"What this document says and does not say, which is reportedly part of the “40 Years Agenda”, analyzed by the South Atlantic and Fisheries expert, Cesar Lerena.

22 de March de 2022 18:18

No image description

These days we have read a document from the Malvinas Secretariat of the Foreign Ministry in which Argentine journalists are recommended to adequately deal with what it calls “the sovereignty dispute with the United Kingdom” over the Malvinas and the South Atlantic Islands. Now The press will give its opinion on receiving recommendations from the government to give adequate treatment to this or many other issues that are part of the country's international relations. We will take care of what this document says and does not say, which, according to reports, is part of the “40 Years Agenda”.

Contrary to the way this “Recommendation” of the Malvinas Secretariat is titled, Argentina does not have a sovereignty dispute in the Malvinas, but rather has a very large maritime and insular territory arrogantly occupied by the United Kingdom and, The issue “to be addressed” by government officials is the recovery of said territories and “the full exercise of sovereignty” (Filmus, Daniel.Infobae, 6/10/2020). Let us remember that the Argentine Nation “ratifies its legitimate and imprescriptible sovereignty over the Malvinas, South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands and the corresponding maritime and insular spaces, as they are an integral part of the national territory" (First Transitory Provision CN1994). This report says "Malvinas and South Atlantic Islands", meaning that the latter include South Georgia, South Sandwich and others; although this is not a minor issue, since the United Kingdom maintains an independent-illegal occupation and administration in these and from there its claim to reach Antarctica.

Although the Secretariat's “Recommendation to Journalists” says: “Responsible communication should not ignore the disputed territory and its considerable natural resources” (sic), this document omits the invasion, occupation and exploitation of the United Kingdom in 1639. 900 km2 of Argentine marine spaces, which represent a percentage equivalent to 52% of the Argentine Exclusive Economic Zone; the extraction of 250,000 annual tons of Argentine fishing species from the Malvinas area, an equivalent of between 650 and 1,000 million dollars per year, and offshore oil exploitation. All of this, violating United Nations Res. 31/49, which should have prevented the United Kingdom from advancing on the occupied Argentine territories and, which this official document does not mention for the knowledge of all the press and all Argentines. In addition, to erroneously refer (?) that the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLPC) with headquarters at the United Nations “recommended” the 1,782,500 km2 presented by Argentina, that Commission only recommended 351,633 km2 since 1,430,367 km2 were not treated by the aforementioned Commission because it understood that these km of platform are in dispute with the United Kingdom. He also omitted that work on the platform began in 1996, not in 2009, which is the date of presentation and, this should be highlighted, because this work became one of the few State policies that have been carried out by all governments from 1996 to 2016.

On the other hand, it is striking that the National Council of Malvinas did not fully prepare this “Recommendation” and only three of its members have done so; both from a political point of view, and, as we know, Law 27,558 approved in 2020 requires that all approval in this Body must be taken by consensus on all those issues that are disseminated to the press: «(b) Collaborate in the preparation of the support of the Argentine position in the sovereignty dispute in its geographical, environmental, historical, legal and political aspects; (c) Propose and carry out teaching and research activities that provide knowledge to the Argentine people about the justice of the claim for the full exercise of sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands (...); (d) Carry out actions aimed at collaborating in the dissemination and promotion of Argentine rights over the Malvinas Islands (...) and (e) Propose strategies that contribute to the permanent recognition of the Former Malvinas Combatants and those who died in combat and their families. (sic).

Point 7 of the report recommends names for the islanders and for British pseudo-institutions that illegally occupy the Malvinas and ends by referring to “the conflict in the South Atlantic” instead of commemorating on April 2 the 40th anniversary of the recovery of the Malvinas, which the islanders The British will do so on June 14. In 1982 the British occupied 11,410 km2 of the archipelagos plus three nautical miles around them. Today there is a “British invasion of the South Atlantic” that occupies 1,639,900 km2 of Argentine maritime territory and they dispute the continental shelf and Antarctica. Wouldn't it have been prudent to make a “copy and paste” of the repudiation of the war and the territorial violation of Ukraine and to do it equally to the United Kingdom regarding the Malvinas? We understand that a “treatment cannot be constructed "media of the facts" (sic) recounting only historical or legal background, or has nothing else been done in these 40 years? Probably not. The president of the Nation referred concerned days ago to "the war against inflation" and this document It does not mention “the Malvinas War” even once, taking away the relevance of the recovery of the Malvinas and April 2, which commemorates “the Day of the Veteran and the Fallen in the Malvinas War.”

As we said (Lerena, César “The Reconquest of Malvinas on April 2, 1982”, 1/24/2022) the government does not want (and neither do I) to attribute this Reconquest to the dictator Galtieri; but, in this failed and authoritarian intellectual effort, which is made evident in this “Recommendation to the Press” confuses Galtieri's spurious motivations; the lack of opportunity and availability of essential weapons; the terrible planning and leadership of those primarily responsible; the strategic inability and the lack of national consent and authorization of the legitimate representatives of the people, among other reasons (which could be detailed with greater precision and breadth), with the Heroic Deed of those who carried out the recovery of Malvinas and the subsequent defense of the national territory, fighting and faithfully fulfilling the oath to "constantly follow the flag and defend it until losing one's life."To devalue the Reconquista is to devalue the efforts of soldiers, non-commissioned officers, officers, merchants, civilians and even fishermen combatants and their families.

By Agenda Malvinas


Other news about Editorials

Might interest you


No comments yet

Log in or sign up to comment.