• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Argentina Reasserts Claims To Falklands (again)

Danjanou said:
Not just Hermes IIRC, HMS Invincible was about to be sold off before HMS Illustrious was ready for duty, HMS Endurance was to be paid off and no replacement on order and several of the Destroyers and Frigates that did sail were due to be paid off in a few months as part of another Defence cutback designed to turn the RN into a 50 ship coastal and ASW force geared towards stopping the Soviets. The Argies could have waited 1-2 months and the RN really would not have been able to generate much of a task force.

They also chose to invade the week that the incoming and outgoing RM Garrison were in the midst of the handover thereby doubling the defenders. ::)

Hence the need for accommodation for twice as many prisoners of war than the Argies had planned for  ;D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4rc9KW0Ww0
 
http://www.nst.com.my/latest/britain-expanding-falklands-claim-zone-argentina-1.17011

AFP Agency France Press

BUENOS AIRES: Argentina claimed yesterday that Britain was seeking to expand its presence around the Falkland Islands by creating a marine protection zone in equally disputed islands to the southeast.

A British official told The Times newspaper on Wednesday that Britain is  planning to create a one million-square-kilometer marine protection zone around the South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands in the wind-swept south Atlantic.

The islands are 1,300 kilometers south-east of the Falklands, known here as the Malvinas. Argentina claims all of the islands.

“I believe the decision to create a sanctuary in the Georgias is no more and no less a move that... under the cover caring for the environment, allows them to broaden their usurpation zone,” Argentine Defense Minister Arturo Puricelli told La Red in reacting to the news.

"If Britain was truly worried about the environment," Puricelli said, “then  they would have to first stop unilateral underwater oil explorations.”   

At least three British companies have been exploring for oil off the  Falklands.

In mid-September, the British company Rockhopper Exploration  announced that it hopes to begin oil production in the region in early 2016 and have a maximum output 120,000 barrels per day by 2018.

The marine protection zone, which has not yet been formally announced, would allow authorities to ban the slaughter of whales and other wildlife, while fishing would only be permitted in designated areas, according to The Times.

Britain and Argentina went to war over the islands in 1982. While London  reclaimed them after an Argentine military invasion, Buenos Aires has never  abandoned its ownership claim.

Argentina and Britain have renewed diplomatic ties since the war, but tension remains over control of the South Atlantic archipelagos.

In September, President Cristina Kirchner warned that Argentina could suspend bilateral working agreements if London fails to sit down for talks over the sovereignty of the islands.

And in mid-November, Argentina complained that Prince William’s six-week  mission as a rescue pilot in the Falklands, set for February, was “a  provocative act.”   

Britain has long maintained that it will keep control of the islands, whose  inhabitants are overwhelmingly of British descent. -- AFP
 
Throwing around words like "Crude colonial power" or "usurpation" It seems to me that Argentina's politician have taking cues off Ahmadinejad's speeches. That's unusually vitriolic for a country that supposedly wants to negotiate.

Also, I fail to see what can be gained through negotiation anyways. Seems to me that the Falklands is a zero sum game and Britain has clearly stated that since the Falkland Islanders wish to remain British, the Island will remain British.
 
daftandbarmy said:
Hence the need for accommodation for twice as many prisoners of war than the Argies had planned for  ;D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4rc9KW0Ww0

Yes but it was very sporting of them to release all the POWs so they could be repatriated back to the UK just in time to join the Taskforce. Nothing like having an extra rifle company that knows every square inch of the objective and is very "motivated"  for a rematch. ;D
 
UK committed to Falklands sovereignty, pledges Cameron

Prime minister affirms commitment in Christmas message to islanders after Argentina closes ports to Falklands ships

23 December 2011
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/dec/23/uk-committed-to-falklands-sovereignty

David Cameron promised that Britain would never surrender sovereignty of the Falklands against the wishes of the islanders. In his Christmas message to the islands on Friday, the prime minister said he could not accept challenges by Argentina to their right to self-determination.

