|
An article on the BBC today quoted the Argentinian President as saying the British Prime Minister was stupid, and his comments were an 'expression of mediocrity'. She went on to describe the UK as a 'crude colonial power in decline'. Why? All because of a small group of islands in the South Atlantic, and specifically because the British refuse to debate on their governance.
+ Show Spoiler +Argentine leader says UK 'arrogant' over Falklands
President Fernandez met UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon this week
The president of Argentina, Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, has called Britain "arrogant" for refusing to negotiate on the Falklands.
She was speaking a day after UK Prime Minister David Cameron said the issue of sovereignty was non-negotiable.
President Fernandez called his refusal to hold talks on the sovereignty of the Falklands, or Malvinas, arrogant and bordering on stupidity.
Britain defeated an Argentine invasion of the islands in 1982.
The Falklands are at the centre of a territorial dispute dating back to the 19th Century.
Argentina has repeatedly requested talks on the islands' future sovereignty.
Mr Cameron said "as long as the Falkland Islands want to be sovereign British territory, they should remain sovereign British territory - full stop, end of story."
'Crude colonial power'
President Fernandez described his comments as an "expression of mediocrity, and almost of stupidity".
She said the British "continue to be a crude colonial power in decline".
Earlier this week a British man became the first Falkland islander to choose Argentine citizenship.
James Peck was handed his national identity card by President Fernandez, during a ceremony to mark the 29th anniversary of the end of the Falklands War.
Mr Peck's father fought for the British during the conflict.
The Falklands have been a part of British territory continuously since 1833. The islanders all speak English and have British citizenship - except one man, James Peck, who recently became the first man to choose Argentinian citizenship. Argentina offers citizenship to every person on the islands, although until now it has been rejected by everyone. Argentina has claimed the islands for years now, and invaded the islands in 1982, resulting in a conflict with the UK, over 900 deaths and a withdrawal. Since then Argentina has pursued a diplomatic course, hoping to have the UK withdraw its claims to the islands and give them back.
The feelings on this issue run deep, and I feel like they colour relations between our two countries. I suspect our football rivalry is so strong because of this issue - recently the Argentine representative at FIFA said he would vote for an English bid to host the World Cup when we give back the islands. I have a New Zealand friend who was assaulted in Argentina because he was speaking English - the man thought he was English himself. His friends later explained that he was drunk and had lost a brother in the Falklands war, and when they found he wasn't English they apologised to my friend and bought him a round of drinks. It seems to be a big issue in Argentina.
The British view on this is that since we have the islands now, and have done for nearly 200 years, since we have defended it militarily and since the islanders all want to be British subjects, the islands are ours. For me, this last one is the most important, although they are all strong reasons why we should keep the islands. If the islanders don't want to become Argentinian, why should the islands become Argentinian? Surely the people there have the right to choose their own nationality, and they have done. Why force them to change nationalities?
As far as I can tell, Argentinian claims are based on the idea that Spain once owned the islands, like most of the rest of South America. When Argentina won independence in 1811, the argument goes, the islands should have also become Argentinian. Britain stole the islands when they settled it in 1833. They also say Argentinian settlers were removed when the British came. Have to say I don't know too much about the Falklands' early history, so I can't say how close to the truth this is. However, it kind of ignores the glaring reality of today - there are people on the islands today, and they want to be British.
There is also the argument that the islands are close to Argentina, so they should be Argentinian. This seems a bit weak to me. The Islands are 290 miles off the coast, well beyond any kind of maritime limits for sovereign waters. And Argentina isn't the only country nearby - maybe they could be Chilean? And do we really want to solve any kind of territorial dispute by proximity?
