MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Criminal complaint filed against Mondino for Lammy deal
Lawyer Valeria Carreras has filed a criminal complaint against Foreign Minister Diana Mondino for alleged “breach of official duties” and “abuse of authority” after the understanding she signed with the United Kingdom to renew the monthly flight between Córdoba and Mount Pleasant, which had been suspended under former President Alberto Fernández when the Foradori-Duncan agreement was denounced. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesThis new deal is going to cause a lot more political unrest inside Argentina this time around. Argentina still refuses to drop its illegal and mythical claim.
Oct 01st, 2024 - 11:23 am - Link - Report abuse +1I personally think we should not be negotiating any deals that include Argentina anyway.
We need to by pass them and go direct to other Latin American countries for direct flights.
Trouble is they are all scared of Argentina the south American dictating bully. That attitude needs to change.
Quite the opposite, the claim is legal and fair, as has been historically demonstrated.
Oct 01st, 2024 - 12:11 pm - Link - Report abuse -2No agreement is reached because although many of them are unfavorable for Argentina, some on the islands put stones in the way, preventing any type of progress.
The other Latin American countries are aware of the conflict and do not want problems, without mentioning that to reach the islands they must cross Argentine sovereign air and maritime space.
Regards.
No Malvi, the claim is not legal in any way shape or form, not remotely fair and the so called historical proof has been destroyed over and over again, but if repeating the same old nonsense floats your boat, then carry on,
Oct 01st, 2024 - 03:12 pm - Link - Report abuse +1so you dont want a direct flight to the from Argentina to the Falklands ?
so you dont want to work together to preserve fish stocks ?
logic and Malvinista talk are so far apart it is unbelievable. it must be wonderfull living in your world of make believe,
Malvi
Oct 01st, 2024 - 03:38 pm - Link - Report abuse +1It has been demonstrated to you countless times that the Argentine claim is so fundamentally flawed they have had to make up an eviction myth as its fundamental foundation. The logs of the Sarandi comprehensively prove that no eviction took place and the handful of inhabitants on the Falklands in 1833 were either desperate to leave or perfectly content with British sovereignty.
Whether the Vernet community could have thrived and turned into an Argentine community had it not been for the Lexington raid is a hypothetical red herring.
The geographic proximity argument forgets conveniently that in the 1830s Patagonia was not part of Argentina.
The argument that somehow an uninhabited island group as the Falklands were in 1811 can choose to become part of a successor state over 1000 miles away, because one of those islands once was colonised by Spain is fanciful.
Thank goodness your current President can see through Peronist propaganda even if you can’t.
Well Juan, they are different points of view.
Oct 01st, 2024 - 04:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Many of my compatriots disagree with me, but I think it is possible to fly directly from Argentina to the islands. On the islands they do not want a direct flight from Argentina nor with the state airline, which for me is absurd.
The other alternative is a direct flight with private airlines. But the islanders always insist on putting up obstacles.
Flights could depart to and from the islands of locations such as Ushuaia, Rio Gallegos, Neuquen, Cordoba, Buenos Aires. The only way is by bringing people together.
I am also in favor of an agreement to preserve the fish reserve, I also believe that the exchange of education, culture, sports between communities is possible.
As you can see Juan I do not live in a world of fantasy and I am more open to ideas than many of you.
Reagards.
I think Malvi that you are a little bit confused about which people are putting up obstacles. You know very well what successive Argentine governments have done to try and bully the islanders, which has failed by the way and will continue to fail, You also know that if a State owned Argentine flagged plane was to fly to Mount Pleasant airport then the propaganda would be on over time in all your TV channels and newspapers and would go ballistic, remember what that idiotic Argentine Olympian did, ? their is hope for you as you can see working together about the fish stock issue, but your opening statement about legal fair and historical is completely fantasy, may be the way forward is for a private Argentine company to fly once a week, but i cant speak for the islanders, may be if your government actually talked to them it would be a start,
Oct 01st, 2024 - 04:51 pm - Link - Report abuse +1The claim is fair and legitimate.. argentina had a settlemen of over 200 people in the period of 1820 to 1833.. of course less after the atack of lexington in 1831.. the uk evicted the argentine authoritys and some of the remanent habitants.
Oct 01st, 2024 - 11:23 pm - Link - Report abuse -2The uk never had or build a title at east island.. and before 1833.. there was null british presence for over 59 years.. its called prescrictive adquisition. Both islands were null land in 1820 when argentina took posession.
ArgyCit
Oct 02nd, 2024 - 01:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The British claim dates from 1690, not 1833.
