MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Argentina rejects UK and Israeli oil plans for Malvinas
Argentina's Foreign Ministry on Thursday issued a vigorous rejection of a reported “Final Investment Decision” by British company Rockhopper Exploration Plc and Israel's Navitas Petroleum Development and Production Limited regarding the “Sea Lion” oil field in the North Falkland Basin. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesOil exploration around the Falklands has nothing to do with Argentina.
Dec 12th, 2025 - 11:31 am - Link - Report abuse +3Malvinas islands are one of ten territories under british colonialism in the United Nations process of decolonization.
Dec 12th, 2025 - 11:39 am - Link - Report abuse -3You seem to forget Liberato, that the whole of what is currently called Argentina was “ colonized” by Spanish Imperialists. When are you going to give it back to its indigenous people ?
Dec 12th, 2025 - 11:52 am - Link - Report abuse +3Who owns what and why...
Dec 12th, 2025 - 12:10 pm - Link - Report abuse +3Falklands – Territorial Waters: https://www.academia.edu/10574593/Falklands_Islands_Territorial_Waters
When is Argentina going to mature I wonder. This ridiculous mythical claim needs to be stopped. We all know the real intentions of what Argentina truly want. It's not the sovereignty which they know has never been theirs. It is the absolute wealth that surrounds us and that of South Georgia.
Dec 12th, 2025 - 03:14 pm - Link - Report abuse +4Argentina has known about the potential of oil before they even invaded Patagonia and stole an indigenous people's land. They did that to expand their empire with full intentions of expanding in the south West Atlantic.
Today Argentina is in serious financial borrowing debt. Much they have and never will fully repay.
The wealth around our islands is very tempting to them and they want it more than ever.
Well we are and always have been British and no Argentine will ever make us bow down to their piracy.
We will exploit our resources in the way we choose is best and nothing Argentina can do to stop that happening. If they don't like what we do then take the case to the ICJ and get this issue sorted once and for all. We all know that Argentina will not do that because they would loose and they would never accept that result anyway.
Falklands Free - Well said. You have my vote.
Dec 12th, 2025 - 06:31 pm - Link - Report abuse +2Its hilarious the responses to my comment. I was not talking at all about Argentina. I was talking about the United Nations and the ten territories under colonialism by Britain under a UN decolonization process. If the problem is the argentine claim, what about the other nine territories under british colonialism which, in most cases, are under no sovereignty dispute?. Uh the fault will be the c24 members right?. So after almost a century, the guilty are the UN and Argentina?. When is the UK going to mature i wonder.
Dec 13th, 2025 - 08:04 pm - Link - Report abuse -3Silly Argie troll, When you decolonise a land you hand it to the people that live there, not transfer it to an alien country that has no rights to it what so ever , the Islands can come off the silly little c24 list tomorrow if the Falklanders choose independence, the sheer stupidity of your point beggars belief, grow up.
Dec 13th, 2025 - 09:13 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Jack Jones. Thats what you think becouse your brain only consider the existance of only one form of colonialism. You think the only form of colonialism that can exist, imply some way of “subjugation” of a people by another people. There are like forty resolutions from the UN. Did you read at least one of them?.
Dec 13th, 2025 - 10:22 pm - Link - Report abuse -4Falklands-Free, The british did not discovered the islands, they were not the first to settle or claim. They created a settlement ( hidden from the french and later spanish authorities in Malvinas) in a little island called “Isla Trinidad”. They left in 1774. The spanish continued their administration alone of the whole area after naming several governors in Malvinas during many years until 1811.
First Governor: Felipe Ruiz Puente (1767–1773), who took over from the French founder Louis-Antoine de Bougainville.
Most Recurring Governors: Several officials served multiple non-consecutive terms to maintain administrative continuity:
Ramón de Clairac: Served 3 times (1785–1786, 1787–1788, 1789–1790).
Pedro Pablo Sanguineto: Served 3 times (1791–1792, 1793–1794, 1795–1796).
Bernardo Bonavía: Served 3 times (1802–1803, 1804–1805, 1806–1809).
Final Governor: Pablo Guillén Martínez (1810–1811).
Governors y Comandants Argentines
David Jewett (1820-1821): First military commander after the official possession ceremony.
Guillermo Mason (1821-1822).
Pablo Areguatí (1823-1828): Governor, of guaraní origin.
Luis Vernet (1829-1831): Designated political and military governor.
Juan Esteban Francisco Mestivier (1832).
José María Pinedo (1832-1833).
We have no empire. you live in a dream or just dum. The words you use referring to argentina as empire or pirates, you should ask anybody in the planet and they will not asosiate those two words with Argentina but with Britain.
