STUPID ARGENTINA CLAIM BY AND THE USELESS NATIONS (ie Corrupt UN officials)

FACT - This map together shows the 35% increase of the "Argentine Platform". It doesn't include Falklands, Georgias, Sandwich and Antarctica. Only the northern section beyond the 200 miles was considered by this UN committee.

Britain expands role in Iraq as warplanes monitor Isis positions

Britain is stepping up its military involvement in the fight against jihadi forces from the Islamic State in Iraq after the defence secretary Michael Fallon confirmed that British warplanes are flying deeper into Iraq in a mission that could last "months".

 

As David Cameron declared that Britain should be prepared to deploy its "military prowess" to help defeat the jihadis, Fallon said that Britain's involvement in Iraq is fast expanding beyond the initial humanitarian mission to relieve Yazidi refugees besieged on Mount Sinjar.

 

"This is not simply a humanitarian mission," the defence secretary said as it was confirmed that RAF Tornado jets, which were deployed to the region last week to identify the location of Yazidi refugees, are now monitoring Islamic State (Isis) positions deep into Iraq.

 

The UK move came as the US announced its most concerted bombing campaign yet over northern Iraq to drive Isis forces back, helping Kurdish forces to reclaim Mosul dam.

 

American warplanes and drones carried out more than 20 strikes at the weekend near the crucial dam that Isis forces took earlier this month. More than a dozen Isis vehicles were destroyed, the Pentagon said. The bombing is designed to help Kurdish forces regain the initiative in fighting for territory in northern Iraq that Isis has seized over the past three months.

 

"Mosul Dam was liberated completely," Ali Awni, an official from Iraq's main Kurdish party, told Agence France-Presse, a statement also confirmed by another party official and a Kurdish security forces officer.

 

Britain was encouraged by the progress over the weekend though Downing Street believes that the US, the Kurds and forces of the Iraqi state face a lengthy battle to defeat the Isis jihadis.

Fallon's declaration that British involvement was expanding beyond a humanitarian mission contrasted with the cautious language of Downing Street last week when officials said that the British mission was limited to providing humanitarian relief for Yazidi refugees besieged on Mount Sinjar.

Britain announced towards the end of last week that it would be prepared to arm Kurdish forces fighting the extremists.

 

Fallon said: "We and other countries in Europe are determined to do what we can to help the government of Iraq combat this new and very extreme form of terrorism that Isil [the Islamic State] is promoting."

 

The defence secretary was speaking at RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus as six Tornado fast jets and a spy plane push beyond the Kurdish region in the very north of Iraq – the focus of the humanitarian crisis – into parts of mainland northern Iraq that were taken over by Islamist militants in the past two months.

 

The aircraft are providing footage and other intelligence on displaced families to assist with the humanitarian effort and also on the movement of jihadis on the ground. It is studied by British analysts before being used to help Kurdish and Iraqi security forces.

 

British intelligence is shared directly with the US military, which has been conducting air strikes against Islamic State positions for the past 10 days.

 

"We are helping the Iraqi authorities and the Kurdish forces build up a better picture of where Isis is, where it is likely to strike next," Fallon said in an interview conducted by the defence editor of the Times and pooled on behalf of the major newspapers including the Guardian.

 

This means that British information could be used by the Iraqi military in planning attacks against jihadis – a development that brings Britain closer to a direct combat role, which could cause alarm among some MPs who are concerned about mission creep.

 

The Rivet Joint spy plane, a sophisticated, electronic surveillance aircraft, has been conducting missions since last week. Its information is combined with intelligence from daily patrols conducted by pairs of Tornado fighter jets, kitted with surveillance pods.

 

The RAF is also flying planeloads of ammunition, rifles and machine guns from former Soviet bloc countries in eastern Europe into Irbil in order to strengthen the fighting power of the Iraqi Kurdish security forces who are combatting the jihadis.

 

In addition, the government is looking at what British gear, such as night-vision goggles and body armour, it could send directly to the country to boost the Kurdish Peshmerga fighters.

 

The defence secretary praised a group of about three dozen airmen and soldiers from the various different units at the RAF base for their work in distributing aid. Fallon then signalled an expansion of the mission which could last months when he said: "This mission isn't over. The humanitarian needs are there…There may well now be in the next few weeks and months other ways that we may need to help save life, protect people. We are going to need all of you again and the surveillance you are able to give us."

 

The signals from Fallon of a greater British military involvement, which will stop short of deploying combat troops, came as the prime minister laid the ground for greater British military involvement in confronting Isis.

 

In a Sunday Telegraph article Cameron warned that Isis has declared an "extremist caliphate" that could soon lead to a "terrorist state on the shores of the Mediterranean and bordering a Nato member [Turkey]".