He condemned what he described as "unjustified and counterproductive" efforts by Buenos Aires to disrupt shipping links to the islands. His intervention comes after Argentina led a group of South American countries in banning ships flying the Falklands flag from their ports.

In his message, Cameron declared: "Whatever challenges we face in the UK, the British government's commitment to the security and prosperity of the overseas territories, including the Falklands, remains undiminished.

"So let me be absolutely clear. We will always maintain our commitment to you on any question of sovereignty. Your right to self-determination is the cornerstone of our policy. We will never negotiate on the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands unless you, the Falkland islanders, so wish. No democracy could ever do otherwise."

The ban by the Mercosur bloc – which also includes Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay – is the latest flare-up between Britain and Argentina over the islands. Buenos Aires – which has long claimed sovereignty over the territory it calls the Malvinas – reacted angrily last year when Britain allowed offshore drilling for oil in the islands' waters. The Argentinians were also irritated by the recent announcement of Prince William's forthcoming RAF posting to the islands.

Cameron said he wanted a "constructive relationship" with Argentina, but its attitude to the Falklands was unacceptable. "Argentina continues its unjustified and counterproductive efforts to disrupt shipping around the islands and to deter business from engaging in legitimate commerce," he said.

"Threats to cut communication links between the islands and your neighbours in South America only reflect badly on those who make them.

"I firmly believe that it is in our interests that we have a constructive relationship with Argentina. There is common ground to be found on issues like the global economy and climate change.

"We want to work with Argentina on those issues. But the Argentine government has continued to make statements which challenge your right to self-determination, and we can never accept that."
 
Interesting blog post on what the Argies should be thinking about if they really, really want the islands "back":
.... the first thing to ask is whether Argentina has sufficient military capability to not only invade the islands now, but also defend them in the long term without a major increase in defence spending.

The next issue when planning such an invasion is the level of violence and casualties one is willing to inflict upon an enemy force to achieve mission success. In 1982, the Argentine attack was predicated on landing roughly battalion sized forces to take out a sub company (barely platoon) sized formation. Its often forgotten that Argentine SF made a deliberate attempt to destroy the marine barracks, presumably hoping to take out the marines in their beds, rather than have a fight.

The world has changed dramatically since 1982 and the arrival of 24/7 media coverage, global news and analysis and the internet & other social media means that any attack or use of force will be questioned. To force the UK defending forces to surrender will mean either denying them the ability to fight or to sustain, or inflicting sufficient casualties to make the ground commander decide further resistance is futile.

Let's put this in context for a moment. The FI are garrisoned normally by up to 1500 military personnel, and supported by a range of logistics and infrastructure that will enable the garrison to continue fighting for a considerable period of time without requiring external support. For an Argentine attack to put the UK garrison in the position where it has to surrender due to an inability to sustain itself, we have to assume the loss of air and maritime resupply for a prolonged period of time, backed up by an aggressive land campaign which reduces stocks. This would seem to require a maritime and air presence beyond that which the Argentines currently possess ....
Thin Pinstriped Line blog, 5 Jan 12
 
http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/25/world/americas/argentina-uk-falklands/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Buenos Aires (CNN) -- It's been nearly 30 years since British and Argentinian troops fought over the Falkland Islands, but politicians from both countries are ratcheting up their rhetoric over the British-controlled territory.

The ideological battle comes as Prince William is scheduled to begin a Royal Air Force tour of duty there next month -- a move which has drawn more attention to islands at a time when Argentinian officials are increasingly criticizing the British presence in the area.

"They are preying on our natural resources, our oil, our fish," Argentinian President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner said Wednesday.

British Prime Minister David Cameron has offered a different take, criticizing Argentinian officials for their renewed claims to the island.

"We support the Falklands' right to self determination, and what the Argentinians have been saying recently I would argue is actually far more like colonialism, because these people want to remain British, and the Argentinians want them to do something else," he told lawmakers last week.

