| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Caribbean-Latin America | |
| Argies' military threat raises fears over Falklands | |
| 2008-07-11 | |
Hard to find a place to file this under.
The plans threaten to inflame tensions between Britain and Argentina over the Falkland Islands, which the South American nation still considers to be its sovereign territory despite losing a war in 1982. The Argies are having their internal problems, an Argentine friend has told me, so.....maybe rattling their sabers may divert attention from within. Argentinian forces were driven from the islands by a British naval task force after three months of fighting and the loss of hundreds of lives. The victory proved decisive in the re-election in 1983 of Margaret Thatcher. "This world is no longer a world divided by ideology," Mrs Fernandez said. "It is more complex, and it is necessary to defend our natural resources, our Antarctica, our water." Coming from a different tack this time. The Argentine president compared the plan to Brazil using its soldiers to protect natural resources in the Amazon rainforest. The proposals come as Britain considers whether formally to claim exploration rights to extended areas of the sea bed around the Falklands, South Georgia and the British Antarctic Territory. Moves are also being made by Argentina, Australia, China, France, New Zealand and Norway to boost their presence and lay claim to waters that could yield oil. Antarctica, protected under a 1959 treaty allowing only scientific research, is the only continent that remains free of military forces. The Argentine president's comments are the first to suggest the use of troops to protect a country's interests. Well, Britain's military forces are not the same as they were in 1982. The proposals come as Mrs Fernandez faces growing opposition at home after winning power last year in a landslide victory to succeed her husband, Néstor Kirchner, as president. Her ties to the Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez have strained relations with the United States and a sluggish economy has seen widespread protests against her policies. Plus people going ape-sh*t in Argentina over corruption in the government. Britain has plans to claim more than 350,000 square miles of sea bed under a United Nations convention that allows rights to areas that are a continuation of their territory's continental shelf. However, a Foreign Office spokesman last night stressed that Britain had not made a formal submission to the UN "although we reserve the right to do so". The deadline is May next year. The situation in part mirrors a rush for territorial rights at the North Pole, also believed to contain vast energy reserves. Russia sparked the race last August by symbolically placing a flag on the sea bed, claiming huge tracts of the region for itself. In turn, Canada announced it would build military training bases in the region and step up patrols of shipping lanes. Denmark and the United States have followed suit since. The Russian army said last month that it was prepared to send winter warfare forces to the region to protect its interests. | |
| Posted by:Alaska Paul |
| #12 and there won't be any surprises in the runup this time |
| Posted by: Frank G 2008-07-11 22:45 |
| #11 I think the Brits can still handle Argentina. They arent that p-whipped yet. |
| Posted by: bigjim-ky 2008-07-11 22:40 |
| #10 1947 - INTER-AMERICAN TREATY OF RECIPROCAL ASSISTANCE ARTICLE 3 1. The High Contracting Parties agree that an armed attack by any State against an American State shall be considered as an attack against all the American States and, consequently, each one of the said Contracting Parties undertakes to assist in meeting the attack in the exercise of the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations. |
| Posted by: john frum 2008-07-11 22:03 |
| #9 IIRC, Falklanders are also British citizens, just as much so as the inhabitants of the Orkneys (north AND south) and other British overseas territories (Ascension, several Caribbean and Pacific islands, Diego Garcia, etc.). The Argentinians are using the Falklands as a way of hiding how poorly the government is doing its job - again. The Brits have held the Falklands since 1839. The 1982 attack re-kindled British spirit for a bit, and may do so again. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2008-07-11 21:51 |
| #8 Sent to the islands to secure what is ours Marching ashore in the cover of night Hide until dawn and attack in the twilight Shake them awake with the thunder of guns Orders from the iron maiden, (get the islands back) Failure will not be accepted, call for artillery strike, launch attack We are (back in control), force them to surrender (take what is ours), restore law and order (back in control), push them further out to sea (Falklands in our hands), back under British reign Push them back further and out from the islands Into our fleet that will stop their retreat Mark their positions and call in the airforce Harriers and vulcans strikes at our command Orders from the iron maiden, (get the islands back) Failure will not be accepted, call for artillery strike, launch attack We are (back in control), force them to surrender (take what is ours), restore law and order (back in control), push them further out to sea (Falklands in our hands), back under British reign Back in control, force them to surrender Take what is ours, restore law and order (back in control), push them further out to sea (Falklands in our hands) (back in control), force them to surrender (take what is ours), restore law and order (back in control), push them further out to sea (Falklands in our hands), back under British reign - Sabaton, "Back In Control" |
| Posted by: Secret Master 2008-07-11 21:06 |
| #7 Not at all P2K. We were attacked by the Japanese and the Germans declared war on us. We went to the defence of England. None of our war objectives were to restore colonial territories and in addition to bankrupting the British Empire we did little to restore it or any of the others. What's our empire got to do with theirs? |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2008-07-11 20:15 |
| #6 The United States will not go to war to preserve the British or any other empire. Sorta missed that nuance during WWII didn't we. I guess Guam is a colony by any other name too right? |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2008-07-11 19:35 |
| #5 The Falklands are not part of the UK. They are a colony. The United States will not go to war to preserve the British or any other empire. All our assistance to the Brits in Falklands I was very hush-hush at the time and I suspect much is still not known. We would help quietly again, but not overtly. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2008-07-11 18:07 |
| #4 NS, Afghanistan is not part of NATO either. The contrivance used was as the assembly area from which an attack upon one of the NATO members [the US]. Britain is still a member of NATO. An attack upon it, just like an attack by Hugo on Dutch islands in the Caribbean would be an attack upon all members. Since we sought out and received assistance under NATO for Afghanistan, it follows that a fellow member can do the same of us. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2008-07-11 17:48 |
| #3 The precedent for what? The Falklands are not part of NATO. And the US is certainly not about to participate in the defence of the British Empire. If the Falklanders had any sense, they'd declare independence and ask for recognition from the US and a mutual defence treaty. Or else brush up on Spanish. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2008-07-11 16:47 |
| #2 The Argies are in about no better place economically than they were under the Junta. Same situation. Same game. Much different 'will' in London. It will only buy time but won't stop the problems. Interesting if London invokes the NATO charter and asks the US for assistance. The precedent has been established. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2008-07-11 15:20 |
| #1 "It is more complex, and it is necessary to defend our natural resources, our Antarctica, our water." Sounds like "precious bodily fluids" talk to me. |
| Posted by: xbalanke 2008-07-11 14:28 |