40 years since the Falklands War in 1982, conflict has once again been sparked by Argentina. However, the conflict is not fought against another opponent, but between foreign powers offering various new aircraft to the Argentine Air Force.

The competition was initiated after the retirement of the French-built Mirage fighter in 2015 due to budget restraints. In the subsequent 7 years since then, Argentina has been on the hunt for a successor, with various nations offering up secondhand fighters such as Jordan and Spain offering up Mirage F1s or Israel’s offer of modernized Kfirs. And in other cases being offered new fighters such as Sweden’s Saab Gripen, and most famously South Korea’s KAI FA-50.

However, all of those aircraft were unable to be selected due to one common factor: British Influence.


This is the opinion of the author and not necessarily that of the UK Defence Journal. If you would like to submit your own article on this topic or any other, please see our submission guidelines.


After the Falklands War, the United Kingdom placed a full embargo upon any and all military hardware from reaching Argentina. For the rest of the 20th century, the embargo showed little to no effect upon the Argentine Armed Forces, however as nations began rearming in the 21st century, Argentina found itself with limited options in terms of its Air Force modernization. The Air Force was forced to rely on Mirage fighters and older A-4 attackers, both of which were veterans of the Falklands War.

The United States even maintained an arms embargo on Argentina from the 1970s until the early 1990s due to Argentine assistance during the 1991 Operation Desert Shield, where they committed a destroyer, two corvettes, and a supply ship as part of their efforts.

Later on, in 1998, Argentina would be declared a ‘Major non-NATO Ally’, the sixth nation in the world to receive the title after Australia, Egypt, Israel, Japan, South Korea, and New Zealand. During this time period, The United States made an offer to sell 36+6 F-16A/Bs, unfortunately, due to financial insecurities, the Argentines declined the offer.

UK blocks sale of South Korean fighter jets to Argentina

Fast forward to 2021. After the UK had rejected Argentina being able to access dozens of
aircraft due to their British-built Martin-Baker Ejection Seats, there were only a handful of
options left for Argentina. Which includes the Chinese contender to the F-16, the JF-17 Block III. The JF-17 is a Chinese/Pakistani joint venture designed to replace older fighters in the Pakistan Air Force, as well as try and contend with the F-16 on the export market.

To the Argentines, the JF-17 looks promising, as with its cheap price tag compared to the MiG-35 (which the Russians were currently offering), it looked like the best choice. Around this time, America had appointed a new SOUTHCOM commander, Gen. Laura J. Richardson.

During General Richardson’s testimony to the United States Congress, she made an explicit request to Representatives of the Armed Service Committee that the United States should aggressively market the F-16 to Argentina in order to stop Chinese influence in ‘America’s Backyard’, even stating that the US should appeal to the UK to lower the embargo to stop Chinese influence from spreading.

Here is where we meet the modern day. The United States is currently appealing to the UK to let them export F-16s to Argentina. Most British people would immediately reject the offer, having said that, this is where the argument against Argentina becomes shortsighted. Argentina, at one point or another, will press on with the recovery of its armed forces, and even today it has various procurement programs in place to restore lost capabilities. The position in which I believe is that the British should lift, or at least reduce the severity of, the arms embargo. If the British do not lift the embargo, South America will fall further and further into Chinese and Russian influence.

Nations such as Peru and Venezuela are already using Russian-built combat aircraft, as well as Uruguay, and Bolivia considering Russian or Chinese light fighters to replace their older systems. By denying Argentina its last opportunity to acquire western-built fighters, the UK has essentially pushed Argentina to the point where it will have to acquire equipment from China.

The Argentines have held out for decades in their attempt to still keep procuring from the West, yet they will be forced to turn away if the UK continues its harsh embargo.

Here’s where the UK has an opportunity: Allow the United States to export the F-16 to
Argentina. Allowing Argentina access to the F-16 stops Chinese military influence directly in its tracks.

The F-16 is a well-known fighter in the British Ministry of Defense, so none of its capabilities will come as a surprise to the Royal Air Force, the same cannot be said for the JF-17 whose capabilities are unknown by western air forces. The F-16 would also help strengthen ties between the United Kingdom and Argentina, as the UK could be seen in a more “accepting” light by the Argentine people.

The British politicians have the last word nonetheless, and I suspect that some may see the current threat of Chinese military influence expanding to Latin America being a much greater common threat than the disagreements of the past.

Avatar photo
South American Defence news analyst based in the United States. Currently studying Criminal Justice and Latin American politics.
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

390 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
rmj
rmj
1 year ago

Simple answer – no. What’s to then stop them once securing F16 then also going for Chinese?

Callum
Callum
1 year ago
Reply to  rmj

Budget, for one thing. The Argies aren’t exactly overflowing with cash to be making multiple major procurements.

Jonathans
Jonathans
1 year ago
Reply to  Callum

The question is will a few F16s prevent Argentina from falling into china’s influence… no because China will just lever the conflict around the falklands to gain influence…so unless we are so stupid and immoral as start developing a plan in which Argentina gets the Falkland it’s a bit pointless geopolitically and infact is only really about selling a US product. So let the US selll them but we want a lot for it thankyou as we would potentially need to up our air defences a bit.

John Francis
John Francis
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

Agreed.

DaveyB
DaveyB
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

China is already there. Late last year and earlier this year Argentinian and Chinese Foreign secretaries meet to discuss fishing rights, where Argentina granted licenced access to their waters. They also discussed and agreed on additional food supplies through beef and agriculture. This will help to bring in much need revenue for Argentina, but also food supplies for China. Significantly, it also sets up a possible conflict. Whereby more Chinese fishing vessels will be caught in Falkland’s waters. Where they may have been granted illegal access by Argentina. From memory there is only one RN OPV stationed down there along… Read more »

George Parker
George Parker
1 year ago
Reply to  DaveyB

Given the rhetoric from the CCP regarding the Big Lizzies recent deployment. It’s a distinct possibility and a potential way to initiate a conflict. Where the CCP PLA Navy deploys, fighting on the side of the Argie b’stards. Several decades of cutting the armed forces suddenly looks very short sighted.

It is time to open up the oil/gas reserves down there and station a very large force to legitimately protect British interests. Probably a good idea to bolster Ascension too.

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
1 year ago
Reply to  DaveyB

If Chinese fishing vessels enter Falklands EEZ then they should be treated professionally, boarded, their nets cut, their crew detained and fined and then released. If there is a consistent approach to this and the Chinese know every time they enter the EEZ this will happen they will soon stop. You have to stand up to bullies and those like Russia that do not respect international law or international norms of civilised behaviour. Instead of bailing out the energy sector with gigantic state subsidised support the government should just enforce an energy cap set an affordable cost per Kwh or… Read more »

Callum
Callum
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

A few F-16s on their own? Of course not, but as part of a wider effort at reconciliation its as good a place to start as any. I fully agree that any plan that involves yielding sovereignty of the Falklands without the consent of inhabitants is both stupid and immoral, but this is about so much more than a US export sale (which still includes UK products, so its not like we don’t actually benefit). We have two options. The first is carry on as we are, let Argentina become increasingly dependent on China, and have a second Falklands War… Read more »

Jonathans
Jonathans
1 year ago
Reply to  Callum

I don’t disagree the effort should be made and the F16s are just a transaction to sort through and a risk to be assessed and the U.K. does need to be provided with the correct reward against that risk, We would be taking one for the team and as an example I’m sure I’d we asked the US to just lift its embargoes around Cuba for betterment of relationships with the west we would be told to sod off so we actually would not be in the wrong to say sod off the this as we as it does create… Read more »

Jonathans
Jonathans
1 year ago
Reply to  Callum

Last point, waiting for war is a shit plan ? I would agree, unfortunately war is inevitable and the only way to prevent it on your doorstep is to be stronger that the other guy who wants what you have, while having consistent lines of foreign policy. We unfortunately cannot prevent war, human beings make war like we breath, conflict is literally hard wired into our DNA ( the aggressive stronger organisms breeds). So when we hit a situation like the falklands there is very little opportunity for a rational way out, we can delay the inevitable and mitigate the… Read more »

FOSTERSMAN
FOSTERSMAN
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

Perhaps we should keep showing the argies clips of marines and paras as a warning to what happens when you keep poking the stick. I’m sure there must be plenty of veterans in there parliament that remember all the one sided battles they fought in and when we fight there’s no messing around. I agree with your previous points I don’t think this is going to be solved through political means, and for US foreign policy this is a disgraceful way to treat an ally for a country that already whored itself out for quick Chinese cash.

Last edited 1 year ago by FOSTERSMAN
Jonathans
Jonathans
1 year ago
Reply to  FOSTERSMAN

Personally I think the best way we can stave of another conflict is as long as we make it very clear, the islanders are a British population on British sovereign soil and will always be treated as such and protected to the full extent of our ability. The moment that is not the case or the balance of power changes there probably will be another conflict ( but I think China will in 20-30 years push for the BAT and other areas of the Antarctic, which will trigger conflict in the region).

FOSTERSMAN
FOSTERSMAN
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

Im not calling out for war but I can’t help but feel the only way the issue of the Falklands is ever going to be solved is through another one unfortunately, it’s just the Argentines will not accept the independence of the British islanders. The Chinese are already well established in Argentina having satellite ground control stations and no doubt full intelligence assimilation of key infrastructure, I’m suprised the US would expose there technology knowing full well a conflict between them is a certainty and bases on the Falklands could become key assets for the US in the future.

George Parker
George Parker
1 year ago
Reply to  FOSTERSMAN

There is a reason why the squatter in the White House is know as Beijing biden. Inference being he sold out to the CCP a long time ago. He cares not what happens when he cashes in on the president title and retires somewhere warm.

If his son is to believe, the “big man always gets his 10%” of all family “access” deals. Apparently he is Irish and hates the British. I wonder how much he will gain from the CCP for this little ploy.

