Cameron digs in over Falklands as oil revives former tension

Source: The Independent (UK)

Cameron digs in over Falklands as oil revives former tension

PM tells Argentina's President Cristina Kirchner that islands' sovereignty is not up for discussion

By Andrew Grice in Toronto

Sunday, 27 June 2010

David Cameron is to issue a strong warning that he will never negotiate over the sovereignty of the Falklands.

A tense stand-off between the Prime Minister and Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, the President of Argentina, is expected when they hold a brief meeting during the G20 summit in Toronto, Canada, which ends today.

Argentina is using every opportunity at international meetings to press its claim to the Falklands after the British company Rockhopper announced this month there are "positive signs" of oil being discovered in the waters around the South Atlantic islands. Last Thursday, Argentina persuaded a United Nations committee to call for talks on the islands' future.

<snip>

The Prime Minister will tell the Argentinian President that the drilling for oil is an entirely legitimate activity and the islanders have every right to develop their economy. It is not yet clear if the likely oil resources will be a commercially viable proposition.

Read more: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/cameron-digs-in-over-falklands-as-oil-revives-former-tension-2011727.html

---

Another oil war in the offing, except that this time Britain has its troops in Afghanistan.

They may bluster and complain but they won't go after the islands a second time.

In such a sale, the US will back Exxon (and lets not forget BP, Argentina could sell the rights to BP and then have BP force the British to give up the oil rights to Argentina so BP can gets its oil.

Besides, the oil there isn't that profitable. Big oil companies aren't really interested.

......their own alliance within the South American continent. The English may get their asses handed to them this time. Figures though since the last "war" was when the conservative Thatcher was in power. Must need another war so they can unite the folks behind queen & country so they can continue to dismantle the "welfare state".

And which type of alliance is this? Are you saying the Brazilians will go to war over the Falklands? Or Chile? Exactly which country do you think will send its navy and air force to fight if Argentina attacks Great Britain?

.......a weaker one at that, trying to take resources that aren't theirs? ie, How do you see this from your point of view?

But the government of Argentina was very wrong to use military means in the early 1980's. Life is full of injustice, as injustices go, this isn't really that bad. I could list quite a few, including one which really bothers me, but which may make DU ban me. So I'll self- censor myself just in case.

.......bothers you, I would be interested just on a different take or perspective.

Marty

Any landing, even air assault would not be unopposed this time around. There are also troops on the ground and additional civil defense measures in place on the islands themselves. However, they all could be overcome at some price in blood and time.

The key issue would be if attacks on the Argentinian mainland would be allowed. Many seem to think it would be given the current force structure of the UK. That means Argentinian cities, ports and air fields would be subject to Tomahawk strikes, full shipping interdiction, spec ops on Argentinian soil, etc. I do not believe the Argentine are stupid enough to risk that happening.

The reality is that the people who live in the Falklands have for generations have been adamant about being UK citizens. Argentina needs to find some other nationalistic rallying point and distraction.

They can stay and be British citizens. Also, most of them aren't even born there. They are sheep herders brought in on contract by the Falklands Company. The Falklands enclave is a colonial enclave, established via ethnic cleansing of a pre-existing group of people (who happened to be from Argentina). Therefore this British claim is bogus. I realize that, once a claim is very old, then it tends to be unenforceable. But we do know of one case where an ethnic/religious group did make a claim which was about 2000 years old. And the UN did vote to support this claim.

and the current international standard of the will of the occupants is the controlling factor.

This means a large group of Mexicans can go to Arizona, take over a portion thereof, and declare they want to be part of Mexico, and the UN will agree with them? :-)

Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, as the saying goes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_the_Triple_Alliance



In total, Argentina and Brazil annexed about 140,000 km² (55,000 square miles) of Paraguayan territory: Argentina took much of the Misiones region and part of the Chaco between the Bermejo and Pilcomayo rivers, an area which today constitutes the province of Formosa; Brazil enlarged its Mato Grosso province by claiming territories that had been disputed with Paraguay before the war. Both demanded a large indemnity (which was never paid) and occupied Paraguay until 1876. Meanwhile, the Colorados had gained political control of Uruguay, which they retained until 1958.



http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Historia_de_la_frontera_Paraguaya.JPG

but an A for effort in defending LA nationalism

to go much further south (the halls of Montezuma and all that) despite the best efforts of the Irish, French and Spanish troops opposing them. (The French of course took over Mexico in 1961 while the Irish were sent to America where they were summarily lynched.)

want to be part of Mexico when they ran up here to get away from it to begin with? Then they'd have to jump the border again! Very inconvenient. :)

The Falklands will always be a colonial enclave. There existed no nativ population prior to first the French and later and separately the British settled there. The French claim was turned over to the Spain and the enclaves co-existed unaware of each other. Once discovered the Spanish removed the British outpost by force, causing Britain to threaten war which resulted in the restoration of the British outpost. Later the British abandoned the outpost although not the claim on the islands. The Spanish outpost kept going for a few years longer until the chaos following the collapse of the Spanish colonial empire made maintaining it impossible and it was evacuated to the mainland leaving the islands unpopulated once again.

