Since President Alberto Fernandez took office, different events have taken place regarding the Malvinas issue and the strategy to be executed by the current government in the future, for a claim that has continued for more than 187 years.

There is a Council, created by Alberto Fernández, whose administration began last December and is made up of the president himself, the Foreign Minister Felipe Solá and the Governor of Tierra del Fuego, as well as a Representative and Senator from the three main political parties, three representatives from the academic and scientific sectors and a former soldier of the Malvinas War fought in 1982.

Image: Cancilleria Argentina

The president recently highlighted the multidisciplinary work of the areas of government involved in the preparation of approved and promulgated laws that demarcate the outer limit of the continental shelf beyond 200 miles and to create a National Council that will advise on policies related to the Malvinas issue.

Last month, the United Nations Special Committee on Decolonization (C-24), adopted by consensus a new resolution which reiterates its view that the United Kingdom and Argentina should resume, as soon as possible, negotiations which ultimately find a peaceful and definitive solution to the controversy regarding sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia, the South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas.

Image: Daniel Filmus

Foreign Minister Felipe Solá assured that "the recovery of full sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands constitutes State policy and a sentiment of the Argentine people."

The Secretary of the Malvinas, Antarctica and South Atlantic, Daniel Filmus, highlighted the "need to resume a substantive dialogue on the sovereignty dispute" and urged the United Kingdom "to comply with the duty imposed by International Law to peacefully resolve this dispute and put an end to this colonial, anachronistic situation in the XXI century."

The current vice president, Cristina Kirchner, indicated some time ago in a statement from the Patria Institute, that "The defense of Argentine sovereignty in the Malvinas does not concern any single political party, but is a matter of national concern."Speaking before the United Nations Decolonization Committee, on 14 June 2012, Cristina Fernández referred to the conversations that the British and Argentine governments began in 1974 and that proposed a condominium in the archipelago.

It is the resumption of these negotiations that Argentina is seeking, said the vice president. “We are not asking them to agree with us, we are not asking them to say yes, that the Malvinas are Argentine. We are asking just, nothing more and nothing less, to sit at a table to open a dialogue. Can someone in the contemporary world refuse a dialogue and then want to become a champion of human rights and freedoms in the civilized, Western and Christian world?”

Former British ambassador to the UN, Mark Lyall Grant at the U.N.

The former British ambassador to the UN, Mark Lyall Grant, stressed in 2013 that "the United Kingdom is not willing to discuss the question of sovereignty of the Malvinas until the inhabitants of the island so request."

Last week the Argentine Foreign Ministry issued a statement rejecting that "it intended to promote the Malvinas Islands as a differentiated entity from Argentina" before a commercial promotion offered in Uruguay.

"Rechazamos que en un stand británico, en una exposición privada de agricultura en Montevideo, se pretenda promover a las Islas Malvinas como una entidad diferenciada de Argentina. Apelamos al tradicional apoyo de Uruguay en la Cuestión Malvinas para evitar que el hecho se repita."

• The Malvinas-Falkland Islands are one of 17 territories on the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories under the supervision of the United Nations Decolonization Committee, in order to examine the situation with regard to the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to the colonial countries and its peoples, so the situation of the archipelago is examined annually by the Decolonization Committee since 1965. Legally, the United Nations Organization considers it a territory of sovereignty still pending definition, among the United Kingdom, which administers it, and Argentina, which claims its return.

• The Argentine Constitution, in its reform in force since 1994, states in its First Transitory Provision that “the Argentine Nation ratifies its legitimate and imprescriptible sovereignty over the Malvinas, South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands and the corresponding maritime and insular areas, as an integral part of the national territory. The recovery of said territories and the full exercise of sovereignty, respecting the way of life of its inhabitants and in accordance with the principles of International Law, constitute a permanent and inalienable objective of the Argentine people."

• Law 346 states in Article 1 that "They are Argentine: All individuals born, or who are born in the territory of the Argentine Republic, regardless of the nationality of their parents."

• The United Kingdom has stated that any negotiations carried out for the sovereignty of the Malvinas must include the wishes of the islanders, to whom it recognizes the right to self-determination. However, Argentina rejects this determination and uses the United Nations resolutions on decolonization as an argument.
  

From here two issues arise that attract attention and on which we wanted to consult with the new Argentine ambassador appointed to the United Kingdom, Javier Figueroa.

If, according to the Argentine Constitution and Law 346, all the inhabitants of the Falkland Islands born there are "undocumented Argentines"[1], would Argentina in that case, not have an internal problem with some Argentine inhabitants being in a part of its national territory? (A case that is repeated with the Mapuche population and other native peoples[2]).

Satellital photo of the Malvinas-Falkland (Image: NASA)?

If this were correct, Argentina would in this case have a problem with the "Argentine" inhabitants in a part of its national territory. Is it really an exclusive conflict with the United Kingdom or also an internal problem that should be dealt with first by the Interior Ministry?

If the principal governmental authorities involved in this issue make mention of dialogue and seeking solutions, should not these other Argentines participate in all the talks, conferences and in the multidisciplinary work that the government intends to carry out? Why are dialogue and talks always limited to the same group related to the government? Doesn't the opinion of diplomats, soldiers, businessmen, native people, journalists or politicians who think differently or have a different vision on the subject serve?

If currently in the country there are serious communication problems among a population that is divided by the so-called "grieta", it is not to be expected that this "sub-grieta" can be resolved overnight. Obviously it is a process that, unfortunately, is inserted in an unfavorable context for the Argentine government since the inhabitants of the islands have a GDP (nominal) per capita 7 times higher [3] than the rest of the country, they do not experience inflation, there is no corruption in its administration and it could be said that respect and norms are very far removed from the codes with which the Argentine political environment is managed.

Image: Cancilleria Argentina

The other point that we wanted to consult is the fishing issue at a time when the Argentine government is printing at full speed the new map with the outer limit of the continental shelf beyond 200 miles.

If one looks at the map and leaves aside for a moment the "circle" administered by the population of the islands (Nr2 in red color), you will see a huge area and a sea of opportunities to seek, perhaps, a new and different dialogue with the islanders and the United Kingdom.

Map prepared by Dr. César Augusto Lerena

No conflict favors a country over time and, on the contrary, there are some specific points related to resources and fishing on which one could try to develop new approaches without any of the parties having to renounce their current position at this moment.

With respect, a willingness to engage in dialogue and leaving aside any type of aggression, it would be possible to start a new path.

No one owns the truth

Editor's note: At the time of publishing this article, we continue to hope that the new Argentine ambassador appointed to the United Kingdom, Javier Figueroa, will receive us or at least answer our calls and emails.

1. Technically speaking, the situation of the population born there would be that of "undocumented Argentines". (So far the Ministry of the Interior has not relieved the population or prepared an electoral roll).

2.Original Native Peoples: Map of the Argentine Confederation 1832-1852 (Source: Wikipedia)

The areas belonging to the native peoples are marked in pink. 

The "Conquest of the Desert" was the military campaign carried out by the Argentine Republic between 1878 and 1885, by which it conquered large extensions of territory that were in the power of native peoples (also referred to as tribes from the side of the State) pampa, ranquel and tehuelche. A wide area of the Pampas region and Patagonia (called Puelmapu by the Mapuche) was incorporated into the effective control of the Argentine Republic, which until then was dominated by indigenous peoples. These, subjected, suffered acculturation, the loss of their lands and their identity when they were forcibly deported to Indian reservations, museums or transferred to serve as forced labor (Source: Wikipedia)

3. Comparative nominal GDP between Argentina and Malvinas-Falkland (source Wikipedia)

editorial@seafood.media
www.seafood.media