The £100bn defence spending could be too little too late.

Alan Henderson
Alan Henderson
6 months ago
Reply to  George Parker

Actually, it was Biden who supported the British against Reagan in the first Falklands War. The US believe Britain is weker outside of the EU and want us back in, its that simple.

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

That’s true- they already have had their referendum and that one wasn’t a hoax fudged affair it was genuine and done correctly. Overwhelming majority in favour of remaining a British overseas territory. 99.5% in favour I think. This was the only referendum Cameron endorsed that was actually useful and correct to hold. (my opinion, very emotive I know) We know that Russia is the current active threat, that has been useful as the Ukraine war has awoken NATO from its slumber and demanded we re-invest in defence. The UK needs to rearm and quickly. We also know that in LESS… Read more »

George Parker
George Parker
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

I completely agree. So “Sod Off Argies” and anyone selling them arms. The CCP will increase their influence to tie Argentina to the belt and road nonsense, regardless. Should they be permitted to have F16 too!
Do not be surprised if a CCP PLA Navy base suddenly appears on the Argentiniana coast. Disguised as a container terminal in some strategically important location. Complete with air base and army barracks.

I assume because F16’s have British technology in them, it means we can veto any sale. Is it the same for the Grippen, with BAE involvement.

George Parker
George Parker
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

That makes good sense. However, we do not know what deals are going on behind the scenes. The current squatter in the White House isn’t called Beijing biden for nothing. Apparently the big man always gets his 10% and “being Irish” he would love to crap on the British, causing another Falkland Islands war.

Tom
Tom
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

There is far more going on, and much more at stake here, that simply handing back the Falklands, which Britain has been owner/protector of, since before 1833. I really do not understand where the “stupid and immoral” comment comes from. Frankly it is a ridiculous thing to say. Britain is not the only country to have ‘oversea territories’ in far flung places. When others decide to give back these “stupid and immoral” territories to… well whoever tries to lay claim to them, maybe stupid Britain will do the same. On a point of order… the Falkland Islands are 1,521km or… Read more »

Jonathans
Jonathans
1 year ago
Reply to  Tom

Tom immoral comes from the fact this is not about rocks soil and occean it’s about the families that live there, That’s 3000+ human beings who put their faith in the British state, and have voted over 95+ to stay part of the U.K politic, so yes to abandon to a county that tried to invade them and would use their home for its own geopolitical gain would be immoral and a shameful act (in the same way as it would to annex the island with force or force them to become citizens of a nation they did not wish… Read more »

Tom
Tom
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

Thanks Jonathans, you make some good, interesting points. To my mind, the whole ‘who owns’ saga is long dead. Personally, I’d suggest a deal with Argentina. Renounce any and all claims to the Falklands now, and for good, and the UK will not block them from buying aircraft.

I doubt they would consider that, or anything else seriously, however it could then not be said, that the UK did not try to improve relations, with a hostile neighbour.

Alan Henderson
Alan Henderson
6 months ago
Reply to  Tom

I didn’t read who owns them. The people who live there own the lands and have done for hundreds fo years. Where exactly do you suggest we up the people and relocate them to?

Alan Henderson
Alan Henderson
6 months ago
Reply to  Tom

The US has an Empire but much smaller than Britian did during its superpower status. Philippines et al and directly iush there foreign policy to be advantageous to themselves only.

Imagine if Hawaii was taken but force by a foreign country. If the US wanted to take it back, should we all call the US stupid too? No maybe stupid is the ones that don’t understand history and the self right to determination of people’s whom have raised in said country for hundreds of years…

Jonathan Bauer
Jonathan Bauer
6 months ago
Reply to  Tom

New Caledonia in the Pacific ocean
Also Reunion in the Indian ocean
As well as Guadelope in the Caribbean
And not forgetting Saint-Pierre and Miquelon of the coast of Canada.
Which all overseas Departments of France.

Andrew crisp
Andrew crisp
6 months ago
Reply to  Jonathans

leverage – we agree it on basis we get the trade agreement with the USA. we also get to agree on what upgrades are fitted and allowed in future / what missiles and air to ground ordance.

rmj
rmj
1 year ago
Reply to  Callum

The Chinese are good with lines of credit! Look at all the countries in hock to them.

Mark B
Mark B
1 year ago
Reply to  rmj

We are in a difficult place if we cannot secure those islands and indeed any of our overeas territories from attack from virtually anyone. I would like to think that even the US would get a bloody nose. Argentina no longer have a dictatorship therefore we need to start nudging the relationship toward something sensible. They know we are not going to be bullied into handing over the islands to anyone but the islanders.We are not achieving anything by preventing them from having enough kit to defend themselves.

Rob N
Rob N
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark B

Strange I thought we had secured the islands. The massive air base, Meteor armed Typhoons, Sky Sabre air defence, a substantial garrison, a permanent RN presence, South Atlantic frigate/destroyer/sub. Plus a reenforcement air bridge. Add the CSG as ultimate backup and
I think the islands are secure.

We should not bend to US/CCP pressure.

Mark B
Mark B
1 year ago
Reply to  Rob N

Hi Rob, sorry my fault. Really what I was trying to say was that we have secured it so well that the Argeninians improving their air power by whatever means will not impact our ability to defend the islands. To me the issue is that we need to hasten the thaw in relations between the UK and Argentina. What we should perhaps be doing is broadening our cooperation with other powers to prevent the hostile takeover of islands unable to defend themselves. The NATO concept has proven very successful – perhaps something similar could be achieved to improve the security… Read more »

Rob N
Rob N
1 year ago
Reply to  Mark B

I have no problem with good relations with Argentina but so long as it claims the Falklands it IS a potential adversary.

Last time the US armed up Argentina against potential influence it was against the Russians… look how that turned out.

Argentina does not need an enhanced military and influence from China can be countered on non-military lines.

As for multilateralism thats fine but the Britain must be solely responsible for the islands defence.

John Francis
John Francis
1 year ago
Reply to  rmj

A lack of money for starters.

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  rmj

Who would have thought that making ejection seats would give you an effective veto on fighter jet arm sales. We should sell the F16, best thing for UK forces would be a re run of 82 but now we have two carriers and TLAM. We should get Martin Baker in to Chinese jets. Help them with exports like we helped SAAB.

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

Jim I agree even with F16s or Chinese cheap crap jets I cannot see any conflict whereby Argentina can retake and hold the Falklands currently. Our 2 QEC mean any attack would be met within 2 weeks by 1-2 x72,000 ton carriers and a full battle group. Argentine air bases and C3 would be rapidly knocked out by F35Bs and tomahawks. HMG just need to double down on the RN and RAF and make sure we have the forces needed to reinforce the Falklands at the first sign of trouble. Getting too a £100 billion defence budget asap and rebuilding… Read more »

Knight7572
Knight7572
1 year ago

Sorry but Argentina will never be allowed to restore their air force as the British do not trust the Argentine Government at all and unless the Americans are willing to help pay for the defense of the Falklands then the British are not going to budge The last time, the British let the Americans worry about Argentina was the Soviet Union and they let the Americans arm them and they invaded the Falklands which cost British blood and treasure to take back, the British will not let that happen again and Americans should give up on trying to sell F… Read more »

BigH1979
BigH1979
1 year ago
Reply to  Knight7572

Agree with your sentiments but lets not forget the Type 42’s that we supplied them complete with mounting points for Exocet. Its easy to blame the US and France.

Frank62
Frank62
1 year ago
Reply to  BigH1979

We also armed Argentina pre-1982 with Canberra jet bombers, bombs with dodgy fuses& probably other things. Then we convinced them we’d lost interest in the area with stupid planned Thatcher cuts.

Roberto F. Diaz
Roberto F. Diaz
1 year ago
Reply to  BigH1979

Also the Blowpipe. One of them destroyed a Harrier in 1982.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
1 year ago

If it did it was probably aimed at something else!!

Alex
Alex
5 months ago

Yes, they must have aimed something else as well when they sunk 4 modern HMS warships and 2 logistic carriers… never happened to us since 2WW. don’t underestimate those brave warriors!! Best war pilots I’ve ever seen

Ukvoter
Ukvoter
1 year ago
Reply to  Knight7572

Sure they can have F16s. As soon as they declare that they have no claim on the Falkland Islands where 99% of the people are British and have voted to remain that way, as well as us defeating them in a war. We should never have left the situation like this. We should have kept pressing until we had a full treaty giving us full claim. That is the problem with this country. We try to be nice to people who use us then turn around and kick us in the back. We have to build our strength and use… Read more »

Martin H-E
Martin H-E
1 year ago
Reply to  Knight7572

Didn’t hear a peep from UK Gov when France shipped a load of Super Etendards during the pandemic. Literally no other role than anti-shippong. Zip from HMGov.

Knight7572
Knight7572
1 year ago
Reply to  Martin H-E

Those Dassault Super Etendards don’t even fly anymore

DMJ
DMJ
1 year ago
Reply to  Martin H-E

The UK arms embargo on the Martin Baker ejector seats applied and as a result they are non operational so the UK govt didn’t need to say anything specific.

Last edited 1 year ago by DMJ
Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Knight7572

Yeah let the US include the FI in NATO security guarantee. See what sleepy joe says to that. 😀

George Parker
George Parker
1 year ago
Reply to  Knight7572

That would have been true with President Trump in the White House. But not with the current clown. There is a reason he is called Beijing biden. He sold out to the CCP years ago. The question is how much will he earn from the CCP for this little ploy.

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
1 year ago
Reply to  George Parker

How much do you think he would earn from CCP for selling Argentina F16 jets?
$100m? Luxury apartment in Beijing?
If only there was some kind of check on a presidents earnings and some kind of government to oversee a presidents rule. Also a free press that investigates and reports on shady dealings?
Trump should of set something up so nobody could scam money from being in office.

