Special Committee on Decolonization Approves Text Reiterating Peaceful Negotiated Settlement as Only Solution to Falklands Islands (Malvinas) Question
Foreign Minister Contrasts Argentina’s Readiness to Resume Negotiations with ‘Uncompromising’ Refusal by United Kingdom
With speakers decrying the anachronistic situation and the “open wound” festering in the South Atlantic, the Special Committee on Decolonization today approved a draft resolution reiterating that a peaceful and negotiated settlement of the sovereignty dispute between Argentina and the United Kingdom was the only way to end the “special and particular” colonial situation of the Falkland Island (Malvinas)*.
By the text, the Special Committee — known formally as the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples — requested that Argentina and the United Kingdom consolidate the current dialogue by resuming negotiations in order to find a peaceful solution to the sovereignty dispute as soon as possible.
The text, approved without a vote, reiterated the Special Committee’s firm support for use of the Secretary-General’s good offices to assist the two parties in ensuring compliance with the General Assembly’s request, in its resolution on the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas).
Speaking before the action, Argentina’s Minister for Foreign Affairs and Worship said the dispute dated back to the United Kingdom’s 1833 occupation of the Malvinas Islands, when that country had illegally expelled the Territory’s authorities and population, implanted its own settlers and taken control of migration policies. “Not all decolonization cases are solved by applying the principle of self-determination,” she emphasized, noting that there was an underlying sovereignty dispute to be resolved by Argentina and the United Kingdom.
While the United Kingdom had been uncompromising in its refusal to resume negotiations, despite the General Assembly’s repeated calls, she said, the President of Argentina had expressed his willingness to start “a new chapter” in bilateral relations from a belief that the two countries could restore their “rich and mutually beneficial” relationship. Argentina wished to maintain a broad agenda with the United Kingdom, as well as an open and clear dialogue in order to find a solution to the sovereignty dispute over the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia Islands and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas.
During the Special Committee’s hearing of petitioners on the issue, Michael Summers, a member of the Legislative Assembly of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas), said the Territory was satisfied with its constitutional relationship with the United Kingdom, and while that could change, there was no wish to do so. It had taken about 160 years to decolonize from the United Kingdom and the Falklands (Malvinas) had no desire to be colonized by any other claimant.
Taking a different view, Alejandro Betts, a fourth-generation resident of the Territory, said Argentina’s sovereignty rights were based on a historical title preceding the British colonization. Argentina had never given up its sovereignty claim and had made clear the illegitimate, violent and arbitrary nature of the United Kingdom’s colonial possession of the Malvinas Islands, he said, adding that the military base at Mount Pleasant seriously compromised the security of South America.
In the ensuing discussion, speakers from around the region expressed support for Argentina’s claims on the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia Islands and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas, applauding that country’s readiness to engage in dialogue over the sovereignty dispute. The United Kingdom could not continue to ignore the universal appeal to relaunch talks, they emphasized.
Bolivia’s representative asked what would have happened had “one of our countries” defied such calls for dialogue. “There would be sanctions, embargos and air exclusion zones,” he said, questioning the principle of equality among nations. Bolivia could not accept abuse of the right to self-determination to preserve a colonial situation.
Ecuador’s representative said the right of self-determination did not apply to the Malvinas question because the Territory’s population had been transplanted by the colonial Power. The issue was not simply a bilateral one, but rather a pending matter for the United Nations, he said, suggesting the use of means other than negotiations if results were not achieved within a reasonable time.
Venezuela’s representative, speaking for the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR), rejected what the United Kingdom described as a referendum, held in 2012, saying it in no way changed the nature of the Malvinas question or ended the sovereignty dispute, the origins and colonial nature of which could not be ignored. He called for implementation of resolution 3149 (1976), which called on the parties to abstain from unilateral decisions that could change the situation during efforts to resolve the sovereignty dispute.
The representative of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines said the General Assembly had repeatedly acknowledged that the Malvinas situation was not the will of a colonized population under alien control. Rather, it involved competing claims of sovereignty over islands that lay a short distance off the Argentine coast.