I'm genuinely interested to hear what people think on this issue, especially people from Argentina, because I've never been and I've never spoken to anyone from Argentina. What I've written is obviously biased, as any view on such a contentious issue would be - I'm British, of course I would want them to remain British. But I am honestly trying to see things from the other point of view, and most things written from an Argentine perspective centre on us being thieves and leaving it at that. Why should the islands be Argentinian now? And what should happen to the islanders if it did become Argentinian, keeping in mind that all except one has rejected Argentinian citizenship?
|
If I remember correctly, a large supply of oil was recently found under and around the islands. That answers whether Britain will ever give them up peacefully. Perhaps another war is the wings? Hopefully not, but I have no idea how strong Argentina's military is these days.
|
The UK has submitted a request to start drilling ater finding some oil and gas reserves, but I don't think anyone quite knows how large or extensive they are. It's just going to make things more tense, but I doubt Argentina will resort to military means again - they seem committed to peacful negotiations, and I think their constitution confirms that.
|
I feel with the Argentinians, the British empire has conquered one island too much!
|
It is common practice in South American president/leaders to appeal to foreigner affairs and nationalism in an attemp to take the look away from the inner shit in the country. Sadly Argentina's political an economical system is specially corrupted, and so are most of their politicians.
|
Given the entirety of the population is British through and through, its simply ludicrous to expect the British to agree to an annexation proposal by the Argentinian government.
Argentina obviously won't resort to force, the situations are almost incomparably different. I agree with GoTunk as well, focusing on external foreign policy and a historic "aggressor" is a great way to divert attention from internal problems
|
On June 17 2011 10:07 Elegy wrote:
Given the entirety of the population is British through and through, its simply ludicrous to expect the British to agree to an annexation proposal by the Argentinian government.
Argentina obviously won't resort to force, the situations are almost incomparably different. I agree with GoTunk as well, focusing on external foreign policy and a historic "aggressor" is a great way to divert attention from internal problems
Wait so the rules goes, if more of my people live in a certain geographical region, it's ours? Screw britains imperial legacy.
|
On June 17 2011 10:09 Glaven wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2011 10:07 Elegy wrote:
Given the entirety of the population is British through and through, its simply ludicrous to expect the British to agree to an annexation proposal by the Argentinian government.
Argentina obviously won't resort to force, the situations are almost incomparably different. I agree with GoTunk as well, focusing on external foreign policy and a historic "aggressor" is a great way to divert attention from internal problems Wait so the rules goes, if more of my people live in a certain geographical region, it's ours? Screw britains imperial legacy.
When it's the entire population of a place that was never part of Argentina then it kinda is...also that's kinda funny since your own country is part of Britain's imperial legacy.
I thought this issue was settled back in 1982, do they want to start Falklands War 2?
After doing some reading it turns out that France and Britain were the first countries to colonise the islands, although they did so on opposite ends of the island chain at the same time without knowing of each other's colonies. The French left in 1776 by an agreement with the Spanish and then the British left in 1776 as a result of economic pressure caused by the American Revolution and the Spanish left in 1811 for the same reason but due to the Napoleonic Wars. Between 1811 and 1833 the island was mostly used by British and American seal hunters until the British returned in 1833 to reclaim the islands.
|
its more of the, "Argentina is invading us, as opposed to Argentina is freeing us". one of those gets the military backing of a country, the other doesn't.
|
Hi, i am Argentinian and i always disliked this issue but ill give my opinion anyways.
As far as i know.. before Britain had controll over the islands there was an Argentinan base (poorly mantained and unable to do anything against no one).. so British invaded (remember they also tried to invade Buenos Aires twice and failed to do so) the islands and at that moment there was nothing Argentina could do to avoid the ocupation. We didnt even had controll over all the South of the country and ATM we also had a civil war.. Buenos aires vs Provinces Coallition that it was basicaly all the other provinces we had.
In 82' we were under a dictarorship and they needed to distract the "country" and our "President" decided to invade Malvinas... some ppl say he was drunk when he decided.. but the idea of the invasion was that the British didnt defend them... but as British also had some problems with public opinion.. it was also a good distraction and they "defended" their lands.
After that war (In which Chile helped resupply British planes, Brasil denied use of their Air space) Argentina as the lossing side had to basicaly discontinue all their military.
So, another war is no option for argentina. I dont know who has more rights.. i really dont know... on the other hand.. its just shamefull the person we have as president.. She speaks as if she knew all and had power.. and she is kind'a bipolar.. so dont mind so much what she says.
Right know what argentian is claiming is a UN resolution of descolonization by which in theory Britain should aboandon Falklands (But i dont know if it is classified as a colony or British territory)
It seems it will be an everlasting problem.