George Parker
George Parker
1 year ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

That would be the same establishment and press, that denied the existance of “Hunters laptop from hell.” Despite knowing otherwise. The FBI had it in their possession for a year and did nothing as “not to influence the election.” Had the electorate known the biden crime family were already doing shady deals, knowingly associating closely with CCP spies. Do you think they would have let sleepy Joe run for office, never mind win. Had the same establishment and press accumulated that much evidence on President Trump, he would be in jail. The US self policing may have been effective at… Read more »

Steven B
Steven B
1 year ago
Reply to  Knight7572

The only reason we can veto it is the British made ejector seats. Do we want to give the US an incentive to develop their own ejector seat, that potentially becomes the new standard and our British company’s goes out of business?

The Argentines will restock there air force … the question is will. It be with Chinese or Western jet. It is not a question or never, just who will supply it. Better we have a jet with known capabilities, or one we don’t?

Marius
Marius
1 year ago

Absolute nonsense to ease any of the embargo. The Argies can (try to) buy whatever they buy. Buying is the easy part, operating and maintaining is what counts, and they are far behind on any related fast jet expertise.

Tomartyr
Tomartyr
1 year ago

Stopping the spread of China in ‘America’s back garden’ is entirely their own problem, stopping the aggression of Argentina on our territory is similarly our own problem and one we expect to continue to face on our own.

If America wants to make us a deal then fine, but don’t expect us to see the overriding necessity of enforcing its hegemony over that continent at the expense of our security.

Callum
Callum
1 year ago
Reply to  Tomartyr

Stopping the spread of Chinese influence is ALL of the West’s problem. This isn’t a national competition, its ideological. Democracy against tyranny.

Also, consider what the article says; the Argies are going to get new fighters. We can’t stop that, but what we CAN do is make the most of the situation to both improve relations with Argentina and enhance our own defence by equipping them with kit we know the full capabilities of. To do anything else isn’t driven by actual logic

Tomartyr
Tomartyr
1 year ago
Reply to  Callum

The US doesn’t need our help defending what they consider ‘their backyard’ and I’d rather we treat the US as they treat us and get something out of them in return, such as a mutual defense pact that covers our overseas territories or at least just the Falklands.

The US has the power to completely ease our security concerns, the ball is very much in its court on this one.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Tomartyr

In this case I think the US does need our (diplomatic) help we need to improve relations with Argentina by flexing on our demands for a moratorium on Argentinian rearmament and by starting negotiations on some sort of Northern Ireland type devolution status which would provide for the possibility of the Falklands becoming part of Argentina. The world has moved on in the last 40 years. China is now the threat.

Tomartyr
Tomartyr
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

“Northern Ireland type devolution status which would provide for the possibility of the Falklands becoming part of Argentina” The Falklands already has devolved government, the Islanders have already voted on independence and there have been no calls for another vote, there is no desire in the Falklands to join Argentina. I honestly think people have a duty to properly educate themselves on issues before calling for constitutional change in someone else’s home. The fact that China is now correctly identified as a threat does not make Argentina our friend, or any less of a threat. If we scratch America’s back… Read more »

Last edited 1 year ago by Tomartyr
Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Tomartyr

See my reply to Jonathans. We need to find a way to move forwards. Some time ago I suggested the idea of selling Argentina some Hawks armed with AA missiles. They have the right to self defence like anybody.

Last edited 1 year ago by Paul.P
Andrew Munro
Andrew Munro
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

They did have a home grown aircraft industry, made their own jet fighters designed by nazi german escapes.

Grizzler
Grizzler
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

So do we.

David Steeper
1 year ago
Reply to  Tomartyr

👍👍

Jonathans
Jonathans
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Sorry Paul, cannot agree, there is no way you can compare nothern Ireland, with a native Irish population and the Argentinian claim to the falklands which is based far more around imperialism and aggression than the UKs claim which is essentially a claim based around a native populations wishes ( as the islands were deserted Atlantic islands before British and french settlers arrived the present population is the native population as they did not replace any previous population), where as the Argentine claim comes from a treaty from the high Middle Ages in which the Catholic Church divided the whole… Read more »

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

As I see it we can either help the US to safeguard and nurture Argentina as a culturally western country or we can allow a British 19th century Imperial view of the world to facilitate Chinese expansionism. The Falklands are not independent. The Falkland Islanders voted in 2013 to remain a British Overseas territory. What’s needed here is a bit of real politik. Right now our policy is all stick and no carrot.

Tomartyr
Tomartyr
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

“British 19th century Imperial view of the world” you mean the Charter of the UN?

Implying the UK doesn’t have the legal and moral high ground betrays your ignorance.

Last edited 1 year ago by Tomartyr
Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Tomartyr

At some point someone has to make a gesture of reconciliation. As victor in the conflict that act of generosity falls to us.

Tomartyr
Tomartyr
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

That’s your excuse you’re using to tie the Islanders to a country that has recently refered to them as “a bunch of squatters”?

If we’re still respecting the pre-UN way of doing things what about vae victis?

Last edited 1 year ago by Tomartyr
David Steeper
1 year ago
Reply to  Tomartyr

👍👍

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Tomartyr

No, the principle of self determination must be respected. But you have to have dialogue. Trade is where you start. Sell the Argentinians some Hawks and some OPVs to police their fisheries – jointly with the Falklands. The Chinese are coming.

Grizzler
Grizzler
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

In this instance I think The Chinese have bigger fish to fry.

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Er no. they are not policing the Falkland’s jointly with us. The Falklands are a British Overseas territory. Inhabited by native Falklander’s who have lived on the island for generations. Since 1865 I think.
Therefore the Argies can bugger off.
Hawks yes- they can buy some old Hawks off us.
Yes they can buy some OPVs but no to policing the Falklands EEZ

David Steeper
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

I think I can summarise your point of view.
“How horrible, fantastic, incredible it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas-masks here because of a quarrel in a far away country between people of whom we know nothing. It seems still more impossible that a quarrel which has already been settled in principle should be the subject of war.”
Neville Chamberlain

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  David Steeper

Well, not quite. But we have to draw Argentina in from the cold somehow. It’s in our interest, and the interest of the Islanders really

Stephen
Stephen
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Why is the ball in our court? We’ll drop our embargo after the Argentinians relinquish their territorial claims on the Falklands

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
1 year ago
Reply to  Stephen

Agree

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Two points. Firstly I would argue it is our interests to take the initiative and secondly the trick is to start a dialogue on a subject of mutual interest while accepting there is a difference of view on sovereignty.
It’s not necessary for the UK to resolve their differences over Gibraltar before you book a holiday in Spain or buy Spanish 🍅 s!

Andrew Munro
Andrew Munro
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

We should take over Argentina like we did late 19th early 20th century .we owned practically all infrastructure in Argentina, they where a peaceful happy rich country then under our guidance.all ruined by person and evite.

Andrew Munro
Andrew Munro
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew Munro

Read Peron and Evita

Andrew
Andrew
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

I assume you are in favour of the breakaway Ukrainian territories you join Russia?

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Andrew

Clearly no. The referendum is a sham.

Jonathans
Jonathans
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

I don’t have a big problem with the US selling a few F16s to Argentina, but I’m sorry the only 19th imperialist behaviour/view is from Argentina. The falklands are an island around five hundred miles away from Argentina with an British ethically British population that wishes to stay part of the United Kingdom. Offering them up as some form of sacrifice in a few decades to buy Argentinian support is immoral, sorry but it is.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

No-one is suggesting a ‘sell out’. What we have to think about is what we want the world to look like for the children and grandchildren of the islanders. These things take generations. C’mon, the Argentinians can’t be all bad, they play rugby for goodness sake!

John Francis
John Francis
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

👏👏

Callum
Callum
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

So in order to secure the future of our children, you’d consign the Falklanders and their subsequent generations to subjugation by a foreign power. Because that’s what you’re suggesting; forcing them to give up sovereignty to a nation that, among other things, covered their home in minefields. Have you got a cogent argument? You’ve suggested a devolution deal, for an already self-governed territory, with the potential for a sovereignty transfer that the population are vehemently against and violates UN law, at the same time as saying that UN law must be respected, while ALSO calling our defence of the principles… Read more »

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Callum

“Subjugation by a foreign power” is the sort of language which is inimical to progress. As I say in my other posts we need to initiate real dialogue.

Chris
Chris
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Why? At the end of the day the Falkland Islanders do not want to become part of Argentina. They have an unswervable desire to remain British. So why would the UK sacrifice that desire purely on the basis of trying to limit China’s role in the region?

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris

IMO the fact that there is a stalemate in the Falklands situation is making it easier for the Chinese to inveigle themselves into positions of influence in Argentina. That’s why I think we need to do something (to normalise relations).
https://africa.cgtn.com/2022/09/29/china-argentina-pledge-to-promote-community-with-shared-future/

Last edited 1 year ago by Paul.P
Chris
Chris
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

I’m sorry, but there simply isn’t any ‘stalemate’ as you put it. The inescapable fact of the matter is that the people of the Falkland Islands have no reason or wish to join with Argentina. It is worth remembering also that the federal state formed in 1853–1861, known today as the Argentine Republic, was formed at least 170 years after the first British colonists arrived there.

If you wish to normalise relations then convince the Argentinians that they have no legitimate claim to the sovereignty of the islands as determined by their own residents.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris

In order to change mindsets you have to start a dialogue, if necessary with the help of an intermediary.

Diego
Diego
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

As an argentinean I can tell you that our education system has been brainwashing everyone about this topic. A rising percentage of our population believes that we should have no links with the West and that we should (further) strengthen our relationship with China and Russia. For example, the government didn’t want to bring Pfizer vaccines, relying instead in Sinopharm and Sputnik. This has been APPLAUDED by lots of people. I really don’t think that a dialogue with the British is going to be seen as something acceptable right now, mainly because of Peronism – Kirchnerism, as stated above. Alberto… Read more »

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Diego

Thanks for this perspective. It reinforces the scale of the challenge – how to counter the brainwashing. As you point out the Chinese are the beneficiaries of the mutual paranoia. Even if all we do is send a chess team or a Spanish speaking Morris dancing group….or just one tech support engineer from Martin Baker for the F-16s, it would be a start!