Also speaking today were representatives of Nicaragua, Syria, China, Cuba, Indonesia, Russian Federation, Dominican Republic (for the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, CELAC), Uruguay (also for the Southern Common Market, MERCOSUR), Guatemala, Brazil, Mexico, Costa Rica, Colombia, Panama, Peru, Paraguay, Honduras and El Salvador.
The Special Committee also heard from four petitioners, two of them members of the Legislative Assembly of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas), the third a fourth-generation resident of the Territory and the fourth a descendant of its first governor.
The Special Committee will reconvene at 10 a.m. on Friday, 24 June, to conclude its resumed session.
Hearing of Petitioners
MICHAEL SUMMERS, Legislative Assembly of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas), said the Territory had been economically self-sufficient for several decades, except for the cost of self-defence. If the Special Committee visited the Falklands (Malvinas), it would see the substantial economic progress made there as well as the fact that the Territory was not a colony of the United Kingdom, which was responsible only for its foreign affairs and defence. The Territory was satisfied with its constitutional relationship with the United Kingdom and could move away from it, but currently there was no wish to do so, he said, adding that it had taken about 160 years to decolonize from the United Kingdom and the Falklands had no desire to be colonized by any other claimant. Noting that Argentina had sought to harass and bully the Falklands (Malvinas) through a series of restrictions and sanctions, he declared: “We are not a colony of the United Kingdom and we have no intention of becoming a colony of Argentina.”
GAVIN SHORT, Legislative Assembly of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas), said the Territory had the right to freely determine its own political status and guide its own social and economic development. It should be left to freely pursue its own economic development. It was not the United Kingdom that had attempted to impede economic growth, he emphasized, but rather Argentina which had sought to wreck the Territory’s economy and return it to a colonial situation. Through prudent management and planning, the Falklands (Malvinas) had transformed from a failing economy to what was now considered to be the envy of many. It was not true that the United Kingdom was only interested in the Territory for economic gain. Although the Falklands (Malvinas) were not completely independent, they had a huge amount of autonomy, and were voluntarily engaged in a relationship with the United Kingdom. “We are not a colony any more,” he emphasized, while pointing out that the Territory’s inhabitants were pragmatic and realized that due to its very small size, full independence could be very difficult to achieve.
ALEJANDRO BETTS, a fourth-generation resident of the Territory, recalled that Great Britain had unlawfully appropriated the Malvinas Islands in 1833, since which time, the Argentine Republic had insisted on its legitimate right to the Territory and urged its effective return. The principle of self-determination of “peoples” was inadequately invoked in the special and particular case of the Malvinas, he said, emphasizing that Argentina’s sovereignty rights were based on a historical title prior to the British colonization. Argentina had never given up its sovereignty claim and had periodically made clear the illegitimate, violent and arbitrary nature of the British colonial possession of the Malvinas Islands. It was by no means convenient that an “open wound” remained indefinitely in the South Atlantic, constituting a potentially dangerous situation due to the presence of a powerful offensive military installation at Mount Pleasant, on the main eastern Malvina Island. The presence of that base seriously compromised the defence and security of the South American subcontinent and all its citizens, he emphasized.
MARÍA ANGÉLICA VERNET said the history of the Malvinas Islands was linked to her family origins, recalling that Louis Vernet, born in Germany, had adopted Argentina as his home. The Governor of Buenos Aires had granted him a passport and he had travelled to the United States, which had offered the “best start” for the future Governor of the Malvinas. He had returned to the Malvinas to build a trade house, and in 1828, he had written about the festivities to celebrate Argentina’s independence, she said, adding that in the same year, he had presented a request to the Government of Buenos Aires for the establishment of a permanent settlement on the Soledad Islands, as well as for rights of possession and property. A decree signed on 5 January 1828 had allowed Mr. Vernet to create a plan for the islands’ development, and an 1829 decree had established him as Commandant of the Malvinas Islands and the basis for Argentine rights over the Territory. Between 1824 and 1832, Mr. Vernet had established a settlement of people belonging to various nationalities, displaced by an implanted population from the United Kingdom. She called upon the Special Committee to promote dialogue between Argentina and the United Kingdom in order to help find a peaceful solution to the situation, which was an affront to Argentina and the entire South American continent.
