Britain cannot defend Falklands: Admiral

[Knaur]

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/...ose-Falklands-

TASK FORCE CHIEF WARNS WE COULD LOSE FALKLANDS



Admiral Woodward said Britain can do “precisely nothing” to prevent Argentina retaking the islands



Tuesday June 14,2011

By John Ingham Defence Editor

BRITAIN’S grip on the Falklands is under severe threat from defence cuts and United States pressure to strike a deal with Argentina, a former top commander claimed yesterday.


Admiral Sir John “Sandy” Woodward, who led the naval Task Force in the 1982 Falklands War, said Britain can do “precisely nothing” to prevent Argentina retaking the islands.
In a public letter he insisted that the wishes of the Falkland Islanders “are more deserving of our continued support than the wretched citizens of Afghanistan and Libya”.
But he warns that President Barack Obama is pushing for United Nations-led negotiations between Britain and Argentina over sovereignty of the islands even though the residents are proudly British.
Admiral Woodward, 79, said: “The islands are already being called Malvinas by the United States. This tells us which way the wind is blowing.”
He said the military has been weakened by the latest Ministry of Defence cuts, which have cost the Navy aircraft carriers and Harrier jump jets, which spearheaded the Falklands War.

The islands are already being called Malvinas by the United States

Admiral Woodward



The Admiral wrote: “With our land and air forces over-committed in Afghanistan and Libya, with the defence budget shrinking, our submarine force more than halved, our destroyer and frigate force halved, our carrier force more than halved in terms of deck availability and completely discarded in terms of fixed-wing assets, it appears we can do nothing other than accede to US pressure. Surely I and some 25,000 others did not fight a nasty little war for this.”
Falklands veteran Commander John Muxworthy, of the UK National Defence Association, added: “We could not retake the Falklands. Argentina has only to seize its moment for an attack.
“The decimation of the Navy has made us impotent and put the security of the nation at risk.”

But the MoD said the Falklands are much better defended than in 1982 with four Typhoons at a purpose-built military airfield plus about 1,000 troops.
A spokesman added: “Claims the Falklands could be taken without a fight are completely without substance. The garrison is much larger in scale and has a greater capability than in 1982.”

[WABA]

Admiral Woodward said Britain can do “precisely nothing” to prevent Argentina retaking the islands


Its very interesting how desperate the cut back in ship numbers which drastically reduces their fighting ability has forced Royal Navy admirals, both serving and retired, to come out very publically to warn the British public of the dangers facing British overseas dependants such as the Falkland Islands.

However, the Argentilian armed forces really DON'T have the capacity to sucessfully invade the Falklands.

The Falklands are virtually a rock solid unsinkable aircraft carrier, I think the RAF keeps a small number of Typoon fighters their which are far superior to any fighter/bomber the Argentine airforce has, and the RAF has the ability to fly in another squadron virtually overnight, plus an amphibious attack is the only way Argentine would need to do to conquer the Falklands, they don't have to ships capable of carrying out the opposed landing, AND the R.N. has over 6 nuclear SSN subs they can put down there within a week, including the brand new Astute class.

Plus, I don't really think the Argentinian's would be stupid enough to start a war, which they won't win, and can't afford, nor do they have the political will.

[SpacemanSpiff]

Originally Posted by WABA

The Falklands are virtually a rock solid unsinkable aircraft carrier, I think the RAF keeps a small number of Typoon fighters their which are far superior to any fighter/bomber the Argentine airforce has, and the RAF has the ability to fly in another squadron virtually overnight, plus an amphibious attack is the only way Argentine would need to do to conquer the Falklands, they don't have to ships capable of carrying out the opposed landing, AND the R.N. has over 6 nuclear SSN subs they can put down there within a week, including the brand new Astute class.

Plus, I don't really think the Argentinian's would be stupid enough to start a war, which they won't win, and can't afford, nor do they have the political will.

I agree that a squadron or two of modern aircraft should be able to deter or stop an invasion. As to whether Britain will maintain this capability in Falklands may be another matter.

[Knaur]

RN was a proud expeditionary force for hundreds' of years, the fact that the defence of Falklands, for ex., is based on Argie's incapability rather than Britain's overwhelming superiority is a sign for times to come.