As for your friend who was assualted.. it depends on the group of ppl he encounters.. i personaly dont have problems with no one.. but there are also persons that reject all foregins.
|
On the subject of my friend - yeah it entirely depends on the people involved, I'm not trying to say Argentina is dangerous in any way  I just wanted to show that feelings seem to run deep on the issue. Like I said the guy apologised later and they had drinks together, so it wasn't a big deal - my friend is pretty scary and fair play to the guy who tried to start something with him. Personally no matter how drunk I am I'm not starting a fight with a 250lb maori.
|
Why do Argentina make a big deal of this :S The first war was party due to a failing Argentina dictator wanting a quick popularity boost, look how heroic I am and how great I am making the country by taking some tiny little island with 0 defence and a few sheep.
I wonder if these words came about that the British navy no longer have an aircraft carrier and are sharing with the French our traditional enemy  Not that having an aircraft carrier would help we don't have any planes either Falklands 2 might not be so successful 
|
United States41959 Posts
Argentina didn't even exist until 1811, British use of the islands predates that by centuries. The islands are a long way outside Argentinian national waters, being the closest landmass to the islands means nothing if they are populated and they don't wish to be governed by you. France has more claim to Britain than Argentina does the the Falklands. They're populated entirely (well, except this one guy) by Brits whose parents were Brits (and so forth back for two centuries) and have full citizen rights.
Every argument for the Falklands belonging to Argentina can be reversed with just as much validity for Argentina belonging to Britain (by virtue of the Falklands) because it is simply an argument of proximity; history, nationality, self determination, culture and international law are all on the side of Britain. The only reason this is an issue at all is for internal Argentinian political reasons.
Ethnic groups 61.3% Falkland Islander
29.0% British
2.6% Spaniard
0.6% Japanese
6.5% Chilean & Other
Does that look Argentinian to anyone?
|
On June 17 2011 10:36 Pengu wrote:Why do Argentina make a big deal of this :S The first war was party due to a failing Argentina dictator wanting a quick popularity boost, look how heroic I am and how great I am making the country by taking some tiny little island with 0 defence and a few sheep. I wonder if these words came about that the British navy no longer have an aircraft carrier and are sharing with the French our traditional enemy Not that having an aircraft carrier would help we don't have any planes either Falklands 2 might not be so successful
The military presence on the islands was beefed up significantly after the last war, we don't need an aircraft carrier as there are air bases there already.
Even with all the defence cuts the UK still has a military that's top 3 in the world, in the unlikely event that a war does start I doubt things will go well for Argentina.
|
On June 17 2011 10:40 KwarK wrote:
Argentina didn't even exist until 1811.
And the USA did not exist until 1776 yet we claim all sorts of islands, some halfway around the world. Dates or longevity are not nearly as relevant as immediate history and relative strength of arms. As other posters have stated, the Falklands War was started to drum up national support for a military dictatorship that disastrously backfired. And the fact that the people on the islands want to remain British seeing as all of them were either born British or remain British citizens is very powerful.
In many ways the islands mirror the case of the Rock of Gibraltar. Again, Spain would really like to claim the island but its people consistently vote in referendums to remain a part of Great Britain. In that case, instead of a blanket offer of citizenship, Spain has tried the opposite tactic of limiting electrical, telephone, and other connections with the mainland in the hopes of convincing the people that their conditions would be improved as part of Spain. But like the Falklands, the islanders seem to love being British.
|
As a Chilean, I have a relevant perspective on this issue. First of all, the Falklands should definitely not be Chilean- we already have Isla de Pascua under our administration and we're horribly negligent with the place ^^;
Argentina has always been one of the big dogs in Latin America, together with Brazil. Between 1976 and 1983, there was a military government in Argentina (Chile also had a military government in that period, between 1973 and 1989); it was very belligerent. Argentina wasn't only after the Falklands- it first tried to wrest control over three Chilean islands: Picton, Lennox and Nueva. Because of Argentina's demands over the islands, Chile and Argentina decided to settle the issue of sovereignty over those three islands via the Beagle Channel Arbitration process, which ruled in favor of Chile in 1977. But Argentina wasn't satisfied; they were on the verge of declaring war on Chile in 1979, but decided to ask the Pope to be the final arbiter on the conflict, to which Chile agreed. John Paul II decided 100% in favor of Chile, which avoided what was almost war with our bigger, stronger neighbor.
