Just read this:
I remember reading somewere that the falklands was uninhabited until the British settled there and I was wondering what Argentina’s claim is?
The Falklands were discovered by an Englishman (who incidently was my namesake) and the first claim of sovereignity was made by the British in 1690. The first people to live their were French sailors but they were thown out by the Spanish in 1766, A British colony had already been plante don the other Island a year earlier in 1765. The British colony was disbanded in 1774 due to finicial reasons, though and the Spanish ruled the islands until 1811 until the South American revolutions and the island was not inhabited again until 1820 when Argentinan warlord took them over. 11 years later in 1833 the US Navy threw the Argentians off for illegally hunting selas. Two years later the British navy arrived again and ever since then the islands have been British hands. In 1920 Argentina layed it’s claim to the islands.
Sorry the US navy threw the Argentians off the island in 1831 not 1833
Strap in.
The Falklands were probably first discovered by Spanish and Portuguese explorers in the 16th century. The British made the first documented landing there in 1690, which is when they were named “Falklands” (after Viscount Falkland.)
The French put a settlement on East Falkland in 1764, the British on West Falkland in 1765. In 1767, Spain purchased the French settlement. In 1770, the Spanish sent warships to demand the British leave West Falkland, claiming their purcahse of the French settlement entitled them to the whole island group. The British were forced to leave by virtue of Spanish superiority of arms, but returned from 1771-1774, then abandoned it again because, to be quite honest, it was too worthless to bother.
In 1811, Spain abandoned the Falklands.
1816: Argentina becomes an independent nation-state. Four years later Argentina declares sovereignty over the Falklands.
In 1828 Argentina sent a small settlement to the Falklands. But in 1831, an American warship destroyed the settlement and chased the settlers away as a reprisal for Argentina seizing some U.S. ships in an unrelated dispute. Then in 1833, the British showed up again and kicked out the remaining Argentines. The British came and stayed. Within a few decades a thriving colony was born.
Basically, the Argentinian claim to the Falklands is:
- Spain used to own it, and Argentina is their inheritor.
- They claimed it in 1820 and briefly occupied it.
- The Pope said it was theirs in the Treaty of Tordesillas.
- It’s close to Argentina.
Frankly, it’s a pretty thin claim. Basically, the argument exists because the Falklands are located right next to Argentina; there’s really no legal basis for their claim to it. The Falklands were a British colony, permanently settled, from 1833 to today. Most importantly, the people of the Falklands want to remain British. To my mind that’s a pretty solid tiebreaker.
The 1982 war was fought in part because the UK didn’t really WANT to keep the Falklands; it served no purpose to do so. during the 1960s and 1970s, Britian kept a running dialogue with Argentina on the status of the Falklands and it’s very probable they would have figured out a way to hand over the islands if it weren’t for the fact that the Falkland Islanders were so adamantly opposed to it.
The war was the result of BOTH sides being stupid and not understanding the other. The British foreign service completely failed to grasp the fact that Argentina was serious about the Falklands and was in a domestic situation, with a failing economy and unpopular government, where they were desperate enough to give it a shot if they felt progress wasn’t being made diplomatically. The Argentines, meanwhile, misread British intentions and managed to convince themselves that Britain would let Argentina take the islands if they could do it with a minimum of bloodshed; they did not understand the fact that Thatcher would have to respond to the public outcry or face the collapse of her government. As one writer put it, “they failed to take into account the natural belligerence of the British people,” which came out in spades; the fact that the average UK Joe didn’t give a crap about the Falklands before April 1982 didn’t stop them from caring a LOT about them when they were taken by force. So off goes the Royal Navy, and a surprisingly nasty and bloody war was fought in which a thousand people died for, basically, no reason at all.