 

The prime minister, who warned of a "generational struggle" against a "poisonous and extremist ideology" that will last for the rest of his political lifetime, wrote: "I agree that we should avoid sending armies to fight or occupy. But we need to recognise that the brighter future we long for requires a long-term plan for our security as well as for our economy.

 

"True security will only be achieved if we use all our resources – aid, diplomacy, our military prowess – to help bring about a more stable world. Today, when every nation is so immediately interconnected, we cannot turn a blind eye and assume that there will not be a cost for us if we do."

The prime minister, who was furious when Ed Miliband blocked his plans to launch military strikes against the regime of the Syrian president Bashar al-Assad last year amid fears of a repeat of the mistakes of the invasion of Iraq in 2003, said that people should make judgments on the world of today.

 

He wrote: "The creation of an extremist caliphate in the heart of Iraq and extending into Syria is not a problem miles away from home. Nor is it a problem that should be defined by a war ten years ago. It is our concern here and now. Because if we do not act to stem the onslaught of this exceptionally dangerous terrorist movement, it will only grow stronger until it can target us on the streets of Britain."

 

Sir Menzies Campbell, the former Liberal Democrat leader, said: "The prime minister is right to emphasise that the effects of any continuing instability in Iraq will not be confined to the region. But it will be necessary to meet the challenge of terrorism by constructing a coalition of allies from both the EU and Nato. A unified approach will be essential with no room for dissent or compromise between countries. The jihadists of IS [the Islamic State] will most certainly test political resolve as well as security challenges."

 

In his interview the defence secretary confirmed that a small number of regular British soldiers were also sent briefly into the semi-autonomous Kurdish north of the country. The troops from 2nd Battalion the Yorkshire Regiment were flown into Arbil, the capital of Iraqi Kurdistan, last week to prepare for a possible deployment of Chinook helicopters on a mission to save families from a little-known religious sect who were stuck on a mountainside.

Britain's High-Tech New Plan to Rule the Waves

The Royal Navy is in the midst of a radical reboot—and that’s on top of the secret edge they’ve got on every other fleet.

 

After too many years of hearing senior U.S. Navy officers gripe about budget cuts and political interference, it’s refreshing to hear a flag officer sounding optimistic.

 

Britain’s First Sea Lord—the Royal Navy’s senior officer—is Sir George Zambellas, educated as an aeronautical engineer, a helicopter pilot by specialty and a confessed “antisubmarine warfare guy.” He was in Washington late last month, in part, on a mission to boost the Royal Navy’s capabilities, which former defense secretary Bob Gates had casually trashed in a British radio interview this year.

The Royal Navy, Zambellas said, “is seeing signs of expansion—which is a really weird place to be.”

 

Including its new aircraft carriers, the evolving Type 26 Global Combat Ship—a Swiss Army knife of a warship for antisubmarine warfare and a multitide of other missions—and a forthcoming replacement for its ballistic missile submarines, the navy will have half of the U.K. military’s procurement budget for buying weapons by the early 2020s. The Royal Navy has been through much deeper cuts than any U.S. service—only now, Zambellas warns, is the U.S. Navy facing a switch from “outcome-led to resource-led” planning. That’s a polite way of saying that the U.S. military is going to have to live in the budgetary climate that other nations have had to deal with for the past decade or two.

 

As noted here a few weeks ago, U.S. leadership in military technology is no longer taken for granted worldwide. One of Zambellas’ most interesting comments was a personal observation from a U.S. Navy commander following an exercise with one of Britain’s new Astute nuclear attack submarines—“the most advanced in the world,” according to Zambellas.

 

“How the hell did you do that again?” the American officer said. “That’s really annoying.”

“That,” in this context, almost certainly refers to the achievement of a new level of stealth. The Cold War-era catchphrase among antisubmarine warfare (ASW) operators was: “If you can’t hear anything, it’s either a diesel-electric or a British nuke.” Key technologies like pumpjet propulsion (which slashes noise at high speed) came out of the U.K. in the 1980s and did not reach the U.S. fleet until the late 1990s.

 

Zambellas stresses cooperation rather than competition. It is a point of pride that the U.S. and U.K. are teamed on the development of the Common Missile Compartment for the next generation of ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs). At an operational level, an increased emphasis on interoperability that started some years ago, in the Persian Gulf, is producing results: One of the Royal Navy’s newest surface combatants, a Type 45 anti-air-warfare destroyer, “is operating as an integral part of the U.S. carrier task force,” Zambellas says, noting the significance of the fact that the U.S. Navy “is comfortable enough to allow its premier asset to be protected by a U.K. ship.”

 

The Type 45 is also the vehicle for the U.K.’s contribution to ballistic missile defense, which has hitherto been a wide-open gap in national capability. Zambellas confirmed that HMS Daring, the first-of-class Type 45, took part in BMD exercises in the Pacific early this year, with a focus on looking at the economics of the operation. “You have to be very careful not to create the most expensive weapon in the world” to counter simple missiles, he said.