The british only controlled de facto the land in Malvinas after the invasion of 1833 and controlled its waters after the 1982 conflict, also by de facto.
Libby Libby Libby, here we go again with your nonsense, you are obsessed with the world colony and continue to orgasm over it,.
Dec 13th, 2025 - 11:52 pm - Link - Report abuse +3as for the rest of your garbage, John Davis sighted the islands in 1592, Richard Hawkins arrived on the islands in 1594, recoded them and claimed them, in 1690 John Strong arrived and reasserted the claim, in 1740 Lord Hanson went the and used the Falklands as his base. all this was before Spain, in fact this is already recorded in Spanish historical archives, so before you you call Jack dumb and accuse him of living in a dream, i suggest you get off your lazy ass and go visit the Spanish historical records, and by the way the c24 committee is of no importance what so ever, what is important is that the UN said ALL people have the right to self determination without exception, you can deny it all you want, but is fact, you yourself are the result of an colonising empire who stole thousands of square kms of land from the natives so how about you return it too them, England . as for your governor claims, they are meaningless, as in irrelevant as the islands where not yours, so to sum up its not Jack who is dumb and in a dream world but idiotic fanatics like you who are, so again for the thousandth time either go to ICJ od STFU.
“..It is therefore not surprising that the General Assembly declared in 1970 that the modem prohibition against the acquisition of territory by conquest should not be construed as affecting titles to territory created 'prior to the Charter regime and valid under international law'..”GA Resolution 2625 (XXV), 24 Oct. 1970).”
Dec 14th, 2025 - 01:43 pm - Link - Report abuse +3Akehurst's Modern Introduction To International Law by Peter Malanczuk
Liberato
Dec 14th, 2025 - 03:24 pm - Link - Report abuse +2Your list of Spanish governors is excellent, indeed they are a true reflection of the leaders appointed by the Spanish Viceroyalty of the Spanish colony on East Falkland between 1767 and 1811. Well done. In 1811, the Spanish garrison voluntarily left their colony, returning to Spain via Montevideo. All undeniable historic fact.
Your next list however is historic fiction,
David Jewett (1820-1821): First military commander after the official possession ceremony.
Arrived on the islands by mistake, stayed a few days, never returned, no garrison, no civilian population, no possession, no colony. needed assistance from British explorer Weddell even to anchor.
Guillermo Mason (1821-1822). Stayed a few weeks, no civilian population, no garrison, no sovereignty, left voluntarily
Pablo Areguatí (1823-1828): Governor, of guaraní origin.
Visited briefly once. for a few days. No civilian population no authority. left voluntarily
Luis Vernet (1829-1831): Designated political and military governor.
Stayed for 2 years, built a business, accepted a worthless title of governor so nobody else would take it, voluntarily left in 1831
Juan Esteban Francisco Mestivier (1832).
Arrived in November 1832, was killed by his own garrison 4 weeks later, his wife was raped and protected from the same murderous crew by the British crew of the Rapid.
José María Pinedo (1832-1833).
Was never governor, was Captain of the SS Sarandi charged with taking Mestevier to the islands, was planning to leave on Jan 6th 1833 before Captain Onslow arrived, and left the same day. No eviction, no ursurpation ever took place.
Your history is fantasy. Argentina never had sovereignty, has no legal possession, and no rights to the billions of dollars of oil.
Argie troll, you have the cheek to call me dumb. its not me that believes in a pack of lies and a fairy tale made up by Peron, as posted before, your arguments are beyond stupidity.
Dec 15th, 2025 - 09:29 am - Link - Report abuse +1“..It is therefore not surprising that the General Assembly declared in 1970 that the modem prohibition against the acquisition of territory by conquest should not be construed as affecting titles to territory created 'prior to the Charter regime and valid under international law'..”GA Resolution 2625 (XXV), 24 Oct. 1970).”
Dec 15th, 2025 - 12:23 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Akehurst's Modern Introduction To International Law by Peter Malanczuk
It's truly amusing how the British blatantly lie, downplaying the Argentine governors when they themselves never even attempted to establish authority on the islands, let alone a British settlement, precisely because they knew the islands didn't belong to them.
Dec 15th, 2025 - 12:32 pm - Link - Report abuse -3Jewett's taking possession was reported in The Times of London. There wasn't a single protest.
Did Weddell help Jewett anchor? Irrelevant. What's relevant is that Weddell didn't raise a single objection, informing Jewett that he was on British territory.
Furthermore, Great Britain had a naval station in Rio de Janeiro, not in Port Egmont, not in Port Soledad. Why would they have a naval base in Rio de Janeiro if the islands belonged to them?
