|
| Argentina, the UK and Las Malvinas | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Feb 24 2013, 08:21 PM (377 Views) | |
| Monica | Feb 24 2013, 08:21 PM Post #1 |
![]()
|
![]() María Perceval Permanent Representative of Argentina to the United Nations Mr. President, Fellow Representatives ; I have come before you again at the request of my government to speak on a Issue that has continued to serve as a Issue of instability for Argentina's International Relations as well as a Issue that has served to hurt stability and relations regionally. A dispute that has so far cost thousands of lives and was responsible for costly war. The Issue of Las Malvinas or known as the Falkland Islands to the government in London, has continued to dog bilateral relations between Argentina and the United Kingdom. This dispute represents not only a territorial claim by Argentina but a Issue that continues to exist in a Modern world which has no more place for it. In a modern world & society which has broken free from the shackles of colonialism this Issue stands as a sore thumb in the path for a truly equal world where colonialism no longer exist. We have continued to reach out to the government in London time and time again, we have been rejected by a government which has refused to even view the Issue. To forcefully evict a indigenous population only to colonize a land with ones own population is a most serious crime in violation of International law which this Organization has time and time again passed. My government has vowed not to use military force in this conflict and we continue to stand by this ideal, a return of rightful Argentine territory can be achieved through peaceful means. However; I ask that this community of nations which stands for International peace and cooperation join me in a International call to London that sends a clear message we demand a end to the unjust policy of colonialism. Join me in urging the United Kingdom to come to the negotiations that will allow for relations to Improve and begin the steps needed for a peaceful dialogue. I yield. Edited by Monica, Feb 24 2013, 08:22 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Replies: | |
|---|---|
| PolishPrince | Feb 25 2013, 06:00 AM Post #11 |
![]()
|
Sir Mark Lyall Grant.Permanent Representative to the United Nations - - - I'm unsure as to what sabre rattling Mr. Churkin is referring too. We have made v not mention of renewed conflict, we haven't deployed 20,000 troops to prop up an Argentinian political group which is grossly unpopular government and nor have we been behind a failed coup attempt. If the greatest support Argentina has is from a crumbling regime, led by a would be King who is having mass protests at home and international condemnation... We are inclined to feel that the risk to our international standing is minimal, at best. However, to right 200 year old wrongs - the prime minister would almost certainly meet with the descendants of those who were displaced almost two centuries ago. Besides that, I reiterate that the matter is not for the international community to decide. It is for the Falkland Islanders to decide. Edited by PolishPrince, Feb 25 2013, 06:02 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Jos1311 | Feb 25 2013, 06:02 AM Post #12 |
![]()
Head Admin
|
![]() Permanent Representative to the UN _____ Berlin urges both Argentina and Britain to discuss this issue through bilateral venues, and while Berlin supports the outcome of various referendums held on the island, it should also be noted that the dispute should be addressed by both Buenos Aires and London. Berlin views it as unwise to let this dispute continue to smolder, we urge both sides to turn towards diplomacy to address the matter. With that said Berlin is questioned by the Russian stance in the matter. Its stance seems to be focused more on acting against the Western world and seeking confrontation, rather than being based upon diplomacy and common sense. The reasoning portrayed here is quite the opposite from what we have heard from Russian representatives when it came to Syria. I would like to inquire how the Russian representative explains that it views thirty-three (33) countries supporting the Argentinian claim as a reason to support Argentina, while it completely ignores one hundred-thirty (130) countries supporting the Syrian National Coalition as a legitimate representative for the Syrian people. Despite the overwhelming majority to see the SNC as a legitimate representative, Moscow continues to view the SNC as terrorists. Yet in the case of the Falkland Islands, it refers to a small group of nations that support the Argentinian claim, there seems to be a big contrast here. Rather than condemning the United Kingdom and accusing it of belligerence and provocative actions, would it not be wiser to stimulate dialogue and cooperation? |
![]() |
|
| Monica | Feb 25 2013, 08:42 AM Post #13 |
![]()
|
![]() María Perceval Permanent Representative of Argentina to the United Nations Ambassador Wittig, it is perhaps more evident that we solely urge London to the negotiating table as Argentina has signaled and made it very clear it is willing to enter into talks. It is Britain who has repeatedly refused any form of communication over the matter and so this will continue to be a Issue which will be a dagger in the side of relations. Responding Ambassador Grant, the 1980's situation in Britain is not something appropriate to discuss at the moment nor is the 1980's Argentine situation. We are here and now in the present and 30 years later this is still a Issue that needs to be resolved. The simple fact that you have admitted you forcefully evicted the original inhabitants of the Island is a major step. You state that you have laid claim to the Islands before Argentina was even in existence yet did you not colonize Africa, Asia, and the United States before any of those nations were in existence? Where is your claim there? A flawed argument. And so we simply show the world our good will by raising the Issue through the UN and the International community now sees the blockade which has been Imposed on progress in this matter by the United Kingdom. |
![]() |
|