 

The new carriers are primarily designed to join coalition operations, Zambellas says. (The near-unanimous view in the Royal Navy is that next year’s defense review will set a date for the second carrier to join the active fleet.) Together with SSBNs and BMD, carriers are the navy’s strategic assets that belong under national control, Zambellas said.

 

Zambellas has one major strategic concern: In just over a month, on Sept. 18, Scotland will vote on independence. “If you ever find yourselves with a naval attaché from Scotland, you’re in serious trouble,” he joked to the Washington audience. Asked about contingency planning for a Yes vote, he responded: “I feel the hand of a parliamentarian on my shoulder—so, no, we’re not doing any contingency planning and it isn’t going to happen.” But he adds seriously and carefully: “The Royal Navy and Marines are closely matched to their current strategic tasks, with no spare capacity.” The loss of Scottish bases would have “a disproportionate” impact on efficiency, he said. 

 

The R.N. has critical assets in Scotland: the SSBNs are based at Faslane and their missiles and nuclear warheads are handled and loaded at Coulport, close by. The carriers are being assembled at Rosyth, which has the only naval dry dock in the U.K. that can accommodate them for repairs or maintenance. Also in the Navy’s sphere: if the Royal Air Force, as expected, restores its maritime patrol capability, its most northerly base in England is more than 200 miles from the North Atlantic than RAF Lossiemouth in Scotland.

 

Sea warfare and land warfare are interdependent, as a study of Nelson’s wars will tell you: Nelson and his fellow admirals fought many battles to take control of seaports or neutralize forts that threatened their movement. The Scottish referendum could underline that lesson.

 

 

After an exercise with one of Britain’s new nuclear attack submarines, a U.S. Navy commander had a simple question: “How the hell did you do that?”

Nuclear submarine to get new core after test reactor problem

Low levels of radioactivity have been discovered in the cooling waters of a nuclear submarine test reactor at Dounreay, Defence Secretary Philip Hammond has said.

Mr Hammond told MPs that no leak had occurred and said there were no safety implications for staff working on the site, or risks to the environment.

But, as a result, HMS Vanguard is to be refuelled with a new nuclear core at a cost of £120m.

The problem was discovered in 2012.

Labour criticised the government for not announcing the information earlier, calling it a matter of "national importance".

'Below scale'

Although the news is only being made public now, the Ministry of Defence says the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and the defence nuclear inspectorate were kept informed.

Mr Hammond said the Vulcan Naval Reactor Test Establishment ran at higher levels of intensity than those on Britain's fleet of nuclear submarines and was designed to pre-empt any similar problems with the reactors on board those vessels.

The defence secretary said: "These low levels of radioactivity are a normal product of a nuclear reaction that takes place within the fuel but they would not normally enter the cooling water.

"This water is contained within the sealed reactor circuit and I can reassure the House there has been no detectable radiation leak from that sealed circuit.

"Indeed, against the International Atomic Energy Agency's measurement scale for nuclear-related events this issue is classed Level 0, described as 'below scale - no safety significance'."

The refuelling of HMS Vanguard - the UK's oldest nuclear submarine - will take place during its next scheduled "deep maintenance period", due to last three and a half years from 2015.

'National security'

Mr Hammond said: "This is the responsible option: replacing the core on a precautionary basis at the next opportunity, rather than waiting to see if the core needs to be replaced at a later date which would mean returning Vanguard for a period of unscheduled deep maintenance, potentially putting at risk the resilience of our ballistic missile submarine operations."

Mr Hammond said a decision on refuelling the next-oldest submarine, HMS Victorious, would not need to be taken until 2018.

New submarines for the Trident replacement programme, known as the Successor submarines, will not be affected by the problem, he added.

For Labour, shadow defence secretary Vernon Coaker said the government should have told the Commons earlier about the fault.

He added: "There must be public confidence in the government to be open and transparent on these matters.

"A fault, however small, that develops in a nuclear reactor is something that the British people and this House should have been told about. This is an issue of national security and national importance."

 

Making Sailors Sharper Shooters

The U.K.is testing a new simulator as it investigates techniques to improve the accuracy of sailors using machine guns on naval and auxiliary vessels.

Simulation specialist NSC pulled together a deactivated weapon, projectors and software and delivered the completed system to the U.K.’s Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL), according to NSC head of business development Steve Yates. It also built an instructor operating station that will allow DSTL to gather information from the system.

The simulator is based around the General Purpose Machine Gun (GPMG), an elderly but much-loved 7.62mm weapon used widely in the U.K. armed forces.

The GPMG is frequently shipped on simple mountings around warships and used to provide close-in fire; it was widely used in this role against attacking Argentinian aircraft during the Falklands conflict.