Stop lying to the islanders about history; the islands are Argentine, they were never British.
What i find amusing is Argentina thinking it can appoint governors over UK territory and clowns thinking its legal and valid, so you stop the constant lying, the islands have never been Argentine and where British before you existed and before France and Spain tried to play silly buggers, you are an indoctrinated buffoon, if you are so confident of your fantasy claim then go to court otherwise stop crying like a spoilt brat who cant get his way,
Dec 15th, 2025 - 01:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The appointment of Argentine governors was perfectly legal; the islands belonged to Argentina and previously to the Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata.
Dec 15th, 2025 - 03:43 pm - Link - Report abuse -3The British in that region could only land on the South Georgia Islands temporarily.
Furthermore, the islands were (illegally) incorporated into the British Crown in 1843, ten years after the expulsion of the Argentine authorities. Therefore, the claim that they were British before the existence of Argentina is incorrect.
The islands were never British; tell the islanders the truth.
Legal ???? only in your deluded brainwashed noggin, and the fanatical indoctrinated crackpots , what an embarrassing clown you are, you lie through your teeth constantly about it day after day year after year , and the islanders know the whole truth and its not the garbage you constantly come out with, again if you are so confident of your case then you know what to do, the islands have never been yours legally, they are. they where and will remain British until the islanders themselves decide other wise, 1594 1690 1740 1765 claims all predate Argentinas existence and Spain. so called claim. you where never in the game,
Dec 15th, 2025 - 04:57 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Malvi
Dec 16th, 2025 - 09:14 am - Link - Report abuse +2It is not “downplaying” Argentine governors, it is denying that they existed.
Someone who pops down to the islands for a week or two before leaving is NOT a governor. Someone who arrives on the islands and is murdered by his own crew after a mutiny is NOT a governor.
A captain of a ship chartered to drop of the mutinous crew is NOT a governor.
There were zero Argie governors between 1810 and 1832, which as you say is exactly the same number as British governors. Every silly pathetic attempt Argie land made to seize the islands in the 22 years they were ungoverned, failed.
So, on last time Malvi. Britain had sovereignty of West Falkland in 1760s, Spain had sovereignty of East Falkland until 1810.
Then the islands were ungoverned for 22 years. A bunch of Argie murdering rapists tried to seize the islands in October 1832, and they were removed on January 6th 1833. Britain has governned ever since.
There is no Argie claim, they had 22 years to put a population on the island, the Vernet business for a few months was the closest they got, but it failed in 1831.
Grow up, stop lying, you make a complete imbecile of yourself.
I generally don't respond to people who resort to insults when they lack arguments. You're violent.
Dec 16th, 2025 - 11:56 am - Link - Report abuse -3An alleged sighting in 1592 does NO grant sovereignty.
Someone who plants a flag and remains there for a day or two does NO grant sovereignty.
A country that had no governors or population during the period 1592-1843 does NO have sovereignty.
A country that has signed various treaties over time recognizing the sovereignty of the occupying country does NO have sovereignty.
A country that has NO claims against another country occupying the islands with governors and a population does NO have sovereignty.
I could go on, but I don't talk to liars.
Then dont talk to yourself as you are the biggest liar of all, you constantly call other people liars and dumb, is that not insulting ? as for you childish alleged 1592 sighting, comment, nothing alleged about it at all and the sovereignty claim was 1594 when Britain returned, you cant even get that right but then again that is you all over, the complete denial of British history, lack arguments ? just because you dont like the truth doesnt mean it didnt happen, yet another lie about Britain accepting Argentine sovereignty, it never happened, i could go on and on, and i will call out your lies every time i see them so as Monkey said you need to grow up and stop lying, because you are making a fool of yourself for all the world to see, what makes it even worse is that you have been given the facts that prove you claims are nonsense year after year, you also try to hair brush out the fact you stole what is now Southern Argentina, if you dont like what read then its quite simple, stop posting your rubbish on here and go get a life, you have no case,
Dec 16th, 2025 - 12:39 pm - Link - Report abuse +2“Self-determination of people: a legal reappraisal by Antonio Cassese
Dec 16th, 2025 - 02:59 pm - Link - Report abuse +2The content of self-determination as laid down in the Covenants Article 1 of both the UN Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides as follows:
All peoples have the right of self-determination. ... All peoples may, ... freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources ...
”The States Parties to the present Covenant, including those having responsibility for the administration of Non-Self-Govcrning and Trust Territories, shall promote ...the right of self-determination, and shall respect that right, in conformity with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.
