FOREIGN OCCUPATION OF THE SOUTH ATLANTIC AND ILLEGAL FISHING, SUPPORT OF THE BRITISH IN THE MalvinaS (PART II)

"In 1982 we occupied 11,410 km2 and three nautical miles around the Malvinas.

5 de July de 2022 11:58

In the South Atlantic, foreign powers take or discard 1,405,000 tons annually, of which 325,000 tons are extracted from the Malvinas area.

On August 16 and 17, 1989, the English ambassador Crispín Tickell and Lucio García del Solar “met alone” in New York to resume the talks on the Madrid Agreements that Caputo had started. Our representative was an accredited Argentine diplomat who had an outstanding participation at the time of the issuance of United Nations Res. 2065, one of the instruments on which the Argentine Foreign Ministry bases its eternal demand to invite the United Kingdom to dialogue.

Former ambassador Horacio Solari, one of the main managers of the work on the claim of the extended Continental Shelf, regarding these meetings alone, said: “Excessive confidentiality and rituality frequently facilitate practices at odds with the common good or interest. general” ( “Malvinas. The pending question of maritime territories and their patrimonial effects”, BA, 1/29/2004 ).

But, the meeting was not “technically alone,” since the dialogue was being recorded by the Argentine State Intelligence Secretariat (SIDE) ( Oscar Raúl Cardozo, Clarín, page 3:4, 8/17/89 and page .10, 3/29/92 ) and surely the British. The retired former ambassador of radical origin García del Solar, summoned by Menem for this purpose, that day committed one of the biggest mistakes of Argentine diplomacy by not taking into account “the fishing” in the negotiations; Then, Cavallo brought his friend Aldo Dadone to the first negotiations as an expert (?) in fishing. This mistake was committed again when ratifying the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in 1995, although an attempt was made to save Article 2, inc. Liberman, they persist in it.

The English Ambassador told the Argentine on that day in 1989: "we ask that Argentina recognize that, at present, there exists in practice a FICZ (NdA: a zone of conservation or exclusion for Argentines from fishing within the 150 nautical miles around Malvinas) . We are not asking the Argentine government to say anything in public. We simply ask it to let things continue." To which García del Solar responded: "The lifting of the military protection zone is essential. The Argentina is not asking for the lifting of the FICZ; "The military protection zone is anachronistic."

Foreign Minister Domingo Cavallo sold the meeting in Buenos Aires as extremely positive and, in this regard, he would say: "No one can come another day and say that this meeting represented some kind of concession," but the reduction of SIDE taxes showed that if there was.

The minimal approach of the skillful Tickell was the winner and he ended up taking everything. It was absolutely unlikely that Argentina would accept the occupation of a large maritime territory by “Fisheries Conservation and Administration” (FICZ), which was the “maximum” position. ; but García del Solar, anxious, who believed that "the resumption of diplomatic relations should not be delayed much beyond the first meeting," served him as a "maximum" when he stated that Argentina would not request the lifting of the FICZ, but that "the existence of that zone would not be accepted either": those who remain silent concede, the United Kingdom continued fishing and preventing Argentine fishing in the area. Having read the SIDE report, García del Solar "took note" and played as if In the “trick” he had a pair of fours and standing (they were the few cards he had) and he did not hide it enough and the British Tickell quickly realized it.
We ask ourselves, what would have happened if Generals San Martín, Belgrano, Güemes, Artigas, Arenales, O'Higgins and many others had limited themselves to “taking note” of the advance of the royalists? We already in those years opposed to that ruinous agreement and we had strong confrontations with Cavallo, who played champion in the Argentine political class (See Open Letter published in the Diario La Capital of Mar del Plata, 2/20/1991 and César Lerena: “Malvinas.Biografía de la Delivery. Fishing for the bargaining chip”, page.278:279, 2009).

To confirm the serious error of Lucio García del Solar, continued, aggravated and expanded today by the aforementioned Carmona and Liberman and, of course, by the Foreign Ministry - which even has a delegate in the Federal Fisheries Council - it would be enough to take into account the statement from the British himself responsible for the islanders' fishing area in the Malvinas: " Without fishing we would not have survived in the Malvinas " (John Barton, Penguin   News, 2012) .

But today, it is possible to show a worse scenario. Let us remember.
In 1982 we had 11,410 km2 and three nautical miles around the Malvinas occupied, today we have 5,497,178 km2 exploited, occupied or in dispute with the United Kingdom; namely: 1,639,900 km2 of Argentine maritime and insular territory; 1,430,367 km2 of extended continental shelf and 2,426,911 km2 of Antarctica and its sea.

In the South Atlantic, foreign powers take or discard 1,405,000 tons annually, of which 325,000 tons are extracted from the Malvinas area with Spanish or Spanish vessels associated with British and Korean, Taiwanese and other nationality vessels. This means in an optimistic calculation (at FOB value) that Argentina has lost in these 40 years the sum of 151,200 million dollars, of which 35,000 million dollars have been extracted from the Malvinas. This last only meant the job loss for Argentina of 10 thousand jobs and that 3 million children and adolescents did not receive a daily ration of the best quality protein every day throughout the year every year until today. While the GDP of the islanders is around 97,893 U$S/per capita /year, that of Argentina 8,579 U$S (2020) and that of La Quiaca, which is the same distance from Buenos Aires as the Malvinas, does not exceed 2,500 U$S (2020).

500 foreign Chinese, Spanish, Korean, Taiwanese, etc. ships invade the South Atlantic and appropriate the migratory resources originating from the Argentine Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), in the face of the most absolute diplomatic passivity and the Argentine enforcement authority. No It is only a biological issue that preys on the ecosystem that must be treated comprehensively and jointly (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea), but also one of political, economic, food, environmental and social sovereignty that is being violated, before the passivity of officials.

Spain, “the so-called motherland,” which recognizes sovereign rights in the Malvinas, is the main partner of the British in the Malvinas; which channels trade in the European Union so that products of this origin do not pay import tariffs, while para-tariff barriers are applied to Argentine companies on value-added products.

While this is happening, we are notified of the granting of licenses granted for the fishing of toothfish (24,000 US$/ton, FOB, 2028) by the United Kingdom in the southern area of the Argentine South Atlantic and in the Antarctic area, to oppose an alleged Russian fishing, in a repeated attitude of the British to violate the Argentine maritime spaces and the spaces subject to the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CAMLR) and the regulations of the Commission for the Conservation of these resources ( CCAMLR), which generates great international tension in the region and the United States' own intervention in the issue ( Perfil, 6/23/2002 ).

The lack of attention of the Argentine Foreign Ministry to the “Zone of Cooperation and Peace” agreed upon by all the countries of West Africa and Eastern America in the South Atlantic, is such that Togo and Gabon, both former French colonies, have just entered the Commonwealth (SAEEG , 6/25/20229).

Added to this is our relationship in MERCOSUR. The periodic landings in Brazil by British Air Force planes making a stopover on flights to and from the Malvinas; as in Chile and Uruguay, and the sustained support that the port of Montevideo gives to vessels coming from the high seas and Malvinas where they carry out ILLEGAL FISHING, facilitating their assembly, logistics, transhipments, crew changes, trade in merchandise, etc. .in the face of the passivity of the officials, who limit themselves to complaining.

By Agenda Malvinas

Tags

Other news about Columnists

Might interest you

COMMENTS

No comments yet

Log in or sign up to comment.