Forty-one years after the Falklands war, the UK has suffered a diplomatic defeat over the archipelago as the EU appeared to endorse the Argentine name for the disputed territory, Islas Malvinas.
Brussels supported an Argentina-backed declaration referring to Islas Malvinas at a summit of EU leaders with Latin America and the Caribbean (Celac) leaders on Tuesday, which Buenos Aires called a “diplomatic triumph”.
I guess this is the declaration they are referring to?
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/65920/st12000-en23.pdfThe only reference I find to Malvinas in that declaration is point 13:
- Regarding the question of sovereignty over the Islas Malvinas / Falkland Islands, the European Union took note of CELAC’s historical position based on the importance of dialogue and respect for international law in the peaceful solution of disputes.
Which actually uses both names “Islas Malvinas / Falkland Islands” and doesn’t really take any stance on it other than “taking note” of the CELAC’s position on the conflict.
So it seems The Guardian’s only bother with it is about the EU acknowledging the existence of the issue and using the Spanish name of the islands together with the English one?
Because only the Argentines and the Brits care. And there were no Brits so the EU went “write whatever makes you happy idc”. If that makes Argentina think they could take the isles I would love to see them try but we all know they are not that retarded.
“look, EU, we will annoy you until you let us call this piece of rock what we want to call it”
“I did never care about something less in my entire life”But it’s also a clear symbol of EU priorities. They had the option to piss one of them off, and apparently Argentina had more to offer.
99.8% of island residents wanted to remain as part of the UK in 2013, and no native peoples were displaced when the islands were settled (so there is no ancestral claim) - not the best look for the EU.
The EU in this case it’s, as most of the times, the ensemble of its national government leaders. In itself the declaration means nothing and was probably used as a bargain cheap for Argentina to delay its idea of joining the BRICS (according to some news)… if that was the case it was not so bad, a meaningless declaration in exchange of limiting Chinese and Russian interference in South America, not so bad.
I doubt such a declaration would have that impact on a long standing basis. However, you may be right, it could certainly delay such influence or throw a question upon it. Then again, surely such a declaration risks emboldening Argentina enough to precipitate a foolish action against the islands.
I don’t know how accurate these reports are, but there were news that China was ready to ok it’s entry to the block on the next summit in South Africa, but now seems like that will not happen.
I don’t think they’re in position to try anything foolish, but fools do foolish things. It’s incredible how often and efficiently the Falkland have been used to justify and distract from the decay of once one of the wealthiest countries on the planet… The Falkland are really the infantile disorder of Argentinian politics.
they are not part of the UK but an overseas territory with internal autonomy. Acknowledging that there is a conflict between UK and Argentina is not equal tobdenying the people their rifht to choose.
Isn’t that just their name in Spanish? (And French I think, maybe others too)
Yes, that’s what I was going to say also.
I am Spanish and they were always called Malvinas for us.
This was a summit with Latin America and the Caribbean countries and I assume it is the same for them. The Falklands name sounds totally made up to us.You can even see the Wikipedia articles in most Latin languages call them Malvinas:
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islas_Malvinas_(territorio_brit%C3%A1nico_de_ultramar)
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%8Eles_Malouines
https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilhas_Malvinas
https://gl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illas_Malvinas
https://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illes_Malvines
https://oc.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illas_Malvinas
Italian and Romanian Wikipedias seem to be the exception:
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isole_Falkland
https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insulele_FalklandThe declaration was written in English, so that doesn’t really explain it.
I believe this was a misstep by the EU countries. No country should legitimize the stupid Argentinian expansionism, especially countries like Portugal, Spain or France, Denmark, Finland or Greece, who also have islands that are closer to third countries.
The Falkland were never Argentinian, it makes as much sense to declare them Argentinian as to declare the Canaries Moroccan or Saint Pierre et Miquelon Canadian.
If being close is reason to annex it, than let the wars begin! Because every territory is close to some other territory.
well, to be fair, if England wanted any influence in rhe EU…well…you know.
Anyway, we’re living the 80s again so its Falkland wars 2, Malvina Boogaloo
I think this was probably used as a reminder of “you’re no longer a member, Brexit means Brexit”, but I think it’s in the interest of EU members to assert once again the importance of international law and basic common sense. Argentianian claims are totally baseless of either and are pure expansionism.
PS: And let’s not forget that Falklanders were not allowed to vote on the Brexit referendum.
And let’s not forget that Falklanders were not allowed to vote on the Brexit referendum.
Sounds like a good reason to want to leave the UK to be honest.
True, but not necessarily to join Argentina, with whom they have very little in common and that already tried to invade once.
My thoughts as well.
Most of the (English) people I know were not allowed to vote on Brexit (living outside the UK you cannot vote after so many years…14 i think?).
well, they aren’t citizens of the UK.
but they’re definitely suffering consequences of Brexit…
Greece:
It’s just a name bro!
So… What the fuck was the declaration about? Missing some critical information here. What a shitty article.
It’s quoted there. The declaration is the final declaration about the summit, this is the bit that matters.
The declaration, endorsed by 32 of the 33 Celac countries, with Nicaragua refusing because of language on the Ukraine conflict, states: “Regarding the question of sovereignty over the Islas Malvinas/Falkland Islands, the European Union took note of Celac’s historical position based on the importance of dialogue and respect for international law in the peaceful solution of disputes.”
That’s all? How does anyone care about this? The EU is neutral in this dispute as they are not affected by it in any way. Why would they care about negotiating anything for a third party? All this says in diplomatic is “we see that CELAC has a position on this. We don’t”.
To be clear: I’m on UKs side, Argentinia’s claims are ridiculous, but as an EU citizen, I want them to primarily focus on our interests and not getting involved in international dick measuring contests of third parties.