SELF-DETERMINATION AS A CONTINUING RIGHT'. EXPRESSION OF THE POPULAR WILL”
1833, people have been polite to you for years, it has been explained to you time and time again how your claims are false, but you keep repeating the same old disproven facts, you have lost all credibility and respect, no wonder people are fed up with your false claims, you deserve everything that comes your way, if you had one shred of evidence that the islands where yours then your governments would have gone to the ICJ long a go ,wake up man,
Dec 16th, 2025 - 03:25 pm - Link - Report abuse +2You're right, Terence. Our country achieved self-determination in 1810, so, as you say, they must stop occupying our country. They've been doing so illegally since 1833. You have your islands in the North Atlantic; let us live in peace in this part of the world.
Dec 16th, 2025 - 03:26 pm - Link - Report abuse -4There it is 1833 in black and white, sheer utter stupidity , why is it any different to the Portuguese and Germans in Brazil or the Spanish and Italians in Argentina, or French and Dutch in Guiana and Suriname ? why dont you go back to Europe where you came from and leave the land to its true owners , hypocrite is an understatement, as for peace, the small garrison at Mount Pleasant ensures there is peace, achieved independence ?? you rebelled against Spain. and was just a small area of land in what is now Northern Argentina expanding south ward stealing thousands of square kms of land and wiping out the natives, so indoctrinated that you can not see it,
Dec 16th, 2025 - 04:19 pm - Link - Report abuse +1“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 definitive title to the Islands by prescription before 1982.
Dec 17th, 2025 - 01:40 pm - Link - Report abuse +1...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.
Extinctive 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
Dec 17th, 2025 - 03:01 pm - Link - Report abuse +1You are proving your own point. I am amazed you cannot see it.
The very reasons you are saying Britain did not have sovereignty in 1832 are EXACTLY the same reasons Argentina didn't have sovereignty in 1832. NEITHER party had sovereignty.
They both had (rather weak) CLAIMS to sovereignty.
Whatever weak claim to sovereignty Argentina had, Britain had an equally weak claim and vice versa.
You accuse Britain of ignoring Argentinas incredibly weak claim, whilst simultaneously ignoring Britains incredibly weak claim.
In October 1832 both parties were well aware of each others weak claim.
So what did Argie land do...? Negotiate sovereignty with Britain? Open dialogue? Ask for a meetings? Any of the things it wants to do today?
No, it sent a militia to seize the islands, completely ignoring the British claim.
The militia failed, in true Argie style, with corruption, murder and rape. In the end Onslow and the Clio didn't even need to evict anyone, they all wanted to leave.
Perhaps had Argentina not so rudely ignored the British claim, we could have negotiated, but you invaded (twice) and failed (twice).
I know you think all you need to do is prove Britain only had a weak claim in 1832, but it proves nothing, Britains claim in 1832 was weak, so was Argie Lands......but you should have negotiated then, instead of trying to thieve the islands....far too late now.
All we want to do is live in peace 1833 ?, well thank the UK armed forces for getting rid of a vile evil military junta. that has allowed you to live in peace for the last 45 years, slightly disagree with you MM, the UK claim is was far stronger than the UPs,
Dec 17th, 2025 - 03:33 pm - Link - Report abuse +1magic:
Dec 18th, 2025 - 01:19 pm - Link - Report abuse -2-In October 1832, both parties were well aware of each other's weak claims.
False, the United Kingdom made no claims during the Spanish period while they occupied the islands. Nor during the Argentine period. The first claim was in 1829. They had no reason to make claims; they had recognized Spanish sovereignty on several occasions. Therefore, it is evident that since the islands did not belong to them, they had no grounds to claim Argentina.
-So what did Pirate Land do...? Negotiate sovereignty with Argentina? Open dialogue? Ask for meetings?
No, true to its pirate style, it ignored years of treaties, land cessions in North America, and recognitions of sovereignty, appropriating the lands of a young nation, sending a militia, two warships, and Captain Onslow, who ignored his instructions.
Nothing more needs to be said; anyone who thinks for a moment will realize that the islands were never British.
'The British Foreign Secretary at the time, Lord Palmerston, ... ... On 27 July 1849, in reply to a question in the House of Commons, he said:
Dec 18th, 2025 - 05:15 pm - Link - Report abuse +1“... a claim had been made many years ago, on the part of Buenos Ayres, to the Falkland Islands, and had been resisted by the British Government. Great Britain had always disputed and denied the claim of Spain to the Falkland Islands, and she was not therefore willing to yield to Buenos Ayres what had been refused to Spain.” “The withdrawal of His Majesty's forces from these islands, in the year 1774, cannot be considered as invalidating His Majesty's just rights. That measure took place in pursuance of a system of retrenchment, adopted at that time by His Britannic Majesty's Government. But the marks and signals of possession and property were left upon the islands. When the Governor took his departure, the British flag remained flying, and all those formalities were observed which indicated the rights of ownership, as well as an intention to resume the occupation of that territory, at a more convenient season.”