Insofar as the discussion is limited to a F-lands military scenario , I agree, if the Argie's couldn't do anything when they caught UK by surprise, they sure wouldn't be able to do anything when Brits are actually prepared for a showdown. This sort of thing is more worrying, specially considering the U/K govt. has shown a considerable lack of spine in the previous decade -

President Barack Obama is pushing for United Nations-led negotiations between Britain and Argentina over sovereignty of the islands even though the residents are proudly British.
Admiral Woodward, 79, said: “The islands are already being called Malvinas by the United States. This tells us which way the wind is blowing.”

[WABA]

President Barack Obama is pushing for United Nations-led negotiations between Britain and Argentina over sovereignty of the islands even though the residents are proudly British.
Admiral Woodward, 79, said: “The islands are already being called Malvinas by the United States. This tells us which way the wind is blowing.”
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Good post Knaur.

Motor mouth Obama never ceases to amaze with his childish left wing rants, he needs to put his mind in to gear before he puts his mouth in to motion.

If he wants to big note himself on the World stage with his 'rights of return' of 'territories' I would be more impressed if he took on Russia - they should be told by Obama to hand back the 4 Kuril Island they not on stole from Japan, and also deported ALL their Japanese citizens, and also hand back Kaliningrad ( Konigsberg ) back to Germany/East Prussia, and I'm sure Obama would also side with Georgia's over their lost land areas, then he could take on China over the illegal invasion and annexation of Tibet and its now demands on ALL the the South Chinese seas, then Indonesia for its annexation of West Iria ( West New Guinea).

Oops, sorry their not Western democracies, its o.k. for them to write their own set of rules. LOL

Then he could also hand back Texas to Mexico. LOVL

By the way I don't blame any of the British admirals for using any possible future threats to point out to the British public the folly of its British politicians kneecaping its military defence capabilities.

[Knaur]

Originally Posted by WABA

By the way I don't blame any of the British admirals for using any possible future threats to point out to the British public the folly of its British politicians kneecaping its military defence capabilities.

I agree, the fact that the native Malvinase mainlanders suck even more at defence preparedness than they did at the time of the war is undeniable, that Britain is now in a better pos. wrt defensive posturing is also true. However, how long Britain will be able to maintain this capability INDEPENDENTLY of its allies is also a question. The Britons have no aircraft carrier at the moment, not only for this type of ops but also for the Libyan situation for ex., or any other scenario where Britain's independent power projection is needed (a repeat of Suez Canal crisis comes to mind). More disturbing in its nature was another comment made by a Commander in the article, a more accurate assessment that -

Falklands veteran Commander John Muxworthy, of the UK National Defence Association, added: “We could not retake the Falklands. Argentina has only to seize its moment for an attack.

While capturing the Islands is beyond Argie's current capability, RE-Taking them were they to be captured is also beyond British Forces' current capability in the region.

[heraldoflord]

Obama is selling out Israel. Why would he be any different to Britain. The Brits are foolish to follow this liar in the White House.

[Knaur]

Originally Posted by heraldoflord

Obama is selling out Israel. Why would he be any different to Britain. The Brits are foolish to follow this liar in the White House.

That is a part of the problem but so is years of focus on social spending while neglecting defence by both Labour and Tories, right since post-Thatcher years.

[Knaur]

Bot Alert!

[Knaur]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...d-Islands.html

Argentina has launched a naval campaign to isolate the Falkland Islands that has seen it detain Spanish fishing vessels on suspicion of breaking the country’s “blockade” of the seas around the British territories.

The Duke of cambridge is to be deployed to the Falklands next February as part of a routine training duties Photo: John Stillwell/PA Wire






By Fergus MacErlean

8:28PM GMT 05 Dec 2011


Argentine patrol vessels have boarded 12 Spanish boats, operating under fishing licences issued by the Falkland Islands, for operating “illegally” in disputed waters in recent weeks.

Argentine patrol commanders carrying out interceptions near the South American coast told Spanish captains they were in violation of Argentina’s “legal” blockade of sea channels to the Falklands.

The warning has been backed up in a letter to Aetinape, the Spanish fishing vessels association from the Argentine embassy in Madrid warning boats in the area that “Falklands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands and adjoining maritime spaces are an integral part of the Argentine territory.”

