Before writing anything more about invasion I believe that we have to start with asking questions: -
“What are Argentinas aims, what are the aims of President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner and what are the aims of those who hold power in Argentina? The aims of each one of these may be the same, similar or different to varying degrees.
For instance President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner may want to go down in history as the person who gave Argentina the Malvinas & South Georgia. She may want to be seen as the President who tried to give the Malvinas to Argentina, whilst knowing that she can’t get them.
Do Argentina see the fact that there are islands close (ish)to their shore line that are owned by a foreign power? Think of Cuba and the USA.
Argentina have shown an interest in the Falkland Islands since the Great Britain owned them.
We know about the oil and fish. The fact that oil might be present was know by both the Uk and by Argentina before 1982 (Geological survey carried out in 1973 to 1975). This survey was carried out at the time of the oil crisis.
The President at the time, Leopoldo Fortunato Galtieri Castelli, was also a General used the invasion to help take away political issues back home in Argentina. Anti-junta demonstrations were replaced by patriotic demonstrations in support of Galtieri.
Next we have to look at why do Argentina get from owning the Malvinas?
When Spain owned Argentina (which didn’t exist at the time, it was called Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata and comprised Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay and part of Bolivia) Spain did own the Falkland Islands for a while. When Argentina became a nation of Argentinians, after Civil war, they felt they should own the Falkland Islands.
Do Argentina strategic, political or economic desires over the Falkland Islands?
I would have to say yes to all of them.
We now need to look at how could Argentina get control of the Falkland Islands. There are three main ways, or a combination of these: -
1/ Political means, which they are being quite successful at
2/ Invasion by Sea
3/ Invasion by air
Someone wrote that it would be possible to retaliate against any invasion very quickly. This is not necessarily true. An invasion by sea may not be detected for some time; after all they are very empty islands. The weather may not be very kind and may not allow transport of assets to the location of invasion. The troops and assets may not be in the correct location for a quick pick up and scoot. By the time sufficient forces were gathered, they may not be able to prevent the invasion. Submarines are a deterrent and are quite effective at hunter killing so this may not be an effective solution; if in the right place at the right time.
Invasion by air. It is possible. Even if all Typhoons work they could be overwhelmed by sufficient aircraft. There is no point in saying that Argentina don’t have sufficient, or enough aircraft. Do you know how many they have? They may borrow from other friendly South American countries, or Russia or? Another tactic might be to land civilian aircraft full of troops on to Mount Pleasant. Would a Typhoon shoot them down? How would it look in the press? The Uk could then be forced to hand over the Falkland Islands. The aircraft could land as a scheduled aircraft even. Defending Mount Pleasant would be extremely difficult. There are not that many troops there who are armed and/ or sufficiently trained to be able to prevent that form of invasion.
I have not written everything down, and what might actually happen could be entirely different
What ever happens we can not expect support from Europe, the USA or even the UN. Europe dislikes us, Hilary Clinton has shown support for Argentina on a number of occasions now. Also I don’t believe Argentina would work alone this time.