With a settlement established in 1765.
Since then the British have always maintained their claim and have recovered the territory from foreign invasions in 1770, 1832 and 1982.
‘terra nullius’ is defined as ‘land over which no previous sovereignty has been exercised’, clearly not the case for the Falklands in 1820 where three countries had already claimed sovereignty over the land.
Not to mention Argentina’s acquiescence to British sovereignty in the 1850 agreement and the subsequent ending of diplomatic protests until 1943.
prescrictive adquisition? If you mean ‘prescriptive acquisition’, there is no such thing.
You cannot ‘take possession’ of territory that is already owned, it’s called invasion and occupation.
The issue of ‘who owned’ the territory was settled in 1771, in favour of the British, long before Argentina ever existed in any form.
AC is nuttier than a conker tree, nobody takes his comments seriously. Richard Hawkins claimed the islands in 1594,
Oct 02nd, 2024 - 03:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Argentine zit
Oct 02nd, 2024 - 05:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There were never “over 200 civilians” between 1820 and 1833.
Vernet didn’t even start his business venture until 1828 and the number of workers peaked at 120.
Yes, the Lexington raid destroyed his business and he left in 1831 with the majority of his workforce.
By October 1832 when Argentina tried to seize sovereignty only 40 or so civilians remained and half of them begged Pinedo to give them passage to the mainland as Vernet had lied to them.
The other 20 remained.
I know that you know the real facts but choose to lie.
In Jan1833 the only civilians who lived on the island and wanted to remain were the 20 or so multi national remnants of a failed business venture.
By no imagination is this an Argentine population forced to accept British sovereignty against their will.
Even if we accepted your false narrative, it does not explain why Argentina claims West Falkland, South Georgia, the South Sandwich Islands and all marine spaces.
I’m sorry, the Falkland islanders have sovereignty and they exercise it.
You downplay a few civilians, a few years, a failed commercial venture, in short, everything.
Oct 03rd, 2024 - 11:33 am - Link - Report abuse -2Then I'll ask you the question you can't answer:
So how are the islands considered British without a single British inhabitant? Without a single complaint? Without occupation of the territory?
Malvi
Oct 03rd, 2024 - 12:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Who cares?
the only thing that is relevant is the wishes of the Falkland Islanders today in 2024 not some whinging moaning Argentines who think it is still 18 something or other.
If you don't like it, tough.
Apologies to those who don’t know the TV show I am referring to, but did anyone else immediately think the same as me when I saw the photo of Valeria?
Oct 03rd, 2024 - 12:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Yeah but … no but, yeah but … Anyway, I saw Debbie Jones letting Bill Smith finger her behind the tractor shed … so there!”
Greetings Darragh, i hope you and your family are doing well and working smoothly in the camp.
Oct 03rd, 2024 - 01:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Malvi, of all the Argie posters on this site, you are the only one with any decency and respect,, however, you really need to move on from this pointless obsession, the Falklands are here to stay, the only change that will happen is when the islanders choose it to change, whether thats independence or anything else, then that is up to them, its 2024 not 1594 not 1690 not 1764 not 1765 not 1833 not 1982, whatever you believe in its all ancient history, life goes on and its too short to waste, dont end up bitter and twisted like 2 of your fellow country, neither of which actually live in Argentina, go visit the islands talk to the people, and for goodness sake dont ever vote for the pathetic Peronist party who with the help of Galtieri destroyed your country,
Oct 03rd, 2024 - 01:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The passage of time is irrelevant, whether 200, 500 or 1000 years pass, the fruit of the tree is still rotten, and we will keep our claim open to the future, doing exactly the same thing you did in 1833.
Oct 03rd, 2024 - 02:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What Russia is doing in Ukraine, stealing territory, and annexing the Donetsk, Lughanks and Kherson regions through referendums, will not be overlooked, even if 300 years pass, the acquisition of the Russian Federation is illegitimate, and Ukraine has the right to attack whenever it sees fit or finds moments of weakness on the part of Russia.
The only thing rotten Zit is your pathetic dubious claim to the Falklands that would be laughed out of court ,nobody is interested in your crying and whining, get a life and grow up, time is not irrelevant by the way,
Oct 03rd, 2024 - 02:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“or 1000 years pass, the fruit of the tree is still rotten, and we will keep our claim open to the future”
Oct 03rd, 2024 - 04:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Assessment of the Totality of Argentina’s Claim to Sovereignty
“Argentina failed to submit the dispute to a body capable of adjudicating the competing claims. .... there is little reasonable doubt that Great Britain acquired definitive title to the Islands by prescription before 1982.”
