The Falklands/Malvinas after the referendum: why the Islands matter

When, in June 2012, David Cameron announced a referendum on the political status – a phrase to avoid calling it on the sovereignty – of the Falkland (or Malvinas) Islands, few had doubts about the outcome. On 10 and 11 March, the kelpers answered a very simple question: «do you wish the Falkland Islands to retain their current political status as an Overseas Territory of the United Kingdom?». As the Argentina’s Ambassador to the United Kingdom, Alicia Castro, said more than a week ago, the result was «100% predictable». Indeed, the option «yes» won without questions.

So, is this the end of a long-standing dispute? Of course not. For the Argentinian Ambassador, the referendum has been just a «silly game»; in a recent interview with The Guardian, also her Foreign Minister, Héctor Timerman, declared that the referendum «is something that doesn't mean anything». The referendum concerned only the wishes of the islanders, an aspect which is not actually at stake for Argentinians. According to Buenos Aires, in fact, the dispute should be solely solved through bilateral discussions with London on the basis of the interests of the islanders. An approach which would exclude from the negotiations the kelpers, denying them any rights to assert their will and, as a consequence, the principle of self-determination.

• Primary Source

ISPI: Commentary: The Falklands/Malvinas after the referendum: why the Islands matter [PDF] http://www.ispionline.it/sites/default/files/pubblicazioni/commentary_borsani_12.03.2013_0.pdf

---