Of course, the war had the interesting side effect of changing the design of warships, which are now far more heavily armed with anti-missile defenses. During the war Argentina owned a grand total of six (6) Exocet ship-killing missles. Six missles, total. They managed to sink FOUR British ships with those six missiles:
HMS Sheffield, a Type 42 destroyer, destroyed May 4 by an Exocet
HMS Argent, sunk May 21 by an Exocet
HMS Antelope, destroyed May 23 by a bomb
HMS Coventry badly damaged with heavy casulaties by bomb attack on May 25
MV Atlantic Conveyor, destroyed May 25 by an Exocet
Two landing craft, Sir Galahad and Sir Tristam, attacked by warplanes on June 11, 50 men killed.
HMS Glamorgan hit by an Exocet on June 12 with massive damage and loss of life.
Had Argentina owned, say, 50 missles (they had more on order from France, but the French had the most conveniently timed administrative problems getting the rest of the shipment sent) the British unquestionably would have lost the war; their task force would have been devastated and could not have stayed in the south Atlantic. Since then, Western navies have outfitted their ships with more robust and advanced anti-missile systems.
That’s one more factor to take into account but by no means should decide the issue. Like Gibraltar and Hong Kong, this is a complex issue and many factors need to be taken into account. This is just one of them.
Why do people WANT to live on the Falklands? They have an extremely wet, cold climate. There are no trees (too much wind), and they are a jillion miles from anywhere!
Unless you like herding sheep, I can think of mush better places to live!
Yes, but in Hong Knong the British had an agreement that it would revert back to Chinese rule. Clearly otherwise the only deciding factor should be the wishes of the people affected and in the case of both the Falklands island and Gibraltar both won’t to remain British and the British government would never cede their sovereignity without agreement from the inhabitants.
I don’t want to hijack this thread with discussions about other colonies and what should be done with them but I just want to correct this point: Hong Kong and the Kowloon peninsula were ceded by China to Britain in perpetuity and only the New Territories were leased for 99 years and would revert to China. The UK decided it did not want to keep Hong Kong and returned it to China without any consultation of the people who lived there.
The reality is that the Falklands war was convenient in the short term for both protagonists.
The Argentine government was in serious trouble and looked like being replaced, the British government was due up for elections the following yearm with its popularity at an all time low (due to massive unemployment) it too would have been ousted.
Argentina took a gamble and it paid off in the very short term, what they didn’t realise was Maggie Thatchers government had only one alternative to restore themselves to any sort of popularity, she simply had to win those islands back.
The war was, of course, completely unnecessary, the previous administration in Britain had sent warships down to the Flalkands on three separate occasions based upon intelligence reports that Argentina was preparing for invasion, the last being at the year end of 1977 through to the beginning of 1978.There was no war on those occasions.
There is no reason why Britain could not have sent down some military assets on this occasion, it would have been far cheaper, but it would not have been quite as glamorous as a victorious war.
One thing of note is that this war was fought to protect the rights of Falklanders, except that it is generally forgotten that they did not have any right of residency in the UK and were not, as far as the Foreign Office were concerned, UK citizens.They has Falkland Islans passports, so it is not as if the war was fought to protect British citizens.
As far as Argentinas proximity claim goes, well this is a nonsense, atlases and world maps distort distances massively, the Falkland Islands in terms of miles are a long way from Argentina, and their claim comes from a time when Argentina itself did not exist.
>> As far as Argentinas proximity claim goes, well this is a nonsense, atlases and world maps distort distances massively, the Falkland Islands in terms of miles are a long way from Argentina,
Damn! My atlas must be really distorted because it mkaes it look like the Falklands are much closer to Argentina than to Britain!
>> and their claim comes from a time when Argentina itself did not exist.
That has no relevance. Argentina inherited whatever claims Spain had.
I believe Rickjay is referring to this page.
I disagree. I have spoken with people who served there. A number of the missiles hit because Seawolf (the anti-missile system) was impeded. In one case, an Exocet hit a ship guarding the aircraft carrier: this is one reason why that ship was there. It is less expensive to lose a frigate than a carrier. And once the troops had landed, it wouldn’t have mattered if most of the fleet were destroyed.
