Argentina claims Falklands now 'key strategic' asset for UK
by Juan Recce
The Malvinas is to the future of the Argentinian real economy as much of a key strategic sector as lithium from the Salar de Oyuni is to Bolivia and the oil of the Orinoco basin is to Venezuela. We would be giving up our genome heritage, biodiversity, mineral wealth and, perhaps, oil to let them go. The issue must be understood in line with climate change, biodiversity pharmaceutical application and transformation of the global energy matrix. We are now facing a high-level game of chess.
We must break the British discourse. The Malvinas and Antarctica, are for the United Kingdom, part of a strategic power agenda. The country's margins expand with its overseas territories located in the central South Atlantic. The islands of Ascension, Tristan da Cunha, South Georgia and South Sandwich give logistical control of the path to Antarctica. The logistical point of projection is Stanley. The Kelpers are not the issue in question, make no mistake. Through the ARGOS worldwide satellite tracking system - the UK monitors temperature, salinity and ocean currents around the Antarctic Ocean.
Through the British Antarctic Survey, it studies nomenclature. Before, there was talk of krill as food for the future. Today, it is the race for patenting of biodiversity for pharmaceutical purposes, for control of mineral resources on the continental shelf that is submerged and control of hydrocarbon resources that may exist in the subsurface. Now Argentina, South America and Latin America have decided not to be passive against colonialism.
Britain, as it has done countless times throughout history, looks to the politics of clubs. The history of the UK shows how this behaviour has negatively conditioned the future of millions of human beings throughout history. Let us take a closer look at the past: China, India, Sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, the Balkans and Ireland. Let us take a look at the contemporary world: Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Iran. The increase in British naval capabilities in the South Atlantic is an offensive gesture toward a nation that calls for the resumption of bilateral negotiations promoted by resolution 2065 of the United Nations. Any offensive gesture deserves the attention of the UN Security Council. Under any view, Argentina can continue to stand against this.
For Argentina, the key is not the militarism. The key is dialogue and peace. Gandhian non-violence dismantled the British Empire in India. Today, we are going down that road. There is a committed and conscientious global society that no longer tolerates certain injustices. Look at the Arab spring, our world is very different from the Victorian era. In this tug of war, Argentina is David and the UK is Goliath. We know how the story ends.
Juan Recce is executive director of the Argentine Centre for International Studies
Margaret Thatcher is held in high regard and with deep affection by Islanders, for she is someone to whom they owe much - writes Mike Summers
The comparison between Indian independence through "non-violence" is very much different from the Falklands - as India wanted independence, but the islanders don't.
Anonymous
"There is a committed and conscientious global society that no longer tolerates certain injustices". Exactly Mr Recce. Nowadays, its called self determination, democracy etc. You cannot impose upon people as used to happen in other eras
David - Gibraltar
This article perhaps says more about the colonialism currently being exercised by Argentina than it does about the history of colonialism in the UK and elsewhere. He and many others that know little about the modern parliamentary democracy that is the UK repeatedly fail to understand, possibly deliberately, that Britain has not been a 'colonial' power for many years and places such as the Falklands are not the 'colonies' they - Argentina - would like to portray. The only thing the Argentines can do is repeat the 'evil colonialists' mantra in an attempt to deceive uninformed nations and cover up their own agenda of obtaining lands for resource exploitation. About the only truthful thing he says here is that the Argentine agenda is not about the Kelpers Islanders. That's because they could care less about them or the settlements there. It is oil, fish and access to the Antarctic that they are after and it always has been, with oil being a newer addition. Where he says "the Malvinas and Antarctica are for the United Kingdom, part of a strategic power agenda". I would replace "United Kingdom" with "Argentina". That would get closer to the real truth.
It is interesting how Argentine commentators and government spokesmen have begun spinning previous criticisms made against them into identical criticisms of the UK. The history of the Falklands is clearly recorded. They were never Argentine property. The Argentines can re-write history as much as they want, it doesn't change things. The Falkland Islanders want to remain British and if the UN wants to remain a legitimate organisation it will support their wishes or god help every small nation on the planet.
Laundryman - UK
Key word "certain". Self determination and democracy nowadays are used as a shield - these neocolonist peple living in places such as Gibraltar and the Malvinas are the ultimate leeches, beneficiaries of great injustices comitted before their time unto others all over the world.