The islands have been under British rule since 1833.

Argentina invaded the Falklands in 1982, prompting a war in which more than 600 Argentinian and 255 British troops died. After the war, the United Kingdom retained control of the islands, which are off Argentina's coast in the South Atlantic.

About 2,500 residents live on the islands, in addition to 1,700 people stationed at the British military's Mount Pleasant Complex there, according to the islands' government website.

Fernandez has recently emphasized her country's claim to the territory, saying she wants British officials to enter into talks with Argentina over the islands, which are known as the Malvinas in Argentina.

Cameron's comments about colonialism have roiled Argentinian politicians and protesters alike.

Demonstrators marching outside the British Embassy in Buenos Aires this month burned British flags and urged Argentina to sever ties with the United Kingdom.

The foreign relations committee of Argentina's Senate is scheduled to hold a meeting Thursday to draft a resolution condemning Cameron's remarks, the state-run Telam news agency reported.

Fernandez has won over several neighboring countries.

Last month, members of the Mercosur trade bloc -- which includes Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay and Paraguay -- said they would stop ships bearing the Falkland Islands flag from entering their ports.

That move angered British officials.

"It is unacceptable to engage in an economic blockade of the Falklands. Mercosur should take the responsible decision and not do this," UK Foreign Office Minister Jeremy Browne said.

Fernandez thanked Argentina's allies for their support.

"The Malvinas are not an Argentine cause, but a global cause," she said.

Prince William will be one of four Royal Air Force pilots to be sent to the Falkland Islands military base next month, the British Ministry of Defence said in November.

The Duke of Cambridge, who is qualified as a search and rescue pilot, has been flying Sea King helicopters for the Royal Air Force from a base in Anglesey, Wales.
 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-16735731

Argentina's Fernandez attacks UK 'nonsense' on Falklands
25 January 2012
Argentina's president has condemned the UK prime minister's claim last week that her government takes a colonialist attitude to the Falklands Islands.

Making her first public appearance after undergoing surgery, Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner branded David Cameron's comment "nonsense".

A surgery scar was visible on her throat as she spoke at government headquarters in Buenos Aires.

This April marks 30 years since the start of the Falklands War.

"They are trying to paint us as bad guys, or violent guys and really, that is not who we are," Mrs Fernandez told a packed auditorium after 20 days of medical leave for thyroid surgery.

Mr Cameron outraged many in Argentina last week when he accused the country of having a "colonialist" attitude over the disputed islands.

Protesters marched on the British embassy in Buenos Aires on Friday, burning the Union flag, and demanding that diplomatic ties with London be severed.

Referring to Mr Cameron's comments, Mrs Fernandez said that people only talk nonsense when they do not have solid arguments.

Mrs Fernandez's comments came mid-way through her remarks to supporters at the Argentine Presidential Palace.

Her remarks illustrate how potent the issue of the Falklands Islands remains across Argentine society.
 
More from the Thin Pinstriped Line blog:
.... Any potential aggressor intending to occupy the Falklands needs to plan an assault around the following factors.      <blockquote>A remote airbase with good ground defences, and located a not inconsiderable  distance from the nearest credible port is the centre of gravity.
    The defending force is well equipped, and has considerable operational experience accrued over the last 30 years of occupying the terrain.
    There are multiple defensive structures dispersed across the facility which would require potent munitions to deny.
    The facility is located some distance from international airlanes, and is unlikely  to see significant commercial air traffic. There are multiple satellite facilities to provide radar coverage. There are air defences present, both air and ground based.
    There is a not inconsiderable maritime force located in the region, which is self sustaining and which may include an SSN.
    Any attack has to be conducted in a manner which denies the defending force the  ability to reinforce, and must force a surrender of all occupying forces in under the  time it  would take to begin the reinforcement plans from the UK.
    Any prolonged attack is going to lead to calls for talks, and be highly damaging to international opinion against the aggressor. A swift fait acompli is essential to secure victory.</blockquote>What this means is that any Argentine commander has to consider some immensely challenging tactical problems which in turn build in time delay. No plan survives first contact with the enemy, and it is likely that any assault will encounter delays.

