Argentina is currently a member of the United Nations Security Council and is chairing its meetings this month. For this reason, Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, Argentina’s president, came to New York to personally preside over a UN Security Council session on August 6th that was supposed to be devoted to the theme of cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations such as the Arab League, the African Union and various Latin American regional organizations.
Instead of limiting her remarks to exploring ways to foster such cooperation, however, President Kirchner used the Security Council platform to once again challenge the United Kingdom over the future status of the Falkland Islands, comparing the dispute between Argentina and the UK to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Against the clearly expressed wishes of the people themselves who reside on the islands, which are nearly 1000 miles away from mainland Argentina, Argentina is nevertheless claiming sovereignty over them. In continuing to do so, Argentina is rejecting completely the wishes of the Falkland residents who overwhelmingly expressed their desire in a referendum last spring to maintain their semi-autonomous political status as a British Oversea Territory. By flouting the cardinal principle of self-determination enshrined in the United Nations Charter and key UN resolutions, Argentina is acting like a neo-colonialist.
President Kirchner set the tone for the day by showing whom the boss was. She strode into the Security Council chamber 25 minutes late to preside over the meeting, keeping UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, fourteen foreign ministers and many UN ambassadors waiting.
In her speech, Argentina’s president claimed that the United Kingdom was not abiding by a UN resolution that had called for the state parties involved in the Falkland Islands dispute to sit down with each other to negotiate a peaceful settlement over the sovereignty issue. Argentina, by the way, refers to the disputed islands as the Malvinas.
“We call on the UK to respect UN Resolution 2065 which calls on the British to sit and discuss the Malvinas sovereignty,” Kirchner told the Security Council. “My country and the UK must engage in negotiations of the Islands sovereignty. This isn’t a caprice posture, it’s not a question of saying we are right, we want the UN resolution to be complied and discuss a controversial and litigant issue.”
Kirchner distorted what the resolution actually said and gave short shrift to the will of the people most directly affected – the residents of the islands. She only cited one part of the General Assembly resolution 2065, which is non-binding in any event.
Here is the text of the operative paragraph of this resolution, which was adopted by the General Assembly on December 16th 1965:
“Invites the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to proceed without delay with the negotiations recommended by the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples with a view to finding a peaceful solution to the problem, bearing in mind the provisions and objectives of the Charter of the United Nations and of General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) and the interests of the population of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas).” (emphasis added)
General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) is entitled “Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples.” It declares the right of the peoples of a dependent territory “to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.”
Taking account of “the interests of the population of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas)” means giving due regard to their expressed will. Indeed, that is the essence of self-determination, which Kirchner may give lip service to but does not respect when it comes to the wishes of the peoples actually residing in the Falklands.
The United Kingdom, not Argentina, has complied with both the spirit and the letter of General Assembly resolution 2065. First and foremost, after being afforded the opportunity to decide for themselves their political future in a referendum held last March, the “population of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas)” (as Resolution 2065 describes them) voted overwhelmingly to continue as a British Overseas Territory. There was a 92% turnout, out of which 99.8% voted yes on continuing their current political status. In response to Argentina’s demand for direct talks between the United Kingdom and Argentina regarding the future of the Falklands, the UK has agreed to hold talks so long as the people residing in the Falklands are also represented. Argentina has turned down this proposal for discussions that would include a representative of the peoples most directly affected by the outcome.
British ambassador to the UN Mark Lyall Grant responded to President Kirchner’s demand for two-party talks, based on Argentina’s distorted reading of relevant UN resolutions, as follows:
“President (Cristina Fernandez de) Kirchner said in the Council that the United Kingdom and Argentina should discuss the Falkland Islands. I want to reiterate that any such discussion is not just a matter for the two governments. There are three parties to the debate. The views of the people of the Falkland Islands cannot be dismissed. There can be no discussion on the sovereignty of the Islands unless and until the Islanders so wish. They made their views unequivocally clear in the referendum in March when they voted overwhelmingly to remain a UK Overseas Territory.
The United Kingdom fully respects all its obligations and responsibilities as a member of the United Nations. The principle of self-determination on which our position on the Falkland Islands is based is enshrined in the UN Charter.”
In short, it is Argentina that is acting like a neo-colonial power with respect to the Falklands, not the United Kingdom.