Quill
Quill
1 year ago
Reply to  Diego

A shame really, the invasion of the Falklands was a distraction by the Junta to stop people complaining about their incompetence and corruption of running the country. One would think that once they were overthrown that this Malvinas islands narratives would be abolished as people would accept that they were manipulated by the then leaders. Alas as you have said, people are still being brainwashed. As far as I see it, Argentina can buy Chinese goods and be influenced, we saw how Sri Lanka ended up after being manipulated by them and building pointless infrastructure that just added debt.

Chris
Chris
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

I think you are missing the point here; the Falkland Islanders do not want their mindsets changing – they are Crown subjects and wish to remain as such. Argentina therefore has no legitimate claim to the Falkland Islands and as such any dialogue is meaningless.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris

What I am suggesting is a ( long-term) process of building a constructive relationship with Argentina which result in interior changes to the character of that country such that the islanders view of it changes ( from negative to positive).

Chris
Chris
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

May I ask how this could be accomplished without the the Islanders renouncing their Crown Sovereignty, an issue that Argentina will most likely be reluctant to overcome?

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris

The issue of sovereignty has to be put to one side. For example it is not necessary for Spain to renounce its claim to Gibraltar in order for you to buy Spanish tomatoes or holiday in Spain or for the Spain to be a partner in Typhoon or for Navantia to rescue Harland and Wolf. Trade is a proven route to better relations. Add in cultural exchanges, school and university exchanges, town twinning, sports, royal visits, subsidise more flights to Rio Gallegos….the objective is to educate Argentinians that their future should be working with the west. By all means trade… Read more »

Chris
Chris
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

A fine idea in theory; the reality is that the Falkland Islanders (I would suggest) want absolutely nothing to do with Argentina, and have absolutely no interest in any trade relations with the country at all.
Your analogy with Spain is also flawed as Spain has never attempted to retake Gibraltar by force so there are no impediments to trade or working with them in industrial partnerships. Were they to do so I would guarantee you that position would end quite dramatically.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris

I am speaking of fostering cultural and trade initiatives between the UK and Argentina, where the political leaders are ( still) creating anti British sentiment in order to secure their own position. We have to go around that influence; communicating directly with the people of the country, by increasing the number and depth of cultural and trade links. It’s a long process.

Chris
Chris
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

As long as the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands isn’t a prerequisite for those initiatives, then I’d say go for it.

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Why do we have too? We actually don’t. The Argentinians have zero moral, ethical or legally viable claim to the Falklands other than they want them because they are close. They might as well claim Chile or Uruguay as those places are closer and actually attached to Argentina.
Just because someone shouts and makes a fuss (argentina) we don’t have to do what they say or give any of their hot air an ear.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

We don’t have to do anything. My argument is that it is better to do something other than dig our heels in; to engage in dialogue in support of cultural and trade exchanges so as to ease tensions in the belief that this will make conflict less likely, inhibit Chinese expansionism, improve the prospects for democracy in Argentina and prosperity all round. Obviously I have failed to make my case. Too bad, at least I have had my chance ( thanks to UKDJ). Tomorrow is another day. Have a good one!

Last edited 1 year ago by Paul.P
Alex
Alex
5 months ago
Reply to  Paul.P

👍👍👍

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Ignoring democracy and selling islanders down the road for Geo politics sounds just like a 19th century imperial policy.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

It’s what de Gaulle did in Algeria. All I am proposing is that we start talking and trading; the Falklands and Argentina need to start to get to know each other, as neighbours.

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

The issue is that Argentina does not recognise the FI government and refuses to talk to them. So what the **** are we meant to do?

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

Morning Jim, you have hit the nail on the head. The challenge is how to build a relationship with someone ( or another nation) when you disagree on an issue you both regard as fundamental. That’s life. I think that trade and cultural exchanges are a proven approach. There’s a view of UK history that the way we moved on from the 17th civil war and religious differences was by focussing on trade and industry; we built the empire. You start by agreeing to disagree but abjuring violence. In selling F-16’s the US is not only safeguarding all our interests… Read more »

Ben Coe
Ben Coe
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Real politik is what caused the Falklands War. We indicated we had no interest per se in the islands. Back then the Islands were just a giant sheep farm. The creation of the 200 nautical Mike EEZs and resource discovery has totally changed that.

The issue here is simply democracy. The Islands belong to their people. Their people have like Gibraltar spoken loudly and clearly.

Real politik is what Chamberlain did to the Csechoslovaks. Real Politik is what we did for Crimea, Fonbas, Georgia and Tranistria.

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Are you daft? Northern Ireland is a state the FI is an independent country able to do what ever it wants. It chooses to be a British territory, even voted 99.7% in a referendum to remain so.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

I’ve no doubt that Westminster would be relieved to see Ireland assume responsibility for NI. A 300 year old Union settlement which is well past it’s sell by date and which assigns a privileged constitutional status to a religious sect stands in the way.

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Seriously, have you read the Good Friday agreement? Clearly not.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

Well, I admit my comment is more attitudinal than politically accurate. But you get my drift.

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Tomartyr

Yes, a one sided “special relationship” is in no one’s interest. You want the embargo on Argentina lifted give us a trade deal. The US has made it very clear repeatedly they don’t have friends only interests. Time for the UK to follow suit. Time for the UK to go back to a bit more of a mercantile foreign policy like every other country. That being said US presidents have about the same amount of power these days as a constitutional monarch. Short of a free guided tour of the white house Biden has little power to give us anything.

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
1 year ago
Reply to  Tomartyr

We shouldn’t be dependent upon the US to ease our security guarantees the UK armed forces should be large enough and power enough to do that on our own with reference to the Falklands territory.

Expat
Expat
1 year ago
Reply to  Callum

I would tend to agree. I think the F16 is too wide spread so easy to circumvent the US to keep them flying. But something old, niche, western and with few operators would mean we have control over the supply chain and therefore availability..

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Expat

Tornado 😀

Expat
Expat
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

Good call 😀

Richard
Richard
1 year ago
Reply to  Callum

Yes it is our problem as well. Argentina recently recognised Taiwan as belonging to China, and China responded in kind declaring that Argentina has a claim to the Falklands. It would help China no end to have the UK removed as a potential thorn in their side when the money and infrastructure starts pouring into Argentina preparing the way for the ultimate desire of a ‘Belt & road’ expansion into South America. This already exists in much of Africa, and if more parts of South America are seduced by the financial gains to be had from China, it effects us… Read more »

Tomartyr
Tomartyr
1 year ago
Reply to  Richard

Surely a prerequisite of arming Argentina would be them ending involvement in Belt and Road, otherwise we’re just arming an enemies vassal.

Last edited 1 year ago by Tomartyr
Richard
Richard
1 year ago
Reply to  Tomartyr

That would a good idea 👍

David Flandry
David Flandry
1 year ago
Reply to  Callum

😀
The Falklands War was 40 years ago. The Chinese threat is now. Keep defenses in the area and respond to the threat.

Kam786
Kam786
1 year ago
Reply to  Callum

Why does the little West think it owns the World? Well just to enlighten you, you don’t and as you have miffed everyone in South America, Africa and Asia your very likely asking for s very severe punch in the nose which appears to ge the very trajectory where the West us heading against a much more powerful International Community that is quite frankly fed up of the little West threatening the rest of the World as its their right to act like dictators when it isn’t. I would recommend that the West behaves and has good relationships with the… Read more »

Jacko
Jacko
1 year ago
Reply to  Kam786

What on earth are you going on about?
As to pissing off African countries etc a good few of them are quite happily members of the commonwealth with countries like Gabon applying to join.
nice rant though.

Grizzler
Grizzler
1 year ago
Reply to  Kam786

If you say so.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
1 year ago
Reply to  Kam786

Is that the rest of the world that sits on its hands and abstains regards Russia / Ukraine rather than joining in sanctions? Right!

No 1 enemy? For some reason the world wants to come to Europe and America for a better life.

Punch on the nose? With what? You are 2nd and 3rd world nations without the money, military or economic power to punch anyone, not G7 economies.

And what is the point of that rant on a UKDJ article about the F16 and the Falkland Islands, whose people wish to be British?

Ukvoter
Ukvoter
1 year ago

Sure they can have F16s. As soon as they declare that they have no claim on the Falkland Islands where 99% of the people are British and have voted to remain that way, as well as us defeating them in a war. We should never have left the situation like this. We should have kept pressing until we had a full treaty giving us full claim. That is the problem with this country. We try to be nice to people who use us then turn around and kick us in the back. We have to build our strength and use… Read more »

Expat
Expat
1 year ago

I know this is controversial but here goes anyway. One argument is its far easier to stop F16s flying as we can push for embargo’s should things heat up. We can’t do that with Chinese or Russian kit. Its quite conceivable China would like UK tied up in the South Atlantic if they made a play for Taiwan. The F16 is probably to wide spread so there’s a lot of operators who could supply parts. Perhaps a more niche western fighter is the answer that the UK easily influence the supplier. And if Argentina has no aggressive plans toward the… Read more »

Armchair Admiral
Armchair Admiral
1 year ago
Reply to  Expat

Agree with all that. Presumably they would use weapons common to an F16 as well, ones we know about…parameters and so on.
Would F16s be much of a threat anyway? Do they have the range. Do the Argies Have tanker capacity? They will be facing Typhoon with Meteor and a sky whatever CAMM battery.
AA

Jay
Jay
1 year ago

The problem will be in numbers. We have 4 Typhoon and 1 Sky Sabre battery. If Argentina is able to field a fleet of F-16’s to good effect, the current defences at the Falkland’s won’t be close to sufficient.

