Obama supports status quo on Falklands, says Cameron
by Joel Shenton
"The US position is that they support the status quo, they don't argue against the status quo and that is very welcome," said Cameron. "They are content with the status quo; they are not challenging the status quo. To me it is very important that we stick up for the right of self-determination. The people who live in the Falkland Islands want to continue with their current status.
"What I wanted to do in this 30th anniversary year is send a very clear signal to the rest of the world – Argentina and others – that while the Falkland Islanders want that status Britain will help them keep that status."
There had been concerns over the US position as both Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have publicly used the term 'Malvinas', a name associated with Argentina's sovereignty claim, to describe the islands. There have also been calls for Britain and Argentina to enter discussions over the islands from US officials.
The prime minister's announcement came at the same time as Argentina threatened to initiate legal action against oil and shipping companies operating in Falklands waters. The country's sovereignty claim over the islands means it believes all prospecting the area is taking place in Argentine territory. Argentine foreign minister Hector Timerman said: "The gas and oil that is found in the South Atlantic belongs to the Argentinian people. All these companies are entering illegal territory."
The Foreign and Commonwealth office in the UK has hit back at Timerman's statement in one of its most strongly worded responses to date. "These latest attempts to damage the economic livelihoods of the Falkland Islands people regrettably reflect a pattern of behaviour by the Argentine government," a spokesman said.
"From harassing Falklands shipping to threatening the islanders' air links with Chile, Argentina's efforts to intimidate the Falklands are illegal, unbecoming and wholly counter-productive."
This article first appeared on sister site defencemanagement.com Obama backs UK over Falklands
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
What a bunch of weasal words from Obama. He must have splinters in his ass after that statement. Does he support self determination or the neo-colonialism of Argentina?
David - Munich
Cameron is trying to obfuscate. The Obama administration does not support 'British rule on the Falkland Islands'. "The US recognizes the de facto UK administration of the islands, but takes no position regarding the sovereignty claims of either party," the US official said. The US government supports UK and Argentine cooperation on practical matters and urges a peaceful resolution to the overall issue. The current US position is consistent with UN declarations on the issue.
The Falklands is listed by the UN as a territory which needs to be de-colonised by the UK. The UN has called for discussions between the UK and Argentina to achieve the de-colonisation of the Falklands. Unfortunately, the UK has chosen to turn a deaf ear to those requests. Cameron can hardly expect Obama to go along with the UK's self-serving intransigence on this issue.
FurtherBeyond - Brisbane, Australia
Cameron needs to suck up to America so that the UK can hold onto a little rock. The deciders of whether Britain can hold onto the Falklands are in America. How pathetic that the UK has no friends in the world and devotes all its meagre efforts to kissing the boots of the USA so that it the UK can get a bit of patronage. Wouldn't it be better if Britain could make its own foreign policy decisions and that it had genuine allies who it could trust and didn't have to kiss the boots of all the time?
pmcdonald - UK
David. The issue is not whether Obama or Cameron for that matter, supports self-determination but rather whether the principle of self-determination applies. There are legal criteria for determining which groups may legitimately claim the right to self-determination.
The Falklanders' right to self-determination is highly dubious for the following reasons: They do not constitute 'a people', and only 'a people' is entitled to self-determination under international law. They are not a population indigenous to the Islands, but were settled there by Britain after it had expelled an Argentinian population that previously existed there. Moreover, they are not sufficiently distinct from the British metropolitan population to be considered 'a people'.
Their status as 'a people' has never been recognised by the UN, which has consistently called them a 'population.' Even if they were 'a people', this would not automatically give them a right to self-determination that could override Argentina's title to the Islands.
I suggest you have a look at the following publications which exhaustively examine why the principle of self-determination does not apply to the Falklanders: R. Laver, The Falklands/Malvinas Case (Nijhoff, 2001); R. Dolzer, The territorial status of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas): past and present (Oceana, 1993).
FurtherBeyond - Brisbane Australia