Britain won because Britain’s soldiers were well-trained professionals and the Argentine soldiers were largely poorly-trained conscripts. My uncle was out there.
Those interested in a decent account from the British side should read Max Hastings’ works.
Agreed. However there were less obvious reasons. Apparently, there are huge reserves of oil within the territorial waters of the Falklands, but they are currently uneconomic to extract. When the time comes, British firms, with their experience of the North Sea, will have a large advantage over their competitors. But under Argentine control, they wouln’t be given that opportunity.
I think it is kind of silly to try to differentiate the feeling of people in Her Majesty’s United Kingdom for the Kingdom itself as opposed to that for those who live in Her crown colonies. That would be like differentiating the feeling of Americans about people living in American Samoa from those living in Hawaii.
As for proximity, maps OVERemphasize distance at that latitude, they don’t UNDERemphasize it. The Falklands lie roughly 300 miles east of the Straits of Magellan, which distance is roughly that between Los Angeles and San Francisco. So, if one were to use proximity as a deciding point, the islands clearly are proximate to Argentina, and not much else.
The Falklands are part of Great Britain because they have British settlers living on them, and no one has successfully knocked the British off them. A more complicated analysis is hardly neccessary.
qts, I can assure you with great confidence that the purpose of the destroyer screen is to try to shoot the missiles down first, not to just act as big expensive shields. The RN’s anti missile systems were wholly ineffective; that is a fact. The Argentine air force fought extremely well and used the Exocets to tremendous effect; that is also a fact. If 6 missiles knocked four ships out of action, how many would 50 have knocked out? With that amount of firepower the Royal Navy simply could not have stayed there to support an invasion. What makes you think the next thirty or forty missile shots would have been less effective than the first six? There would have been no destroyers left to screen the carriers.
It IS a fact beyond dispute that the scare of the Falkland Islands war caused Western navies to embark on a very serious program of naval anti-missile defence. And it wasn’t because the Exocets didn’t work.
>> I think it is kind of silly to try to differentiate the feeling of people in Her Majesty’s United Kingdom for the Kingdom itself as opposed to that for those who live in Her crown colonies.
Except that, as has been said, Falklanders don’t enjoy full British citizenship. In relation to Britain they are more like Canadians.
Not really. The Falklands are subject to the British Parliament and have no separate international status. They’re a Crown dependency, not a sovereign nation.
I realize that but the people do not enjoy full citizenship. they can’t move to London if they want to.
That is certainly the Argentinian postion. But there are arguments against that, as well. Argentina rebelled against the Spanish, and so got valid claim to Argentina. But why does that necessarily give them any rights to whatever else Spain claimed in the same region?
I don’t see the US claiming Canada because it was under British control when the US rebelled, and it happens to be next door.
DancingFool
sailor, true, the Falklanders have no right to move to and live in the U.K. But that doesn’t make them more like Canadians, any more than it makes them more like Americans, neither of which have that right.
The Falklanders are British subjects, without the right of residency. If they travel abroad, using the Falkland passport, they are still under the protection of the British government. That is not the case with Canadian citizens - we are not British subjects, and when abroad, are under the protection of the Canadian government, not the British government.
But you did make that claim, back in 1775, and again in 1812.
To the OP: the main arguments are those RickJay arise
When teachers talk about it at the class or for Malvina’s Day (April 2nd I believe) it’s said that Falklands are within continental platform, basically point 4.
I know, it’s dumb.
… and that’s just another example of Argentina’s government shi**ing on the people for their own interest (I’m really getting tired of seeing this… worldwide speaking, the benefit for one or two people on cost of many)
Now, I’m generally ignored, but since I’m Argentinian, I would like that PLEEEASE RickJay or anyone answers me what basis would constitute LEGAL basis.
Excuse my English if I made some gross mistakes. Please point them out if you post, that would help me to improve it