Expat
Expat
1 year ago
Reply to  Jay

Yes agree, but if you has access to the intelligence which would if you’re friendly with the supplier we will know if Argentina was preparing for something enabling us to bolster defences.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
1 year ago
Reply to  Expat

We have intelligence assets that can help detect Argentinean intentions.

With possession of MPA we can reinforce if necessary.

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
1 year ago
Reply to  Jay

MPA and its defences are built to keep the runway open long enough to fly extra assets in to bolster the defence of the FI. Unless the Argentinian airforce got the F16 (or J whatever from China) in large numbers ,managed to conduct a undetected buildup and subsequent surprise attack the whole “attack the FI” is not going to hold water. With the defences in place at MPA, the ability to reinforce with Aircraft and troops and the RNs SSN capability the Falklands would be a tough nut to crack for anyone. This isn’t 1982 anymore. There is an air… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
1 year ago

I look at this in three ways, and cannot decide which to go with. How about….before the UK bows to US pressure yet again. Extraditing Sacoolas to the UK for the killing Harry Dunn, which the US still blocks because she and her husband are actually NSA, pretending “diplomatic immunity” sadly with the collusion of some areas of HMG it seems. Biden stops putting his nose in UK affairs and causing issues regards NI / EU / protocol, which is delicate enough without his interventions which then the media pounce on like wolves to make a story denouncing the UK… Read more »

Tomartyr
Tomartyr
1 year ago

Agree on all points although I would add in the simplest option of the US signing a defence treaty to defend the Falklands.

Tomartyr
Tomartyr
1 year ago
Reply to  Tomartyr

Although the one thing they could do with fighters, regardless of any treaties we have with the US, is use them to harass the oil industry in the Falklands.

Jonathans
Jonathans
1 year ago

I honestly think that in this case selling F16s will make no difference to Argentina falling into china’s influence as the falklands are to much of a conflict and the U.K. would be acting in both an immoral and Geopolitically foolish way if it ever gave up the falklands unless the population asked. So on balance all this is would be a trade, the US gets benefits selling aircraft ( jobs and money) Argentina gets benefits… stronger airforce, we get a cost… the need to up our air defences in the south Atlantic. So unless the US is willing to… Read more »

Last edited 1 year ago by Jonathans
Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

As usual, a thought provoking post.

Agreed, under not circumstances is the FI to be given away, which I greatly feared with JC and the Labour left.
I hope KS and the current Labour front bench are more strategically aware J, considering the state of HMG at the moment! That also applies to Gibraltar and the SBAs in Cyprus, of value beyond measure.

Can you ever see capitalist Europe/US weening themselves off Chinese goods?

Jonathans
Jonathans
1 year ago

Unfortunately Daniele the west either drops its Neoliberal dogma and protects its own industries and markets or it accepts China will have hedgemony from the mid 21c.

Im not sure what choices our leaders will make…but I think personal profit and the needs of multinational companies will overcome national need.

Last edited 1 year ago by Jonathans
John Francis
John Francis
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

It always does unfortunately.

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

I’m not sure what China you are talking about. Is it the one that is the 78th richest country in the world, just below Botswana with the collapsing population, gigantic debt bomb that currently has about 30% of its population under house arrest to control a cold virus? On current population trends Nigeria will have a larger population and economy than China by around 2070. India will over take China in population in 3 months officially but probably did in reality about 10 years ago.

Jonathans
Jonathans
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

In talking about the China which last year had a trade gap With the rest of the world of around +600 billion dollars, that is not the generated trade, that is the money that China made over and above what it imported in goods and services. China as a nation gets that every year. It’s the nation with an expected GDP this year of 16 trillion dollars. I noted that you compared the wealth of China with the wealth of Botswana, Botswana has a GDP of 15.5 billion dollars, China’s is 16 trillion dollars….note that means China has the same… Read more »

Jonathans
Jonathans
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

What ??? China is the second biggest economy on the planet with a gdp of 17-18 trillion dollars and a net worth of 85 trillion dollars. It’s GPD is over a thousand times larger than Botswana and it’s it’s net worth is 17 time that of the entire African continent. As of last year it’s GDP was greater that that of the whole EU and is forcast by every single economic expert to overtake that of the US by 2030. Yes it’s population is dropping but it’s presently at 1.5 billion which is actually to mean..by 2100 it will have… Read more »

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

It has the worlds 78th highest per capita GDP. That’s how you measure if a country is rich not the size of its economy. Botswana has a higher per capita GDP. It’s population is 1.3 billion and falling rapidly and it will likely never have “shed loads of cash” It’s trade surplus has been dropping fir years and will soon begin to reverse due to its ageing population.

Jonathans
Jonathans
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

Sorry no that’s not great a measure and is a bit meaningless all told the best model model is PPP GDP. Which gives to total spending power of the nation ( China actually has the Highest PPP GDP, of any nation even above the US, it’s easy to look up). so why is GDP per capital a crap way to measure a nations wealth….well…according to GPD per capital Luxembourg is the wealthiest nation on earth with Ireland as the the third wealthiest nation. So should we be more worried about the superpowers which are Luxembourg and Ireland or that third… Read more »

Grizzler
Grizzler
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

Quite simply rubbish.

ChariotRider
ChariotRider
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

Hi Jonathans, I think you are right regarding the choices our politicians will make. Just look at the current government hanging its future and the country’s future on the idea of trickle down economics which is debunked by none other than the London School of Economics. https://www.lse.ac.uk/News/Latest-news-from-LSE/2020/L-December/Tax-cuts-for-the-rich However, I think the majority of people are beginning to realise that they are being sold a lie. Even well paid professionals are finding it increasingly difficult to cope, especially if the have a mortgage or rent (most people). Most fixed rate mortgages are apparently only 2 years so have a fast turnover… Read more »

Jonathans
Jonathans
1 year ago
Reply to  ChariotRider

Don’t apologise, that was a very good rant. I don’t disagree I think at some point we will probably need some form of social reset. Most of the leaders of cutting edge tec are pretty clear that because the future is AI and autonomous heuristic learning systems doing most things ( they are even now better at diagnostics of complex diseases than any human consultant) we are going to need a social reset…Simply at some point we are going to truly become post scarcity society and if we take our present baggage of “your only value is in the work… Read more »

Jim
Jim
1 year ago

I thought we all agreed to keep the politics out of it from now on.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

Hi Jim

When did we all agree? And when is me expressing a hope concerning HM oppositions policies an issue?
I’m not complaining, I’d be relieved.

Jim
Jim
1 year ago

About two threads ago 😀

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

Really? Cut and paste for me please where I agreed, said, I would not state any political opinions or mention Labour or it’s leader?

From now on? There have been arguments debate here on UKDJ for years that won’t ever change whatever agreement you wrongly thought occurred a few threads ago!

Expat
Expat
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

We will defeat China by hitting its mercantile strategy head on, so destroying its access to its key market

China already knows this and with its made in China policy and belt and road initiative it has a longer term plan not to be reliant on the west. Unfortunately the Mr Clinton set the ball in motion and now its unstoppable.

Jonathans
Jonathans
1 year ago
Reply to  Expat

now this is where you have to separate the bits of the Mercantile strategy. There are three things you need in a mercantile strategy and if you can affect one you collapse the strategy. 1) tec and or productivity advantage, if you can came it cheaper or better you win this bit of the strategy…so we can impact this by making better, so make sure our tec is better. We cannot win on productivity as China as a massive slave workforce. 2) resources and raw materials, this is actually what the belt and road strategy is about, Africa and South… Read more »

Expat
Expat
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

I disagree we can make cheaper and tech allows us to do that. AI, machine learning and automation are key to doing thus. It used to be you only automated high volume production that’s changing due to technology, developing this smart manufacturing is crucial. The other aspect the UK as whole need to get its head around is ‘What is a productive job’ we tend to get far to attached to unproductive employment and people confused someone earning more money with productivity.

Jonathans
Jonathans
1 year ago
Reply to  Expat

But it’s around the two points, manufacturing and market. You can make all the stuff in the works as cheaply as you like but you need a market, which is why you have to pay people even if it’s just for make work. In reality most U.K. jobs are not about production and growing wealth they are about moving it around and spending, we have effectively become a very large market place and a very small producer, this is the economic incongruity we need to deal with. the simple fact is China is out performing the west and out producing… Read more »

Expat
Expat
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

Actually we’re not a small producer by value we’re 9th in the world and if you work out manufacturing value per person we’re much higher up.

It’s refreshing that someone recognises the economy we’ve become though and I find it hard to understand why we continue to add people when ultimately their will be a pot of cash to redistribute from largely automated industries. So personal wealth will be directly impacted by volume of people as the pot will be spread more thinly.

Jonathans
Jonathans
1 year ago
Reply to  Expat

Lol yes but Italy actually out produces us and we are not far ahead of Taiwan, which is not even officially a county and has a 3rd if our population. Considering we are the fifth largest economy in the world that means we are spending a lot of time buying stuff and selling services, which is nice, but service industries are easy to move and can disappear, even so we are generally running a net trade deficit of around 10% which is not sustainable as if we don’t out grow the deficit at some point you end up with a… Read more »

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

It’s much much harder to move services because they involve a lot of highly skilled people and people don’t like to move. Moving factories is a piece of piss. All the factory’s that left us and eventually ended up in China are currently moving to Vietnam and in 10 years time will be in Bangladesh. London and the UK has been the centre of the service industry world wide since the 17th century and will probably be so in 300 years from now.

David Steeper
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

Spot on.