Like the U.S. and other western navies, the U.K. Royal Navy is concerned by the prospect of Iranian swarm attacks by small speedboats in the Arabian Gulf. The new simulator can replicating scenarios that include defending against small, fast-moving vessels, supporting anti-piracy missions, and protecting ports and vessels within them.

DSTL awarded NSC the contract to develop the new simulator for use in trials of “novel training methods” for Royal Navy and Royal Fleet Auxiliary (RFA) personnel. The RFA is a civilian-manned fleet owned by the U.K. Ministry of Defence (MoD) that supports Royal Navy ships with fuel, ammunition and supplies.

The simulator is the first in the U.K. to use the newest version of Bohemia Interactive Simulations’ Virtual Battlespace 2. It puts users’ fingers on the trigger of a deactivated GPMG as the action unfolds on an almost seven-foot-tall, 180-degree curved screen.

Compressed air provides recoil feedback from the deactivated GPMG, while hidden electronics track the weapon’s movements, allowing operators to tackle engagements in an immersive environment.

The simulator does not include motion, but the projected image can reproduce varying factors such as sea states, solar glare, surface reflections and sea spray.

“The U.K. MoD is a big user of the earlier VBS2 1.6,” said Yates. VBS 2 2.0 had a number of improvements in visual reproduction, “particularly in areas such as reflections on the sea and visualisation of objects at long distances.”

The DSTL is collaborating with sports psychologists from Exeter University for the trials testing this method of training. In a written statement, the DSTL said that the NSC synthetic environment “provides specific performance data on the accuracy of the participants, allowing the researchers to compare two training approaches: traditional mechanical instructions, in comparison to instructions relating to the participant’s eye movements during the task.

The DSTL also noted that successful eye movement training could introduce a way of increasing skills development and reducing the time spent in synthetic environments during training, but declined to give further details.

Falklands have never been part of Argentina and Islanders overwhelmingly voted to remain British

Respecting territorial integrity is a key cornerstone of diplomatic relations between the United Kingdom and other Members of the United Nations. The UK respects the right of every independent nation to have an opinion, but it is imperative that those opinions reflect the facts and international law. Otherwise, as history has shown, the consequences for peace, stability and constructive relations can be severe.

The facts are straightforward: The Falklands have never been part of Argentina and never will be until the residents of those Islands (comprised of 33 nationalities, including Argentine) decide they want that. Their opinion is clear: 99.8% voted for the Falkland Islands to remain a British Overseas Territory (ie part of the United Kingdom) in March’s referendum. So that is what they will remain. Just because the Falkland Islands’ nearest neighbor is Argentina (400 miles away) does not make the Falklands Argentine. Expanding such thinking leads to unjustified and unjustifiable claims by others to sovereign territory. Imagine the consequences if every country said that any land 400 miles from its internationally recognized border was theirs? Most countries, including Guyana and the United Kingdom, would cease to exist.

International law is also straightforward: Peoples’ right to self-determination is inalienable and outlined in the UN Charter; indeed the exercising of those rights is what led to the independence of many countries in the Caribbean. The UK Government and Falkland Islands representatives support dialogue on the Falklands. That is why Mr. Mike Summers, member of the elected Falklands Legislative Assembly visited Guyana in March; to have discussions with the Government of Guyana. It was a pity that previously arranged meetings were cancelled at very short notice meaning an opportunity to sit down, talk and try to find a solution was lost. However sovereignty will only be discussed when the Falkland Islanders themselves want it. That is their right. And as they are British citizens, the UK will protect that right.

There have been several UN resolutions on the Falklands over the years. Non-binding UNGA resolution 2065 (1965) did indeed call for negotiations with a view to finding a peaceful resolution. But that in no way precludes the right to self-determination as outlined in the UN Charter, something which Argentina continues to overlook by refusing to acknowledge the inalienable rights of the Islanders. Binding UN Security Council Resolution 502 (1982) referred to the need for immediate withdrawal of all Argentine forces from the Falkland Islands. As history showed, Argentina ignored that resolution meaning military action to remove an illegally occupying force, whilst regrettable, became both necessary and legal. You cannot have your cake and eat it.
 

Preserving independence for the Falklands

 Falkland Islanders celebrating results of the March referendum (Pic by T.Chater)

In 1776, a group of American patriots wrote a letter to their king informing him they were unhappy with their political status and had plans to change it. Americans know this story well. That letter, the Declaration of Independence, formed the United States' profound belief that we all have “certain unalienable rights,” including “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Thousands of miles from U.S. shores, 3,000 Falkland Islanders, including me, are being denied those same rights. Like those brave patriots, we wish to choose our political status and how we are governed. However, the lifestyle our ancestors established for us nine generations ago is being threatened by a country that seeks to redefine our islands and our history. Under its constitution, Argentina will accept nothing other than full sovereignty and control of our homeland, rejecting our inalienable rights to determine our political, economic and cultural future.

