The government is not always lost in the hands of new electoral offers; it is often due to the exhaustion of the expectations of the citizens who, despite Machiavelli's warning that "nothing generates more resistance than the change of the current order", broke If the “residence trial” were reinstated, many officials who go home “without pain or glory” would be in serious trouble.
We will limit ourselves - as always - to giving our opinion on those issues relating to the administration of the South Atlantic, Malvinas and Fisheries at the end of this cycle, as we have been doing since 1976.
We know that the maritime and island spaces represent 68% of the total of bicontinental and maritime Argentina, and that a large part of these territories are invaded and disputed by the United Kingdom of Great Britain (RUGB), so we go ahead That is to say, those responsible for the Foreign Ministry (and its Secretariat and Malvinas Council); The Secretariat of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries (and its Undersecretariat and the Federal Fisheries Council) and the Ministry of Defense have not provided a service in accordance with the needs of the national interest. The same has happened with the role of the coastal provinces Maritime. There is even the incongruity that Tierra del Fuego, even though it is a territory directly affected by the conflict (Malvinas, etc. are part of that Province) has not had any notable role in the face of the repeated and inconsequential policies of the Foreign Ministry and, Unusually, its inhabitants voted overwhelmingly for the new president, who, if the tax exemption regime provided for in Law 19,640 is eliminated, its sustainability will be seriously compromised, which would make it even more difficult to defend national interests in the region, in the face of the presence of RUGB and other States.
All of this, in an international scenario very conducive to carrying out a National and International Strategy in these matters. The Brexit that separated the RUGB and its self-proclaimed overseas territories from the European Union (2021); the tension between the United States and China and their interest in the South Atlantic and Antarctica; the Russian-Ukrainian war with the consequent need for food and gas; the demand against illegal fishing by multilateral organizations; the expansion of continental shelves beyond 200 miles in Argentina and Chile; the pre-Agreement of the European Union and MERCOSUR; the asymmetry of Uruguay in relation to Argentina and Brazil in this market; the favorable climate at the national level on the occasion of the commemoration of the 40th anniversary of the recovery of the Malvinas.
Leaving aside some recognitions for veterans produced on the occasion of the aforementioned anniversary; the repeated irrelevant demands of the Foreign Ministry to the RUGB to negotiate the sovereignty of the Malvinas and different seminars aimed at incorporating the history and rights over the Malvinas into the knowledge of Argentines, the outgoing government has done nothing to occupy and administer the marine territories and exploit the resources of the South Atlantic and its archipelagos. This implies not only a question of sovereignty in the sea, the archipelagos and Antarctica and their relationship with the Pacific and Indian oceans, but also the absence of new population, industrial, logistics and job creation in Argentine Patagonia, whose population density is the lowest in our territory, in a region of high international conflict. Foreign Ministry officials find out from the newspapers about the installation of a British radar in national territory.
This government is among the worst of the last two decades, since although it was not the manager of the execrable pre-existing agreements, it maintained them, as is the case of the Madrid Agreements I and II and the privileges to the RUGB conferred by Law 24,184 which, even though its validity has expired, has not been reported.
Despite the creation of the “Council on Affairs relating to the Malvinas, Georgias and South Sandwich and the corresponding maritime and island spaces”, within the Presidency of the Nation in 2020, this body did not generate a single strategy aimed at recovering gradually some of the matters entrusted to it. We have already referred to the role played by some of the members from 1976 to date ( see cesarlerena.com.ar ).
In our previous article ( César Lerena “Train the secretary of Malvinas”, 5/27/2023 ) despite the interesting initiative to train public officials on the “Malvinas Question” we opportunely made some objections to Law 27,671 due to its limited perspective. of the issue since, “ This is not a dispute, but rather the arrogant appropriation of the RUGB of island and maritime spaces that form an indivisible part of the national territory and, of the exploitation of its natural resources, which curtails national sovereignty and impoverishes to the Argentine people. Training cannot be limited to detailing background and rights as indicated in Article 6 of the Law, but rather explaining what the RUGB's appropriation of these important national spaces represents politically, strategically, economically, socially and territorially ( more details in referred art .
We should not forget that the RUGB not only occupies the 11,410 km2 of the Malvinas, but today invades 1,639,900 km2 of maritime and island territories and disputes 1,430,367 km2 of the continental shelf beyond 200 miles and 2,426,911 km2. of the Antarctic continent. The Foreign Ministry never referred to this very serious occupation and dispute of our territories.
Nothing has been done to promote the creation of a merchant, river and fishing fleet and the construction and modernization of ports and a greater naval presence in the strategic regions of the Republic, especially in the southern area of the South Atlantic and its accesses. to the Pacific and Indian oceans and the Argentine Antarctica.
In this period, the British from the Malvinas advanced on our territories and appropriated the fishing, oil and gas resources. They built a port in Georgia and put out to tender another 400 meter port in the Malvinas; They improved their logistics and landing strips; they modernized military weapons; relations with our neighbors Brazil, Chile and Uruguay increased; They optimized their corporate relations with Spain to favor the entry of fishery products without tariffs into the European Union despite Brexit; The British embassy in Argentina aims to acculturate Argentines by inviting our young people to “ visit their neighbors the islanders ” (sic) or teach English to residents of the provinces, as if the Argentine State could not do so.