Introduction of Draft Resolution
CRISTIÁN BARROS MELET (Chile), introducing the draft resolution on the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) (document A/AC.109/2016/L.7) on behalf of Bolivia, Cuba, Ecuador, Nicaragua and Venezuela, said it covered the main concepts that the United Nations had established 50 years ago as a means to resolve peacefully the sovereignty dispute concerning the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia Islands and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas. The only two parties were Argentina and the United Kingdom, he said, applauding Argentina’s readiness to resume dialogue.
He went on to state that Argentina had made that clear in Davos, Switzerland, on 21 January 2016, and in Washington, D.C., on 1 April, when the President of Argentina and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom had expressed a willingness to continue an open dialogue. At a 23 April meeting of UNASUR, member countries had expressed support for Argentina’s sovereign rights over the Malvinas Islands, Georgia Islands and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas, he recalled. At an OAS meeting on 16 June in the Dominican Republic, member States had appealed to the United Kingdom to renew negotiations with Argentina, recognizing that the issue was a special and particular colonial situation, given the existence of a sovereignty dispute between Argentina and the United Kingdom.
The draft resolution stated that the only way to end that particular situation was through a negotiated solution, he said, calling upon both parties to launch a dialogue in order to find a solution that was in accordance with United Nations resolutions. Joint declarations had been issued in many forums, expressing support for Argentina’s legitimate rights in the sovereignty dispute over the Malvinas Islands. The question was an anachronism that must be ended, he emphasized, expressing regret that negotiations had not been renewed. Chile recognized Argentina’s rights to the Malvinas Islands, Georgia Islands and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas, he said, calling on the parties to resume negotiations as soon as possible.
Statements
SUSANA MALCORRA, Minister for Foreign Relations and Worship of Argentina, said the question of the Malvinas Islands was a special and particular colonial situation among the 17 remaining decolonization cases. It was also a central issue of Argentina’s foreign policy, as outlined in the constitution, which reaffirmed the country’s legitimate and imprescriptible sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia Islands and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas. It established that “[r]ecovering these territories and full sovereignty over them, while respecting the lifestyle of the islanders and in accordance with international law, is a permanent and unrelinquished objective of the Argentine people”.
“The Malvinas Islands have been an integral part of the Argentine territory since the very birth of our nation,” she continued. In 1833, the Territory had been occupied by the United Kingdom, an act of force at the core of the Malvinas question to which Argentina had never consented. It had since claimed restitution of its full sovereignty over the Territory, and the passage of time had not eroded the validity of its claim, she emphasized, while reiterating Argentina’s willingness to resume negotiations with the United Kingdom in order to find a peaceful and definite solution to the sovereignty dispute, as stated in successive General Assembly resolutions.
In that context, she recalled resolution 2065 (XX), adopted by the General Assembly in 1965, which recognized the existence of a sovereignty dispute over the question of the Malvinas Islands and called for its resolution through negotiations between the two parties, taking the interests of the islanders into account. While Argentina strongly supported the principle of self-determination, that principle was not absolute, she stressed. “It cannot violate the territorial integrity of existing States,” which was why it did not apply to the current inhabitants of the Malvinas Islands, who were not recognized as a “people” who could exercise that right under United Nations resolutions.
Unlike traditional cases of colonialism, in which a pre-existing population fell victim to colonial rule, resolutions on the question of the Malvinas Islands did not refer to the principle of self-determination, she noted, recalling that the Assembly had rejected, in 1985, two attempts to incorporate such a reference into the relevant resolution. In 1833, the United Kingdom had expelled the authorities and population of the State that had legitimately been exercising sovereignty, subsequently implanting its own settlers and controlling migration policies. “Not all decolonization cases are solved by applying the principle of self-determination,” she said, stressing that the underlying sovereignty dispute must be solved by Argentina and the United Kingdom.
