Special for Agenda Malvinas , August 8, 2026 

The current Argentine government follows to the letter the new trends of the great imperialist powers to appropriate the land and resources of emerging and indebted countries; but, equating itself to any banana republic, the national government uses the procedure of ceding lands and resources for free.

It is incredible that after the adoption of United Nations Resolutions 1514, 2065, and 37/9 ( November 4, 1982), the most significant event that brought Argentina's rights over the Malvina Islands to light was the display on July 15, 2016, before billions of people worldwide and some 30 million Argentinians, of a white banner bearing the text "The Malvinas are Argentine" by the national team players who had defeated England in the World Cup semifinal. Winning the World Cup was no longer necessary; on the contrary, it would have served as a smokescreen to mask the outstanding popular act of reclaiming national dignity by defending our territorial rights and reminding the government that "The Homeland is not for sale," as would happen days later. It also exposed the lamentable policy—with some exceptions—carried out by the Foreign Ministry in recent years.

 It will no longer be necessary to explain why Argentinians, in need of some joy, rush to gather around the Obelisk, giving meaning to the many symbolic and cultural interpretations that consider it a phallic symbol. England lost the game and also the false arguments it used to justify its invasion and the appropriation of territories and resources.

The Argentine government also lost, having pursued a policy of submission that will be remembered as the one that has done the most damage to the territorial integrity of the Malvina Islands, the Argentine continent, and the weakening of the national productive apparatus.

The role of Pinedo and of those within and outside the government who support its policies

On January 2, 1833, when the British invaded the Malvina Islands, Argentine Navy Lieutenant Colonel José María Pinedo, governor and commander in the Malvinas, assessed the inferiority of his forces compared to the British and offered no resistance. He lowered the flag and, two days later, "seized the ship." Who remembers Pinedo's deplorable role? A century and a half later, on March 23, 1976, Casildo Herreras, then Secretary General of the CGT (General Confederation of Labor), when asked what was happening in Buenos Aires as he fled to Montevideo, replied: "Oh, I don't know. I disappeared." Clearly, there have always been traitors, and today, there are plenty.

If our generals, colonels and soldiers, due to numerical inferiority, had followed Pineda's path, San Martín, who lost the Battle of Cancha Rayada in March 1818, would not have won the Battle of Maipú days later in April 1818, paving the way for the independence of Chile and the subsequent freedom of Peru. Artigas would not have fought against the Spanish at Las Piedras, against the Portuguese-Brazilians, and against the centralist forces of the Buenos Aires Unitarian Directory. Belgrano would not have fought against the royalist forces with the Army of the North, nor would General Martín Miguel de Güemes have halted the royalist armies with his "infernal" gauchos. Similarly, Admiral William Brown would not have fought under inferior conditions against the Spanish at Martín García; the Battle of Buceo; and against the Brazilian Empire at the Battle of Los Pozos; the Battle of Quilmes; and the Battle of Juncal, where he destroyed the Brazilian squadron on the Uruguay River.

Incidentally, our combatants and fallen soldiers in the Malvinas would not have been equated with our national heroes of Independence if they had not fought with the courage and dedication they showed in defending our flag and national territorial integrity in the Malvinas.

It is likely that if there hadn't been strong opposition to the stateless figures who deny and fail to defend Argentina's rights over the Malvina Islands (for example, Ambassador Mariana Plaza in London, a diplomat who "proposes abandoning the Malvinas claim" < Augusto Taglioni, La Políticaonline, 4/23/2025 >), this nation would already have been reduced to a colony. Although we are very close to becoming one. Among them are those who, through their policies and statements (they have been cited many times, including the President himself), favor the political and economic domination of our territories and resources.

The government that has linked its policies with those of the Malvinas, no longer with the foreign ownership of the archipelagos and the Argentine sea, but with the foreign ownership of the entire continent.