(....)

While much remains uncertain, and while this author deeply hopes that such a situation is never tested for real, he would suggest that any potential attack against the islands using current Argentine ORBATS would result in a very bloody and humiliating defeat for Argentina, and one that is completely unnecessary ....
 
I wonder what reaction the US would have to an invasion of the Falklands this time?
 
I think the difference in the Political situation in Chile will play a role in all of this as well. (i.e no SAS raids on airfields via Chile).
 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/feb/01/argentina-falklands-economic-blockade

Argentina 'plotting Falklands economic blockade'

British diplomats accuse Argentina of attempting to isolate Falklands Islands by pressuring Chile to end Port Stanley flights


British diplomats have accused Argentina of plotting an economic blockade of the Falkland Islands amid fears Buenos Aires is attempting to block all flights from Chile to the islands.

The government of Cristina Fernández de Kirchner has publicly threatened to cut the weekly route between Punta Arenas and Port Stanley, the islands' only air link with South America and its main link with the outside world.

British officials believe the service will disappear in an attempt by Argentina to make the Falklands too expensive for Britain to maintain.

"If the LAN Chile flight is cancelled it would be pretty difficult to resist the already credible thesis that there is an economic blockade of the civilian population of the Falklands," a senior British diplomat in the region said on Wednesday.

The move, which diplomats predicted would come soon, would further isolate the disputed island chain and ratchet up tension with London on the eve of the 30th anniversary of the war between Argentina and Britain. British officials said if LAN resisted, Argentina would simply ban the use of its airspace.

Fernández signalled the escalation in a speech to the UN last September, when she said Buenos Aires may block the flights, negotiated during a thaw in relations in 1999, if David Cameron's government refused to discuss sovereignty of the islands - which Argentina refers to as Las Malvinas. "We'll wait a little longer, but otherwise we'll be forced to review the standing provisional agreements," she said.

Cameron has continued to refuse talks and recently angered the Argentinian government by accusing it of "colonialism" in its campaign to win back the islands. Argentina says Britain stole the territory 300 miles off its south Atlantic coast in 1833.

Argentinian commentators reported last week that Buenos Aires was squeezing LAN, a view shared by British officials. The cancellation of the route would leave the Falklands entirely dependent on the twice-weekly 8,000-mile military flight from London via Ascension Island, a volcanic island on the equator.

"This has been rumbling for many months. It's a possibility we live with on a daily basis," said Barry Elsby, a member of the self-governing territory's legislative assembly. "It would be sad, especially for the Chileans who work and live here, because they would have to leave. And it would be a shame for a nation like Chile to be dictated to."

Instead of a 560-mile flight home to southern Chile, the islands' estimated 250 Chileans would have to travel via London.

Elsby said relatives of Argentina's 600 war dead would also suffer by losing cemetery visits. Once a month the LAN flights stop in Rio Gallegos, Argentina.

He played down the economic and political implications of the 3,000-strong population losing its main link to the outside world. "It would be an inconvenience but nothing that would harm the Falklands," he said.

Others have been less sanguine and warned of blows to tourism and exports.

The row puts LAN, which has one of the region's biggest fleets of aircraft, and Chile's conservative president, Sebastián Piñera, in an awkward position. Neither can be seen to bow to a neighbour's bullying, but there is commercial pressure for an accommodation.

The Falkland Islands flights are a profitable but tiny part of operations for LAN, which requires Argentinian co-operation for much of its international business.

The airline, which Piñera partly owned before becoming president, has been unsuccessfully seeking permission from Argentina's aviation authorities for a Buenos Aires to Miami flight.