Since the adoption of resolution 2065 (XX), those two parties had engaged in negotiations, discussing proposals for recovery of the exercise of Argentina’s sovereignty, she recalled. In 1968, both Governments had initiated a memorandum of understanding, stating that the “common objective is to settle definitively and in an amicable manner the dispute over sovereignty”. In 1974, a British proposal of condominium over the Malvinas Islands had been discussed as a step prior to a solution. In 1981, at bilateral talks in New York, it had not been possible to reach agreement, she said, adding that since 1982, the United Kingdom had been uncompromising in its refusal to resume negotiations, despite the Assembly’s repeated calls.
She went on to point out that 26 years had passed since the parties had resumed diplomatic relations through a bilateral agreement, with a sovereignty safeguard clause safeguarding their respective positions on the dispute over the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia Islands and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas. Noting that President Mauricio Macri had expressed his willingness to start a new chapter in relations between Argentina and the United Kingdom, she said the two countries had traditionally enjoyed a “rich and mutually beneficial” relationship, which the President believed could be restored. She recalled that she had recently met with the United Kingdom’s Foreign Secretary for the first such work session in more than 14 years.
Argentina had repeatedly expressed its willingness to solve the matter through negotiations with the United Kingdom, taking the interests of the islanders into account and respecting their lifestyle, she said. Argentina wished to maintain a broad agenda with the United Kingdom, as well as an open and clear dialogue over the sovereignty dispute in order to work towards a resolution of the dispute over the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia Islands and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas.
Within such a framework, Argentina expected that the parties could work in a spirit of cooperation, addressing each issue on the bilateral agenda, she said. It also expected that the United Kingdom would end its unilateral measures in the area under dispute, as required by Assembly resolution 31/49 (1976), since several multilateral and regional forums had condemned those activities for the exploration and exploitation of natural renewable and non-renewable resources carried out in the area. With political will, it was possible to reach a definitive solution to the question of the Malvinas Islands, she said in conclusion.
She went on to acknowledge the Latin American countries that had co-sponsored the draft resolution, as well as Argentina’s allies in the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR), Union of South American Nations (UNASUR), the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), Organization of American States (OAS) as well as the “Group of 77” developing countries and China and other countries that had expressed their support for resolving the dispute through multilateral, regional and bilateral forums, such as the Summit of South American-Arab Countries, the South America-Africa Summit and the Ibero-American Summit.
JAIME HERMIDA CASTILLO (Nicaragua), associating himself with statement to be delivered on behalf of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), said the United Kingdom must not continue to ignore and defy the universal appeal of the international community that had been expressed in many forums, urging the parties to relaunch talks to find a peaceful and lasting solution to the question of the Malvinas Islands. Nicaragua was in solidarity with Argentina’s legitimate sovereignty rights over the Malvinas Islands, the South Georgia Islands and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas, under occupation by the United Kingdom, he said, expressing his delegation’s wish to see them returned to Argentina.
BASHAR JA’AFFARI (Syria) called for stepped up efforts to promote decolonization, which was a humanitarian crime, a violation of the United Nations Charter and of the decolonization Declaration as well as international law. Expressing support for the consensus approval of the draft resolution and reasserting his full support for Argentina with regard to resolving the issue of the Malvinas, he said Syria continued to resolutely defend the right of people to self-determination. At the same time, it would not accept a situation whereby that principle continued to be used as a pretext to justify the sovereignty dispute that had violated Argentina’s territorial integrity since 1833. Syria reaffirmed its support for Argentina’s legitimate rights over the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia Islands and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas.
HORACIO SEVILLA BORJA (Ecuador) said his country once again supported Argentina, which was working to resolve the sovereignty problem and end the colonial status of the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia Islands and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas through peaceful dispute settlement. The draft resolution stated that direct negotiations to find a peaceful solution was the “more advisable” means to end the impasse, he noted, urging both Governments to resume that process. The text also requested the activation of the Secretary-General’s good offices to achieve that objective. Recalling that the foreign ministers of Argentina and the United Kingdom had agreed on the substance of the dispute, he said they had also identified areas of cooperation in the South Atlantic, including on the exploitation of natural resources and connectivity between the South American continent and the islands. The issue was not simply a bilateral one, but rather, a pending matter for the United Nations, he emphasized, suggesting the use of means other than negotiations if results were not achieved within a reasonable time.
