Dunno if FI residents were allowed a vote they could just as easily vote for their own self determination independent of everybody and then request support from UK.

Especially if this storey is true and they do want to buy Gripens after all....... :O

Brazilian Air Force Backs Gripen In Jet Debate - Defense News

If you are suggesting that I "bizarely ...take an opposite view and rant on about the "evils" of "colonialism" since I suggested the referendum of self-determination, then you couldn't be more wrong. In a previous life I was proud to be branded 'an apologist for British imperialism' in a post-module validation by the class student socialist worker activist, who objected to my contention that the Falklands were British and that the Argentines could be said to have embarked upon a war of aggression in 1982...

The point I'm making about a referendum is that despite your contention that

It quite clearly is in doubt, otherwise the Argentines would not enjoy the level of support that they do from certain of their neighbours and some other states and the matter would go away. The sad fact is that simply drawing upon the outline history (once again) does nothing to deny the Argentines the ability to garner a level of support for their claim, even if it is based upon the egregious decision to downplay the fundamental right of self-determination by those supporting it.

The referendum I (hyopthetically) mooted above (which is less likely to happen than Sharkey Ward's next book is to praise Op Blackbuck), if it went the way we'd expect, would present a clear, unambiguous, UN-sponsored verdict on the Argentine claim.

Unless the UN went against its own basic premise, then a 'We're British, thanks' outcome would go a long way towards settling the matter because of what it represents (which, as Ken notes, is why the Argentines would reject any such move), removing the crutch of whatever the Spanish for 'it's colonialism, inn'it?' from the Argentines once and for all...

PN, I think that the furthest you could go is to call the ownership of the islands "disputed"; the Americans opt for this description

"Falkland Islands (Islas Malvinas) (overseas territory of the UK; also claimed by Argentina)"

(See: https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat...k/geos/fk.html)

The legal case would be immeasurably strengthened if there was a free and fair referendum of the inhabitants on the future of the territory. Of course Argentina will refuse to recognise the result, and claim (improbably) that if you were going to have a referendum, you'd need to include the great-great-great-great (etc etc) grandchildren of the Argentine settlers who were booted off in 1833-34 (though not all were).

But the beauty of this is would be to settle once and for the next wee while questions of popular will amongst the islanders, which does matter in the legal and political realms.

And there probably will be another war over the islands, but only if the UK denudes them of meaningful protection. AFAIK, the Argentine forces are in an even more parlous state than the UK forces. So it should be a while yet - and in the meantime, let's hope the Int boys and girls provide the necessary warning for reinforcement.

S41

It's ok, don't panic! If it does all kick off, we can send a couple of spare battalions down , with a harrier strike & fleet defence force on our aircraft carriers, with the Nimrod providing ship/sub hunting capability. Then we can send lots of our spare helicopters in to ferry troops around, and use the spare tri-stars to maintain a safe airbridge... :} Oh.. Wait... :*

Someone had to say it Keng but you are right what chance of us doing anything abouut it now

... Or rather than pontificating about how the UK would retake the Falklands why don't the Govt instruct CAS to put a couple of squadrons of Typhoons on the patch. With all the predicted base closures i'm sure it would help ease the overcrowding.

Unscr 502
 

ODS HOME PAGE


UNSCR 502 requiring the Argentine forces to withdraw has yet to be rescinded or overturned by the UNSC. And as long as the UK has P5 membership (and the power of Veto) any hostilities against the Falklands would remain unlawful - moreover if Brazil supported such action, it would scupper their chances of getting a permanent seat on the Security Council (not that this is likely in the foreseeable future!).

I'm sure that will happen if it ever becomes appropriate.

Good use for the 50+ trance 1 Typhoons they're planning on scrapping soon.

Mind you knowing the crazy governments we get they'll probably sell them to the Argentinians.

What, Newcastle?

As g g stated use the Tranche 1 Tiffies, surely they can handle anything the Argentians may throw at the Falkland Islands.(with assistance from a sub or two)

Maybe Tevez knew something we didn't when he stated that he wanted to return to Argentina from Manchester City FC, I think it's time I stocked up on the old Corned Beef, I guess the RAF could bomb Gaucho grills in London.:)

How far is it from Kandahar to Port Stanley?:8

How can you be sure? So far Desire/FOG have been high on hype and nil on results.

Ok, how about this twist on the referendum idea:

Since the Kelpers were (most of them, I assume) born in the islands, which are claimed by Argentina, that automatically makes them Argentinians, so why not:

1. Make a declaration to the effect that the Falk... Malvinas do in fact belong to Argentina
2. Declare themselves Argentinians by birthright (get a passport and all)
3. Organise a referendum of independence from Argentina :E

Now that, LH2, is a bloody good idea!

The UK could then offer 'support' to the FI's should the Argies refuse to concede to their secession after such a decision had been reached through a democratic referendum. Brilliant!

Re: oil. Well its just a matter of time. Oilex techniques are advancing with every decade and reserves popping up all over the place where at first they thought were none.

We shall see.

Earl

Referendum
 

Ah, yes, quite a good idea...but the GoA are not obliged to grant a referendum to the Bennies, now, are they?

Another clever (and somewhat ironic) legal device would be for the UK to grant the Falkland Island independence after an internationally adjudicated plebiscite, with their legal person defined under Montevideo Convention on Rights and Duties of States 1933, Art 1. (ie permanent population, defined territory, government, and capacity to engage in international relations) Immediately on granting independence (or Dominion status) the UK and FI governments would ratify a mutual defence and assistance treaty. [This is similar to the creation of Belize]. Of course, few South American countries (with the exception of Chile) would recognise this new state, but who cares? The Falkland Islanders would have 'self-determination' as required under UN Charter Art 1(2) and subsequent Decolonisation conventions.



Confusingly, the first colonists in East Falkland were French, in 1764 - who then sold their settlement to Spain in 1767. British occupation of West Falkand comemnced in 1765, which was conquered by the Spanish in 1770 and then returned in 1771. The British abandoned the settlement in 1774, but left a plaque confirming that it remained British (actually English) territory and not terre nullis. It then gets complicated. Argentina (as is) declared independence from Spain in 1811 and took formal possession of the islands in 1820. The Colonial Office, being on the ball, protested some 9 years later. In 1831 a USN ship evicted the Argentine settlers in reprisal for actions taken by the Governor and in 1833 the British captured the island and have remained there ever since, apart from a brief interregnum in 1982. British possession is based on the principle of conquest, which is upheld by international law. Simples!

Oh, and one final point, it is accepted point of international law that a state (in this case the UK) is entitled to rely upon the right of self defence even when its possession of the territory in question is subject to controversy

Stick that up your Junta!

.. nicely put but have our politicos got the cojones to do anything about it.

They are putting the lives of our west-country fleet at risk with decisions made recently, so do you think they'd hesitate to dump the FIs given a chance?

Whoops, I forgot, the Iron Lady would probably kill them if they tried.

Kandahar to Mount Pleasant is 8105nm, great circle route...

...which passes over Iran, Yemen and Somalia (among other African not-so-great states).

Bend it a bit and you get a stop-over in Seffrica, though :ok:

HMS Astute alone would deter the attack.
Is it off the sandbank yet?

Have seen a comment on another forum that HMS Clyde made a bit of a mess last time she visited that port with a fuel spill.
But At least there is movement on the Endurance front RN are to lease a vessel (To Be named HMS Protector) till a descision is made on Endurance future.

HMS Protector will be Endurance replacement - Portsmouth Today