It’s C24 time again

June 14th 2012.

The 30th anniversary of the end of the Falklands war in 1982. Also the first time that the Head of State of any country in the world demeaned herself to go and try, in desperation, to convince the sub-sub-Committee of the United Nations, known as the C24, that she had a claim to another territory.

And the basis for this claim? Another defeat at the hands of British forces, 150 years before the Falklands War. President Cristina Kirchner alleges that in 1833 the British ‘usurped’ her country and threw off the legal authorities that were representing Buenos Aires. She even took along to the C24 a long-lost son of the family that Argentina claims established their right of sovereignty. A Vernet!

That poor scion was dragged up to say that his family had had a house on the Falklands since 1823 and that they became, in 1829, the representatives of the Buenos Aires Government. ” .. great-great-grandmother Maria had been the wife of the first political and military commander of the Malvinas Islands and those adjacent to Cape Horn.  Since 1823, her house had been part of Malvinas.  At that time, ranches had been set up for livestock.  Her brother and brother-in-law settled in Puerto de la Soledad in 1824.  In 1828, a decree had given her family land as a way to encourage the development of new areas for national prosperity.  In 1829, Maria was 29 with three children, the youngest of whom had taken her first steps in Malvinas.”

Now this is one of Argentina’s lies. They’ve been doing it to the C24 ever since Ruda’s speech in the 1960’s. What Marcello Luis Vernet did not mention, is that his family’s expedition to East Falkland in 1824 (not 1823) failed. The truth of that, the Vernet family’s initial attempt to establish a business on the islands under one Pablo Arequati, goes rather more like this: 

February 2nd, Pablo Areguati, with 25 gauchos, arrives on East Falkland. February 12th, Areguati writes, “We are without meat, without ship’s biscuits, and without gunpowder for hunting. We support ourselves by chance captures of rabbits, since there is no fat meat since we cannot go out to slaughter as there are no horses. I have resolved to tell you that we are perishing.” April 8th, the Captain of the British ship Adeona, threatens to denounce Areguati’s party as ‘pirates.June 7th, Areguati abandons the settlement and returns to Buenos Aires in the Fenwick. He leaves 8 gauchos behind, including the foreman Aniceto Oviedo. July 24th, the remaining gauchos are taken off East Falkland by the British sealer, Susannah Anne.

So – no house established in 1823.

In 1825, Britain and Buenos Aires signed a commercial Treaty which, while not recognising any right of Buenos Aires to any territory still claimed by Spain, at least set up the mechanism for trade. In Article 3, Britain gave permission for settlers from the mainland to try to forge business interests on the Falklands. So now the Vernet family had British permission.

And yet Marcello Vernet accused Britain of making the “gross historical error” !

Vernet then quoted from his ancestor’s Diary that at the time of Maria Vernet’s arrival in 1829 (not 1823), there were some 20 other settler families.  Her diary described daily life in a small community composed of Germans, people from Patagonia, Scots, Frenchmen, Genoese, English, Irish, and Africans.

He did not explain how these representatives from so many countries quite provides Argentina with the right to claim the Falklands.

Vernet also talked about the ‘Malvinas Command’, being founded on August 30th 1829. He did not mention the British protest of that same year which clearly told Buenos Aires that the Falklands were British and that they should stay away.

In many ways, the most surprising thing about Argentina’s claims over 1833 is that they were actually surprised that the British turned out to be as good as their word. They still do not think the British can be as good as their word.

In 1832 Argentina did not believe that the British would throw them off. They were wrong.

In 1982 Argentina did not believe that the British would throw them off. They were wrong.

And yet here they are still, in 2012, screeching at a discredited and biased sub-sub-Committee of the United Nations that Britain should let them onto a set of islands that they never owned, nor ever established any claim to.

Is Argentina hard of hearing ?

http://falklandstimeline.wordpress.com/

http://falklandstimeline.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/falklands-history8.pdf

http://www.falklandshistory.org/gettingitright.pdf

http://falklandshistory.org/sites/default/files/false-falklands-history.pdf

Let’s hear it for expense accounts !