The confrontation strategy targetting foreign boats marks an escalation of tensions in seas that Duke of Cambridge, a Flight Lieutenant with the RAF, is set to patrol during a tour of duty next year.

The Duke is to be deployed to the Falklands next February as part of a routine training duties. Commanders would face the dilemma of despatching the Royal to take part in an operations to monitor or contain the Argentine challenge.

President Cristina Kirchner has adopted a steadily more beligerent stance towards Britain’s South Atlantic possessions.
A newly formed gathering of South American nations meeting in Venezeula backed Argentina’s sovereignty demands at the weekend.
Argentina’s claim over the Falklands was backed by a newly formed block of South American and Caribbean countries, CELAC, on Saturday with unanimous approval. Mrs Kirchner used the last UN General Assembly meeting to put Argentina’s claims of sovereignty over the Falklands on a par with Palestinian claims to statehood.
But it is the Falklands economic lifeline that has been most affected by Argentinian manoeurving.
It announced permits were required by all ships using Argentine waters en route to the Falklands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands, all of which are UK controlled.
Argentina declared vessels were “operating illegally” in the South Atlantic if they did not request permission to enter Argentine waters. The authorities declared their willingness “to put an end to all those illegal fishing activities”.
The vessels, from Galicia, were boarded as they were making their way across the huge Rio de la Plata estuary, which separates Argentina and Uruguay, before off-loading their catches in Montevideo, Uruguay.
Mrs Kirchner, 58, has also threatened to suspend a vital Falklands air link — the only one off the islands — which was established in a 1999 deal between the UK and Argentina unless Britain entered into talks leading to sovereignty negotiations.
A Foreign Office spokesman said Britain had lodged an official complaint about the Argentine action. “We are aware that Argentina has recently challenged vessels transiting between the Falklands and the port of Montevideo,” the spokesman said. “The UK has protested to Argentina. We consider that it is not compliant with international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
Mike Summers, a member of the Falkland Islands legislative assembly, said Argentina was trying to cut the Islands off from the South American mainland. “The Falkland Islands Government has no doubt about its right to issue licenses to foreign companies to fish in its waters,” he said. “There have been other difficulties in recent months with Falklands flagged vessels seeking to use South American ports; Argentina seeks to prevail on its neighbours to implement its foreign policy for it, by denying access to their ports for vessels doing business in the Falklands.”

[Knaur]

This might go some way in explaining Argentina's new found assertiveness -

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011...kland-dispute/

The Obama administration once again has sided with Argentina -- and by default, against Britain -- in the ongoing dispute over the island chain at the center of a 1982 war.
In a move one British conservative analyst called "hugely insulting to Britain," the Organization of American States earlier this week adopted a declaration calling for negotiations between the United Kingdom and Argentina over the "sovereignty" of the Falkland Islands. While the U.S. delegation did not speak in support of the measure, it ultimately joined a consensus adopting it.

However, Britain does not consider the sovereignty in question. After the British fended off an Argentine invasion of the nearby islands in 1982 -- a war in which hundreds died on both sides -- the government continues to assert control over the Falklands and grant islanders British citizenship.
Britain has resisted international calls for the two nations to negotiate the issue -- which makes the U.S. position all the more peculiar.
Noting that President Obama just returned from a visit to London where he cited the U.S.-U.K. "special relationship," Heritage Foundation analyst Nile Gardiner said the U.S. should at least stay neutral on the Falkland issue.
"British sovereignty over the islands is not an issue for negotiation. ... This is a slap in the face for America's closest friend and ally," he said, accusing the administration of siding with Venezuela and others against its friend.
"This is a bizarre foreign policy," he added. Gardiner is the director of the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom, whose namesake was prime minister during the Falklands War.
The Obama administration made clear in early 2010 that it would endorse calls for talks over the islands. At a Buenos Aires news conference with Argentina's president in March 2010, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said she agreed with Argentina that the two nations should "sit down and resolve the issues between them."
From there, the U.S. implicitly backed an OAS document calling for talks last June and again Tuesday at a conference in El Salvador. The latest declaration, which refers to the islands as the Malvinas Islands, calls for exploring "all possible avenues towards a peaceful settlement of the dispute" and resuming sovereignty negotiations "as soon as possible."
It was accompanied by some tough words toward Britain. In an OAS press release, Argentine foreign minister Hector Timerman said: "Unfortunately, Britain still declines to resume bilateral dialogue, in violation not only of repeated resolutions of the United Nations and this Organization." Timerman called for a "peaceful settlement to the dispute."
In the wake of the adoption, the British government quietly asserted its sovereignty over the Falkland Islands while downplaying the U.S. position -- stressing that the Obama administration continues to recognize British control of the territory.
"The longstanding U.S. position is unchanged. The U.S. recognizes the U.K.'s administration of the Falkland Islands," a British Embassy representative told FoxNews.com. "We're in regular touch with the U.S. on this issue, as on so many issues, and we expect that dialogue to continue."
The government on the Falkland Islands expressed disappointment with the OAS declaration. According to a report in MercoPress, Falkland officials issued a statement saying they "regret that this issue should once again be raised on the regional stage" and support the standing British position that "the issue of sovereignty is non-negotiable."

