The diplomatic crisis triggered by the incursion of the British patrol vessel HMS Medway has taken a decisive turn, exposing regional complicity with the occupying power. According to reports in the Argentine press, including information from the newspaperClarín and the specialized websiteInfodefensa.com , the Argentine Foreign Ministry not only lodged a complaint with London, but also delivered a formal note of protest to the Chilean government on Monday, July 13.

In the diplomatic document, Buenos Aires described as "serious" the arrival of the Royal Navy ship at the Arturo Prat dock in Punta Arenas —which occurred between July 5 and 9 for resupply tasks— and denounced the breaking of the historical commitments assumed by the region not to provide assistance to the colonial occupation fleet.

The complaint to La Moneda: The abandonment of regional commitments

The central point of the complaint lodged with the Chilean government concerns the violated Latin American solidarity regarding the Malvina Islands issue. The note delivered by the San Martín Palace to the Chilean authorities emphasizes this point verbatim:

“The Argentine Government is forced to emphasize the seriousness of this situation, which implies a departure from the commitment assumed by the Government of Chile not to allow the entry into Chilean ports of ships stationed in the disputed area.”

The HMS Medway (P-223), aRiver Batch 2 class patrol vessel permanently deployed by the British Crown to the Malvina Islands since January 2016, made its first official visit to the capital of the Magallanes Region. For Argentina, allowing a military unit whose operational mission is to protect the usurpation of the archipelago to make a logistical stop in Punta Arenas violates Mercosur agreements and the consensuses of UNASUR and CELAC, which expressly prohibit providing support to the British military in the South Atlantic.

"Late and informal" notification: The trap of Anglo-Chilean diplomacy

The published information fully corroborates the analysis we have been maintaining at Agenda Malvinas . Contrary to theForeign Office 's claims that Buenos Aires had been notified about the ship's movement, Argentine diplomatic documentation clarifies the nature of the omission: the British notification was late and informal .

Buenos Aires categorically denounced the fact that the vessel transited through Argentine territorial waters before entering the Strait of Magellan without complying with bilateral post-war protocols. By sending a notification late and through unofficial channels, the United Kingdom violated the Madrid Treaty II and its 1991 and 1993 updates, which require formal written notification at least 48 hours in advance and mutual agreement to operate within 15 nautical miles of the continental coast.

A scenario of defensive isolation

 This double diplomatic protest—presented simultaneously on July 13 to both the British Embassy and the Chilean representation—completes the true picture of events:

1.    Great Britain violated bilateral military trust treaties by moving a warship through waters under Argentine jurisdiction without prior regulatory notice, then attempting to claim "innocent passage" which does not apply.

2.    Chile broke the regional diplomatic commitment by opening the docks of Punta Arenas and the industrial capacity of ASMAR to supply a British patrol boat that had just left the usurped territory.

3.    The Argentine government , although it took fourteen days to make these actions public so as not to interfere with the political agenda and sports attention, was cornered by the forcefulness of the sensors of the Southern Naval Area and the pressure of public opinion, being forced to formalize the claims before both countries.

The arrival of HMS Medway in Punta Arenas was neither an isolated incident nor a simple technical stop. It was a coordinated operation that exposes the ongoing logistical alliance between Santiago and London, operating behind Argentina's back. While the United Kingdom disregards the peace agreements and Chile lends its ports to the Royal Navy, sovereignty in the far south demands more than belated protest notes: it requires effective control of the sea, firm diplomacy without speculation, and a clear denunciation of those who assist the usurper on our own southern border.