New forms of territorial appropriation and of its resources

While military methods are still used to seize territories and resources, today's powerful nations, with their vast economic, technological, and communication capabilities, under the guise of liberalism and by promoting the free market, appropriate land and natural wealth from indebted and weakened third-party countries, resulting in a gradual and sustained loss of sovereignty. They apply the metaphor of the boiled frog.

Major territorial changes occurred during the Greek/Hellenistic wars; the Roman wars; those resulting from the First World War with the creation of new states; as well as the territorial losses following the Second World War. Of course, we must also remember the Napoleonic Wars; the American Wars of Independence and the end (or so it seemed) of the British, Spanish, Portuguese, French, and other colonial empires in the Americas. We must also consider the independence of new republics after the dissolution of the USSR. And, of course, the current conflicts in Iran, Israel-Palestine, Ukraine-Russia, and others.

Leaving aside the millions of deaths these wars have caused and continue to cause, the truth is that new forms of bloodless domination (or so they claim) are appropriating the basic resources of nations, causing unemployment, poverty, hunger, subjugation, and indignity among the people, under the pretext of a hypothetical general welfare that will never materialize. The current Argentine government—in this regard—is acting as a Viceroy; we can later speculate on whether or not the President is in his right mind, but he is fulfilling foreign objectives. 

Law of Inviolability of Private Property or of foreign ownership of land and sea.

We already referred in 2024 to the government project included in the “Law of Bases and Starting Points for the Freedom of Argentinians” which granted total freedom to foreign vessels to fish in the Argentine Exclusive Economic Zone ( César Lerena “Selling the assets of the state…”, 8/2/2024 ); a project that had it not received massive rejection would have bankrupted the national fishing industry.

The Milei-Sturzenegger project to allow foreign ownership of the land is identical to the presence of foreigners in the Malvina Islands, as it increases the strategic areas of the Republic that can be foreign-owned; the complete opposite of the British, who prevent Argentinians from settling and investing in the Malvinas. This deplorable project, regardless of increasing the percentage of land that can be foreign-owned, opens up border areas and, in addition, all areas with water, oil, gas, mining, fishing, and other resources. It sounds, quite literally, like the story of the goose that laid the golden eggs. A complete surrender.

Foreign companies—and there are many with very good and valuable intentions—don't come to Argentina to manage the country, protect its sovereignty, and provide for the well-being of its citizens; they come to take—legally, because the government authorizes it—the resources or to improve the performance of their societies. They usually generate employment and the infrastructure necessary to extract and transport the resources. In many cases, they cause environmental damage and will inevitably leave when those resources are depleted, just as Argentine companies would. However, no government would dream of granting all kinds of incentives to foreign investment while neglecting national companies with an extremely high tax burden, the liberalization of all imports, and high domestic costs for basic services.

This government attempted to modify Law 26,737 on Land, which established a percentage cap on foreign ownership, raising it from 15% to 25%. This even extended to the maximum limits for each province or department; eliminating the 1,000-hectare limit per foreign owner and the prohibition on foreigners purchasing land with lakes, rivers, etc. This possibility could also include foreign exploitation of the Exclusive Economic Zone, and in fact, the government has already authorized the exploitation of oil resources to this day, even violating the Solanas Law (Law 26,659). The water is Argentine.

The amendment to the Land Law could allow the United Kingdom to buy the Malvina Islands and the surrounding waters for a pittance, effectively ending any economic claims from Argentina. Or perhaps they could buy the Province of Tierra del Fuego, fulfilling the project initiated in 1863 by the Anglican Thomas Bridges. Oh… and the intermediary could be the libertarian congressman and land speculator Joaquín Benegas Lynch. After all, it's all about money, and those who go into debt, as Milei would say, "nobody's holding a gun to their heads. It's a private agreement…"

When Pedro Medrano, a representative from Buenos Aires, proposed modifying the Oath of Independence so that it would not be limited to being “ independent from King Ferdinand VII and his successors… ” but rather “… from all foreign domination, ” this was implicitly aimed at the British Crown, which had attempted to invade Buenos Aires in 1806 and 1807. Buenos Aires, with its 203 km², comprises only 1.78% of the Malvina Islands, not counting the 1,639,900 km² occupied and exploited by the British for fishing and oil. This territory is equivalent to all the Argentine provinces except Córdoba, Santa Fe, and Buenos Aires.