The Special Committee then approved the draft resolution without a vote.
SACHA SERGIO LLORENTTY SOLÍZ (Bolivia), associating himself with statements CELAC, UNASUR, and MERCOSUR, said that the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia Islands and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas were an issue for Argentina as well as for Latin American and Caribbean identity and history. International law outlined that the islands belonged to Argentina, he said, pointing out that the United Kingdom had systematically ignored Assembly resolutions. Had “one of our countries” done so, “there would be sanctions, embargos and air exclusion zones”, he said, questioning the validity of the principle of equality among nations. People who had been freed on the basis of such principles were offended. There had been attempts to treat occupiers as a nation, and Bolivia could not accept that the right to self-determination had been abused to preserve a colonial situation. Argentina’s requests for negotiations had been rebuffed, he added.
XU ZHONGSHENG (China) said the question of the Malvinas was one of colonialization, adding that the General Assembly had adopted a number of resolutions calling upon the United Kingdom and Argentina to start negotiations to resolve the issue, in accordance with the universal wishes of the Special Committee and Member States. China had always supported Argentina’s sovereign right over the Malvinas Islands, and supported all efforts to resolve territorial disputes through negotiations, he emphasized.
INGA RHONDA KING (Saint Vincent and the Grenadines), associating herself with CELAC, said the General Assembly had repeatedly acknowledged that the Malvinas situation was not the will of a colonized population under alien control. Rather, it involved competing claims of sovereignty over islands that lay a short distance off the Argentine coast. As an archipelagic State, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines fully understood the political, emotional and existential ties of its citizens with every far-flung island in its archipelago, she said, pointing out that the territorial integrity of, and sovereignty over, each of her country’s islands was not subject to the whims of distant former colonial Powers. Saint Vincent and the Grenadines remained deeply concerned and frustrated with the ongoing failure to achieve progress in the long-standing sovereignty dispute over the Malvinas.
ANA SILVIA RODRÍGUEZ ABASCAL (Cuba), associating herself with CELAC, said her country’s support for Argentina was a matter of principle. Cuba strongly opposed the British occupation of part of Argentine soil and the expulsion of the legitimate Argentine inhabitants who had been living there. Some 50 years ago, the General Assembly had adopted its first resolution specifically addressing the situation of the Malvinas Islands, although five decades later, today, there was still not a definitive solution to the ongoing sovereignty dispute. The question of the Malvinas was a matter of colonialism and involved a sovereignty dispute between Argentina and the United Kingdom, which must be resolved through negotiations involving both States, taking into account the United Nations Charter. Despite repeated calls by the international community, the United Kingdom continued to refuse to resume dialogue with Argentina, she said.
RAFAEL DARÍO RAMÍREZ CARREÑO (Venezuela), speaking on behalf of UNASUR, said the Heads of State of that group had reiterated their support for Argentina’s legitimate sovereign rights over the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia Islands and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas. Highlighting Argentina’s readiness to engage in negotiations to find a peaceful solution to the anachronistic situation, he urged the parties to abstain from any decision involving unilateral changes to the current situation. UNASUR had addressed the United Kingdom’s military activities on the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia Islands and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas in 2012, when it had stressed that that such a presence contravened the region’s policy that sought a peaceful solution to the sovereignty dispute.
Rejecting what the United Kingdom described as a referendum, he said that activity neither changed the nature of the question nor ended the sovereignty dispute, the origins and colonial nature of which could not be ignored. Resolution 3149 (1976) called on the parties to abstain from decisions that changed the situation during efforts to resolve the sovereignty dispute, and it should be implemented. He expressed support for Argentina’s legitimate claims to the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia Islands, South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas, calling on the United Kingdom to renew negotiations with that country to peacefully resolve the dispute.