May already! This occasional commentary piece has become very occasional. Of course the reason for this is that I’ve devoted rather more of my time to the Falklands History Blog and the Falklands News site.

Having said that, one of my particular grouses concerns the United Nations sub-sub-Committee known as the C24, and, as in previous years, they are gearing up once again for the show that they put on for a few weeks in summer.

This annual circus commences with a Regional Seminar which is held at one of the Non-Self-Governing Territories which remain on this rather outdated Committee’s ‘list’. Or perhaps not. This year it’s going to be held in Ecuador’s capital city. Well, I suppose the night life will be rather better than if they held it in a small wanna-be nation in the middle of the Pacific. Or in the Falklands for instance.

The original remit of this Committee was to oversea the transfer to full sovereignty of the oppressed colonies that once belonged to the supposed super-powers. This they did, in their early years. But these are not the early years, and there is a palpable sense at the UN of money being wasted seeing as how this Committee has failed to achieve very much in the last 20 years.

One of the things that they should be doing, is listening to the peoples of the NSG Territories. But it would seem that even this is beyond them. A number of NSGT’s have been shouting that they like the status quo, but does that get them off the list – oh no. Others have been asking for a visit by this Committee, but again their requests fall on deaf ears.

Ecuador then. Perhaps the perfect place for an old boys club where a goodly percentage of the old boys are from that region and are living high on expense accounts. At the expense of the NSGT’s certainly.

And what’s next? Well after the junket, the old boys will all return to the UN where they’ll spend a week listening to the same arguments that they heard last year, and, in fact, every year. They’ll then probably make the same recommendations to the Fourth Committee above them that they did last year, and every year.

Of course the one question that they’ll not consider is: Why do they bother ?

http://falklandstimeline.wordpress.com/

http://falklandsnews.wordpress.com/

Happy New Year 2012

I haven’t had a moan on this site since November I see. Well, I’m beginning to get a little disillusioned. I have doubts.

I have doubts that Argentina is actually a serious contender.

Let’s take a look at events since my last post here. What has happened? Nothing really. Having failed, arguably not even tried, to get a ‘live’ United Nations General Assembly Resolution again in 2011, Argentina continues to shout about long dead Resolutions. 2065 for example, which dates back to 1965, and was probably Argentina’s only real diplomatic success at the UN. The problem though is that, for all the desperate attempts to resurrect it, Resolution 2065 is dead. Stabbed in the back by Argentina itself in 1982. A diplomatic suicide.

Then there are the annual General Assembly Resolutions that were thrown up between 1982 and 1988. All of them requesting that Britain and Argentina talk, and eventually that’s what they did. There was talk and, in 1989, a resumption of diplomatic contact, and, indeed, a number of agreements on fisheries, oil exploration, etc. All of which Argentina subsequently broke of course, but then that’s Argentina for you.

Importantly, the UN stopped making Resolutions asking Britain and Argentina to discuss their differences. I can only take the near deafening silence since 1988 as an indication that the UN was satisfied with the renewal of diplomatic relations and would now rather the whole subject went and annoyed someone else.

So that was the UN. Nothing getting passed the Fourth Committee on the issue of the Falklands, and in particular, nothing from the sub-sub-Commmittee generally known as the C24. It is suggested that the C is for ‘Committee’ but I have a rather different opinion. It’s not a high one, or worthy of repeating here. Britain long ago withdrew from dealing with the C24, although we did reserve a right to comment on matters involving the Falklands. Officially, I don’t think we ever have. Unofficially, the Englishman who sits at the back of the room has been known to have a quiet word after some particularly ludicrous decision. The quiet word seems to work.

Argentina doesn’t much go for quiet words, so November and December has been filled with increasingly loud rhetoric and claims of small victories. “China supports us”, was one; failing to mention that China always has, mostly because China wants Argentine support over Taiwan. “CELAC supports us”, was yet another, even though CELAC’s support was muted, and no-one actually knows what a CELAC is. I think that it is a type of vegetable, which is what it looks like, but I suspect we may never get to find out.

The latest storm in a tea-cup was Mercosur’s ban on Falkland flagged vessels from visiting their ports. Actually, this one dates from 2010, but as nobody seemed to have noticed, it was obviously worth repeating. Or at least it would have been, if the ban was actually very effective.

