Worth noting that the Chinese ambassador also called it the Malvinas throughout, not the Falklands.
Not a huge fan of this. I know why they’re doing this but it sucks for the people living on the Falkland Islands being used as pawns in a larger geopolitical game.
Don’t Argentina’s claims basically come from it being part of the same Spanish colony? Cause idk that doesn’t sound very de-colonialist to me.
but like, on serious note, this is probably just China doing the whole ‘East Turkestan is a real country’ shit but in reverse.
I mean it might be because it’s right there
You could also use that argument to claim any other island belongs to the nearby landmass. By that logic Florida has a claim on Cuba
Cuba’s not right there. It’s way over somewhere. Falklands are right there.
UK is waaaaay the fuck over there. Not even here. They’re too far there to be here and thus lay no claim.
I don’t know about this take I think which country the people that live there want to be part of is by far the better metric. Ireland is right by Great Britain but they clearly don’t want to be in the UK
Defence of the islands is provided by the United Kingdom.[85] A British military garrison is stationed on the islands, and the Falkland Islands government funds an additional platoon to company-sized light infantry Falkland Islands Defence Force.[86] The Falklands claim an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) extending 200 nmi (370 km) from its coastal baselines, based on the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea; this zone overlaps with the EEZ of Argentina.[87]
this is what you’re defending lol (not trying to throw shade just saying)
a fascist military junta tried to seize the islands against the wishes of 99% of the inhabitants
this is what you’re defending lol (not throwing shade just saying)
Counterpoint: the inhabitants were British.
On the one hand, anything that makes
mad is cool and funny, but why pick literally the only place they settled fair and square?how is it fair and square they literally fought a war over it, to prevent argentina from getting to use it
Argintina literally had a US installed fascist government that was torturing people for being socialists at the time of the Falklands war. Losing the Falklands war was one of the main things that led to the collapse of said government
what justifiable claim does Argentina have to the islands?
That it’s literally a foreign government’s outpost on an island directly off the coast of Argentina, which Argentina could benefit from (and Argentina isn’t as rich as Britain).
What claim do a bunch of British people who get their British people food shipped half way around the world have? They don’t even import food from Argentina as far as I know.
Apparently they even has a ship they sail around there. Woo hoo massively polluting military industrial complex!
They don’t even import food from Argentina as far as I know.
Do you think there’s a reason you wouldn’t want your food imports dependent on a hostile power
100% agree, the US’s claim to Cuba is valid and it should be a US territory.
That’s how we handle islands off the coast right? Significantly closer than the Falklands, and the US actually owned Cuba for a while!
it’s been a british outpost since before argentina was even a country
it’s just a spanish imperial claim inherited by a colony, pursued by the colonizersIt literally has nothing to do with that. It’s land off the coast of Argentina. They should be allowed to use it and not have British oil drilling and navy ships patrolling around it.
How long before the US decides to coup Argentina and sets up some spy base or black site on the islands, if they don’t have one already?
How long before the US decides to coup Argentina and sets up some spy base or black site on the islands, if they don’t have one already?
and how would that be affected by the brits owning it?
as a communsist, the thing i care about the most is people and the people of the falklands overwhelmingly want to be part of this hell hole for some fucking reason
and given that the islands were uninhabited before they were colonised, there is no justification for suddnly making them argentinianNot like those people have any more claim to the islands than anyone else. Who cares that they were uninhabited beforehand or whatever. The here and now is that Britain is drilling for resources there.
The UK is 11th in terms of median wealth, Argentina is 119th. Should oil money off the coast of Argentina benefit Argentinians, or British people?
There’s a lot to criticize the UK for. Fairly inhabiting barren rocks without an indigenous population isn’t one of them.
Nobody should have control over land on the other side of the planet.
I agree, how dare the Irish occupiers squat on the western british isles, intruding into the UK’s rightful atlantic EEZ. The people that live there will be returned to rightful british rule, as that is clearly what is harmonious.
Xi needs to start supporting Irish independence and start arming the resistance.
It’s the only way if we want to reach that 2024 deadline.
Inside you are two wolves
One of them wants to post, "Sink England into the sea lmao unlimited genocide on the first world"
The other is deeply concerned about defending British territorial claims in South America
You are a Hexbear poster
Britain should give Argentina the Falklands because they won the world cup. It’s your own game, England! it’s more than fair!