But, after 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
However, since this was such a long period of time, exceeding eighty years, no one could conclude under general principles of international law that this was a sufficient period to extinguish Argentina's claim in spite of her diplomatic protests.
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.
The League of Nations and, later, the United Nations provided bodies capable of adjudicating the competing claims. ...
To avoid losing her claim by extinctive prescription, Argentina should have submitted her claim to the LON, the PCIJ or the ICJ....For over 50 years prior to the armed conflict of April 2, 1982, Argentina failed to submit the dispute to a body capable of adjudicating the competing claims.
diplomatic protests were no longer sufficient to keep Argentina's claim to sovereignty alive.
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. ”
Major James Francis Gravelle
MILITARY LAW REVIEW CONTEMPORARY INTERNATIONAL LEGAL ISSUES
Pamphlet NO. 27-100-107 HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY;
Mr hill, The United Kingdom made it very clear that 59 years of silence of abandonment between 1764 and 1829 do not constitute prescription.
Oct 03rd, 2024 - 04:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina had sovereignty between 1820 and 1833.
and in any case it was interrupted by the use of force by the United States and the United Kingdom.
In any case, the Argentine title is much stronger and more solid than the weak British argument regarding possession in egdmont, which was a temporary military settlement without civil activity and without carrying out sovereign acts.
That is an utter and complete lie Peronist fanatic , you had no sovereignty what so ever, cut the bull shine and take your flimsy useless evidence to court, you bore people to death with your childish lies, best joke i have seen this week, (Argentine title is much more stronger) lol ,only in your deluded brainwashed mind,
Oct 03rd, 2024 - 04:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There is not obligation to set disputes at the icj..
Oct 03rd, 2024 - 10:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0We had the right to keep open the territorial dispute.. and the uk can hold the position and defend.
“59 years of silence of abandonment between 1764 and 1829 do not constitute prescription.”
Oct 03rd, 2024 - 10:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“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.”
“A State which has ceased to exercise any authority over a territory cannot, by purely verbal protestations, indefinitely maintain its title against another which for a sufficiently long time has effectively exercised the powers and fulfilled the duties of sovereignty in it.''(Theory and Reality in International Law, de Visscher, 1957, p201).
Higgins in '82 states exactly “No tribunal could tell her [Argentina] that she has to accept British title because she has acquiesced to it But what the protests do not do is to defeat the British title, which was built up in other ways through Argentinas acquiescence.”
“However intensely Argentina may disagree, Britain has clearly built up good title to the Falkland Islands under International Law over the last 150 years.”
Therefore she has confirmed the Islanders right to self-determination by that statement. Moreover, Argentina is barred from using “territorial integrity” as an argument. As it is a post UN law and cannot be applied retroactively.
”...The rule of the intertemporal law still insists that an act must be characterized in accordance with the law in force at the time it was done, or closely on the next occasion. ...
The Acquisition of Territory in International Law By Robert Yewdall Jenningsa Judge of the International Court of Justice from 1982. He also served as the President of the ICJ between 1991 and 1994. So in spite of your typical Argentine propensity for lying your argument is shown for the fraud that it is.
“We had the right to keep open the territorial dispute.. and the uk can hold the position and defend.”
Oct 05th, 2024 - 06:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Indeed, you feel you have the right to continue to kill and the UK will hopefully cost you dearly. On the bright side, as larger conflict seems to be coming upon us, the Chinese space base and other activities should land your republic at least two nukes with accompanying chaos. As they used to say in that old Patrick McGoohan show, “The Prisoner,” be seeing you!
ArgyCit
Oct 06th, 2024 - 02:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Argentina acquiesced to British sovereignty in the 1850 agreement and the subsequent ending of diplomatic protests until 1943.
For 93 years British sovereignty of the Falklands was not disputed by Argentina.
Just as Spain acquiesced to British sovereignty in the 1771 agreement and never challenged it again.
Also, Britain ‘took possession’ of S. Georgia and S. Sandwich Islands in 1776, where British sovereignty was not disputed by Argentina until 1926 and 1946 respectively.
Still can’t find out exactly what is the basis of Argentina’s claim to those territories other than the fact they want them.
Face it, you just don’t have a case.
“There is not obligation to set disputes at the icj.”
Oct 06th, 2024 - 03:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Exactement, mirroring international law.
“There is no obligation in general international law to settle disputes”.
Principles of Public International Law, third edition, 1979 by Ian Brownlie
Thus, what is good for the goose, is good for the gander.
So you're right back where you started from.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!