What do Kelpers, English and Argentinians want from Malvinas?

The potential oilfield under the Malvinas (called Falklands in England) islands, if found, would turn their sheep-ocracy into a tiny oil nation, making many islanders rich and tripling the British tight reserves.  Regardless there are still people questioning the viability of defending the island infrastructure, which with only 1,300 people already costs $100 million dollars a year. 


Part of the reasons the Kelpers (islanders) want to keep their Englishman status are England’s $93 million grants, tuition for their students and taxes from every natural resource taken from the 3000 inhabitants island. The Latin American agreement forbidding any ship with the Falklands flag to sell or buy any goods from Latin Americans ports makes the islanders more dependent on England and Europe and turns Malvinas into a costly colonial territory.

The Kelpers are the great-great-great grandchildren of a policy that sent slaves, prisoners and volunteers to populate the remote places conquered by the British Empire.  It was the cheap alternative to a costly British Army base and a way to keep the territories through time. Hundreds of thousands of Brits living in Kenya, Rhodesia, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Cyprus and every other British colony had to accept their independence or return to England.

In Las Malvinas those pushing to maintain the status-quo argue they must keep the islands in honor of the 233 English soldiers that lost their lives on the islands in their quest to retake them from Argentina – a weak argument considering that in Mau Mau, Malay and Cyprus English blood was also spilled. There is no self-determination to discuss and the war in 1982 was a reminder of where the Kelpers are from. Today, the debate in both Argentina and Britain is tainted by nationalist pride and resentment that makes no sense and no good.

Argentinian Blindness or “Viveza Criolla”(Native Cunning)

The most intolerant Argentinean opponent of its country approach towards Malvinas is Jorge Lanata. He says, "Argentina's policy towards the Malvinas is insane, erratic, senseless, blocking the ports is more of the same madness.” Lanata argues "Argentina needs to integrate the islands, Malvinas is not part of Argentina; it is part of our imagination. We're so blinded by years of rhetoric that we can't see reality."

He believes that “the revival of sovereignty claim comes at the same time when the government is putting austerity measures in place and it is being used as a smokescreen.” It is the first time a Peronista (Argentina’s most popular party) has to do it and “they don’t know how to do it” he says.

On the surface of the debate, Argentinians and English politicians keep talking about sovereignty, at the same time the British-owned Rockhopper Petroleum says it has found a site with 350 million barrels of petroleum.

Sovereignty is only a part of the discussion, and a part that will not be resolved any time soon.  There is a chance for an economic agreement, however, the all or nothing rhetoric of both countries leaves little room for a fruitful outcome and seems out of tune with reality. A bill to block all the English companies in the South American country is gaining popularity but English lobbyists are doing a good job keeping the measure from taking place. Before everyone’s eyes, Argentina has the chance to grab the quill and write down the terms of an agreement, but the priorities in the southern country are set to keep the Peronist machine rolling.

Links
Foreign Affairs
Los Angeles Times
Los Angeles Times