Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

The new British empire?


Mekorig

Recommended Posts

I still don't fully understand Argentinas claim to the Falklands against the wishes of the vast majority of the self-governing inhabitants other than ""but ïts close". On the same basis the US could start to claim Cuba. As I understand it they were uninhabited and the French, Spanish and British all laid claim with Argentina just continuing the Spanish claim after independence. There was no Argentina when Britain first claimed them so how can Argentina have a longer historical claim ?

As a peace-loving democracy Argentina should simply respect the wishes of the Islanders and as for the claims to the South Atlantic shelf, why does Argentina not simply lodge its own claim rather than worrying about "the new British empire" ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Mekorig

    29

  • Moon Monkey

    17

  • ships-cat

    7

  • stevewinn

    5

Its easy Moon Monkey, the islanders are british citizens, descendants of colonialist bringed by the UK after hey expelled the argentinian inhabitants. You could really argue who discovered the islands, but the first estable settlers were Argetinians.

Now, Argentina doenst really gives much attention to the Islanders because they are not an independent gov, but a part of the UK, soo, the Argentinian gov negotiate whith the UK gov.

Take in mind this: Tomorrow i come to your city, expell all its inhabitants, including you, bring argentinians to live there, and declare it a part of Argentina. Would you like to come back to your house, your city, part of your nation? Would you take in count the wishes of the new inhabitants? And 100 years after the incident? 500 years? You could argue that you were an original inhabitants, but your ancestors also come from elsewhere.

And about Spain, they lay down any claim in South America a long ago.

PD: The British claim about discovering it can be argued by the French also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

News update:

Its seens no that the UK said it is was a misunderstanding, that they are only ckaiming a 350 miles zone to the east, toward the Atlantic, and no towards the Argentine Sea.

linked-image

Source - Clarin 24/09/2007

In other things related, i heard someone from the Foregain Affairs Ministry talking about this: Its seens that whith a new Sea-Bed Treaty on the UN, almost all the nations whith coasts are making claims to extend their national zones. The Treaty get to work in 2009, soo all the countries are getting hurried to put all the scientific data to support their claims.

It also appear to be an administrative system that if two countries claim a zone in dispute, like the case of Argentina and the UK, their claims are filed until the dispute is solved. Soo, the UK claim would be filed, hasd the Argentina one to extend their sea zone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its easy Moon Monkey, the islanders are british citizens, descendants of colonialist bringed by the UK after hey expelled the argentinian inhabitants. You could really argue who discovered the islands, but the first estable settlers were Argetinians.

Now, Argentina doenst really gives much attention to the Islanders because they are not an independent gov, but a part of the UK, soo, the Argentinian gov negotiate whith the UK gov.

Take in mind this: Tomorrow i come to your city, expell all its inhabitants, including you, bring argentinians to live there, and declare it a part of Argentina. Would you like to come back to your house, your city, part of your nation? Would you take in count the wishes of the new inhabitants? And 100 years after the incident? 500 years? You could argue that you were an original inhabitants, but your ancestors also come from elsewhere.

And about Spain, they lay down any claim in South America a long ago.

PD: The British claim about discovering it can be argued by the French also.

Its seems Argentinas claim under international law is due to Spains rights under territory claimed in war and was led by an american privateer. Anyhoo, Argentina only "ruled"the place for 12 years until Britain reestablished its control. Here is Wikis slant:

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moon Monkey: Has i would love to argue whith you in this matter, i can see that this could easyly become in a "you say, i say". Historians are still arguing on who discovered the islands, whi settled then first, what treatys applied to them, but historians and people on both sides saying diferent things based in facts.

Has you could easyly provide whith a huge amount of link supporting the english claim, i can provide whith also a huge amount of links supporting the argentine one, yours despicting Argentina like thiefs in the nights, mines showing the UK has pirates.

Also, i have to remark that Wikipedia, altough a good source of info, wich i usually use, can be modified to support any claim, if written in a way that the mods can object.

If you want we could join in MSN or other messenger program to discuss it another day, but for the reasons i already give to you, i found futile to discuss the antecedents of the dispute in this forum.

Example:

Wikipedia in Spanish - History of the Malvinas Islands

This differs from the link you provieded, even if both are from Wikipedia. Do you understand my point?

Edited by Mekorig
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moon Monkey: Has i would love to argue whith you in this matter, i can see that this could easyly become in a "you say, i say". Historians are still arguing on who discovered the islands, whi settled then first, what treatys applied to them, but historians and people on both sides saying diferent things based in facts.