No one could give certainty regarding the purchase or not of territories in Patagonia by Israeli companies, as has been discussed for some time, or that any other State (including Chinese, Russian or American, European, etc.) through businessmen will acquire strategic Argentine territories. 

Other measures that threaten national sovereignty. 

There are numerous actions aimed at discouraging Argentina's territorial integration. These range from opinions expressed by important political figures (deputies, senators, members of the Executive Branch) who, despite the First Transitory Provision of the Constitution, deny or diminish Argentina's rights over the Malvina Islands.

We observe that the United Provinces of the Río de la Plata signed the Treaty of Perpetual Friendship, Commerce, and Navigation with the British Crown in 1825, and, treacherously, a few years later—in 1833—the British invaded the national territory of the Malvina Islands. Despite this, to this day, Law 24.184 on the Protection and Promotion of British Investments and the Madrid Agreements, which grant privileges to the United Kingdom and limit our defensive capabilities, remain in force.

Furthermore, in March 2024, the current government agreed with the United States Army Corps of Engineers for it to carry out, "among other unspecified activities," maintenance tasks on the Paraná-Paraguay and Río de la Plata trunk lines, whose management is being granted as a 30-year concession to foreign companies.

Also striking is the intervention in the Port of Ushuaia under the pretext of mismanagement by a provincial official, while the national government discusses cooperation projects related to the region's defense with the United States and Great Britain. It's like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse.

We also do not forget that the governors of the provinces of Chubut, Santa Cruz and Tierra del Fuego sought to reach agreements with Chinese state-owned companies or Spanish companies that fish in the Malvina Islands.

The RIGI, tax exemption, import duties; fiscal, customs and other benefits stability and, low wages; destruction of trade, of national industry and loss of employment.

The Incentive Regime for Large Investments (RIGI) was approved by the Framework Law (Law 27,742) to attract large investments - especially foreign ones - in strategic sectors with various benefits that do not reach national companies, in an evidently unfair policy.

Implementing market policies that major powers, which subsidize their production (as in the case of the European Union, for example) and impose differentiated tariff barriers like the United States, do not. In this context, the statements made by Economy Minister Toto Caputo "for all the idiots who talk about industry" on August 5th at the Chamber of Stock Exchange Agents are telling.

The dismantling of the State and national education

To support these policies, major public companies and agencies are being dismantled or privatized. This is especially true for those related to water use, energy production and distribution, and communications, among others. Examples include AySA (Agua y Saneamientos Argentinos); Enarsa and Transener (thermal power plants and Energía Argentina); the Comahue hydroelectric dams; Nucleoeléctrica Argentina (NASA, nuclear power plants); Télam; and Radio y Televisión Argentina (RTA), all of which are slated for privatization or transformation; ARSAT (satellites and telecommunications); Intercargo (airport services); Belgrano Cargas, Corredores Viales, and SOFSE (Trenes Argentinos), all subject to privatization or concession; and the Paraná-Paraguay river line, which carries 80% of the nation's trade and is being operated under a long-term concession. Other examples include the defunding of public universities and the privatization of other companies, such as YPF and Aerolíneas Argentinas, which were prevented by public pressure. This constitutes a policy of weakening national sovereignty. 

The Malvinas policy; the attempt to transfer ownership of the land to foreign interests and weaken national industry. An internationally orchestrated policy that the national government shamelessly implements for its patron.

Dr. César Augusto Lerena

South Atlantic and Fisheries Expert – Former Secretary of State

President of the Center for Latin American Fisheries Studies (CESPEL)

cesarlerena.com.ar