Ms. MALCORRA thanked the Special Committee for having approved the draft resolution, expressing hope that, through creative solutions, her country would not need to appear before it again seeking to resolve the question.
ACHSANUL HABIB (Indonesia), welcoming the Special Committee’s focus on the remaining Non-Self-Governing Territories on the United Nations list, expressed his country’s readiness to provide the necessary support. Acknowledging the unique situation of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas), he emphasized the importance of finding a mutually acceptable solution. To that end, he encouraged Argentina and the United Kingdom to resume negotiations.
PETR V. ILIICHEV (Russian Federation) expressed hope that Argentina and the United Kingdom would soon resume negotiations to find a peaceful solution to the sovereignty dispute. While doing so, it was essential to pay close attention to previous resolutions and to the United Nations Charter, he said while stressing that Member States must fulfil their international commitments.
JOSÉ BLANCO CONDE (Dominican Republic) speaking on behalf of CELAC, said that since its founding, the Community had reiterated its strong support for Argentina’s legitimate rights with regard to the question of the Malvinas Islands. Recalling that CELAC Heads of State and Government had adopted the “Special Declaration on the Question of the Malvinas Islands” on 27 January 2016, during a summit held in Quito, Ecuador, he said that in that statement, they had expressed the strongest support for the resumption of negotiations aimed at finding, as soon as possible, a peaceful and definitive solution to the sovereignty dispute over the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia Islands and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas. The statement further reiterated the importance of observing General Assembly resolution 31/49 (1976), which called on both parties to refrain from taking decisions entailing the introduction of unilateral modifications to the situation.
ELBIO ROSSELLI (Uruguay), speaking on behalf of MERCOSUR, said that on numerous occasions, the group’s Heads of State and Government had paid due attention to the question of the Malvinas Islands and had demonstrated its support for Argentina’s legitimate rights in the sovereignty dispute. Unilateral measures were not compatible with the wishes of the international community for a peaceful resolution of the question of the Malvinas Islands. He noted the regional interest in having the prolonged sovereignty dispute between Argentina and the United Kingdom over the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia Islands and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas resolved in accordance with the relevant General Assembly resolutions.
Speaking in his national capacity and associating himself with CELAC, he noted that the Special Committee held a session devoted to the question of the Malvinas Islands every year. The sessions were a reaffirmation of belief in and commitment to Argentina’s legitimate rights over the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia Islands and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas, for historic, legal and geographic reasons. “The Malvinas are Argentinian”, he emphasized.
JOSÉ ALBERTO ANTONIO SANDOVAL COJULÚN (Guatemala) expressed his country’s continuing support for Argentina’s sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia Islands and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas. Drawing attention to their unique characteristics, he noted that the Malvinas had been occupied since 1833 through a systematic colonial policy and expressed hope that Argentina and the United Kingdom would resume negotiations for a peaceful resolution of the sovereignty dispute.
CARLOS SERGIO SOBRAL DUARTE (Brazil), associating himself with CELAC, described the issue as a colonial problem, and reiterated his country’s support for principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity. Emphasizing that Argentina and the United Kingdom must return to the negotiation table, he warned against the introduction of changes in the disputed area, calling upon the United Kingdom to put an end to the exploration for natural resources and stressing that the South Atlantic was a zone of peace.
JUAN SANDOVAL MENDIOLEA (Mexico), associating himself with CELAC, emphasized the importance of reaching a peaceful, fair, definitive and mutually-acceptable resolution of the question of the Malvinas Islands. Recalling that Heads of State and Government of Latin American countries had met recently in Vera Cruz, Mexico, he said they had reaffirmed the need for the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom to resume negotiations as soon as possible to find a quick resolution of the question of sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia Islands and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas. Furthermore, they had expressed concern about unilateral exploration and exploitation of renewable and non-renewable resources that would change the situation of the Malvinas.
JUAN CARLOS MENDOZA-GARCÍA (Costa Rica), associating himself with CELAC, said his country would not tire of urging the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom to renew negotiations over the long-standing question of the Malvinas Islands, with a view to finding a peaceful and definitive solution, based on the relevant General Assembly and the Special Committee. Urging the parties to refrain from activities that would lead to unilateral changes in the Territory, he said they should renew negotiations as soon as possible, adding that Costa Rica supported open and frank dialogue, based on substantive discussions.