Jonathans
Jonathans
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

Actually Jim moving a modern production line is not a piss as you do need shed loads of skilled people as well as massive investment in tec and tooling as well as setting up all of the just in time logistics and supply chains. It’s why when you loss a sovereign capacity is probably lost and why our submarine construction suffered and we could not have more that 7 astutes even if we wanted more. Getting a few bankers to move is piss easy you just offer them money and they move centres…The infrastructure they need is server based and… Read more »

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

Yeah if your moving Rolls Royce Trent engine production you do. If your knocking out widgets like most factories it’s piss easy. That’s why they all left the UK and other countries constantly looking for cheapest location. That why all the high skilled stuff stayed in the UK. Moving PWC audit business, Barclays Capital or Clifford Chances legal consultancy out of the UK is hard. All have tried before and come back with entire tail between their legs as they are all staff led and staff don’t like to move.

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Expat

don’t be daft, we all need to get back down the Tyne and the Clyde and start knocking big metal boxes together. Shove your design skills and high value added manufacturing sector. Who wants to be an investment banker anyway 😀

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

I’m not sure what your day job is but it’s clearly not an economist. The UK has about 11% of its GDP in manufacturing which is the same as the USA which is pretty impressive for a mid sized country that completely dominates services and finance. How much more of the economy do you want to turn over to manufacturing? What would be the benefit? The UK is running at close to full employment with zero capacity to spare so what jobs would you stop us doing and industries would you shut down to free up labour for this new… Read more »

Jonathans
Jonathans
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

Actually U.K. and US manufacturing is more like 17-18 percent. The issue is the massive trade deficits every western country is running…you cannot keep running a massive trade deficit and keep you position and the trade deficit between the west and China is 500-600billion dollars a year ( that is China increasing its net wealth by at least a trillion dollars a year) that is why china’s net worth has gone through the roof. At preset if the west does not actually start reeling in that deficit ( which is entirely based around manufacturing) then the west will loss its… Read more »

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

You can keep running trade deficits when your capital account supports it. It’s pretty complicated to understand if you don’t have a background in economics but at a very simplistic level no rich Americans move to China but lots of rich Chinese move to America. No rich British people fly to Shanghai to buy designer handbags, lots of rich Chinese come to the UK to shop. Times these interactions and hundreds more like it by many millions and you see what countries like the UK and the US can fund trade deficits indefinitely.

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Expat

Chinas plan sucks, it’s stuck itself with a bunch of debts from a group of countries who are not willing to pay it back and there is nothing China can do but write it down.

Jonathans
Jonathans
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

china has moved from a third world nation to the 2 second biggest economy in the world in one generation, they don’t give a crap about the debt, the whole point is the nations cannot pay it back, China is financed by a western trade deficit of 600billion dollars a year, that’s money they can loss and still not be showing a deficit…they are putting the third and second world into a debt trap using money generated by western democracies trade deficits, it’s actually brilliant and is second only to the last great mercantile power to make an empire by… Read more »

Jim
Jim
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

It’s still technically a third world country although there is no such distinction in economics. It is towards the bottom of the middle income countries just below Botswana and Iraq. They only debt trap China has built is for itself. You need to get more current, everything your are quoting is form a decade ago.

Jonathans
Jonathans
1 year ago
Reply to  Jim

No I’m quoting, the latest papers from financial journals actually. I like to read and I always keep of with the economics of the Major geopolitical players.

Grizzler
Grizzler
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

To me it would depend on what damage 2 squadron s of F16 could inflict .Argentinian pilots were effective in 1982 & caused a lot of injuries …do we really want to give them additional help? Yes I understand that we may have more effective defensive capabilities (soft and hard) against F16s but politically it’s surely not a good idea to sanction that sale.

Armchair Admiral
Armchair Admiral
1 year ago

Yes, let them have them. The benefits would seem to outweigh the negligible military threat.
After all, they have no navy, no “extras”…subs and so on, so no threat to the FI at all as far as I can see?

If they were to try and buy Tomahawk and some sort of long range Ashm…that would be a different matter!
AA

Gareth
Gareth
1 year ago

Until Argentina recognises the sovereignty of the Falkland Islanders to choose their own future (which they already have in referenda) then no, the UK should not acquiesce. The US would never agree to such if the situation were reversed. Besides, Russian influence at least, is definitely on the wain right now given the overall poor performance of both their armed forces personnel and their military technology in Ukraine. If Argentina wants to waist it’s fragile economic resources on clapped out Russian kit then let them. As for the Chinese kit, the JF-17 has inferior performance to the Typhoon anyway and… Read more »

Last edited 1 year ago by Gareth
Jonathans
Jonathans
1 year ago

Its an interesting piece, but the true geopolitical lesson here has nothing to do with selling some f16s to Argentina as Argentina is likely going to fall into china’s orbit due to the ongoing dispute over the Falklands ( which we should never give up unless the population asks us to, it’s strategically massive and would be an immoral act against an ethnically British, native population as all evidence shows the first humans to inhabit and colonise the falklands were the french and British). The true lesions are about: 1) The power of industrial might. If you make it you… Read more »

Expat
Expat
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

Couple of points, our access to the British Empire and common wealth made us sloppy, captive market with little competition lead many in industry believe UK Manufacturing had no peers. This attitude carried on into the 1970s, when the British public had access to better products from Europe deserted UK manufacturers. Second point is Global Capitalism generates the UK a lot of wealth, BAe wouldn’t be one of the largest defence companies without access to other markets. When you shut down our market to close out competition you risk reciprocal measures. Not saying we shouldn’t help home grown industries but… Read more »

Jonathans
Jonathans
1 year ago
Reply to  Expat

i don’t have a problem with level markets, so an internal western market is fine. The problem is we have a nation with a vast serf population that it’s mobilising using a mercantile strategy to gain dominance. China is what the British empire was in its years of growth not what British industry was from the 1950s onward.

Its a choice, allow the primacy of Neoliberalism and accept likely Chinese hedgemony or develop a more cogent western led market, that protects western interest.

Last edited 1 year ago by Jonathans
Bringer of Facts
Bringer of Facts
1 year ago
Reply to  Jonathans

I agree mostly with your first point, a nation that has no or limited industrial capacity has no power. Many successive governments have failed to keep our military industries going, case in point is the Vickers tank factory closure.

If we ever have to face a country with sizeable armed forces that are peer matched in capability, then we have to be prepared for attrition, good Industrial capacity is a buffer for that.

Levi Goldsteinberg
Levi Goldsteinberg
1 year ago

My most rationale, peace-loving and dove-like thought on this is that if Argentina purchases fighters, they should be destroyed on the ground in an F-35 night raid

AlbertStarburst
AlbertStarburst
1 year ago

Here is my very controversial thought: Let them buy Britiish. e.g. mothballed Tornados or even Typhoons batch 1s. A bit like the Russia/Ukraine thing. That is never going to end until Russia is defeated and a regime falls with a change of thought towards Ukraine and other countries in the West. Similarly the Falklands thing is never going to go away until Argentina recognises that the Falklands are British. Also the British and Argentinian military seem to show a good level of respect for each other, and many Argentinians are of Welsh descent. Indeed Welsh language and education is growing… Read more »

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago

Lol you can’t compare Argentina with Russia, we weren’t an empire like them. Do you know who was an empire? The United Kingdom
You have a reductionist vision of the history of Latin America

AlbertStarburst
AlbertStarburst
1 year ago

Sounds like my attempt at extending the arm of friendship across nations has fallen on at least one pair of deaf ears.

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago

We are willing to shake hands, but not at any cost. Accepting that you compare us with Russia is DENIGRATING (and even more so coming from a country that conquered half the world by force)

Rob N
Rob N
1 year ago

This is all about the US trying to increase and reopen sales to Argentina. There are other ways to build good US/Argentina relations without arms sales. Also Argentina is managing just fine without a new airforce…. no one is attacking them. The last time the US sold weapons to them the Hunta took over and the UK faced those weapons. Why the US is keen to sell weapons to a potential adversary of an friend I am not sure on…. F16 is a slippery slope… it will be F16 plus better radar and then BVR AAMs… etc This is simply… Read more »

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  Rob N

But Argentina has the right to arm itself, and it will do so one way or another.
Postscript: how paranoid the English are. Surely they think that Argentina is still governed by the military 🤣🤣🤣🤣

Knight7572
Knight7572
1 year ago
Reply to  Santiago

As i said the British Government just do not trust the Argentine Government

But to be honest, you guys should consider yourselves lucky that the British didn’t have stuff like the CVA01 carrier as i can already imagine what probably would have on May 25th 1982 had circumstances played its hand differently with the British having CVA01s

Would you like me to elaborate?

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  Knight7572

Keep talking 👌🏻

Knight7572
Knight7572
1 year ago
Reply to  Santiago

What I suspect most likely would have happened  On May 25th 1982 the 2 CVA-01-Class carriers sent have their AWACS up and detect the 25th of May and her escort, given how much of the threat the carrier was, the Blackburn Buccaneers with F-4K Phantom 2 escorts are dispatched on a carrier strike avoiding the wind drop that scuppers the Argentine strike later that day and they hit the carrier group likely doing a lot of damage, how much is hard to say but I don’t believe the carrier would survive because her 12 40mm Bofors AA Guns are useless… Read more »

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  Knight7572

But it didn’t happen 🥱

Knight7572
Knight7572
1 year ago
Reply to  Santiago

Yeah because of decisions and factors that played against the British in the 50s, 60s and 70s
The CVA-01 Carriers that would likely be available would be CVA-02 HMS Duke of Edinburgh and CVA-03 HMS Prince of Wales as realistically the RN would have got 3 CVA-01 instead of 5

ironically Santiago if the UK had the CVA-01, Argentina would not go to war with the UK over the Falklands in the 1st Place

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  Knight7572

Well, don’t worry. We will buy jets to China, we have no problems with that; but you will have to answer to your daddy USA for ignoring his petition. Good luck

Knight7572
Knight7572
1 year ago
Reply to  Santiago

2 Questions
Is that worth being debt trapped to China?I
Is that worth annoying the Americans?

Last edited 1 year ago by Knight7572
Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  Knight7572

1) “Debt trap” is more of a myth than a reality. For now, no one gave anything for apparently “unpayable” debts

2) You missed my point. It is not Argentina that will make the United States angry, it will be the UK for maintaining an uncompromising position and paving the way for China. Americans know thay they can’t blame us for trading with China

Knight7572
Knight7572
1 year ago
Reply to  Santiago

Have you seen what Pakistan had to give them?

