Argentina's Joker |
I see from the pictures published in the press that this
woman’s lips are thicker than ever, inflated by her addiction to Botox. I
think it may have begun to affect her intellect, which is thick and getting
thicker. Is there any point, I wonder, in teaching monkeys history? But
for those a fraction more perceptive than Madame Botox, which I think will be
just about everyone who stumbles this way, let me explain the simple facts.
Kirchner claims that “the Argentines on the Islands were expelled by the Royal Navy.” It’s
rubbish. To begin with the islands were barely inhabited in 1833.
The few ‘Argentines’ on the islands were allowed to remain. In fact it
was the remnants of a party led there in 1826 by one Louis Vernet, a merchant
of Franco-German origin who came with a mandate from Buenos Aires . The ‘Argentines’ in
question consisted of Vernet’s family and about forty English and German
colonists.
Let the facts bite even deeper: Argentina , as we know it today, did
not exist in 1833. The country was then called the United Provinces of
the River Plate. It was only after it began the bloody conquest of Patagonia , an exercise know as the Conquest of the
Desert, that the present name was assumed. That same conquest,
incidentally, of a desert that was not a desert, was based on the wholesale
extirpation of the indigenous inhabitants. This is something that
Kirchner may call to mind when she drones on about ‘colonialism.’
The 1850 Convention of Settlement, also known as the
Arana-Southern Treaty, regulating relations between Britain
and Argentina , effectively
ended that latter’s claim to the Falklands .
At the time Lord Palmerston, the British Foreign Secretary, said;
… a claim had been made many years ago, on the part of
Buenos Ayres, to the Falkland Islands , and had
been resisted by the British Government. Great
Britain had always disputed and denied the claim of Spain to the Falkland Islands, and she was not
therefore willing to yield to Buenos Ayres what had been refused to Spain . 10 or 12
years ago the Falkland Islands, having been unoccupied for some time, were
taken possession of by Great Britain, and a settlement had ever since been
maintained there; and he thought it would be most unadvisable to revive a
correspondence which had ceased by the acquiescence of one party and the
maintenance of the other.
So that, as they say, is that. All Argentine protests
were dropped. The diplomatic realities were acknowledged by the Argentine
leaders in their Messages to Congress in the 1850s. The Islands
were not mentioned again for another ninety odd years in Congress, not until
1941, to be precise.
It’s also worth noting that the issue has come to the
surface in the modern age, a continuing diversion away from Argentina ’s
internal problems. This is a nation that, unable to cope with itself, was
continually beguiled by demagogues: military dictatorship at one turn, outright
fascism at the next. Britain ,
in resisting the invasion of the Falklands in
1982, at least saved that benighted country from its own political
stupidity.
There are bigger issues here going beyond arcane matters of
diplomatic history. Kirchner talks of ‘colonialism’, seemingly without
having the first idea what the word and the practice means. The
Falklands, as the Foreign Office pointed out, are not a ‘colony’ but a
self-governing British
Overseas Territory .
The Islands have their own government and the
three thousand odd inhabitants a complete right to self-destination.
This March the Falklanders will be asked in a referendum if
they wish to continue their present status as an Overseas Territory .
Personally speaking I would offer them a further choice – full political union
with the United Kingdom , in
the same fashion as some of the departments of France
located in the Americas .
That would settle the matter once and for all. Any future attack should
be regarded as an attack on Britain
itself.
The truth is that Kirchner, in protesting against
‘colonialism’, would treat the people of the Falklands
in a thoroughly colonial way. What arrogance in the modern word to assume
that the native inhabitants of a place can be ignored and disposed of by other
powers. Commenting on this the Foreign Office said;
The people of the Falklands
are British and have chosen to be so. They remain free to choose their
own futures, both politically and economically, and have the right to
self-determination as enshrined in the UN Charter. This is a fundamental right
for all peoples. There are three parties to the debate, not just two as Argentina likes
to pretend. The Islanders can’t just be written out of history. As
such there can be no negotiations on the sovereignty of the Falkland
Islands unless and until such time as the Islanders so wish.
So there! Poor Madame Botox; there she is, desperate
to divert attention away from her own internal problems by raising this issue
yet again to no purpose whatsoever. She fires letter in the way that her
fascist predecessors fired bullets. Letters or bullets it makes no
difference. The day that the people of the Falklands decide to join
Cristina’s failing republic will be a cold day in hell...and in Buenos Aires .
A very silly woman with a clown-like appearance. During the British colonial period populations were imported and exported to suit British interests, a practice that has caused political, cultural and racial conflict to this day. Plantation labor around the world, like the importation of Indians to Fiji and Africans to the Americas, the expulsion of the French from Nova Scotia to Arcadia etc. The history of mankind is ripe with conflict.
ReplyDeleteIt certainly is, Anthony.
DeleteI am much wiser about the history of the Falkland Islands now after reading your article and of course I agree with you about who is right and who is wrong and what is the preferred solution for the future of those islands. However I foresee practical problems in safeguarding the rights of the islanders at some point in the future when political expediency and economic necessity may make a virtue out of doing the wrong thing. No doubt if that does occur the islanders will be offered hansom compensation and relocation. If in the mean time substantial oil and mineral reserves are found in the territorial waters surrounding the Falklands then that can only exacerbate the crises between Argentina and the UK. Argentina will be more intent on gaining possession and the UK will be just as intent on keeping possession. This is a saga that will run and run. Obama in the White house is not helpful to the UK position as the Latin vote is so important to him and the Democrat party.
ReplyDeleteAntisthenes, yes, I agree with you. Militarily we are not in the position we were in 1982, but then neither is Argentina. I think it important to emphasise the exact political status of the islanders simply to refute the absurd 'colonialism' claim. These people cannot be disposed of in the way this stupid woman imagines.
DeleteForeign politics: all arm waving and shouting gibberish. Best to ignore them.
ReplyDeleteCalvin, yes, all show and no substance. I hope you see this because a gremlin seems to be in the works this evening. None of my other published comments are appearing!
ReplyDeleteOh, now they are!!
ReplyDeleteFirst class blog Ana. Better than most I have read on the subject in the press at God knows how much a pop and a lesson in economy and clarity.
ReplyDeleteThanks, dear Badger, and a Happy New Year!
Delete