Argentina's Foreign Minister Hector Marcos Timerman is to lodge a protest at the UN on Friday against the UK's "militarisation" of the Falklands
( Read more... )
but there are no people who arnt colisiests there. no one lived there befor the brits put people there, i think. and they want to be british subjects. so thats the self determation covered.
There were Argentine colonists before the British arrived, at Puerto Soledad. They were forced to leave at gunpoint, and the British took their place after 1833.
This is a big part of Argentina's argument about the islands - they contest that the British presence is in fact illegal, and has been since the Brits arrived.
Legally, the right to self-determination can only be applied to the indigenous inhabitants of a place...which the current residents of the islands are not. If anything, they're two steps removed from being eligible for self-determination, not one - they're technically not even the colonists who settled the place. The British presence in the Falklands/Malvinas came about because they turned up to an Argentinean settlement that already existed and made the inhabitants leave under threat of being immediately flattened by Royal Navy ships
( ... )
Hey, I don't actually care who holds the islands. I just think it should be decided by some sort of international tribunal with legal weight, rather than "Well, we hold it now, it's gone, you're never getting it back so there's nothing to discuss."
In either case, you're referencing a principle of self-determination which quite frankly does not apply here. It was meant for nations subjugated by empires, not colonizers, and to extend it to cover any current settlers in an area has pretty undesirable implications = you could claim territory by displacing the pre-existing population.
(I left Argentina when I was ten years old. I live in Britain now, with a husband seconded to the British army...honestly, I'd like this resolved so it doesn't flare up into war again one day. That's all.)
"Who's the colonialist now?" OP Argentinians have never been colonialist, and we never will. You need to look up the meaning of the word.
1- The people living in Malvinas were put there when the UK invaded the islands, therefore they are not native from the islands, and only the people native from the island can have self-determination (the UN has said this over and over again). Nice to see this self-determination thing the UK wants to bring when actually they never asked us when the two english invasions of Argentina happened. That was colonialism or an attempt of it btw. 2- UK's militarisation of Malvinas is true and it's happening, bringing nuclear weapons here is an act of militarisation. 3- Malvinas son Argentinas.
Comments 13
(The comment has been removed)
(The comment has been removed)
but there are no people who arnt colisiests there. no one lived there befor the brits put people there, i think. and they want to be british subjects. so thats the self determation covered.
Reply
This is a big part of Argentina's argument about the islands - they contest that the British presence is in fact illegal, and has been since the Brits arrived.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Legally, the right to self-determination can only be applied to the indigenous inhabitants of a place...which the current residents of the islands are not. If anything, they're two steps removed from being eligible for self-determination, not one - they're technically not even the colonists who settled the place. The British presence in the Falklands/Malvinas came about because they turned up to an Argentinean settlement that already existed and made the inhabitants leave under threat of being immediately flattened by Royal Navy ships ( ... )
Reply
Yes, it's quite obvious.
Reply
In either case, you're referencing a principle of self-determination which quite frankly does not apply here. It was meant for nations subjugated by empires, not colonizers, and to extend it to cover any current settlers in an area has pretty undesirable implications = you could claim territory by displacing the pre-existing population.
(I left Argentina when I was ten years old. I live in Britain now, with a husband seconded to the British army...honestly, I'd like this resolved so it doesn't flare up into war again one day. That's all.)
Reply
OP Argentinians have never been colonialist, and we never will. You need to look up the meaning of the word.
1- The people living in Malvinas were put there when the UK invaded the islands, therefore they are not native from the islands, and only the people native from the island can have self-determination (the UN has said this over and over again).
Nice to see this self-determination thing the UK wants to bring when actually they never asked us when the two english invasions of Argentina happened. That was colonialism or an attempt of it btw.
2- UK's militarisation of Malvinas is true and it's happening, bringing nuclear weapons here is an act of militarisation.
3- Malvinas son Argentinas.
Reply
Leave a comment