| Jos1311 | Feb 25 2013, 09:18 AM Post #14 |
![]()
Head Admin
|
![]() Permanent Representative to the UN _____ The desire of Argentina to discuss the issue of the Falklands is clear, and we respect their claim over the island. However as the issue has resulted in armed conflict between both nations not too long ago, we emphasize the need the come to an agreement on the matter through diplomatic channels. We therefore call upon Britain to discuss the matter at hand, and also call for the UN to acknowledge the Islanders' right to choose their future. With that said Berlin considers the Falklands to be part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, but also emphasizes the right of the inhabitants of the island to self-determination, as is also emphasized in the UN Charters. We therefore reiterate our call for a diplomatic solution to the issue, which should center around this right, and call upon London and Buenos Aires to look at the diplomatic options available to them. |
![]() |
|
| PolishPrince | Feb 25 2013, 09:56 AM Post #15 |
![]()
|
Sir Mark Lyall Grant.Permanent Representative to the United Nations - - - There is absolutely nothing to discuss. The Falkland Islanders have resided on the Islands for approximately 200 years. The original settlers, Argentinian and British, are, by now, dust. The fact that Argentina went almost 100 years without claiming the Falklands were their territorial property says it all! The military Junta of the 80's revived the issue for political reasons, and now the flailing Kerchner government does the same. There will be no negotiation. I cannot state that point strongly enough. Negotiations will only come if the referendum provides a pro-Argentinian result. Failing that, you may as well ask us to relinquish York, or Leeds or Durham. I strongly advise that you return to your President, and inform her that she is welcome to visit the Islands as a tourist, pending appropriate passport and visa checks, but she may not visit them as some sort of Boudicca. |
![]() |
|
| Monica | Feb 25 2013, 09:57 AM Post #16 |
![]()
|
![]() María Perceval Permanent Representative of Argentina to the United Nations Argentina will not support any resolution that puts into a legal binding that the Malvinas be decided on the vote of residents that were put there as part of a colonization efforts. Are the original Inhabitants that were forcefully expelled from the Islands to be silenced in the name of colonialism? Given the highly anti-colonial nature of this assembly, I doubt it would garner enough support beyond the European nations to be passed. Instead we should look to already passed binding resolutions such as United Nations Resolution 2065 which clearly states the Islands are a remnant of colonial days and urges Britain to enter into discussions. Yet this resolution has been defied. Resolutions have already been passed and continue to remain in place, it is Britain who has failed to adhere to them. Argentina has stated several times and will state again we are committed to coming to a peaceful agreement on the matter and enter into a peaceful dialogue. It is now Britain who must take that first step forward. We would urge our friends in Berlin to focus it's attention on this matter there as it is the keystone step. Now that Britain has acknowledged they forcefully ejected the original Inhabitants we can move on. Edited by Monica, Feb 25 2013, 09:58 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Monica | Feb 25 2013, 10:08 AM Post #17 |
![]()
|
![]() María Perceval Permanent Representative of Argentina to the United Nations I will Invoke my right to respond in this matter. Firstly Argentina has never dropped it's claim nor have we ever forgotten the Islands. Not in the 100 years that you claim or the time since the end of the war. As you have resorted to child-like insults we will not respond to your claim on a "flailing" government that was democratically elected since you see fit to compare my government to a Military Junta. The governments may have changed, but our rightful claim to La Islas Malvinas have not. Perhaps we will choose to be diplomatic adults here in this chamber as I am sure the International community recognizes the comments on York, Leeds and Durham are completely exaggerated. Let us keep cool heads? In regards to again your remarks attacking my government and belittling my President. Perhaps it is you who should visit your Prime Minister and remind him of the opinion of this chamber and the many resolutions it has passed barring the UK's past time tradition of colonialism and more specifically the ones on La Islas Malvinas. Edited by Monica, Feb 25 2013, 10:10 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Rezim | Feb 25 2013, 10:22 AM Post #18 |
|
His Majesty King Carol I
|
![]() Jorge Hidalgo Valero Permanent Representative to The United Nations Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela supports the Argentine claim to the Islas Malvinas, recognizing the legitimacy of the Argentinian nation of the islands. While we welcome the neutral rhetoric of the United States and Germany, it should be noted that Kirchner and her government in Buenos Aries are more than willing and prepared for negotiation with the British government... However, it is the government of David Cameron that refuses to even discuss the matter in these chambers - these very chambers that maintain the purpose of cooperation within the international community with regards to disputes or other matters. If the British government is in fact so certain in their claim to the Islas Malvinas, then they should certainly have no issue with having negotiations with Argentina on the matter. Perhaps, the United Kingdom fears that this assembly would be majority in support of Argentina's claim to the islands, and this would force the United Kingdom to actually cooperate with other nations. We in Venezuela will not hold our breath in hopes of British cooperation, since this is the same government that was arguably preparing to raid the Ecuadorian embassy to arrest Julian Assange. Furthermore, we condemn the language of the British delegate and by extension the government, comparing President Kirchner to Boudicca, not