For political reasons little Uruguay took the most vocal stand for this ban, failing to  mention to its neighbours that the country would need some legislative change to make it work. Or that such change, was by no means certain. Uruguay’s official stance is that no new law is needed, but as there is at least one Falklands flagged vessel still sitting at Montevideo, this looks about as effective as the ban on British warships. One of which is also sitting in Montevideo harbour now, and has been since December 30th.

All of which only goes to show, that politics + bull and bluster = no contest.

I do hope that things liven up this year. In many ways they should, what with the 30th anniversary of Argentina’s last attempt at invasion, the 180th anniversary of their first, and Queen Elizabeth’s Diamond Jubilee celebrations which will include a Royal visit ( by a very minor Royal) to the Falkland Islands. Oh, and there’s Prince William’s deployment too. Well, if he turns up at your crisis, any self-respecting Argentine should refuse to have anything to do with him, and drown for their misplaced cause.

Maybe I won’t be disappointed in 2012, but I suspect that I will.

Argentina just hasn’t got it!

Happy New Year.

Falkland Islands

One of my particular bones of contention is the beligerent way in which Argentina treats the Falkland Islands based on no claim whatsoever other than geography ( the islands lie closer to Argentina than the UK), and their need to take control over the south Atlantic in an attempt to exert some influence over the future of the Antarctic. Geopolitics pure and simple.

Oh yes, Argentina will come up with a concocted history claiming that they had founded a settlement in the 1820’s and then been thrown off by British forces in 1833. This is a selective, indeed spurious, version of events as it fails to note that the British first gained sovereignty in 1765. Long before Argentina was even a twinkle in a revolutionary’s eye.

There was no indiginous population on the islands when the first British settlement was founded and the sovereighty claim that Britain gained then has never been renounced nor abandoned

However, what is most important here in the 21st century is the future of the islander’s themselves. As an ex-colony and a non-self governing territory they are entitled to both protection and rights under the multi-lateral Treaty known as the Charter of the United Nations.

The Falkland Islander’s are empowered by the Charter to decide their own future and the British Government is meeting its responsibilities under Article 73 with that end in mind.

Article 73 states:

” Members of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept as a sacred trust the obligation to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace and security established by the present Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these territories, and, to this end:

a) to ensure, with due respect for the culture of the peoples concerned, their political, economic, social, and educational advancement, their just treatment, and their protection against abuses;

b) to develop self-government, to take due account of the political aspirations of the peoples, and to assist them in the progressive development of their free
political institutions, according to the particular circumstances of each
territory and its peoples and their varying stages of advancement;

c) to further international peace and security;

d) to promote constructive measures of development, to encourage research, and to co-operate with one another and, when and where appropriate, with specialized international bodies with a view to the practical achievement of the social, economic, and scientific purposes set forth in this Article; and

e) to transmit regularly to the Secretary-General for information purposes, subject to such limitation as security and constitutional considerations may require, statistical and other information of a technical nature relating to economic, social, and educational conditions in the territories for which they are respectively responsible ….. “

The islanders have their own government in the form of a Legislative Assembly with eight elected members representing a population of around 3,000 islanders and they are increasingly taking responsibility for their own development.

For example the recent oil exploration licences were issued by the Falkland Islands Government, not the UK. These, together with fishing licences, sheep farming, tourism and the production of stamps, have reduced the islander’s dependancy on the UK to the point that the only costs the British pick up are those for defence.

However, there is another Article in the UN Charter regarding non-self governing territories.

Article 74 states:

” Members of the United Nations also agree that their policy in respect of the
territories to which this Chapter applies, no less than in respect of their
metropolitan areas, must be based on the general principle of good-neighbourliness, due account being taken of the interests and well-being of the rest of the world, in social, economic, and commercial matters. “

This Article applies to all of the Members of the United Nations and lays a duty upon them. Argentina is in breach of that duty. Argentina is not a ‘good neighbour’.

http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter11.shtml

http://www.falklandshistory.org/gettingitright.pdf

http://en.mercopress.com/falkland-islands