The Malvinas Islands Question once again exposed the deep diplomatic rift between Argentina and the United Kingdom, this time before the Fourth Committee on Decolonization of the UN General Assembly . In a statement on October 16, British representative Simon Thomas reaffirmed his country's refusal to negotiate sovereignty, directly defying the international organization's repeated calls to resume bilateral dialogue .

Ambassador Thomas was emphatic in stating that "the United Kingdom has no doubts about its sovereignty over the Malvina Islands, nor about the right of its inhabitants to determine their political status." He argued that the relationship with the islands is a "modern relationship of partnership and shared values." seeking to replace the notion of a colony with that of self-determination, as subjects of the Crown, under the format of becoming a British Overseas Territory. A tutelary state, under the military protection of the United Kingdom, designed by the empire itself.

"The United Kingdom has no doubt about its sovereignty over the Malvina Islands...Nor do we have any doubt about Malvina Islanders’ right of self-determination" 🗣️

UK Ambassador to the UN General Assembly @UKSimonT restating the UK's support for the Malvinas this week. 🇫🇰🇬🇧🇺🇳 pic.twitter.com/91m68uvjtu

This position, which omits any reference to the negotiating mandate, is based on the unilateral referendum of 2013, which London uses as irrefutable proof of the islanders' will.

The Argentine Questioning: Dialogue and Decolonization

The Argentine response, expressed by Foreign Minister Gerardo Werthein (who had already presented the claim to the Special Committee on Decolonization in June 2025), dismantles this British narrative, based on the UN legal framework.

Argentina recalled that the international organization, through multiple resolutions since 1965 (Resolution 2065, among others), recognizes that the Malvinas Question is a sovereignty dispute and not a simple case of self-determination. On that occasion, Werthein refuted the application of the principle of self-determination , considering the current population to be an "implanted population" following the expulsion of the Argentine authorities in 1833.

From Argentina's perspective, the principle of self-determination cannot be a pretext for violating a country's territorial integrity, a fundamental principle of decolonization.

The British refusal

The United Kingdom's persistent refusal to sit at the negotiating table is at the heart of the conflict. The UN has urged both sides to seek a peaceful solution, but, following the 1982 war, London maintains its diplomatic siege under the pretext of the will of the inhabitants.

This attitude not only ignores international law but also contravenes General Assembly Resolution 31/49 , which calls on the parties to refrain from taking unilateral decisions that alter the status of the islands. Argentine complaints about the disproportionate military presence and unilateral activities in the exploration of natural resources in the disputed area highlight this violation, projecting an image of power and occupation that conflicts with the pursuit of regional peace.

The British position transforms the Malvinas issue into a case of anachronistic colonialism , where the will of the occupying power prevails over the multilateral mandate and the demands of a member state. Argentina continues to advocate for dialogue, which, according to Werthein, is in "favorable conditions to open a new stage," urging London to set aside the rhetoric of self-determination for a case where it does not apply, and to assume the commitment to negotiations that the international community demands. The Malvinas Question is consolidating, once again this year, as an open wound in the decolonization agenda.