Then, in 1982, Argentina's military government went on to bully another country- Britain, over the Falklands this time. Everyone in Chile was rooting for Britain- Argentina at that point was a warmongering country, and you could only imagine who was next on their hit list if they had been victorious vs. Britain.
As it happens, Argentina lost the war, and returned to Democracy. Wars are sad affairs, and I can see why they'd still hold a grudge vs. Britain. It's been almost 3 decades now, and as to whether the Falklands should be handed over to Argentina, I agree with the OP: If the citizens want to remain as British, then British they should be.
EDIT: 2000th post! I'm a DT now!
|
On June 17 2011 10:36 Pengu wrote:Why do Argentina make a big deal of this :S The first war was party due to a failing Argentina dictator wanting a quick popularity boost, look how heroic I am and how great I am making the country by taking some tiny little island with 0 defence and a few sheep. I wonder if these words came about that the British navy no longer have an aircraft carrier and are sharing with the French our traditional enemy Not that having an aircraft carrier would help we don't have any planes either Falklands 2 might not be so successful
As far as I know you guys do have an aircraft carrier, the HMS Illustrious , and are in the process of building several US style supercarriers, the first of which was recently laid down: HMS Queen Elizabeth .
|
Spain populated the territory , Argentina achieved its independence hence taking control of Islas Malvinas,wich is by international law close enough from the coast and is in seas shallow enough to be considered part of argentinian territory,
Argentina was invaded twice by britain,they failed twice. but some years later they started populating the Malvinas, at that time Argentina was busy with other wars and civil war, so they couldn take them back.
30 years ago, in Argentina , military with civil and corporate aid , instaured a dictatorship that ended with 30.000 people abducted and ilegally killed by the state. , the country was crumbling a few years later, and to buff nationalism and be able to have a war economy (good to solve economical problems) we started the war to take the islands back, of course we lost, bad tactical decisiotions,not proffesional armies (mostly kids, drafted trained and sent to figth.) crappy equipment,not being supported by any other countries (even being betrayed by neighbours)
after that, Britain has populated the islands further , so people can now say the titpical excuse "people living there are and want to be british , you have no claim" wich makes no sense.
Ethnic groups 61.3% Falkland Islander
29.0% British
2.6% Spaniard
0.6% Japanese
6.5% Chilean & Other
well, OF COURSE THEY ARE NOT GONNA BE ANY ARGENTINIANS THERE.. brithis have invaded the islands for almost 200 years now!..
argentians are only allowed in the islands on occasions like memorials for soldiers and special filming crews for documentaries.
|
United States41959 Posts
On June 17 2011 10:53 Carras wrote:
Spain populated the territory
If defeating Spain to get independence gives you control over whatever Spain owns at the time then go after Spain itself. It's also outside your territorial waters and like the Falklands, has no wish to be Argentinian and never belonged to Argentina. There is at least an argument for some cultural similarity there.
No Argentinians ever colonised the islands. They were unpopulated until Europeans got there and of the Europeans they fell under British control. They are outside Argentinian territorial waters. This is absurd.
On June 17 2011 10:53 Carras wrote:Show nested quote +Ethnic groups 61.3% Falkland Islander
29.0% British
2.6% Spaniard
0.6% Japanese
6.5% Chilean & Other well, OF COURSE THEY ARE NOT GONNA BE ANY ARGENTINIANS THERE.. brithis have invaded the islands for almost 200 years now!.. argentians are only allowed in the islands on occasions like memorials for soldiers and special filming crews for documentaries.
I claim Argentina. Of course the majority of people there aren't me, it's been Argentinian for almost 200 years now. But if it hadn't been Argentinian and they had all been me then they'd be me and therefore I'd have a valid claim.
Do you not see how weak that argument is?
|
United States41959 Posts
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
