Will the UK lose the Falklands?

[Bill Moore]

Provided a series of posts on the current political rift with between the UK and Argentina over the Falklands. It appears that the UK has few friends in Latin America, and if this escalates to a conflict may in fact find themselves facing a coalition of Latin American nations, which will put the U.S. in an ackward position to say the least. One would hope the diplomats will work this out, but the rapid escalation of tensions may have put both nations in a position where compromise is politically infeasible.

http://www.publicserviceeurope.com/a...egional-access

War 'unlikely' in Falklands, but UK could lose regional access

The Falklands have been at the centre of a territorial dispute between Argentina and Britain that dates back to the 19th century. Nevertheless, the feud has been reinvigorated following recent UK oil exploration. In particular, the announcement last month by UK-based company Rockhopper Exploration that it may have discovered significant oil reserves in the North Falklands Basin have heightened tensions and highlighted the potential geopolitical risks involved in the search for fossil fuels. This comes after Rockhopper unveiled plans last year for a $2bn project to transform the islands into a major oil production hub. An announcement, which sparked further accusations from Argentinian officials that Britain has taken Argentine resources from the Islands and the waters surrounding them.

While it is highly unlikely that the current dispute will lead to armed conflict, Argentina's continued ability to mobilise regional sympathy over the Falklands debate may result in the UK being further denied a level of access within the region that it once took for granted. This may include constraining Britain's ability to promote British business in the region, or denying military ships access to key Latin American ports - as happened in September 2010. Then, the Uruguayan authorities prevented HMS Gloucester from docking in Montevideo and, in January 2011, when Brazil refused permission for HMS Clyde to dock in Rio de Janeiro. Argentina could also seek to end the last commercial aviation link between the Falklands and Chile. As Argentina strengthens its relations throughout Latin America and as the region continues to support current integration efforts - the UK could, therefore, find itself becoming increasingly isolated as tensions over the dispute continue to escalate. Perhaps, the biggest game-changer in this debate rests then with the answer to the following question: just how far are other Latin American countries prepared to go to support Argentina's territorial claims to the Falklands?

[Bill Moore]

http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/...927175500.html

What underlies the Falklands dispute?

"There are three elements that are very sensitive. First is the anniversary of the war, then we have the increment of the military British presence in the disputed area and finally the thorny issue of oil exploitation by the British in a unilateral manner which is not compatible with the UN resolution."

- Fernando Petrella, a former Argentinian envoy to the UN

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...Falklands.html

Hugo Chavez says Venezuelan troops would fight with Argentina over Falklands

Hugo Chavez has pledged that Venezuelan armed forces would fight alongside Argentina against Britain in any future conflict over the Falkland Islands at a regional meeting this weekend.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...-ceremony.html

Argentine president Cristina Kirchner hosting Falklands ceremony

Argentine President Cristina Kirchner invited Falklands War veterans and opposition leaders to a ceremony on Tuesday amid renewed tensions with London ahead of the 30-year anniversary of a conflict over the archipelago.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...arisation.html


Mr Castro, the 85-year-old said, who gave a ranting two-hour broadcast to launch his memoirs this week, made fun of the Royal Navy in his speech:

Somewhere is the English ship sailing to the Falklands but the English only have one little boat left...The only ones who have aircraft carriers are the Yankees. All the English can do is send over a destroyer, they can't even send an aircraft carrier.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...n-Ki-moon.html

UK and Argentina must stop 'escalating' conflict over Falklands, says Ban Ki-moon

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...Falklands.html

UK accused of deploying nuclear weapons near the Falklands

In an increasingly tense war of words, Argentinian Foreign Minister Hector Timberman claims the UK is deploying nuclear weapons near the Falkland Islands

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/n...-windfall.html

Falklands oilfields could yield $176bn tax windfall

The Falkland Islands stand to benefit from an enormous $176bn (£111.7bn) tax windfall from oil and gas exploration, according to a major new report.

[carl]

Mr. Chavez and Mr. Castro should be more more aware of the capabilities of nuclear submarines. Or at least Mr. Chavez. I suspect Mr. Castro already knows and is having his bit of fun.

[Rex Brynen]

It is probably worth remembering that the Argentines have taken even deeper defence cuts than the UK (they spend about 0.9% of GNP on defence, one of the lowest in Latin America), and have undergone virtually no modernization (and no replacements) since 1982.

This is all largely political bluster, in my humble opinion.

[Bill Moore]

This is all largely political bluster, in my humble opinion.

Perhaps and hopefully so, but bluster can sometimes lead to dumb actions that escalate rapidly. The main point of my posts was will the UK lose the Falklands, and losing the Falklands is not limited to war. If they face enough pressure from the UN and Latin American nations circle the wagons to support Argentina will they have enough political and economic clout to convince the UK to leave or at least modify their position? The UK left Hong Kong without a fight.

Posted by Carl,

Mr. Chavez and Mr. Castro should be more more aware of the capabilities of nuclear submarines. Or at least Mr. Chavez. I suspect Mr. Castro already knows and is having his bit of fun

.

What useful capabilities would those be for mitigating this potential conflict? Safe bet the UK won't use nukes to maintain a territory, but I guess they can sink a few Argentinian Naval vessels if the need arised, still not convinced it is much of deterrent against Argentina's strategy.

[carl]

Bill:

The Argentine Navy most likely has zero capability to hunt down and destroy a Royal Navy nuke attack boat. Those boats can kill what surface ships they will as they please. The Argentines could not supply a force on the Falklands but by air. I don't know if they have the capability to do that but even if they do it would be very expensive. That is the first thing.

If the British chose to view any military attempt on the Falklands as an old fashioned act of war, they might then blockade or quarantine, or whatever the legal term is, Argentina. They would have the physical capability to shut down seaborne trade to Argentina. They wouldn't even have to sink anything, just announce that they would and no commercial ship would chance it. I don't know the legalities but they could do as they pleased to Argentine maritime trade and there is nothing that could stop them.

Lastly some of those attack boats carry Tomahawks and they could shoot up various targets in Argentina where and when they chose.

As long as the Royal Navy has those subs, and the Argentine Navy has no way to sink them, the British control Argentina's access to the ocean. Whether Great Britain would play that hard, I don't know, but they have the capability if they want to use it.

The British did leave Hong Kong. But there they were up against China on the other side of the world, not Argentina in the South Atlantic.