Has you could easyly provide whith a huge amount of link supporting the english claim, i can provide whith also a huge amount of links supporting the argentine one, yours despicting Argentina like thiefs in the nights, mines showing the UK has pirates.

Also, i have to remark that Wikipedia, altough a good source of info, wich i usually use, can be modified to support any claim, if written in a way that the mods can object.

If you want we could join in MSN or other messenger program to discuss it another day, but for the reasons i already give to you, i found futile to discuss the antecedents of the dispute in this forum.

Fair enough. I would just like to say that if the people living there wanted to be Argentinian, I would have absolutely no problem with that. Arguing about "facts" from hundreds of years ago is as you say pointless, I would rather discuss facts as they are today. The title of the thread talked about "a new British Empire", I simply question if there is anything new about Britians relationship with the Islands and also if claiming the shelf is impirical, or just something any nation including Argentina is able to do under international law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the Falklands have changed hands may times in the past, the likes of the French Spanish and British, at the end of the day when all the smoke has cleared the British flag flies over the Falklands, the Argies had ago at taking them in 82 failed so any Argentinian claim or what ever has gone out the window, it doesnt matter who first spotted the islands or who first settled there, its all about who controls the islands now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

stevewinn: If the world would follow that line of thinking, the world today would be a more violent place (if that could be posible). For that international law, the UN and other forum where the nations can negotiate where established.

Moon Monkey: The title of the thread was the original The Guardian note´s title. I choose to put it like it was in the note. While i understand your position about the islanders, Argentina is pushing for negotiations whith the nation that currently hold the islands, the UK. If the Islanders declared thenselfs independant, the negotiations objetive coud shift to them in the descolonization forum of the UN.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

stevewinn: If the world would follow that line of thinking, the world today would be a more violent place (if that could be posible). For that international law, the UN and other forum where the nations can negotiate where established.

Moon Monkey: The title of the thread was the original The Guardian note´s title. I choose to put it like it was in the note. While i understand your position about the islanders, Argentina is pushing for negotiations whith the nation that currently hold the islands, the UK. If the Islanders declared thenselfs independant, the negotiations objetive coud shift to them in the descolonization forum of the UN.

What are Argentina pushing for negotiations over ? The Islands are currently a self-governing overseas British domain, should they want independence they will be independent...I just don't see where Argentina come into the equation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the moment the islands are part of the UK, and therefore under the soveregian of the UK, and soo,m in the descolonization forum of the USA, the negotiations are about the Argentina and the UK. Also i think that is one of the reasons the islanders have not declared their "independence". And the economic factors is other reason in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the moment the islands are part of the UK, and therefore under the soveregian of the UK, and soo,m in the descolonization forum of the USA, the negotiations are about the Argentina and the UK. Also i think that is one of the reasons the islanders have not declared their "independence". And the economic factors is other reason in my opinion.

What about the Argentina and the UK ? In 1981 the UK might have walked away and made the Islanders come to you with a begging bowl, not in 1983 and not now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All the problem is in the Descolonization Forum of the UN, soo the UK and Argentina are compelled to negotiate in a resolution of the problem. Also all the current fishing licences and posible hidrocabures extration in the zone is exposed to international legal actions from the Argentina. That is why the islanders are not getting all the money they could get form the fishing bussiness, and not extration have taken place. A lot of enterprizes doing bussiness whith the Falkland/Malvinas Council are also making bussiness in Argentina, and dont want to risk to a demands or judicial actions in the international economic jurys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Islands are self-sufficient 77 Million GDP last year, the Fishing is thriving, once we hit oil/Gas the Islands will be the richest in the world, they're even looking for Gold inshore, if oil/gas is found expect a larger military presence,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All the problem is in the Descolonization Forum of the UN, soo the UK and Argentina are compelled to negotiate in a resolution of the problem. Also all the current fishing licences and posible hidrocabures extration in the zone is exposed to international legal actions from the Argentina. That is why the islanders are not getting all the money they could get form the fishing bussiness, and not extration have taken place. A lot of enterprizes doing bussiness whith the Falkland/Malvinas Council are also making bussiness in Argentina, and dont want to risk to a demands or judicial actions in the international economic jurys.

What have Argentina got to do with the Decolonisation forum, they are a "colony"of the UK not Argentina....having spoken to a few Argentinians over the years it seems you want to claim it as a colony, what on earth has the decolonisation got to do with you ?

Economic and extraction problems will be discussed in the appropiate committees, hence the UK lodging the claims discussed in the OP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

stevewinn]: Hey could get all the money they can, but a lot of services still are not present on the islands. For some medical services the islanders still have to travel to the UK or Chile, and a lot of food have to be bought outside.

