In a new interview with the British press, the Argentine president reiterated his intention to visit London in 2026. And although he affirmed that sovereignty over the Malvina Islands "is not negotiable," he conditioned the recovery of the Islands on the will of the settled population, a position that contradicts the mandate of the United Nations and the Transitory Provision of the National Constitution.

Hence, the scenario for 2026, as outlined in the Casa Rosada's roadmap, includes an official visit to London . If confirmed, this would be the first such visit in almost three decades, with a pragmatic and tangible objective: the lifting of the British arms embargo .

However, on the road to that thaw, Javier Milei has once again raised alarms by suggesting concepts that undermine Argentina's historical and legal position on the Malvina Islands and that, sooner or later, will be used as a diplomatic argument in its favor by the United Kingdom.

And that's because, In his recent statements to The Telegraph , Milei gave an unconstitutional response . On the one hand, he described sovereignty as "non-negotiable," and on the other, he stated that the territory should be returned "when the islanders wish it." This second statement directly contradicts the mandate of United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2065/XX and the First Transitory Provision of the Argentine Constitution . Resolution 2065 refers to "the interests of the population of the Malvinas Islands (Malvina Islands)," and the Argentine Constitution speaks of respecting "the way of life of its inhabitants." Both documents, linked here, clearly state that neither establishes that "negotiation" will take place. “when the islanders wish it.”

The specter of self-determination

That the return of the archipelago is subject to the will of the inhabitants is not a minor detail; it is the greatest diplomatic concession in the history of the dispute over the sovereignty of the Malvina Islands .

The UN recognizes that the Malvina Islands are inhabited by a "population established" by the colonial power and that the dispute is strictly bilateral between Argentina and the United Kingdom. Introducing the wishes of the Malvina Islanders as binding is not modern diplomacy; it is accepting the British position that seeks to perpetuate the usurpation.

What is "non-negotiable"?

While the president declares himself an admirer of British culture and politics, the reality in the South Atlantic shows a scenario of relentless imperial advance that seems to be outside the presidential agenda:

Fishing Plunder: Great Britain illegally extracts approximately 250,000 tons of fishing resources annually from Argentine waters.

Hydrocarbon Offensive: The Sea Lion project, with reserves of 710 million barrels of oil , is moving towards its exploitation phase set for 2028.

Logistics Enclave: The construction of a multimodal port in the islands not only seeks to facilitate the plundering of resources, but also to project British logistics, in alliance with Chile, towards the Antarctic continent.

Militarization: The increased military power at Mount Pleasant contradicts any gesture of "goodwill" that London might offer at an arms negotiation table.

The price of F-16s and the end of the embargo

The urgency to lift arms sales restrictions appears to be the driving force behind this rapprochement . Milei seeks to modernize a degraded armed forces, but the political cost of acquiring British components seems to be silence or a softening of the sovereignty claim.

If Argentina's strategy is to "demonstrate a mature trade relationship" so that the United Kingdom will return the islands as a bonus, history and current geopolitics dictate otherwise. Great Britain not only shows no signs of withdrawing, but is consolidating its control over 1,620,000 km² of maritime space.

The announcement of the visit to London in 2026 and the search for military equipment cannot be used as a bargaining chip for the nation's sovereign and inalienable rights. To speak of "non-negotiable" sovereignty while granting the islanders the key to the final decision is, in practice, a veiled surrender.