If you remember that thing I told you on the 5th

well according to retired Blackburn Buccaneer officers a Royal Navy Buccaneer air attack on Argentine carrier Veinticinco de Mayo would have the 1st wave of buccaneers unescorted attack with Anti-Ship missiles, getting in, firing and getting out then the 2nd wave escorted by fighters would hit the Veinticinco de Mayo task force with unguided-bombs with the Veinticinco De Mayo as primary target and her escorts are secondary targets

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  Knight7572

😴

Ian
Ian
1 year ago

Unfortunately this doesn’t concern ‘disagreements of the past’, because Argentina still claims the territory. If its government were to recognise the Falkland Islands as exclusively UK territory then there would be no need for an on-going embargo at all. The ball is very much in their court.

Geoffi
Geoffi
1 year ago

If they are still early-block A-versions from AMARG. Our Typhoons can wipe the floor with them anyway.

farouk
farouk
1 year ago

Is this the same US which refused to allow Israel to sell its old F16s to Croatia in 2019 then when that was dropped, Washington then offered Croatia in 2020 its own F16s. Lets be honest here, Washington will always put Washington first.

Harry Bulpit
Harry Bulpit
1 year ago

Argentina should be prevented at all costs to gain any type of fighter force, until they can show that they respect the rights of the Falklanders and act with some resemblance of maturity. Argentina has shown that it will do anything to antagonise us and the islanders, and there us no doubt that they will use any fighters to probe and irritate the Falklands defences. Not only would this creat a significant risk but would cause a massive financial burden on our side. Perhaps if the USA was actually a true ally they would first be putting more pressure on… Read more »

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  Harry Bulpit

“Putting more pressure on Argentina”
What do you mean?

Harry Bulpit
Harry Bulpit
1 year ago
Reply to  Santiago

By telling Argentina to grow up and act with maturity over the issue of the Falklands and to respect the rights of its inhabitants.

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  Harry Bulpit

Yeah, because UK is peace and love 💀

Ivan Adams
Ivan Adams
1 year ago

If we sell western tech to them then we still have control over its usage because they will need spares. If it came to war we would cut their supply to spares.
Ivan

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  Ivan Adams

But your English compatriots, ignorant of foreign policy from what I am reading, prefer not to lift the embargo. THANK YOU

Ivan Adams
Ivan Adams
1 year ago
Reply to  Santiago

Hi Santiago You must remember that Argentina made an unprovoked attack on the Falkland Isles, it is very difficult to arm a country that seeks expansionism. A simple acceptance of the Islanders right of ownership would probably open all doors for you.

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  Ivan Adams

Another British mistake: treating us like if we were still ruled by a dictatorship. Thank you again, China is the way

Ivan Adams
Ivan Adams
1 year ago
Reply to  Santiago

Hi Santiago You turn your face from one dictatorship to another, China is also expansionist. Democracy is about people being free to live there lives in harmony, Business can be expansionistic but countries shouldn’t. We are not against China but we take our dealings with them very seriously as I think all democracies should. At the end of the day you do need defensive weapons and if we don’t sell them then you must get them from somewhere, but for us to trust Argentina as they would like to be trusted we will look at the kind of decisions they… Read more »

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  Ivan Adams

USA has partnership with Saudi Arabia and another Middle East countries that difficulty could be considered “democracies” by Western vision, and 80% of the world has trades with China. You can’t mix morals with foreign affairs.

MJB
MJB
1 year ago

The US state department is always lecturing the world about human rights but not a single word in support of the Falkland islands because it does not support the State departments clouded interests. If we saw some strength on the issue Argentina might realize the great Malvinas myth they spin to any party worldwide willing to listen has ended. The Argentine Government have already freely given the Chinese a Base in Patagonia that no parties are allowed access. Who takes the most fish from the Argentines in the South Atlantic, their friends the Chinese and not a word from the… Read more »

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  MJB

Don’t be ignorant, man. To build hegemony, you must offer something in return. Today, China offers more than the US and that is why Latin America prefers it over other countries.
Also, what can they offer Argentina besides “shared values”?

grizzler
grizzler
1 year ago
Reply to  Santiago

What exactly do the Chinese offer you – and what exactly do you think you will end up paying in real terms.
It obvious reading your comments your underlying rationale is not just defence you are looking for what you can gain.
It doesn’t matter whether you are ruled by the military or not your government still maintains its claim on The Falklands so I fail to understand why anyone here would want to provide any assistance whatsoever to realise that claim.

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  grizzler

We have no problems with British position about the embargo, but your daddy USA has it. They worry that Britain’s uncompromising and capricious stance will pave the way for China in South America. Talk about it among yourselves, we are going to continue negotiating with China

Blessed
Blessed
1 year ago
Reply to  Santiago

Continue with your devils bargain by all means. Unfortunately Argentina is ripe for the picking for China. The UK will have to reinforce MPA accordingly though.

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  Blessed

Man UK has more serious problems. Your main city is becoming Londonistan

Blessed
Blessed
1 year ago
Reply to  Santiago

Is it. You best brush up on your Mandarin pal, ingratiate yourself with your Chinese overlords 😂

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  Blessed

Lol it’s not happening, because we don’t have inmigrants taking the cities like your country has

Blessed
Blessed
1 year ago
Reply to  Santiago

You do realise your country is a product of European immigration and unfortunately ( mainly by the Spanish) utter destruction of the local inhabitants don’t you?

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  Blessed

Read to me, Anglo-Saxon: ALL South American countries are sons of Spanish/Portuguese and Native people. We aren’t a product of X inmigration. French, Dutch and British people are the ones who killed native people of their formee colonies.
Besides, almost 70% of Argentine people have at least one indigenous ancestor. We belong here. The racial argument is a problem of the First World

Blessed
Blessed
1 year ago
Reply to  Santiago

It’s ironic that you think the descendants of Europeans who displaced the indigenous population belong in Argentina but the people of the Faulklands somehow don’t. A quick look on Google and it says 1.49% of Argentinians consider themselves indigenous but you are right in that many Argentines think they have at least one indigenous ancestor. Also Argentina is the country with the second highest number of immigrants after the US. As for “ the racial argument” I don’t know what you mean.

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  Blessed

If your source is Google, what can I say…… 🤭🤭

Blessed
Blessed
1 year ago
Reply to  Santiago

Because everything on Google is untrue?

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  Blessed

For those things, you should check the information from INDEC (organization that is in charge of statistics and censuses in Argentina). There is nothing to hide, the data is there

Martin H-E
Martin H-E
1 year ago

Thanks for this. This does read rather like a University essay, where the author is second language English. It’s a little annoying, is replete with assertion, subjection, and supposition. For eg Argentina isn’t a Nation any more than the UK is. It is a State. Nations share a common genetic heritage, language, and religion; almost the opposite of Argentina. Aside from this, there’s no mention of Argentina’s recent acquisition (for peanuts) of French Super Etendard aircraft. These ‘exocet carriers’ were used to deadly effect during the Falklands, and a batch of second hand units were recently shipped to Argentina by… Read more »

Last edited 1 year ago by Martin H-E
DMJ
DMJ
1 year ago
Reply to  Martin H-E

Not quite correct. They were supplied in 2017, in another post you claimed it was during Covid. They have been nonoperational as they cannot get parts for the Martin Baker ejection seats due to the UK arms embargo.

Martin H-E
Martin H-E
1 year ago

It’s high time we nationalised the Falkland Islands company, integrated the Falklands into UK proper, and have it as a constituency with an MP in the Commons. This is what the French do. This ‘ours’ but actually ‘mostly owned by the Falkland Island Company’ halfway house is too ambiguous. Make it part of UK ‘mainland’ and be done with it. Same goes for Gib and other Bots.

DaveyB
DaveyB
1 year ago

Perhaps we should allow them the F16s, but only with Martin Baker ejection seats. Then secretly plant software in the seats control unit, that activates the seat when it receives the correct code!

But seriously, if the US want to make sure Chinese influence stays out of Argentina. They need to insist that part of the deal also includes them dropping their fake claim to the Falklands. Then significant aid packages can be arranged.

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  DaveyB

So basically you want to end the conflict making Argentina to dropp the claim. You are a genius 🤣

DaveyB
DaveyB
1 year ago
Reply to  Santiago

Er, yes!

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  DaveyB

I was joking. You’re a clown 🤡

DaveyB
DaveyB
1 year ago
Reply to  Santiago

So why am I a clown for stating the bloody obvious? If Argentina actually responded to legal summons and tried to argue their case. They would surely loose. To save the embarrassment of losing a World Court trial, it would be better in everyone’s interest if they dropped the sovereignty claim. If this was done, then the Country may be looked on more favourably rather than as a pariah and the UK would lift the embargo. It doesn’t get much simpler than that!

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  DaveyB

Yeah, we surely will hear your advise 🤣🤣🤣🤣

DaveyB
DaveyB
1 year ago
Reply to  Santiago

Shame, I guess Argentina will maintain its slow and steady decline into the arms of China and all that entails. Good Luck.

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  DaveyB

Thanks, and don’t piss off your daddy USA

grizzler
grizzler
1 year ago
Reply to  Santiago

End what conflict exactly?

The Artist Formerly Known As Los Pollos Chicken
The Artist Formerly Known As Los Pollos Chicken
1 year ago

Aye the folk advocating allowing a potential enemy we’ve already gone to war with in recent past to get more capable weapons platforms that could be used against our forces need to lay off the crystal meth simple as.

