Alfredo Astiz signing the surrender document on board the British HMS Plymouth, 14 June 1982
Posted on 06/29/2006 6:35:21 PM PDT by blam
Argentina renews campaign over Falklands claim
By Jeremy McDermott, Latin America Correspondent
(Filed: 30/06/2006)
Argentina sought yesterday to rally international support for its claim of sovereignty over the Falkland Islands and to isolate Britain in world opinion when it launched an aggressive campaign to win control of the distant outpost in the south Atlantic.
The parliament in Buenos Aires established a special commission with a brief to "Malvinise" the country's political agenda in a concerted effort to force Britain to surrender its sovereignty over the islands known in Argentina as the Malvinas.
A row over fishing licences has reignited Argentine demands over the Falklands. The government of President Nestor Kirchner is determined to press the nation's claims with new vigour.
"What is coming is a big fight over fishing and petroleum," said an Argentine diplomat. "The Malvinas will become a top priority again."
Argentina is requesting that the United Nations intervenes and rules on the ownership of the islands.
In an address to the world body's decolonialisation committee last week, the foreign minister, Jorge Taiana, attacked Britain's claim over the islands as "illegitimate".
The reason for the sudden burst of activity over the Falklands was Britain's recent decision to grant fishing concessions around the islands over a 25-year period.
They had previously been renewed on an annual basis.
The Argentine government insists that Britain has no right to award fishing rights over what it insists are Argentine waters, or at least waters under dispute.
But the UK does not recognise any claims over the Falklands and believes it is free to do as it wishes with British sovereign territory.
The islands have been disputed for hundreds of years. Britain formally claimed sovereignty in 1833, expelling Argentine settlers. The greatest level of co-operation between London and Buenos Aires came in the wake of the 1982 conflict, with talks held over the removal of tens of thousands of mines planted by the invading forces.
Next year is the 25th anniversary of the conflict, in which 255 Britons and 655 Argentines lost their lives when the Latin American country's military regime moved to take control of the islands.
Britain has already announced a "major celebration", which will no doubt further antagonise Argentina.
The Falklands issue still awakens passion in Argentina and is an emotive subject that politicians have seldom been able to resist exploiting.
The islanders themselves want to remain part of Britain and the British position is one of self-determination. As long as the inhabitants of the islands want to remain part of the UK then Britain will respect their wishes.
Argentina owes its freedom to Margaret Thatcher.
They owe her a debt of gratitude.
You would think Argentia would have learned its lesson.
I didn't think Reagan was supported of the falkland war?
Has Hugo Chavez been making phone calls?
Hernan Crespo must be hurt - someone got a tip that they're going to lose to Germany tomorrow.
Geez...not again!!
"On April 10 the EEC approved trade sanctions against Argentina. President Ronald Reagan and the U.S. administration did not issue direct diplomatic condemnations, instead providing intelligence support to the British military."
It's a whole new set of crackpots.
they might wanna rethink that whole automatic guns in the home is bad thing...
We have Merkel in Germany's whose soccer team will send Argentina packing.
Right; Blair, Brown and a Labour government.
The U.S. did a lot as a neutral power to help Britain win, including passing intelligence items to the British.
We will support the UK fully. Count on it. The Argies will get an arse whipping if it keeps pressing.
Prior to the invasion, our State Department along with Al Haig publicly took the side of the Argentine generals. The generals were flirting with the Soviets at the time, and we were playing at "we're all Americans here, north and south together". A similar game got us in trouble on the eve of the Kuwait invasion years later when we pal'd it up with Saddam while he was massing troops on the Kuwaiti border.
But the moment the shooting started, there was no doubt where Reagan stood (and it caught the Argentines by surprise). We provided surveillance information to the Brits, and more importantly, munitions. When the British fleet left England they had no ammo. We met the fleet at Ascension Island as I recall, and supplied them en route.
Thanks to Haig and State, the Argentines rightly believed we had betrayed them, but seriously, did they really believe in a shooting war we would back them against our primary NATO ally? Reagan and Thatcher were very close in those days. That ought to have been a clue.
And if the Argies want to have another go, we'll probably back John Bull again. Perhaps we can short circuit a war by telling the Argies right now that it will be not only the British fleet in their way, but the United States and its (not insignificant) air and naval forces as well.
Reagan also loaned planes/ships to the British so that they could meet their euro NATO obligations. The British were then free to move their limited resources south. So Reagan did more than not opposing them.
Not to mention Sidewinders.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.