Getting it right: the real history of the Falklands/Malvinas by Graham Pascoe and Peter Pepper
Malvi
Dec 19th, 2025 - 09:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0Are you special needs?
You deny Argentina was aware of the British claim in October 1832 and then say there were aware in 1829. You contradict yourself.
The islands had no authority or sovereignty between 1810 and 1832. You can fantasise about a few days here and there over 22 years, but they do not amount to sovereignty.
Therefore for 22 years all there were, were weak claims, a Spanish claim, an Argie claim, a British claim. All weak and in abstentia.
You believe Argentina inherited the islands, there is no legal, moral, or actual president for this, and a hundred examples where it would not be true. Does modern day India claim Yemen because it used to be administered by Bombay? It is ludicrous.
Not a single Spaniard living on the islands in 1810 joined Argie land in its revolution, zero claimed independence, zero.
So, uninhibited islands for 22 years, 1000 miles from Argentina (this predates your genocidal colonisation of Patagonia). An Argie claim amounting to a few days here and there (there was far greater British presence on the islands between 1810-1832).
And then no negotiation or discussion, but a failed attempt to seize the islands by some Argie murderers and rapists.
October -Dec 1832 shows Argentina in its true light....an attempt to steal something, a greedy mutiny followed by murder and rape, then a military capitulation, followed by blaming someone else.
That is your country in a nutshell.....and you are the living embodiment of that kind of filth.
Magic: I didn't mention anything about 1832. There's no contradiction.
Dec 19th, 2025 - 11:51 am - Link - Report abuse -1I said the only British protest occurred in 1829, you know it, everyone knows it, there's no way to hide it. And as you know, it was in bad faith because there were no prior claims during the Spanish and then Argentine occupation.
Besides the lack of claims, there were also no British authorities or population on the islands. So explain to me how it's possible that these lands are British, tell me once and for all!
...So, uninhibited islands for 22 years, 1000 miles from Argentina....
It's funny that you say that when Great Britain is on the other side of the planet.
....uninhibited islands for 22 years...
https://www.argentina.gob.ar/noticias/conoce-la-carta-en-la-que-san-martin-se-refiere-las-islas-malvinas
Add that to your history book.
......(there was far greater British presence on the islands between 1810-1832).....
??????? Mention the authorities, and the location of the population, if you can...????
.....October -Dec 1832 shows Argentina in its true light....an attempt to steal something, a greedy mutiny followed by murder and rape .....
I don't see how a country's internal problems in any way favor the British position; admit it, you have nothing.
As both the UK and Argentina under the UN Charter are bound to accept the Islanders referendum. Therefor, there can be no negotiations or even a legal determination, without their endorsement. Since, their self determination is Public international law; globally accepted standards of behaviour (peremptory norms known as jus cogens or ius cogens)” International law; From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. In other words binding.
Dec 19th, 2025 - 12:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Malvi
Dec 19th, 2025 - 10:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0the first line of your post references 1832 dumbass.
It is not for Britain to prove it had sovereignty in 1832, it is for Argentina to prove that it did. It is without question that Britain has had sovereignty since Jan 6th 1833. You need to prove it was stolen from Argentina, you have categorically and totally failed to do it with evidence.
Lie 1: Inheritance from Spain: There was none, not a single Spaniard that lived on the islands between 1765 and 1810 chose to be Argentine, they all returned to Spain and remained Spanish, the fact Spain administer the islands from BA is irrelevant.
Lie 2: Jewitt, Mistakenly arrived on the islands, claimed them and left, utterly irrelevant to a sovereignty claim
Lie 3: Vernet: Vernet was aware of competing sovereignty claims, as evidenced by his letter to Woodbine Parrish. He just wanted to run a business, which he did for 2 years and then left voluntarily.
Lie 4: the eviction and usurpation: Nobody left the islands on Jan 6th 1833, that didn't want to. It's the most stupid of all Argie lies as Pinedos own logs tell the facts.
There is zero evidence of Argie sovereignty except weak claims, therefore Britain was completely within its rights to re- take sovereignty in 1833.
you can repeat your fantasies as often as you like. Argieland had 22 years to put a thriving population on the islands, and utterly failed.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!