In fact, the islanders could benefit greatly of the economic contact whith the Argentina, but still a lot of their council is still hard core against any contact (be comercial or social) whit Argentina.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In fact, the islanders could benefit greatly of the economic contact whith the Argentina, but still a lot of their council is still hard core against any contact (be comercial or social) whit Argentina.

My Grandad wouldn't buy anything Japanese till the day he died, some things take a number of generations to get over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What have Argentina got to do with the Decolonisation forum, they are a "colony"of the UK not Argentina....having spoken to a few Argentinians over the years it seems you want to claim it as a colony, what on earth has the decolonisation got to do with you ?

Economic and extraction problems will be discussed in the appropiate committees, hence the UK lodging the claims discussed in the OP.

The Malvinas/Falklands are still a British overseas territory, a colony, and the UN urged both parts to discuss about the severegin in the Descolonization Comitee. In fact, any claim or economic claim is locked until the soveregein discution is over.

The Argentina didnt recognize the right of auto-determination of the islanders on grounds that they are not aboriginal and were brought to replace the Argentine population that Argentina claims was expelled after the British invasion of 1833.

[Resolutions of the United Nations and the OAS

The General Assembly of the United Nations explicitly addressed the issue of the Falkland Islands in 1965 for the first time, which Resolution 2065 noted "the existence of a dispute between the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland concerning sovereignty over [said] Islands", and invited those governments "to proceed without delay with the negotiations... with a view to finding a peaceful solution to the problem, bearing in mind the provisions and objectives of the Charter of the United Nations and of General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) and the interests of the population of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas)."

The UN General Assembly and the UN Decolonization Committee have repeated this call for the resumption of negotiations since then, [39] and especially since the resoration of democracy in Argentina in 1983.[6]

On 6 June 2006 the Organization of American States (OAS) voted unanimously in favour of the Argentine proposal to restart the negotiations. [7][8]

Source - Wikipedia

Both sides have countries that support their claims in the international forum.

Has i said Moon Moneky, this is becoming a "i say, you say" discution. If you want to mantain it by PM or MSN you are welcome.

PD: I found this web forum created by an Argentine mediator has a way to facilitate the contect betewn argentinians and islanders:

Falklands-Mavinas Forum

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My Grandad wouldn't buy anything Japanese till the day he died, some things take a number of generations to get over.

Yep, that is why, at my best hopes, i see a posible pacefull solution only in my old age. At worst, my grand-childrens would see a pacefull solution All if Bush didnt cause a nuclear war firs :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Malvinas/Falklands are still a British overseas territory, a colony, and the UN urged both parts to discuss about the severegin in the Descolonization Comitee. In fact, any claim or economic claim is locked until the soveregein discution is over.

The Argentina didnt recognize the right of auto-determination of the islanders on grounds that they are not aboriginal and were brought to replace the Argentine population that Argentina claims was expelled after the British invasion of 1833.

Source - Wikipedia

Both sides have countries that support their claims in the international forum.

Has i said Moon Moneky, this is becoming a "i say, you say" discution. If you want to mantain it by PM or MSN you are welcome.

PD: I found this web forum created by an Argentine mediator has a way to facilitate the contect betewn argentinians and islanders:

Falklands-Mavinas Forum

If the Falklands are a British overseas territory at the moment why are Argentina involved in a discussion about soverignty at the Decolonisation committee ? The only way Argentina could be involved is by taking soveriegnty from Britain before then decolonising...seems silly IMO what would be the point ? Surely you can only decolonise from your "colonial masters" not some country that beleives it has a claim on soverienty from 170 years ago. What rights of the islanders Argentina recognise or not is by the by.

I notice you reference Wiki about the 1833 invasion, so I will simply refer you to the earler Wiki reference I gave a few posts ago of the full history not just the 1825-1833 Argentinian colony.

It is not I say, you say...I am asking why Argentina are involved in a decolonisation process for islands that are not their colony and all against the wishes of the inhabitants of those islands. What do Agentina want out of this ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Argentina didnt recognize the right of auto-determination of the islanders on grounds that they are not aboriginal and were brought to replace the Argentine population that Argentina claims was expelled after the British invasion of 1833.

Again, you could say the same about about Argentina.

My advice to Argentina is-Mind your own business! or you'll get another spanking. :lol:

That is, if the UK doesn't explode into civil war...

The next time Argentina wants to have a go and getting their hands on the falkland Islands; they'd probably be going up against Islam. :P

Edited by billyhill
Link to comment
Share on other sites

billyhill: If you only can contribuite whith Hooligan-like comments, please, dont contribuite to the thread.