Max
Why are the Argentinians so imperialistic? You drove out the native South Americans and now threaten the security of people on an island hundreds of miles away who have lived there for generations and wish to have nothing to do with Argentina. Argentina should cease this shameless bullying.
Miguel - UK
The Falkland Islanders are David and Argentina is Goliath. It is time for Argentina to move out of Victorian times Mr Recce and into an era of democracy. Yet, you propose some sort of petro-colonialism under the pretense of "genome heritage", whatever that is. The islands are not yours to let go and never were. Do you have any interest in the rights of the Falkland Islanders?
Juan - Bogotá
@Max. Neo-colonist? Some 180 years ago was when the Falkland Islands was first successfully colonised. "Neo" means "new" and the only new attempts at colonisation are currently being attempted by the Argentines. I do agree that self determination and democracy are shields though, and thank god that they are there, otherwise there would be a whole host of small minded thuggish countries trying to take over their neighbours.
And also, how was the claiming and subsequent colonisation of an uninhabited island, long before Argentina was actually a country a great injustice - to the Penguins perhaps or, maybe, the seals?
The only leeches i see around are those in Argentina engaged in trying to force the island into submission through nefarious means such as illegal blockades, deliberate overfishing and vile rhetoric. Not to mention a false re-writing of history, which is taught to school children over there.
Laundryman - UK
To the writer: Don't be so naive concerning Argentina's need for isolation and independence. In case you didn't know, the world's fight over power comes down to resource acquisition. And that means the global leading countries of the world taking advances to acquire critical resources, even if its in your vicinity. At this point in my writing, this sounds suspect and downright evil. I agree. However, would you rather have the world's resources in the hands of dictators or in the hands of democracies? Because you're gonna have to choose between the two. There's no way around it.
And yes, you can't impose democracy on people. They want to have it. I completely empathise with any resentment here.
However, the modern day world is trending towards democracy and away from old govt and dictatorships. It's best for Argentina to understand this and do their best to negotiate on their behalf and sovereignty while understanding how they play a role in the propagation of freedom in the world. No nation is an island in this perpetual fight for freedom, which will continue until all dictatorships are eradicated and replaced by representation by the people and for the people.
David - USA
The problem is that the people, who live there don't want to be part of Argentina.They are the first people to live there. It was uninhabited before they arrived. So case closed its there land. Also Argentina was a colony of Spain and they did all the same slaughter of native peoples as all the European colonialists. It seems you don't like the English.
mat - Australia
Wrong, there was a group of Argentine colonists which were expelled by UK. And, of course, their right to self determination was completely ignored such, as the recent Chagos islanders episode. The UK has a loong history of this convenient manipulation to hold on the his former empire remmants, and I say neo beacause the current inhabitants are just that, neocolonists. a few promoting explotaition of foreign lands for the benefit of a foreign power.
Max
@Max. Yet again, you repeat the Argentine re-writing of history. The fact of the matter is this. Louis Vernet, a Frenchman, set about trying to build a colony on the island in the ten years prior to 1833. While doing so, he asked permission from the British and also asked for their protection. Only after the Argentines sent a garrison to the Islands and tried to set up a penal colony did the British protest and evict the troops. HMS Clio was the ship that did it, and its captain was under strict instructions not to disturb the settlers.
In fact, he was instructed to encourage them to stay, which he did. This is recorded in historical text. Further there are descendants of one of the original families still on the island today. Also, Charles Darwin arrived shortly after the events and made reference in his journals about the colonists. What you are quoting is Argentine non-history, which is judged by many historians to be full of historical inaccuracies. Use your head, put down your Argentine history book and pick up one with real history in it.
Laundryman - UK
What a load of rubbish. Using history to be an example of British intentions is quite frankly lazy journalism. Yes there are resources and yes I agree Britain, perhaps, is out of line for drilling for oil but that doesn't justify giving away a free people's independence. Like it or not, Argentina has to accept that the people on the Falklands wish to remain British. Yes, the islands are close to Argentina and 14,000km away from Britain. But what ever happened in the past has happened and we are here where we are today with British familes living a life they wish to live, not under Argentine rule. Argentina clearly doesn't value the rights of the people, freedom of choice or democracy.
john - britain