This week, one of my fellow Falkland Islanders and I are meeting with members of Congress to share our story. Last week, we were in New York for the annual meeting of the United Nations Committee on De-Colonization, which is charged with assisting territories that are not self-governing with achieving a political status that is acceptable to them. It is not the purpose of the committee to have an opinion on the sovereignty of a territory. Yet sadly, every year the committee engages in a distracting argument over sovereignty based on deliberate distortions spread by the Argentine government, rather than a discussion about our right to self-determination.

In March, we held a referendum on our political status. We sent a clear message to the world — with a 92 percent turnout, 99.8 percent of voters chose to retain our status as an overseas territory of the United Kingdom. For the first time in our long history, there can be no misinterpretation as to how we feel about our relationship with Britain. It is a relationship that has evolved over centuries, and one that we are proud to maintain. Ours is a modern relationship, based on mutual respect and democratic values.

We did not hold the referendum because we had any doubts about who we are or what future we desire. We held it to show the world just how very certain we are about our wishes. The Argentine government dismissed our referendum before a single vote was cast, and it continues to do so. It repeatedly calls for dialogue, but is not prepared to speak with the democratic representatives of the Falkland Islands. The Argentine foreign minister made very clear his government's disrespect toward our people and our rights when he stated plainly that the Falkland Islands people do not exist. All we desire is normal neighbourly relations with Argentina, as with all nations.

We Falkland Islanders have opened a new chapter in our history, one that looks to the future and focuses on building our home for future generations. We will continue to focus on growing our economy through the sustainable management of fisheries, tourism and agriculture, and we will strive to develop our oil industry in an environmentally responsible manner. We will continue to place the highest value on health and education and helping our young people to reach their full potential. In an uncertain world, this is, sadly, not a future we are currently able to realize freely and without threat.
It is time for those nations around the world who respect human rights and democracy, and who are not afraid to stand up for justice and freedom, to lend us their support, too. In the spirit of the Fourth of July, we Falkland Islanders demand the right to pursue life, liberty and happiness.

(*) Mike Summers is one of eight democratically elected members of the Falkland Islands Legislative Assembly. He is a sixth-generation Falkland Islander and has two eighth-generation grandchildren.

Falklands Referendum: Voters from many countries around the world voted Yes

In March, 1,513 people in the Falklands voted Yes to remaining a British Overseas Territory and only three people voted No. The Yes vote was a remarkable 99.8% of the voters on an exceptionally high turnout of 92.0%. The orthodox view that British voters chose to remain British is not enough to explain the result.

New tables from the Falklands census show that the 11.0% of the referendum electorate were neither born in the Islands nor in Britain. Almost certainly, some 100 to 150 foreign-born individuals, or perhaps more, voted Yes.

This is the conclusion of Professor Peter Willetts from City University, London, who went to the Falklands to monitor the referendum. Today he published a formal report on his findings, as an occasional paper of the South Atlantic Council, which was set up in 1983 to promote understanding between Argentina, Britain and the Falkland Islanders.

The idea of holding a referendum was the Islanders’ response to the increasing pressure they faced from President Cristina Fernandez of Argentina, pursuing a sovereignty claim over the Falklands. Professor Willetts concludes she achieved the direct opposite to her intentions. Instead of weakening and isolating the Falkland Islanders, they were strengthened and given a stronger basis for appealing to the global political community for support. Ironically, President Fernandez de Kirchner has guaranteed that there will be no settlement of the dispute during her presidency and she has made it much more difficult for her successors to have any possibility of being trusted as potential negotiating partners. The Islanders have become so united as a political community they should be called a “micro-nation”.

Professor Willetts agrees with the official Referendum International Observation Mission that procedures for a free and secret ballot were scrupulously followed and the result accurately represented the collective choice of the electorate. It cannot be reasonably argued by the Argentine Government that there was any unfair bias against their sovereignty claim. However, he suggests the Falkland Islands Government (FIG) information about the referendum, sent out to every voter, was “highly prejudicial against voting No to support independence”. The three No votes are widely believed to have been pro-independence and not pro-Argentine. Professor Willetts does not support independence or any other specific option for the future of the Falklands, but he recognises the referendum result has forcefully asserted the right of the Falkland Islanders to have their wishes respected. The Islanders will have to be participants if any negotiations about the future of the Islands are resumed.

The impressive turnout was due to two factors, the intense administrative effort and the enthusiasm of the electorate. The main polling stations were open for two days. Small isolated settlements and farms were visited by five mobile polling stations. An aircraft covered the most isolated places and small islands. Two people on Sea Lion Island had cast postal votes but the aircraft still landed there to collect the ballot paper of the third voter. The capital, Stanley, where 83% of the 1,650 people on the electoral registers live, had a carnival atmosphere with flags, posters and large demonstrations to support a Yes vote.

