Leopoldo Godio
Facundo Rodriguez
08/08/2021 21:46
Clarín.com
Opinion
Updated 08/08/2021 21:46
Recently, different essayists made statements about the situation in the Falkland Islands.
Although their interpretations can be justified in the right to freedom of expression, we believe it is necessary to establish brief clarifications because it is the “Malvinas Question”: the sovereignty dispute between Argentina and the United Kingdom over the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia, Sandwich del South and the corresponding maritime and insular spaces.
First: the demonstrations in question present a striking argumentative similarity to a "group letter" signed by personalities in 2012, which erroneously sought to weigh (and request) the "respect" and "application" of the right of self-determination to the inhabitants of the islands.
On this point, it is important to remember that the Malvinas Question is a legal dispute without nuances, beyond the geopolitical reasons that explain the illegal occupation of the United Kingdom.
In other words, it is not convenient to confuse Argentines through reflections that seek to modify the historical foundation of the Argentine claim in observance of the guiding principles of international law in matters of territorial disputes.
Second: the principle of self-determination constitutes one of the pillars of international law that allowed many subjugated peoples to achieve their independence.
However, it is necessary to point out that the UN Decolonization Committee - the body in charge of monitoring the mechanisms for a territory to be decolonized - ordered a "case by case" examination and that for this reason the Malvinas Question has a special and particular nature. since the very people affected and stripped of their lands was the Argentine.
Regarding the latter, the International Court of Justice declared (in 2019) that the principle of self-determination of peoples does not have a univocal exegesis and that, therefore, the UN General Assembly has not applied it to those who were not a “people ”Holder of the right of self-determination.
Likewise, the Court clarified that it is the same Assembly that supervises and is issued on the modality of decolonization of a territory, discarding the opinion of the United Kingdom as an occupying power.
Regarding the Malvinas Question in particular, the General Assembly has established that the negotiation between Argentina and the United Kingdom is the way to put an end to the dispute, taking into account the interests of the population of the islands;
and it never encouraged or applied the right of self-determination in this controversy.
Third: in view of the concerns of some intellectuals, it is necessary to remember that the United Provinces of the Río de la Plata (later Argentina), as the legitimate successor of Spain and by virtue of a widely recognized principle of international law, inherited the territories that belonged to the old administrative division of the Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata and since then exercised acts of sovereignty in a constant, public, peaceful and good faith manner, officially externalized on November 6, 1820 when taking official possession of the Malvinas Islands.
Finally, we are convinced that the Malvinas Question not only requires more than "a minute of our thinking", but also to confront responsibly the most sensitive issue of Argentine foreign policy, especially when the ideas of the issuer are valued based on credentials far removed from it. matter.