CARLOS ARTURO MORALES LÓPEZ (Colombia) thanked delegates for having applauded the signing of a ceasefire today in Havana, Cuba, today declaring: “It is a clear demonstration that, through dialogue, it is possible to resolve differences.” Associating himself with CELAC, UNASUR and MERCOSUR, he reaffirmed the importance of a peaceful, negotiated solution to end the special particular colonial matter that recognized the existence of a sovereignty dispute between Argentina and United Kingdom. Urging the parties to resume negotiations as soon as possible, he expressed support for using the Secretary-General’s good offices to help the parties ensure compliance with the relevant Assembly resolutions, especially resolution 2065 (XX), the first to have referred to the Malvinas.
JOSÉ DE JESÚS MARTÍNEZ (Panama), associating himself with CELAC, reiterated his support for Argentina’s rights over the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia Islands and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas, noting that resolution 2065 (XX) recognized the colonial situation on the Malvinas Islands and recommended a solution to the dispute through negotiations between Argentina and the United Kingdom. Panama supported Argentina’s willingness to engage in dialogue, he said, citing in that context the Torrijos–Carter Treaty by which his country had succeeded in its generational struggle to gain the full return of the inter-ocean canal. Indeed, dialogue was the only way to resolve disputes among States, he emphasized, urging both parties to engage.
FRANCISCO TENYA HASEGAWA (Peru), associating himself with CELAC, UNASUR and MERCOSOUR, said his country had historically supported Argentina’s legitimate rights of sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia Islands and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas. Peru had demonstrated its support on many different occasions and through declarations adopted in various forums, including regional mechanisms and the United Nations. He urged the two parties to refrain from actions that could result in unilateral changes in the situation of the Malvinas, and emphasized that there was no possible solution to the question of the Malvinas other than negotiations between the concerned parties.
JULIA ANSELMINA MACIEL GONZÁLEZ (Paraguay), associating herself with CELAC, UNASUR and MERCOSOUR, emphasized the need for the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom to resume, as soon as possible, negotiations on the long-standing sovereignty dispute concerning the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia Islands and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas, with a view to finding a peaceful solution.
DULCE SÁNCHEZ (Honduras) reaffirmed Argentina’s sovereign right over the Malvinas Islands, South Georgia Islands and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas, recalling that foreign ministers at the thirty-ninth annual meeting of the Group of 77 and China had adopted a document referring to the fiftieth anniversary of resolution 2065 (XX). There was need for Argentina and the United Kingdom to resume negotiations, in accordance with the United Nations Charter and relevant Assembly resolutions, in order to find a peaceful solution to the sovereignty dispute as soon as possible. There was also need to refrain from decisions that would bring about unilateral changes to the situation during the process recommended by the Assembly, she said, adding that the foreign ministers had also recognized Argentina’s right to take judicial actions, in accordance with international law, against unauthorized hydrocarbon-related exploration and exploitation in the area.
RUBÉN IGNACIO ZAMORA RIVAS (El Salvador) said resolution 2065 (XX) called on the parties to resolve the dispute through dialogue and negotiation, an appeal often repeated, notably in the 13 resolutions approved by the Special Committee. He expressed appreciation for the fact that the Argentine and United Kingdom positions had moved closer, urging both Governments to promote strong ties and seek a just, peaceful and lasting solution, in accordance with the resolutions of the Assembly and regional organizations. He said that during a 2014 meeting of energy ministers in El Salvador, participants had expressed support for Argentina’s position on the exploration and exploitation of natural resources on its continental shelf. Both Governments should resume negotiations on the sovereignty dispute as soon as possible, while ensuring respect for international law, including the principle of territorial integrity, and the legal and historical rights of those on the archipelago that belonged to Argentina.
__________
* A dispute exists between the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom concerning sovereignty over the Falkland Islands (Malvinas).