic protests were no longer sufficient to keep Argentina's claim to sovereignty alive.
To avoid losing her claim by extinctive prescription, Argentina should have submitted her claim to the international court ... For over 50 years prior to 1982, Argentina failed to submit the dispute to a body capable of adjudicating the competing claims.”
The Falklands (Malvinas) James Gravelle
MILITARY LAW REVIEW CONTEMPORARY INTERNATIONAL LEGAL ISSUES
Pamphlet NO. 27-100-107; Washington, D.C., Winter 1985”
Malvi, you are behaving like a troll, just stop with this fanatical BS, just repeating the same old debunked and defeated argument does you no credit what so ever, read what has been posted, do some genuine research on the history of these islands, then get a life.
Feb 24th, 2024 - 05:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@Juan
Feb 26th, 2024 - 11:48 am - Link - Report abuse -1From the first moment, since the British invasion they refused to discuss the arguments, they adduced as justification for the affront the discovery that, as demonstrated with numerous documentation and maps, is not true.
They didn't discover the islands, they didn't settle them first, be honest and say if those points are a lie. Two plus two is four, the earth is round, corta la bocha.
Malvi
Feb 26th, 2024 - 01:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Who did or didn't first discover the Falkland Island has no relevance
Who did or didn't first settle the Falkland Islands has no relevance
What you or Argentina thinks has no relevance
The only thing that matters are the wishes and desires of the Falkland Islanders.
This is the 21st Century not the 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th or 20th or whatever century you wish to live in.
Now stop acting the goat and grow up.
From the moment of the British invasion Malvi. stop talking indoctrinated garbage, it was your evil military Junta who sent 100s of your own people to their death using the Falklands to deflect from all the terrible domestic issues thats what unpopular politicians do, , the UN said withdraw immediately, neither France or Spain have ever said they saw and claimed the islands first , clearly they did not, you lie constantly about an eviction that never happened, an Argie settlement that never was, a usurping that never happened, and the biggest lie of all the so called inheritance, a break away region of Spain does not claim anything 1000s of miles away, just like they did not inherit any other Latin American land, all you do is lie about the history because that is all you know, cut the crap, go to court present your evidence, then get laughed out of court, you are nothing but a fanatical political troll, i gave you credit when you first started debating, you tried, but all your claims one by one were defeated, it is now 2024 get a life,
Feb 26th, 2024 - 07:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@Juan
Feb 27th, 2024 - 12:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Tell the full story, be honest, the war began on San Pedro/Georgias Island when an attempt was made to evict the workers who were trying to dismantle the whaling factories with authorization from the British embassy in Buenos Aires.
A lunatic like Rex Hunt saw an invasion where there was none.
It must also take into account the economic crisis, unemployment and the unpopularity of Margaret Thatcher.
Regards.
Sorry 1833, your credibility is fast disappearing, your latest statement is laughable. Britain started a war with just 60+ marines on the islands did they ? have a day off.
Feb 27th, 2024 - 12:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@ Spencer
Feb 27th, 2024 - 01:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 060 marines?
A small British garrison was evicted, all the inhabitants chose to remain under Argentine sovereignty, no one was expelled, a war over something so small?
Now you are being so ridiculous its not worth talking to you, JS is right you are a fanatical political troll, grow up,
Feb 27th, 2024 - 02:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Malv
Feb 27th, 2024 - 02:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0We just have to ‘agree to disagree, politely’.
Until Argentina, inevitably, acquiesces to British sovereignty in today, as it did in 1850.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!