The full results of the latest census in April 2012 were published a month after the referendum. Among the whole census population of 2,840 people, 8.9% do not have British citizenship; 24.8% were neither born in the Islands nor born in the United Kingdom; and 24.0% do not chose British or Falkland Islander, when asked to “describe their national identity”. These figures cover both people with Falkland Islands Status (FIS), who could vote, and immigrants on work or residence permits, who could not vote.

It is not necessary to be a British citizen to have the vote. New immigrants, who have been in the Islands long enough, are able to apply to belong to the community, to gain FIS and to vote. Professor Willetts has invented the term “Incorporated Islanders”, to cover people who have been granted Falkland Islands Status, who were neither born in the Falklands nor born in the UK. He then asked the census office for an extra table counting the number of Incorporated Islanders. The answer was 182 people from 58 other countries provided 11% of the referendum electorate. Given 8% of the electorate did not vote, then simple arithmetic proves that a minimum of 3% or at least 45 individuals who voted Yes were foreign-born.

The largest minorities were St Helenians and Chileans, but there were also 18 Argentines on the electoral register. These new Islanders are committed to their new country. Over 100 have also chosen to become British citizens, alongside the 42 St Helenian voters who are British. Only one third of the foreign-born Islanders chose their former country as their national identity in the census and two thirds have changed to being an Islander or British or having joint identity. Professor Willetts deduces, not just 45, but most of the 182 Incorporated Islanders voted Yes with the same enthusiasm as the longer established population.

 - From ‘A Report on the Referendum on the Political Status of the Falkland Islands’, by the South Atlantic Council as an Occasional Paper.

About the author

Professor Willetts went to the Falklands from 7-15 March, to witness the referendum on behalf of the South Atlantic Council. He was a founder member of the Council, which was set up in December 1983, to promote better communication and understanding between Argentina, Britain and the Falkland Islanders –

Falklands: MPs blast Spanish MEP for comments on the Islands sovereignty

“The EU is encroaching on foreign affairs in a way that I find absolutely outrageous” said MP Andrew Rosindell for Romford, Essex.

“The EU is again giving the impression that it has some influence and power over things which rightly are British government domain”, added MP Rosindell.

Last week a delegation of European lawmakers visited Argentina and met with peers from the Senate mainly to discuss how to advance stalled trade relations between the EU and Mercosur member countries.

Taking advantage of the circumstance Senator Daniel Filmus head to the Foreign Affairs Committee called on members of the EU delegation to press Britain to begin talks with Argentina about the disputed Falklands/Malvinas sovereignty

“To advance in the strengthening of the accords it would be beneficial if the EU would commit itself to help”, said Filmus who added Argentina wanted the UK to dialogue on the “Malvinas question”.

It was then that MEP Luis Yañez Barnuevo, from Spain and head of the delegation replied that for the European Parliament “British sovereignty over the Islands, as such is not accepted”.

This despite the fact that in early March the Falkland Islands held a referendum on their future and political status, and an overwhelming turnout and vote confirmed the Islanders wish to remain as a British Overseas Territory.

MP Rossindell said that this attitude from members of the European Parliament “is yet another reason why PM Cameron must bring forward the referendum (on remaining with the EU) so Britain can reassert its independence and prevent the diminishing or our own power and sovereignty over issues that should rightly be decided by the British people”.

MEP William Dartmouth from the Independent Party said “It is almost unbelievable that a politician from another country considers it appropriate to make unhelpful and hostile comments about Britain’s internal affairs. Spain still holds its own conclaves in Africa claimed by neighbouring Morocco.

“You can’t imagine a British politician going to Morocco and making similar comments”, insisted MEP Dartmouth.

A Falklands’ war veteran Major-General Julian Thompson was also involved in the debate and said MEPs have ‘no right to make such statements’.

“Some might ask what right Spain has to hold colonies in Africa for instance. The will of the Falkland Islanders has been clearly expressed and it should be respected”, said the Thompson is direct reference to the March referendum.

Open letter to Argentina President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner

A group of Falkland Islanders have written a letter to Argentina President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner stating their own feelings on the territory dispute. Read the letter below.

Dear Ms Kirchner

For many years YOU have been publicly expressing far too readily what YOU think 

For many years YOU have been publicly expressing far too readily what YOU think should happen to OUR home, the Falkland Islands.

As Falkland Islanders we thought that we would take this moment to share our thoughts with you and correct some rather glaring factual mistakes on your part.

You haven't asked us to date, or even acknowledged us, but nonetheless we feel it is important that OUR voices are heard.

We have our own Government, Legislative Assembly, Executive Council, judiciary - we have OUR own voice. Our voice is a Falklands voice and not a Las Malvinas voice as you rather rudely insist in referring to us as.

We live here because we want to. Our home is a British Overseas Territory, not a Colony as you seemingly wish to convince people.

Through our right to self-determination as enshrined by the United Nations we can choose to associate ourselves with whomever we so choose.

