Falklands

[Louis VI the Fat]

Louis, Louis, what has it actually won?

Nothing of any substance.

The fact that Brits are peeved is because we expect the support of our friends, not because the lack of support has any consequence in an issue where:

Our claim de-jure is as good as anyones.
Our claim de-facto is incontestable.
Our claim on self determination is overwhelming.

Argentina will win one of two things:
- shared concession and exploration rights
- a shift in global opinion and policy towards the Argentinian goal: an acknowledgement that there ought to be negotiations over the Falklands.


It is all show. You are quite right not to go full Chubby Checker with your knickers. The shift in Washington is very slight.


One could analyse this as Britain taking one for a friend. The US has six hundred million southern neighbours to deal with. It has internal political realities. There is the Monroe doctrine. Should the US sacrifice these for what is of little consequence to Britain? (As of yet...)

Washington isn't won over until it supports negotiations, rather than 'encourage' them. Clinton did what American diplomacy had been forced to do: end the silence, sit down with Kirchner.
Hillary - bless her - was so politically clever to publicly state beforehand 'ten minutes' with Kirchner, then make it a two hour talk. This all portrays 'yes, we listen, we hear you, we understand your point - but it is not our dispute to resolve'. Good show. She gave Kirchner something to work with. Argentina can tout this around as a major diplomatic coup, whereas in reality it is of only slight consequence.

Lord knows, it might ease the tension, function as a pressure valve for the rising sentiment in Argentina, which has now found a way out.
Then again, Washington is now on record as supporting the Argentinean demand of negotiations over the Falklands - always the goal of Buenos Aires. The shift, if slight, is very real. It is as of today much more difficult for Britain to simply refuse negotiations.



The point also remains that Washington could do for Britain what all of Europe* has done: tell Buenos Aires just where to stick it, and recognise the Falklands as British territory.
*Spain is a more complex story.


Just to irritate you, (you know I have to ) the EU not kowtowing to Argentinean demands, and explicitly adopting in the Treaty of Lisbon that the Falklands are British territory:

Argentina has voiced outrage at the inclusion of the Falkland Islands as British territory in the draft EU constitution.
"We are perturbed, we reject this thoroughly, but it is not a new issue and we will have to fight about it for years to come," said foreign minister, Rafael Bielsa.

Argentina has complained to Brussels and ordered its ambassadors in the 25 EU capitals to issue protests.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...ink-to-EU.html

Bless the Irish' 'Yes' to Lisbon a few months ago.

[Louis VI the Fat]

As regards the special relationship:

A rhinoceros and an oxpecker bird have a special relationship. The Rhinoceros gets its ears cleaned, is kept free of parasites, the oxpecker helps the rhino by removing the ticks who terrorize it.
The bird gets guaranteed safety in return. Nobody challenges a rhino to get a bird. The bird is guaranteed of his supply of food in this manner too, enjoys all sorts of perks.

This relationship is intimate, mutualistic, and both animals rely on it for their very health and ultimate safety.

It does not imply a relationship of recipocitry, nor of equality. The bird does not expect the rhino to follow it, never. The rhino decides, always. The bird travels along on its back, and enjoys the perks of its free ride.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

As regards the special relationship:

A rhinoceros and an oxpecker bird have a special relationship. The Rhinoceros gets its ears cleaned, is kept free of parasites, the oxpecker helps the rhino by removing the ticks who terrorize it.
The bird gets guaranteed safety in return. Nobody challenges a rhino to get a bird. The bird is guaranteed of his supply of food in this manner too, enjoys all sorts of perks.

This relationship is intimate, mutualistic, and both animals rely on it for their very health and ultimate safety.

It does not imply a relationship of recipocitry, nor of equality. The bird does not expect the rhino to follow it, never. The rhino decides, always. The bird travels along on its back, and enjoys the perks of its free ride.

No, I think not. We have supported the US in two wars, we are their major military ally. They need to either support us to prevent a possible military action, or shop elsewhere for men to put in body bags; I would not be surprised if Britian currently fills more body bags as a retio in Afganistan than anyone else.

[Pannonian]

No, I think not. We have supported the US in two wars, we are their major military ally. They need to either support us to prevent a possible military action, or shop elsewhere for men to put in body bags; I would not be surprised if Britian currently fills more body bags as a retio in Afganistan than anyone else.

No fear. The ever valuable Israel will gladly take Britain's place.

[Furunculus]

Argentina will win one of two things:
- shared concession and exploration rights
- a shift in global opinion and policy towards the Argentinian goal: an acknowledgement that there ought to be negotiations over the Falklands.

i agree with everything you said below the statement above, but take issue with the quoted statement itself.

it won't 'win' and oil concession, it was already offered one, 50% i believe.
who cares about global opinion. *rhetorical question*

of course global opinion matters, but when;
Our claim de-jure is as good as anyones.
Our claim de-facto is incontestable.
Our claim on self determination is overwhelming.
why are we negotiating something that we have no intention of relinquishing?

it was endless useless negotiation from the FCO that caused the original war as much as the removal of the navy ship.