Of who ?

Penguins ?

...ARGENTINIAN penguins.

By your lights, the indigenous nations are the legitimate rulers:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_peoples_of_the_Americas

Argentina's indigenous population is about 403,000 (0.9 percent of total population). Indigenous nations include the Toba, Wichí, Mocoví, Pilagá, Chulupí, Diaguita-Calchaquí, Kolla, Guaraní (Tupí Guaraní and Avá Guaraní in the provinces of Jujuy and Salta, and Mbyá Guaraní in the province of Misiones), Chorote (Iyo'wujwa Chorote and Iyojwa'ja Chorote), Chané, Tapieté, Mapuche (probably the largest indigenous nation in Argentina) and Tehuelche. The Selknam (Ona) people are now virtually extinct in its pure form. The languages of the Diaguita, Tehuelche, and Selknam nations are now extinct or virtually extinct: the Cacán language (spoken by Diaguitas) in the 18th century, the Selknam language in the 20th century; whereas one Tehuelche language (Southern Tehuelche) is still spoken by a small handful of elderly people.


http://www.indec.gov.ar/webcenso/ECPI/index_ecpi.asp

http://www.indec.mecon.ar/nuevaweb/cuadros/2/ECPI_res_generales_junio2006.pdf


Of course, the European colonists can stay and apply for citizenship from the countries their ancestors came from...

Really?

The islands were uninhabited when they were first discovered by Europeans, but it was the French and later English who first settled there, who left in 1776 but never abandoned their claim. And when the English reestablished control in 1833, at least according to Wikipedia there was no "ethnic cleansing."

In January 1833, British forces returned and informed the Argentine commander that they intended to reassert British sovereignty. The existing settlers were allowed to remain, with an Irish member of Vernet's settlement, William Dickson, appointed as the Islands' governor. Vernet's deputy, Matthew Brisbane, returned later that year and was informed that the British had no objections to the continuation of Vernet's business ventures provided there was no interference with British control.

I searched on the phrases "ethnic cleansing of falklands" and "falklands 1833" and found no evidence of alleged ethnic cleansing. Google is not perfect, but if there were historical evidence there might have been a hit on it in the 8 pages I looked at. I did find a reference to the removal of a group suspected of murder, but who were never tried because of lack of witnesses.

http://www.history.horizon.co.fk/chronology.html
http://www.history.horizon.co.fk/articles/murders.html

And there is no question of the wishes of the current inhabitants on this issue. So if Argentina had control it seems clear that the only ethnic cleansing would be of the current inhabitants.

The Argentine military (i'm assuming that's what you are talking about, not the soccer team...) is very much WEAKER that it was in 1982, both in relative and absolute terms.

The Airforce is still flying the same types as it had in 1982, just less of them. The Navy has scrapped its ampibious ship and therefore has no way to even get a meaningful amount of troops ashore the Army has largely stood still which is academic anyway since they've got no way to get to the Falklands.

The UK in comparision has replaced most of the weapon systems used in 1982 and has fighter aircraft based on the Falklands which are superior or equal to any fighter apart from the US F22.

Seriously, just look this stuff up on Wikipedia.

The British army might be distracted but hardly the navy or air force. At the last Argie imperialist adventure the defenses on the Falklands was a company of marines. Go in on Google and check out the massive Mount Pleasant base south of Port Stanley on the satellite pictures. Invading the Islands today would be an operation several magnitudes larger and harder than in the 80'ties and to make matters worse today the British have weapons to seriously hurt mainland Argentina as well. Although the British capability have decayed the Argentinian capability have also decayed. Bottom line is the Argentinians blew their best shot at ever getting their hands on the islands with the war, before the UK was trying it's hardest to give the place away; after the war holding it is matter of national prestige.

There aren't two full UK armoured division sat in Germany anymore, but that wasn't a factor in 1982 either.

Actually in the South Atlantic things are different. Short of a suprise attack via sub ocean tunnel Argentina doesn't have a hope. It would have to be the biggest miracle in military history.

The Argentinian attempts to isolate the islands also cuts down their military options. They could have a lively traffic to hide an operation in and a fifth column of guest workers on the islands but since it is extremeny rare for there to be any connection anything out of the ordinary would be fairly easy to spot.

The Malvinas issue is nothing really but a convenient nationalistic bone for the Argentinians to chew on when things are bad. When the Argentinians actually had the islands they had to use convicts to get people to move there and get things rolling. If the islands ever become Argentinian the goverment will have to promote some other territorial dispute to the new national bone, if they survive the massive dissapointment backlash when the Argentinian population discovers that all the worlds problams didn't go away just because they got the Falklands.

And there is precedent for that in Argentina

Just the thing to help him balance the budget, which is his main priority right now.

They just want the oil money.

Leave it alone, you aren't getting it.

When you cause the problem yourself. GG

The islanders CONSIDER THEMSELVES BRITISH, that settles it.