because Boudicca was rebellious, but because the British see themselves as a modern day Roman empire and see Kirchner as a figure who should be flogged, or worse. That said, we can't say we are surprised by the rhetoric of the British delegation, since they have never given up their colonial wet dreams. First they threaten to attack Ecuador to arrest a journalist, now they refuse to even sit at the same table as the Argentine government to discuss anything regarding the Islas Malvinas. What is next, the British crown will claim that the aboriginal peoples of Canada as rebels against the crown? Negotiation requires good will, unfortunately I feel the Argentinian delegate is wasting her time attempting to negotiate with imperialists. The British delegate and by extension government, acts as if it is above international law, and above the governments of other nations. Perhaps certain nations can learn a lesson from their own rhetoric. They demand negotiation with Iran, they demand Iran to cooperate... And Iran is doing so. Well now, we demand that the British play by the rules they have set for other nations, and negotiate with the Argentinian government, instead of insulting them. |
![]() |
|
| PolishPrince | Feb 26 2013, 12:34 AM Post #19 |
![]()
|
Sir Mark Lyall Grant.Permanent Representative to the United Nations - - - I would like to take this opportunity to address several issues that have been thus raised;
I would like to firstly point out that the original inhabitants died out approximately one hundred and sixty years ago, the descendent's of the Falklands are now, I think, the legal occupants. I also take umbrage with the term 'original Inhabitants', as there were no 'original' inhabitants. The settlers you refer to were Argentinian colonisers, so we feel that your choice of words is inappropriate and misleading.
I feel I should clarify that I was not directly comparing the government of President Kirchner to that of the military Junta, it was a reference to the woeful economic policy which has led to a stagnant economy, one of the highest inflation rates in the world, which has received international condemnation for it's nationalisation of YDF and finally which is facing legal action at the World Bank. So please, do not think the comment was an attempt to stain your diplomatic credentials. It was, in fact, an observation that your domestic situation is precarious at the moment, and raising the Falkland Islands issue is a convenient way of rallying the Argentinian people around the flag.
These comments were not at all exaggerated. Her Majesties' Government holds that any British territory is entitled to an equally robust defence from any hostile actions, be they economic or military.
Mr. Valero, we choose not to enter into negotiations because there is nothing to negotiate. I wonder, if Argentina had won the Falklands War and colonised the Islands, would you be as supportive of our claim to the Islands and be as concerned for the rights of the living Falkland Islanders, as you are for the long dead Argentinian settlers of almost two centuries ago?
I strongly condemn the wording of this statement, it is entirely unacceptable language for this chamber; I would like to point out, however, that if we had such colonial ambitions - why has this government granted the Scottish people a referendum on their own future?, could it be that when we speak of the right to self determination we speak of it for all peoples in all places? Could it be that we pursue that ideal even when it could be to the detriment of the United Kingdom?...
I shall assume that you are referring to Mr. Assange. I would remind you that Mr. Assange faces very serious charges of a sexual nature and was due to be deported to face trial , that Ecuador offered Mr. Assange sanctuary in their embassy is entirely irrelevant to this debate and this government is perfectly happy to let Mr. Assange remain in the Ecuadorian embassy; a place which will surely come to feel like a prison. This body should recognise that any Argentinian presence on the Islands, almost two hundred years ago, was a group of settlers which, if they did indeed exist, would have been on the Islands for only a handful of years. This body should also recognise that they were put there by an ambitious young Argentinian Republic which itself, had colonial ambitions. I wonder, will Argentina return total control of the Pantagonia region to the native indegenious population which Buenos Aires waged war on? A population which faced a genocidal war which shattered their numbers and obliterated their society or perhaps you shall next argue that the United States should return control of all lands and territories which it forcefully took from the Native Americans?... Or did these things happen so long ago that it would be ludicrous to relinquish control of such territory for such reasons? We are in full compliance with the 1960's UNGA resolution 1514 (XV) which states supports, entitled 'Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples', which provides for the the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples in providing an inevitable legal linkage between self-determination and its goal of decolonisation. I thin the Falkland Islands referendum, to determine their own future, meets the goals which this body have in the past supported. There will be no negotiations over the Sovereignty of the Falkland Islands. To barter away such a land, to offer control of the territory without even consulting the Islanders would be colonialism... So I reiterate to this body that the Falkland Islanders will choose their own future in the upcoming referendum, because we believe in their right to self determination. Edited by PolishPrince, Feb 26 2013, 12:46 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Monica | Feb 26 2013, 01:47 AM Post #20 |
![]()
|
![]() Hector Timerman Foreign Minister of Argentina I have been asked here by my President to personally head discussion on this most pressing Issue for the time being as a clear sign of the Importance that my government places on this Issue and I will begin by first Invoking my right to a response against the claims leveled against Argentina.