We choose to maintain our relationship with the United Kingdom in this way.

Since the British reassertion of rule in 1833, through the wishes of the islands inhabitants (who have all immigrated and settled voluntarily for the past 180 years) we are a proud Overseas Territory of the United Kingdom sharing many values, traditions and customs including free choice - something you appear to have no regard for.

We asked our residents what they think. Krysteen Ormond, a Stanley local, echoes the thoughts of many of us that it is: "…our right as Falkland Islanders to self-determination. Our voice has to be the most important one in any conversation about the islands, as it is our home and our future being debated."

Another resident, Teslyn Barkman, explains: "[Your] government's hounding attempts to colonise our land armed only with ridiculous claims and a UN resolution from a charter that would only support our right to self-determination are exhausting to hear but we live in hope that one day they'll realise how absurd and undemocratic they sound."

We have never been prouder of our association with the United Kingdom and our unique relationship. Any decision to change that would be OUR and not YOUR choice.

In 1982 we didn't have a voice. In 2013 we do. We are OUR own people and we have a right to OUR own democracy and to where OUR sovereignty lies.

We look forward to our referendum in March of this year and failure on your part to accept the outcome will prove to the world that there is only one colonial power in the region.

Regards,
Falklands United

Argentina strongly protests UK’s naming Queen Elizabeth land in Antarctica

Argentina strongly protested on Friday Britain's decision to name a vast swath of Antarctica as Queen Elizabeth Land. The Foreign ministry handed a formal protest note to British Ambassador John Freeman in Buenos Aires.

The naming is contrary to the spirit of peace and cooperation of the Antarctic Treaty argues Argentina

In the note the Argentine government recalls the country’s categorical rejection to all British territorial pretension in Antarctica and reaffirms its rights over what it describes the Argentine Antarctic Sector.

The note rejects London's claim since 1908 to a chunk of Antarctic known as the British Antarctic Territory, and it criticizes what Argentina calls Britain's “imperialistic ambitions going back to ancient practices” and contrary to the spirit of peace and cooperation of the Antarctic Treaty.

Argentina has long claimed as its own the land named after the British monarch this week. That area is about a third of the British Antarctic Territory.

The protest note reiterates Argentina’s commitment to the values and principles of the Antarctic Treaty System based on peace, science, international cooperation and the protection of the environment, and underlined that Article IV of the treaty safeguards the positions of the parties in affairs referring to sovereignty claims in Antarctica.

UK and US in talks for use of bases

Britain’s announces that it is ‘in touch’ with the US over military contingency planning on the potential flashpoints in the Middle East, but insists it doesn’t support any imminent strike on Iran

 

The British Royal Navy’s Astute Class attack submarine, HMS Ambush, is seen in this photo. The UK has at least one nuclear submarine in the Hormuz Strait. 

Britain’s government has said it is involved in military contingency planning with the United States on potential flashpoints in the Middle East, but insisted it does not support any imminent strike on Iran’s nuclear sites.

Prime Minister David Cameron’s office confirmed Oct. 26 that planning is being carried out with the U.S. and other allies, including on the potential use of British bases overseas by U.S. forces.

The confirmation followed a report by The Guardian that the U.S. had asked Britain to use its bases in Greekk Cyprus, and British territory in the Atlantic and Indian Ocean, to build up forces in the Gulf.

Cameron’s office said discussions were taking place, but declined to specify the details. According to The Guardian, the British government has rejected Washington’s request to use military bases in Greek Cyprus, Ascension Island in the Atlantic and Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, citing advice from British government lawyers that such an attack would violate international law.

Clear breach of int’l law

The U.S.’ approach is part of contingency planning over the nuclear standoff with Tehran, but British ministers rebuffed the request. They have pointed U.S. officials to legal advice drafted by the attorney general’s office which has been circulated to Downing Street, the Foreign Office and the Defense Ministry.

The West and its allies fear the nuclear enrichment process of Tehran could lead to nuclear weapons development, a charge Iran denies, saying its nuclear ambitions are only for peaceful purposes.
The advice stated that providing assistance to forces that could be involved in a preemptive strike would be a clear breach of international law. “The U.K. would be in breach of international law if it facilitated what amounted to a preemptive strike on Iran,” said a senior British official. “It is explicit.
The government has been using this to push back against the Americans.”

According to the report, Washington has not made a formal request to the British government and that they did not believe acceleration toward conflict was imminent. “But I think the U.S. has been surprised that ministers have been reluctant to provide assurances about this kind of upfront assistance,” said one source.

The British navy has up to 10 ships in the region, including a nuclear-powered submarine and counter-mine vessels which are on permanent duty in Hormuz.

Britain has assumed that it would only become involved once a conflict had already begun and has been reluctant to commit overt support to Washington in the buildup to any military action.