Those responsible for the Malvinas area within the Foreign Ministry never understood the role of fishing in the South Atlantic and Malvinas, nor the effect that fisheries regulation in the Atlantic and the elimination of illegal fishing in this area could cause; This, despite Lord Shackleton's report of 7/21/1976 and the statements of the illegal director of Fisheries in the Malvinas John Barton, who already in 2012 declared that “fishing was central to ensuring British permanence in the Malvinas”. In the year In 2020, the government sanctioned Law 27,564 to increase sanctions on the fleet that fishes illegally in Argentine territory, however, it never sanctioned the Spanish, Korean and Taiwanese fleet that has extracted more than 250,000 tons of fish from the Argentine territory since 1976. Argentine area of Malvinas, despite all national and international regulations.
As a counterpart, in Argentina fishing sales are falling and the Chamber of Fisheries Industries (CAPIP) requests the declaration of emergency for the provinces of Chubut and Santa Cruz ( Pescha Puerto Magazine, 8/29/2023 ), adding to this that those responsible of the current extractive fishing model ( César Lerena “The fishing model delays 50 years ”, 2023 ) did not promote comprehensive and sustainable administration and exploitation and, much less, the fight against illegal fishing of all resources and in particular migratory ones originating in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) Argentina, preventing sustainable industrial development, generating employment and territorial sovereignty in the Patagonian region and, most especially, isolating the RUGB in the fishing it carries out in the Malvinas area and its logistics and transportation in the EEZ and subsequent trade in the European Union; policy, in which the Foreign Ministry was also absent and, on the contrary, Spain, obtained a three-year post-Brexit extension to enter the fishing raw materials captured in the Malvinas into Europe without tariffs and process them on that continent, to the detriment of all companies. Argentine producers.
Nor have the national fishing officials analyzed the particular situation of the Spanish fishing companies based in Argentina, while vessels of the same nationality fish in association with the islanders in the Malvinas. Likewise, Chinese State fishing companies are enabled in the country, while more than Three hundred Chinese vessels every year fish illegally in the southwest Atlantic, taking away the sustainability of the resources, damaging the ecosystem of the Argentine sea and, in both cases, taking away the competitiveness of national and foreign companies based in the country.
How to hide an elephant? Surrounding it with a huge number of elephants. The same thing happens with the RUGB fishing in the Malvinas, to which five hundred Chinese, Spanish, Korean, Taiwanese, etc. vessels that extract illegally are added every year. from the South Atlantic another 750,000 tons of Argentine migratory resources. Argentina does not manage the South Atlantic.
The Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries and its area officials and the Foreign Ministry and its related officials have not sanctioned foreign vessels that fish in the Malvinas; Therefore, they would have failed to comply with the provisions of the National Constitution and laws 24,543, 24,922; 26,386 and 27,564 (for more detail see the aforementioned articles and “Train the Undersecretary of Fisheries, 10/4/2023 ) and may be in breach of public officials. Both the Undersecretary of Fisheries and the Secretary of Malvinas and other officials have irresponsibly stated that " there is no illegal fishing in the South Atlantic and fishing on the high seas is legal " ( Urgent 24, 3/30/2023 and others ) denying the aforementioned legislation; but also, UN Resolution 31/49, which in 1976 established that innovation could not be carried out in the Malvinas, an issue that was ratified by UN Res. 37/9 of 11/4/1982.And this is a clear definition of ignorance; but also, a serious confession, since on the one hand, they do not include Malvinas in the Argentine sea, where every year the British, through illegal licenses, extract 250,000 tons of Argentine fishing resources worth about 6 billion dollars. of final commercialization and, on the other hand, not considering illegal high sea fishing of migratory resources originating from the EEZ is a regrettable recognition that these officials have done nothing to eradicate this predatory practice that affects the sustainability of the ecosystem and deprives to Argentina of very important economic resources and the development of the towns of the maritime coast.
Fishing on the high seas under the conditions it is carried out is illegal, at least for three basic reasons:
1) The flag State to which the vessel that captures remotely belongs does not control its fishing (Art.91º, 92º, 94º, 211º, 212º, 217º et seq., UNCLOS) and, if it only does so through satellite systems, these do not They are a sufficient instrument to determine whether or not the vessel is carrying out illegal fishing (IUU); whether the vessel applies the legislation of the country of origin (discards, etc.); if the staff works as slaves and/or traffics drugs, etc.
2) Sustainability in the integrity referred to in UNCLOS It cannot be obtained unless the relevant studies and research are carried out on the high seas and in relation to the EEZ to determine the “Maximum Sustainable Catch” (Art.119º, 197º, 200º, 201º, 255º, 257º et seq., UNCLOS); which causes not only fishing on the high seas to be unsustainable but also the EEZ. Here the precautionary principle applies, because fishing on the high seas, without these basic parameters, cannot be carried out without predation, much less when there is no control of the flag State as we have indicated and,
3) Member States must keep in mind that their fishing on the high seas and in the EEZ does not affect the interests of third States (Preamble and Art.59º, 87º, 116º to 118º, UNCLOS); Therefore, if there are no agreements between States when fishing is carried out on the high seas without control, without knowing the stocks and without agreements with coastal States, fishing is illegal (IUU).This type of fishing also includes that carried out by foreign vessels with bottom trawl nets on the continental shelf extending beyond 200 miles, an issue that the Argentine Undersecretariat of Fisheries and the CFP, strikingly, have not prohibited.