Firstly allow me to remind the British delegation that the Island's were populated before Argentina even came into existence so any attempt to make Argentina out to be a "colonizer" is laughable. If we would like to compare the colonial history of Britain and Argentina please let us. I remind this chamber that the only reason the United Kingdom has successively kept a claim to Las Malvinas is because they succeeded in forcing out it's original Inhabitants and therefor have whipped out any resistance to it's rule over the Islands. The original Inhabitants have yes of course long perished long ago never being able to return to there homeland however there ancestors and history is still very alive and real. The fact that you are arguing on behalf of the colonist currently occupying the Islands yet deny any link's to Argentina is completely hypocritical.
The United Kingdom has denounced Venezuela for bringing up irrelevant issues in this argument yet is guilty of this itself. Firstly; Argentina has long claimed the Malvinas rather it be in a time of economic growth or economic hardship and so any accusations that we use it is a scapegoat is a unfounded claim started by London papers. Secondly; while yes we have had high Inflation rates, I remind this chamber that several Latin American economies suffer from this and it is a Issue that is being worked at throughout the region however to use it as a reason to argue against a Argentine claim is irrelevant as economist also tell us our Inflation rates are dropping dramatically and we are posting higher growth rates then that of the UK itself. To accuse us of using the Issue to distract the population from other problems is a claim that goes both ways as in our view the conservative government in London uses the Issue to stir up nationalism and right-wing tendencies that appear in the form of further provocative militarization, high profile deployments and exercises in the region
The difference being Mr. Grant; you are not Illegally occupying the mentioned cities whereas in Las Malvinas you are as recognized by many states. Now to level claims of racial genocide against my government against shows the hypocritical policy that resonates in all levels of the British government. Shall we compare history Mr. Grant on how many wars, colonies, territorial expansions, ethnic cleansing and forceful removals that have been executed by the UK and Argentina? We doubt that would be a argument that would go heavily in your favor however as stated this is not the proper venue to debate those facts but instead the issue of sovereignty over Las Malvinas. I would like to announce that my government will be drafting a strongly worded resolution that will join the ranks of the already several other resolutions passed on the Issue. This time decrying the British refusal to conduct diplomacy and again denouncing colonialism in all forms. We are confident that we can attain the votes needed for the UNGA to pass it. You claim to be in compliance with UN resolution yet you have failed to mention that the United Kingdom still defies the 1958 UN Convention on the Continental Shelf which clearly solidifies Argentina's claim to Las Malvinas. Or to mention United Nations Resolution 2065 which clearly states " by the cherish aim of bringing an end everywhere colonialism in all it's forms; one of which covers Las Malvinas" and goes on to state " Invites the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to proceed without delay with the negotiations" and yet the United Kingdom has failed at abiding by and continues to defy these resolutions they are party to by continuing to even discuss sovereignty which is the Issue. Again Resolution 3160 calls on the United Kingdom to enter into talks over sovereignty which was again brushed aside by London. And yet Argentina is the one that is defying International law and has no legal claim? We think not. As my government has clearly stated time and time again that we will not continue to entertain the reluctance of Britain to enter into any kind of negotiations for the past century. And so my government is considering a wide range of economic restrictions that can be Imposed on the Falkland Island's including cancelling the only airline operating to and from the Islands in addition to consulting with our South American allies for a more united response. The time where Latin American nations were pushed around by former Colonial Empires is long gone and it is time that the United Kingdom come to the diplomatic table as a equal partner to discuss the Issue of sovereignty as sensible nations. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
![]() Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today. Learn More · Sign-up Now |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Round 1 · Next Topic » |










Sir Mark Lyall Grant.





6:11 AM Jul 11