Moon Monkey: We are in that negotiation because the Argentinian goverment consider the Malvinas/Falklands part of their territory that was ilegally taken by the UK. The UK made a colony there supplanting the Argentine population. That is why all the issue in the Descolonization Comittie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

billyhill: If you only can contribuite whith Hooligan-like comments, please, dont contribuite to the thread.

The Falkland Islands have had a complex history since their discovery, with France, Britain, Spain, and Argentina all claiming possession, and establishing as well as abandoning settlements on the islands. The Falklands Crisis of 1770 was nearly the cause of a war between France, Spain and Britain.

So, my question to you Mekorig is, should france still have a legitimate claim? Or is it only the last ones who were defeated who can make the claim?

We are in that negotiation because the Argentinian goverment consider the Malvinas/Falklands part of their territory that was ilegally taken by the UK.

yes and it's obvious that you agree with your government.

The United Kingdom took control of the islands by force with the 1833 invasion of the Falkland Islands following the destruction of the Argentine settlement at Puerto Luis by the American sloop USS Lexington (28 December 1831).

wiki.

we in the UK, believe in Democracy- laser guided if need be. So it's up to the islanders themselves! And they've made it loud and clear; they've voted they still want to be part of the UK.

And, due to the ongoing sovereignty dispute, the use of many Spanish names is considered offensive in the Falkland Islands, particularly those associated with the 1982 invasion of the Falkland Islands.

wiki

Link to comment
Share on other sites

billyhill: If you only can contribuite whith Hooligan-like comments, please, dont contribuite to the thread.

Moon Monkey: We are in that negotiation because the Argentinian goverment consider the Malvinas/Falklands part of their territory that was ilegally taken by the UK. The UK made a colony there supplanting the Argentine population. That is why all the issue in the Descolonization Comittie.

Maybe it is just my understanding of what decolonisation means...according to the UN it means self-determination, which the islanders have, and the undoing of colonialism, which Argentina has nothing to do with. I just don't understand what Argentina are involved in the decolonisation for or what they expect to get out of it. Why argue for years, recind treaties and make a fuss over Islands that are either going to chose to be a British protectorate or become independence ? They will never be part of Argentina.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IIRC, the French claim was surrendered to the Spanish by a treaty. Whn in home i have to investigate better.

About Malvinas Islands beign offensive, i know of a Argentinian/Islander forum where both names are used, and no one is offended. The Islanders are not a soli block in their opinions, has the Argentines are not a solid block in their opinions about the issue. Soo, to respect my opinion and the Islanders opinion i sude the Malvinas/Falkland naming.

Also Moon Monkey, this could be of interest to you:

Special Committee on Decolonization Report

Its from the mentioned argentine-islander board. You have transcriptions and direct links to the Reports inside the thread. I found this board today, and found most of the proposition beign made there very interesting and beneficial to all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also Moon Monkey, this could be of interest to you:

Special Committee on Decolonization Report

Its from the mentioned argentine-islander board. You have transcriptions and direct links to the Reports inside the thread. I found this board today, and found most of the proposition beign made there very interesting and beneficial to all.

What is beneficial to all ? How about just leaving it to the inhabitants to decide what is beneficial for them.

the Territory held its last general elections on 17 November 2005, electing eight members to four-year terms in the Legislative Council. The councillors have no ministerial duties, though each is responsible for a particular portfolio. Questions of policy are considered by the Executive Council, which consists of three members of the Legislative Council and two ex-officio members with no voting rights. The Legislative Councillors elect a speaker and appoint a Chief Executive to implement policy. The Governor presides over Executive Council meetings and is obliged to consult the Council in respect of his functions, while retaining responsibility for foreign policy and defence.

The paper explains that the role of the Legislative Councillors is under “active consideration” as part of a constitutional review, although the Government of Argentina -- which contests the United Kingdom’s sovereignty over the Territory -- rejects that constitutional reform process, saying it would “unilaterally modify the current situation” on the Territory. Argentina also claims title over the Falklands (Malvinas), a position traditionally supported by other countries in the region and at the United Nations. Argentina has repeatedly called on the United Kingdom to begin resolving the sovereignty dispute through negotiations, but the latter has maintained its sovereignty over the Territory, saying “there can be no negotiations on the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) unless and until such a time as the Falklanders so wish”.

The way I read that is the Islanders are quite happy with their constitution and the UK will leave it to their wishes. Sounds fair.

Edited by Moon Monkey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.