UK sees Security Council with “no appetite” to address Falklands issue

The United Kingdom said it did not see ‘any appetite’ from the UN Security Council members to address the Falklands/Malvinas issue, following the election of Argentina as one of the five new non permanent members to the council on Thursday.

“I think the Security Council has a large agenda of serious and pressing issues of international peace and security. We don’t see any appetite among other Council members to have that issue raised in the Council”, said Ambassador Philip Parham, Chargé D’Affaires of the UK mission to the UN.

Ambassador Parham made the statement following the UN General Assembly vote on the new five Council members: Argentina, Rwanda, Australia, Luxembourg and South Korea. Argentina was the country which had the greatest support, 182 votes out of the 193 UN members and ran unopposed in her group.

The arrival of Argentina to the UN council for two years beginning next January coincides with growing tension with the UK over the Falklands sovereignty dispute, and forecasted to worsen not only because of the 30th anniversary this year of the South Atlantic conflict but because of the dynamic development of the oil and gas industry in the Islands waters.

Earlier in the week Argentina formally presented a complaint before the Security Council relative to the alleged ‘militarization’ of the South Atlantic with regular exercises involving launching missiles from the Falklands. UK argues the exercises are routine since the end of the conflict in 1982 when Argentina invaded the Islands.

Nevertheless Ambassador Parham said the UK wants to work closely with Argentina on many issues of common interest.

“We look forward also to working closely with Argentina as we do in many other fora on issues, for example, non-proliferation and human rights”, said the UK diplomat welcoming Argentina to the Security Council.

Ambassador Parham also made a brief statement welcoming the newly elected non permanent members recalling Luxembourg will be joining the Council for the first time, “a founder member of the UN joins the Council for the first time and is member who makes a disproportionate contribution to the UN work”.

Australia has made historic contributions to international peace and security such as the Cambodia peace agreements and currently, to stabilisation in Afghanistan. Australia returns to the Council for the first time since 1986.

“Rwanda will bring to the Council the particular perspective of a country that has overcome serious conflict and has done so more successfully than many. We look forward to working with them on issues of international peace and security, including the efforts to try to end the cycle of violence in the Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo”.

And finally the Republic of Korea will join the Council “as a significant international actor, one that’s making major contributions to the work of the United Nations”.

UK to Cristina: “no Falklands’ sovereignty negotiations unless and until the Islanders so wish”

“There can be no negotiations on the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands unless and until such time as the Islanders so wish” was the official reply from the UK to remarks made by Argentine president Cristina Fernandez during her speech on Tuesday before the UN General Assembly.

The Falkland Islands flag flying at the Foreign Office

Furthermore the Foreign Office laments Argentina’s repeated attempts to ignore the Falklands’ right to self determination and recalls that a referendum to be held by the Falkland Islands Government in 2013 will make the Islanders' wishes clear to the international community

The UK has no doubt about its sovereignty over the Falkland Islands. The UK Government attaches great importance to the principle of self determination as set out in Article 1.2 of the Charter of the United Nations and Article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. That principle underlies our position on the Falkland Islands. There can be no negotiations on the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands unless and until such time as the islanders so wish. The UK's relationship with all its overseas territories is a modern one based on partnership, shared values and the right of the people of each Territory to determine its own future.

The democratically elected representatives of the Falkland Islands once again expressed their own views clearly when they visited the United Nations for this year's debate in the Special Committee of 24 on Decolonisation. They asked the Committee and all its member states to respect the principle of self-determination, which is a universal human right, and the Falkland Islanders' legal entitlement to exercise their right. They reiterated the historical facts that the Falkland Islands had no indigenous people and that no civilian population was expelled prior to their ancestors settling on the Islands. They confirmed that the Falklands Islands has been peacefully settled for over a century and half by their ancestors and others from many parts of the world, and that they have no desire other than to be left to live in peace. They lamented the Republic of Argentina's attempts to ignore their right of self-determination under the UN Charter. The representatives also expressed their disappointment after the President of Argentina refused to accept an invitation from them inviting the Argentine Government to meet and listen to the views of the Falkland Islands people.

The UK continues to believe that there are many opportunities for co-operation in the South Atlantic. However, in recent years Argentina has rejected these opportunities. It withdrew from co-operation on the South Atlantic Fisheries Commission, and in 2007 repudiated the 1995 Joint Declaration on Cooperation over Offshore Activities in the South West Atlantic. Argentina placed a ban on charter flights travelling to the Islands in 2003. It has also introduced domestic legislation to restrict shipping to the Islands and penalise companies who wish to do business in or with the Falkland Islands.

The UK has maintained an unchanged defensive military posture in the South Atlantic for thirty years. This includes routine military exercises. The UK remains fully committed to defending the rights of the people of the Falkland Islands to determine their own political, social and economic future. A referendum to be held by the Falkland Islands Government in 2013 will make the Islanders' wishes clear to the international community.