The Iron Lady (La dama de hierro)

[jp]

And of course, no mentions to the origin of the islands and how the british ended up there.... The point that the british always are sure to ignore and hide behind the supposed "self determination" of the invaders.

This is a incredibly good point. We should always frame contemporary politics based on what happened 200 years earlier.

Although, having said that its perhaps best to gloss over the awkward truth that the nation of Argentina was established on land arbitrarily awarded to the Spanish crown by the pope, and that the glorious founding of said nation involved several decades of genocide against the aboriginal population.

But still, I blame the pirates. Nasty bunch.

 

[Magoya]

This is a incredibly good point. We should always frame contemporary politics based on what happened 200 years earlier.

Although, having said that its perhaps best to gloss over the awkward truth that the nation of Argentina was established on land arbitrarily awarded to the Spanish crown by the pope, and that the glorious founding of said nation involved several decades of genocide against the aboriginal population.

But still, I blame the pirates. Nasty bunch.

Even if the british don't want to recognize there's a dispute, because the people they moved there don't want to stop being british,it doesn't change that the origin is far from clear and that there is in fact a dispute. One can only guess that the british don't want to discuss about it because they must be afraid of not being able to withstand scrutiny.

 

[pauper]

Even if the british don't want to recognize there's a dispute, because the people they moved there don't want to stop being british,it doesn't change that the origin is far from clear and that there is in fact a dispute. One can only guess that the british don't want to discuss about it because they must be afraid of not being able to withstand scrutiny.

...and the reason the Argentines won't submit to compulsory ICJ jurisdiction on the matter?

 

[Aconcagua]

...and the reason the Argentines won't submit to compulsory ICJ jurisdiction on the matter?

Because Argentina might be required to deal Rawson back to the Welch.

 

[jp]

Even if the british don't want to recognize there's a dispute, because the people they moved there don't want to stop being british,it doesn't change that the origin is far from clear and that there is in fact a dispute. One can only guess that the british don't want to discuss about it because they must be afraid of not being able to withstand scrutiny.

Britain acknowledges the dispute, but unfortunately it also recognises the right to self determination of an island peoples who have lived peacefully on a miserable clumps of rocks in the south atlantic for nearly 200 years. Britain can't discuss the fate of the Islanders on their behalf. Its not their future to discuss.

Personally I think its in the kelpers interests to be closer aligned to Argentina & South America in the long term. But its up to them. Doesn't matter what Britain thinks, neither does it matter what Argentina writes in its constitution.

If Argentina was serious about the Malvinas it would turn its attention to the Islanders, not the crumbling imperial power headed up by a mediocre and stupid leader.

 

[Magoya]

From Argentina's point of view, the kelpers are nothing more than invaders on national territory. They have no say on the matter. The responsible ones that must deal with it is the country that has international voice for them.
The British themselves are adamant about not even recognizing there's a dispute. Saying that the people they put there after the invasion have the right to decide for their future doesn't change the fact that the country could have a legitimate claim to the territories which they decide to ignore.

 

[perry]

I believe that the Malvinas is rightfully Argentinas and do not believe that an invading force ever has the right to an island because they have been there for a few generations.

The same thing happened in Cyprus an island with a 3000 year history of greek culture that was divided by Turkey in 1973 . They were invaded by an imperial power and the United Kingdom did not lift a finger to help them even though Cyprus was a British Colony for over 100 years .

Also look at the sad history of the Changos Islands whose people were brutally sent off their islands by the British and sold to USA and is now famous as Diego Garcia
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3667764379758632511

There is too much hypocrisy with the UK position and they will lose the Faklands ( malvinas ) by 2014 as the powers that be have decided that Argentina will have them .

 

[marksoc]

I would happily give Argentinean citizenship to the kelpers, and invite them to a tour of the country. If their sons could come freely to study in UBA, and regularly fly to the continent, I feel that their views about ARG would change.

 

[Aconcagua]

I would happily give Argentinean citizenship to the kelpers, and invite them to a tour of the country. If their sons could come freely to study in UBA, and regularly fly to the continent, I feel that their views about ARG would change.

Since residents of the islands use ¨Islander¨ as the word to describe themselves, you would be making a good first impression. As for a tour of the country, I think that would be nice for islanders. However, I fail to see a benefit (air travel excluded) that any person from the islands could derive from Argentine oversight. Why would anyone elect to join utter social, economic and political chaos when a civil system is in place?

 

[jp]

It seems strange to refer to the settlement as "an invasion". Nobody had ever successfully settled the islands. In 1833 a tiny handful of settlers displaced another tiny handful of settlers with minimal bloodshed.

Also worth bearing in mind that the islands weren't considered national territory at the time they were "invaded". Patagonia wouldn't be conquered until the 1870s in the somewhat less than glorious Conquest of the Desert. The claim that the islands belong to Argentina isn't particularly well supported by history. Its much more of a modern, political claim that has been brought to prominence in recent decades.

There's no getting away from the fact that people have lived there peacefully for almost as long as Argentina itself has existed. Every UN resolution acknowledges that the islanders should have a say over their future.

Personally I think that the islands would be better off being aligned with South America than Britain in the long term. I'm sure they could keep their cultural integrity, autonomy and work out a beneficial solution regarding the fishing rights and hydrocarbon reserves.

Persuade the Islanders that union with Argentina is in their best interests, and the sovereignty dispute is settled. Unfortunately there's enormous political capital to be made in protracting a 200 year old "dispute" for as long as possible. Based on this, I don't see any progress being made any time soon.