Britain has said the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands is not up for negotiation, after Argentina’s newly-elected president promised to “get them back”.
Javier Milei, who won a resounding victory in Argentina’s presidential election on Sunday, said Buenos Aires had “non-negotiable” sovereignty over the Falklands, the archipelago in the South Atlantic Ocean which is known as Islas Malvinas in Argentina.
Mr Milei said during a TV debate in the run-up to the election that “we have to make every effort to recover the islands through diplomatic channels”.
On Tuesday a spokesperson for prime minister Rishi Sunak said: “The UK has no doubt about the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands, and indeed South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands.
“The UK government will continue to proactively defend the Falkland islanders’ right to self determination.”
I’m pretty sure it’s all just saber rattling. International agreement is firmly on the side of the UK having jurisdiction, so there isn’t really a diplomatic route that they can take.
A militaristic route would not do them any good either and they know it.
Not there’s anything about the Falkland Islands that is worth getting excited about. It’s all just a pissing contest.
Oil.
The areas around the South American coastline is generally thought to be rich in oil reserves, and the UK have a good chunk of that with their economic borders smack in the middle of Argentina’s.
I’m no expert on Argentina domestic policy, but it does seem that every time a major drama is going on domestically, the government’s automatic reaction is “let’s get the Falklands!” to divert attention from their own issues.
See also: Boris Johnson and Ukraine, except over forty years.
The UK has its own oil fields in the North sea though.
More oil never hurts (barring climate etc) especially in the next 50 years.
I mean yeah, but I can kinda see why Argentina would be miffed about having a big chunk of resources off their coast under another country’s control.
If the islands were uninhabited there might actually be a good point, but they’re not uninhabited. The land is already under the sovereignty of another country and countries don’t get to annex land just because that land is nearby, how would that work?
Sorry my friend, you’re the second person that’s come to that conclusion from my comment, so I’ve obviously written it like a muppet.
I agree wholeheartedly with you, it wouldn’t work and any form of annexation would be unwise to say the least.
My point is that having an island sat that close to your own borders under the ownership of another country sat on a large prospect of oil would always prove to be a lightning rod for nationalists or rabble-rousers, which is what the Argentine (Argentinian? I’m not sure) government has been seemingly using to deflect from their own failings for years.
It’s not “just off the coast of Argentina” it’s nowhere near Argentina, it’s like Australia claiming they own New Zealand.
There are lots of islands out there. Shound countries go around seizing control of any islands near them?
No?
Sorry, I’m not quite sure where you’re going with this is all.
My viewpoint will naturally be heavily skewed being British, but it’s globally recognised as British territory as has been earlier noted, and the last two referenda on the topic to my knowledge have overwhelmingly resulted in the residents wishing to remain effectively British - so no I wouldn’t support Argentine (or anyone’s) efforts to retake it.
My point is - if I may make a haphazard analogy - that if the Irish Sea was believed to be rich in some valuable resource and Argentina had ownership of the Isle of Man, then I can see how the Brits would be frustrated at potentially losing out over all the money that’s on their doorstep, even though it didnt belong to them.
Having a common enemy is a good way of generating support, i think the main purpose of claiming the islands is just popularity.
Not there’s anything about the Falkland Islands that is worth getting excited about.
I bet there are some pretty big aerials over there. They are valuable for their location from a sigint point of view.
I know the 80’s is back in fashion but this is ridiculous.
The war rescued Margaret Thatcher’s teetering prime ministerial career for almost a whole decade more. Let’s hope we don’t have another one under Sunak.
Yes, it’s not like history has ever repeated itself.
Wait, is that David Cameron on the front bench?
Yeah, not to mention the idea of him doing a thatcher impersonation 🤮
Instead of no, no, no we will get a maybe, maybe, maybe!
Considering the financial hole Argentina is in ATM, this wouldn’t be the brightest move if he decided to copy Galtieri. Especially remembering Galtieri invaded in April and was replaced in June of the same year.
UK:
deleted by creator
The Falklands are as part of the UK as any other. They’re also incredibly valuable because of their geographic location, just like Gibraltar and Cyprus.
I think it’s more can you please shut up and change the channel. It’s not going to happen
Come and get it then you pussy.
