Worth noting that the Chinese ambassador also called it the Malvinas throughout, not the Falklands.

  • AssortedBiscuits [they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    You can’t simultaneously support British balkanization and think the UK should have an imperialist outpost in South America lmao. There’s a reason why the Global South as a whole supports Argentina’s claims to the Malvinas no matter how many times Anglos, including the ones here, cry about “the Falklanders’ sovereignty.” How very convenient these Falklanders aren’t asking to be their own sovereign country but part of the UK where the UK has access to its oil and territorial waters. They couldn’t even ask to be a Commonwealth state like Jamaica. At least Taiwanese, Uighur, and Tibetan separatists have the decency to pretend their respective republics would be an independent country and not just some US proxy state when the Falklanders couldn’t even do that.

        • usernamesaredifficul [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I do kind of think Taiwan is basically a settled issue. There was a war 70 years ago and it resulted in this split. Yes the people there would be better off if the PRC had control of the island but no one would be better off if they started fighting back up again. It isn’t a pressing issue though

          China has a legal and moral claim on Taiwan but making an issue of it would just be bad for everyone involved

    • NotKrause [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      How very convenient these Falklanders aren’t asking to be their own sovereign country but part of the UK

      This really hits the nail in the head: if the issue here is “sovereignty” then shouldn’t they reject both Argentina AND the UK?

    • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s fair. I have no argument to that.

      Ultimately this is why I flip flop on it. In terms of popular support though people will always side with “What do the people living there want?” and this is what makes it a mess.

      I think part of the reason support for being part of Britain is so high is the implicit threat that without British protection then Argentina would take the island and they’d be shit out of luck, potentially even kicked out. Taiwanese separatists are similarly reliant on American protection and the majority of Taiwan wants to “maintain the status quo” because they know what it means if the status quo changes. Similar story there in my opinion.

      With all that said, Britain losing more would be good. If the islanders can have their security and existing laws guaranteed then changing hands of the island is probably fine.

      • AssortedBiscuits [they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        There’s so many things that the UK (and Argentina) could’ve done if they actually cared about the people living in the Falkland Islands/Malvinas instead of using them as geopolitical pawns. Like, if we must insist that the Malvinas get labeled “Falkland Islands (UK)” on maps:

        1. The UK could de jure or de facto cede territorial waters to Argentina.

        2. The UK could demilitarize the island.

        3. The UK could grant Argentina fishing and drilling rights on the islands.

        4. The UK could offer to pay a lease for the islands.

        5. The UK could buy the islands from Argentina.

        6. The UK could offer a trade agreement favorable to Argentina for the islands.

        7. The UK could have a similar arrangement like the PRC and Portugal regarding Macau where the island belongs to the UK but is administered by Argentina (or vice versa).

        Nobody on the islands has to get deported to the UK and both countries can save face. But the UK had absolutely no intentions for diplomacy.

        • Staines [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago
          1. Why, fair is fair?
          2. I wonder why they had to militarize it.
          3. Argentina argues those rights aren’t the UK’s to grant, and it will prosecute companies bidding for rights.
          4. Argentina has no de jure or de facto claim or ownership to the islands.
          5. Argentina has no de jure or de facto claim or ownership to the islands.
          6. Argentina has no de jure or de facto claim or ownership to the islands.
          7. The people living there have no interest in being administered by Argentina.

          Last time the Argentinians invaded, they immediately started rounding up people to be deported.