Argentina has cancelled landing rights at Aeroparque, the capital's domestic airport, for LAN's flights from Santiago and São Paulo. It has transferred these flights to Ezeiza, the city's international airport, which represents a major drawback for LAN because it is further outside the city and deters potential passengers. Chilean commentators speculated this was done to gain leverage over the airline.

Fernández is understood to have raised the issue of Falklands flights with Piñera during a UN meeting in New York last September. She was expected to do so again earlier this month in Santiago, but the visit was pushed back because of her thyroid treatment.
 
.... on a pre-planned deployment:
HMS Dauntless is to be deployed off the coast of the Falklands Islands in the South Atlantic, the Royal Navy has confirmed.

The Portsmouth-based ship will be the first of the navy's new Type 45 air defence destroyers to go to the area.

The Ministry of Defence said it was a routine deployment and HMS Dauntless would replace a frigate currently stationed there.

A MoD spokesman said he would not say when the ship was due to set sail.

He added that the deployment had nothing to do with increased tensions between the UK and Argentina about who owns the Falklands Islands.

BBC defence correspondent Jonathan Beale said it was standard for the UK to have a permanent military presence in the region, which usually included a frigate, a patrol boat and occasionally a submarine, as well as troops and fighter aircraft.

Our correspondent said he did not believe the decision to send HMS Dauntless was a case of the government trying to flex its military muscle.

However, he did say it would "undoubtedly increase tensions" ....
BBC, 31 Jan 12
 
Without the Harriers and carriers I think the Brits would not be successful in another go with Argentina.
 
More from the Thin Pinstriped Line blog:
.... There are two things which are worthy of greater concern than the media excitement {over the deployment of the HMS Dauntless}. The first is the (in the authors strictly personal view) reprehensible way in which serving or retired members of the Naval Service are being quoted talking in language last seen in a 'commando' type comic about blowing the Argentines and every other south American airforce out the sky. Yes, the T45 is capable, but in a region which has a culture of machismo, and in which we fight a daily diplomatic battle to remain relevant, engaged and able to exert meaningful influence, is boasting about your ability to humiliate another country particularly sensible? It may play well in the Sun, but quotes like this get filed, get remembered and get dug out at inopportune moments when it may be necessary to whip a crowd into a frenzy. Crowing about our capability is a great way to equip your face for, but not with, egg in due course.

Personally, this author thinks that if serving members are found to have issued such ridiculous quotes to the media about T45, then they should be discouraged from speaking to the media again for a long time, if needs be by posting them to sites where internet access is a long term aspiration...

Secondly, the focus on the deployment to the FI takes away the fact that DAUNTLESS is likely to have a much wider programme of engagement and defence diplomacy which will do an immense amount to further the UK interests in the wider area. As ever, the UK media are incapable of seeing any story about the southern hemisphere without seeing it through the prism of 1982 redux; in reality it's likely that the presence of a T45 on whatever route she takes is likely to have a major, and immensely positive effect on the UK military reputation in the region, and could do an immense amount of good ....
 
ex-Dragoon wrote

"Without the Harriers and carriers I think the Brits would not be successful in another go with Argentina."

They have an RAF base on the islands in place of the few Harriers from 1982.  A couple of Nuke Boats would take care of any Argie naval sorties.
 
Didn't the Argies learn their lesson from the last time?

What about that big elephant in the room, that almost the entire population is British?  Sounds like the only ones that remember that were the invading soldiers from 1982, who were surprised to be spit at by the populace.
 
NavalMoose said:
ex-Dragoon wrote

"Without the Harriers and carriers I think the Brits would not be successful in another go with Argentina."

They have an RAF base on the islands in place of the few Harriers from 1982.  A couple of Nuke Boats would take care of any Argie naval sorties.

Sadly though the 4 Typhoons they usually have there won't be enough to take on the the entire Fuerza Aérea Argentina without timely reinforcement
 
Back
Top