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇬🇧

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago

You surely also think that Argentina still ruled by a dictatorship…..

FOSTERSMAN
FOSTERSMAN
1 year ago

Chinese or F16 doesn’t matter could be a damned F15, nothing is escaping a locked on meteor.

Matheson
Matheson
1 year ago

It’s my understanding that the F-16 is equipped with a Raytheon seat, so this piece seems to be based off a false premise.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACES_II

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
1 year ago

How does selling some F16s stop Chinese interests in Argentina? Maybe they don’t get Chinese jets. Just everything else. China doesn’t see it like they bought F16, all deals are off, close the embassy. Argentina will do what works for Argentina as they should. More importantly there needs to be some kind of deal done to end the falklands uncertainty. Some way Argentina benefits and the islanders gain more security. Perhaps an economic sharing agreement. Falklands and Argentina split oil prospects in certain regions. Just something to move peace along. I know some Argentinians/South Americans are still grumpy about the… Read more »

Knight7572
Knight7572
1 year ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

As I said earlier the British do not trust the Argentine Government and as far the British, their embargo is not outdated

Pato_vj
Pato_vj
1 year ago

Hello everyone, im from Argentina. I’m convinced that in 50 years there will be no interest in the islands from my country. Its alredy undergoing deep inside the goverment and the people. China is a difficult issue, since it represents a significant percentage of the money entering the country. Everything you read or hear from my country regarding the claims for the islands is nothing more than colored pieces of paper (as we say here, meaning “load of sh*t”) for electoral gains on the few who still believe in the brainless peronist governments. Chinese influence not only worries the US… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
1 year ago
Reply to  Pato_vj

👍

AlbertStarburst
AlbertStarburst
1 year ago
Reply to  Pato_vj

Thank you Pato_vj.

We can all be friends in the21st Century and share mutual respect and our history. That is the way forward. Not China, or trying to invade the Falklands again. Crumbs, many Argentinians have Welsh heritage for goodness sake.

LongTime
LongTime
1 year ago

Or I don’t know the US could put pressure on the Argentinian government to sort their problems with the UK.

R.Leake
R.Leake
1 year ago
Reply to  LongTime

Why not make the Falklands part of the United kingdom like Russia has made part of the Ukraine Russian so that we can actually bomb Argentina if it threatens part of the United kingdom ie the Falklands whats good for the goose is good for the gander

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  R.Leake

If you do that, all South America will be pushed to Russia/China arms, because it would confirm the fear of a new kind of European “imperialism”

Lazerbenabba
Lazerbenabba
1 year ago

Who ever supplies the aircraft eventually better receive a substantial upfront payment as the Argies are not exactly reliable payers; just take a look at their inability to comply with and pay their debts to the IMF.
Mind you the IMF likes to point the finger at the UK for alleged poor economics when they are so remiss in how they judge who to give money to, generally utter basket financial cases.

Andrew D
Andrew D
1 year ago

Don’t think HMG are to worried ,but best keep an eye don’t want to make same mistake again.🔭📡

Graham Moore
Graham Moore
1 year ago

Does or could Argentina really exercise influence over America’s ‘back yard’?
Where is this back yard?

ABCRodney
ABCRodney
1 year ago

It seems to me that this is a bit of a King Canute problem, as much as we wish Argentina never acquires new military equipment they inevitably will. So if we can’t stop it be pragmatic and control it in a constructive way, we use that as an Olive Branch, after all we have nothing to lose and some added value to gain. The F16A/B are old and will be a sod to maintain and to be fair they are probably beyond Argentinas requirements. I would allow them to buy what they wanted in the 1st place which was a… Read more »

criss whicker
criss whicker
1 year ago

Do you trust the Americans? do you trust the Chinese?
do you trust the EU? do you trust Argentina.?

remember every decision has a consequence. and might cost British lives in the future,
why takes the chance.? NO

DanielMorgan
DanielMorgan
1 year ago

Be careful which bear (eagle) one pokes. The US just may say one day that its reliance on Martin Baker for ejection seats is not in the US interest since it precludes certain arms sales that the US considers in its national interest. A nation with a $813 billion defense budget and the premier defense corporations in the world could quite easily remedy a dependence on a foreign nation for a vital defense asset by deciding to fund a program to manufacture that asset domestically.

grizzler
grizzler
1 year ago
Reply to  DanielMorgan

Or they could be so impressed by the company they buy it. (to paraphrase an old advert).
In all seriousness that would be their answer – and our government would of course allow it.

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago

UK should have lifted the embargo when the USA declared Argentina extra NATO allies, but you choosed to treat us as if we were still ruled by a dictatorship. Next year we celebrate 40 years of democracy, and all our democratic governments always wanted and still wanting a pacific solution. That embargo has no sense, but it’s too late now, and I’m really disappointed of seeing many British people thinking we are dangerous. You evidently don’t know my country

Harry Bulpit
Harry Bulpit
1 year ago
Reply to  Santiago

Coming from the country that decided it was a good idea to promote your Olympic team in 2012, by desecration our war graves.

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  Harry Bulpit

Better than conquering half of the world by force like UK did until the 1960’s

Blessed
Blessed
1 year ago
Reply to  Santiago

If Argentina could of done it they would have done it. I wonder if they would of relinquished power with as much grace as the British empire.

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  Blessed

“Yes, I’m a killer, but the rest of the people are potential killers too”. Great thinking 🤡🤡🤡

Blessed
Blessed
1 year ago
Reply to  Santiago

You missed the point entirely🙈

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  Blessed

No

Pablo
Pablo
1 year ago

I have read all this interesting thread about Argentina / Falkland Islands and F16s jets. I was born and live in Argentina, and had 21 years old when the war hapened. That event was the most ridiculous, impractical and immoral idea that came up to a bunch of military trying to held in power (later condemned to life in prison for their crimes). Discussing (again and again) about (us) gaining the sovereignity of the island is absolutely pointless and also impossible to obtain. By the way: what would mean to Argentina to have that sovereignity? What will change for the… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
1 year ago
Reply to  Pablo

You’re entitled to like anyone else Pablo. 👍

Esteban
Esteban
1 year ago

This is really an interesting discussion…. It’s been it’s been 40 years since this conflict occurred. Just a few more years and it would be the span of the entire Cold war. It’s time to get over this and move on. How about some actual diplomatic negotiations. It is also interesting to hear the level of hatred for the United States. Not sure where that misguided opinion came from. That is the post colonial hatred from the UK that blames the United States for where the UK is in the world order at the moment. Interesting psychology going on there.

Harry Bulpit
Harry Bulpit
1 year ago
Reply to  Esteban

Actually I think the disdaine for America comes from more contemporary issues. Such as the fact we entered a decade long war in their defence, costing us hundreds of lives and billions of pounds and yet they never thought to include us in the “peace negotiations”. Or perhaps its because their citizens who lived in our country as guests are protected from prosecution after they killed one of our children. Also don’t forget that their current president is continously intervening in our domestic and foreign affairs to our disadvantage, due to some ludicrous personal family feelings.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
1 year ago
Reply to  Harry Bulpit

Bravo.

Harry Bulpit
Harry Bulpit
1 year ago
Reply to  Esteban

Also we are not the ones preventing diplomacy, why don’t you share you’re views with the Argentine government who continue to antagonise the Falklanders.

Airborne
Airborne
1 year ago
Reply to  Esteban

Post colonial hatred? Nothing of the sort, more research by yourself needed I’m afraid. Cheers.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago

ChiCom overtures to Argentina are not common knowledge in US. Really don’t wish to contemplate their infestation of SA. It’s about time to break our the insecticide.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
1 year ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

…out…

S. GANESH M. SUBRAMANIAM
S. GANESH M. SUBRAMANIAM
1 year ago

Just take up the offer buying the Indian made Tejas or refurbished F 16 provided the UK okay the deal because of the ejection seat

James
James
1 year ago

Who will lend them the money to buy the F16’s? Ah yes, China.

What will China want in return, alot. Raw materials, food products, access to the oceans off Argentina etc etc etc.

By selling them the F16’s it still benefits China regardless.

Templar
Templar
1 year ago

I do not believe that Argentina buys weapons thinking of a new armed conflict with the UK. Argentina has serious problems with the infiltration of drugs through the northern border, it has a lot of surface to take care of, patrol, Bolivia a few years ago moved the Border Mark and appropriated a few kilometers on the Argentine continental territory. The depredation of fishing on their coasts, they had to use the only operational submarine they had left to patrol the coast and it sank. Whatever the plane they buy, it is not enough to try a new conflict with… Read more »

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  Templar

Because we would smash them some time later

WSM
WSM
1 year ago

Having access to Western weapons systems – British built Type 42 Destroyers , Canberra bombers , French Mirages and Exocets to name just a few – didn’t exactly prevent the nasty little fascist dictatorship from invading forty years ago did it ? Why do you think they wouldn’t try something again ? (regardless of where they obtain their weapons)

Santiago
Santiago
1 year ago
Reply to  WSM

Because we aren’t ruled by a dictatorship. Next year we celebrate 40 years of democracy, and all our democratic governments wanted and still wanting a pacific solution. But if you still treating us in that way, UK has the problem, not us

Harry Bulpit
Harry Bulpit
1 year ago
Reply to  Santiago

So why did Argentina try so hard to exclude the Falklands island badminton team from competing in the South American games last year? It is not us that has the problem.

James
James
1 year ago
Reply to  Santiago

Yes the UK has a problem in that it does not want to have to go to war again.

If the ‘democratic’ Argentinian governments dont have an issue they should stop the repeated rhetoric on the ‘Malvinas’.

WSM
WSM
1 year ago
Reply to  Santiago

A “democracy” that refuses to acknowledge the wish of 99% of the FI population to remain British