They should have done this with hawaii, its a much more legitimate case
Hawaii is a major US naval base that would have been a far more agressive move
You can’t simultaneously support British balkanization and think the UK should have an imperialist outpost in South America lmao. There’s a reason why the Global South as a whole supports Argentina’s claims to the Malvinas no matter how many times Anglos, including the ones here, cry about “the Falklanders’ sovereignty.” How very convenient these Falklanders aren’t asking to be their own sovereign country but part of the UK where the UK has access to its oil and territorial waters. They couldn’t even ask to be a Commonwealth state like Jamaica. At least Taiwanese, Uighur, and Tibetan separatists have the decency to pretend their respective republics would be an independent country and not just some US proxy state when the Falklanders couldn’t even do that.
“imperialist outpost”
Literally just people living there, who are entitled to the same international legal considerations.
There people living in Taiwan. Should we protect and cherish their right to riddle their island with US bases if they want to?
I do kind of think Taiwan is basically a settled issue. There was a war 70 years ago and it resulted in this split. Yes the people there would be better off if the PRC had control of the island but no one would be better off if they started fighting back up again. It isn’t a pressing issue though
China has a legal and moral claim on Taiwan but making an issue of it would just be bad for everyone involved
That’s fair. I have no argument to that.
Ultimately this is why I flip flop on it. In terms of popular support though people will always side with “What do the people living there want?” and this is what makes it a mess.
I think part of the reason support for being part of Britain is so high is the implicit threat that without British protection then Argentina would take the island and they’d be shit out of luck, potentially even kicked out. Taiwanese separatists are similarly reliant on American protection and the majority of Taiwan wants to “maintain the status quo” because they know what it means if the status quo changes. Similar story there in my opinion.
With all that said, Britain losing more would be good. If the islanders can have their security and existing laws guaranteed then changing hands of the island is probably fine.
There’s so many things that the UK (and Argentina) could’ve done if they actually cared about the people living in the Falkland Islands/Malvinas instead of using them as geopolitical pawns. Like, if we must insist that the Malvinas get labeled “Falkland Islands (UK)” on maps:
-
The UK could de jure or de facto cede territorial waters to Argentina.
-
The UK could demilitarize the island.
-
The UK could grant Argentina fishing and drilling rights on the islands.
-
The UK could offer to pay a lease for the islands.
-
The UK could buy the islands from Argentina.
-
The UK could offer a trade agreement favorable to Argentina for the islands.
-
The UK could have a similar arrangement like the PRC and Portugal regarding Macau where the island belongs to the UK but is administered by Argentina (or vice versa).
Nobody on the islands has to get deported to the UK and both countries can save face. But the UK had absolutely no intentions for diplomacy.
- Why, fair is fair?
- I wonder why they had to militarize it.
- Argentina argues those rights aren’t the UK’s to grant, and it will prosecute companies bidding for rights.
- Argentina has no de jure or de facto claim or ownership to the islands.
- Argentina has no de jure or de facto claim or ownership to the islands.
- Argentina has no de jure or de facto claim or ownership to the islands.
- The people living there have no interest in being administered by Argentina.
Last time the Argentinians invaded, they immediately started rounding up people to be deported.
-
How very convenient these Falklanders aren’t asking to be their own sovereign country but part of the UK
This really hits the nail in the head: if the issue here is “sovereignty” then shouldn’t they reject both Argentina AND the UK?
It’s 4000 shepherds on a rock, you understand that autarky has consequences right
It’s 4000 shepherds on a rock
It’s “4000 shepherds on a rock” who give the United Kingdom territory in South America, if it was “just 4000 shepherds” they would be fine without the UK’s military presence in the region.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1938/09/liberation.htm
if it was “just 4000 shepherds” they would be fine without the UK’s military presence in the region
Right, Argentina never invaded it before and started displacing the people who live there. That definitely did not happen.
Map of countries that support Argentina’s claims in the South Atlantic
DPRK, Laos, Iran are anti-imperialist countries (and arguably South Africa) which do not. There are Euro imperialist countries which do. This isn’t totally clear cut.
Even if it were, that many countries in the Global South rhetorically support a position does not automatically make it correct, even if that is often a useful heuristic. NAFOids post maps of Global South countries which voted in the UN to condemn the Russian invasion of Russia. So what?
China recently renamed Okinawa to Ryukyu in its internal nomenclature and Xi was reported specifically talking about Ryukyu’s historical connections with China.
Seems like we’re entering the “two can play at that game” stage of Chinese diplomacy.
Liberate Okinawa from the tyrannical occupation of Western devils
Not just western occupation but also Japanese occupation. Ryukyuans are the indigenous ethnic group, like the Ainu in what is currently called Hokkaido.