That was some months ago, since then Obama has been steadily cosying up to the Argies' at UK's expense.

[Knaur]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...7NL21Q20111221

By Philip Baillie
LONDON | Wed Dec 21, 2011 11:03am EST

Dec 21 (Reuters) - Britain has condemned a move to ban fishing boats flying the Falkland Islands flag from many South American ports - a step analysts say is part of Argentina's intensifying campaign to undermine Britain's hold on the islands.
The South American trading bloc Mercosur announced the ban at a summit in the Uruguayan capital Montevideo on Tuesday.
"We are very concerned by this latest Argentine attempt to isolate the Falkland Islands people and damage their livelihoods, for which there is no justification," a British foreign office statement said on Wednesday.
Falklands-flagged ships will not be allowed to dock at ports in Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay. The ban will not include British-flagged civilian ships that supply the islands, although it will apply to military vessels.
Robert Spink, president of the archipelago's chamber of commerce, told Reuters by phone the ban would affect 20 fishing vessels that fly the Falklands flag, 19 of which jointly operate with Spanish licences.
Britain has controlled the islands since 1833 and fought a two-month war with Argentina over the territory it claims and calls the Malvinas in 1982, resulting in the deaths of 255 British and 649 Argentine soldiers.
Argentina objects to plans by British oil explorer Rockhopper to develop the Sea Lion well, the first oil discovery in the islands.
But Spink said the Mercosur decision would not have any impact on oil exploration in the area.
"Exploration companies such as Rockhopper operate from the UK and are not involved with South American countries so this decision will not have any effect," he said.
"Perhaps the only effect is one of punishment by Argentina of the 3,000 inhabitants of the Falkland Islands," he added.
Rockhopper declined to comment.
"BETWEEN SPAT AND ESCALATION"
Research Fellow George Grant at the British-based think-tank the Henry Jackson Society said: "I think the Mercosur decision to ban Falkland flags is somewhere between a spat and a more serious escalation.
"This latest move is part of a long-running and increasingly widening campaign, specifically to other South American states, of delegitimising the UK's claim to the Falkland Islands."
He said there was no risk of military action, but expected to see further joint action by South American countries in the area to put pressure on the UK's claim to the archipelago.
Celia Szusterman, director of the Latin America programme at the British-based research body Institute for Statecraft, told the BBC the latest dispute was connected with the approach of the 30th anniversary of the Falklands War.
"Argentina has for the past eight years been trying to pursue a very aggressive diplomatic offensive for the Falklands and to recover what they call the Malvinas and Argentina is now temporary chair of the Mercosur regional arrangement," she said. (Editing by Andrew Roche)

[Knaur]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politic...5875-23652647/

David Cameron's cuts have left Britain without an aircraft carrier


THE Navy was last night on standby as a South American blockade of the Falklands sparked fears *that Argentina is preparing a fresh bid to take control of the islands.
Military chiefs signalled Britain was ready to step in after several countries agreed to ban boats from the South Atlantic outpost from docking at their ports.
The move, by the Mercosur trading bloc of Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay, was branded provocative and unjustified.
Advertisement >>



There are fears Argentina is making a move knowing David Cameron’s defence cuts have left Britain without an aircraft carrier. Former head of the Navy Admiral Lord West said the UK would do all it could to protect the islands.
He added: “Argentina is becoming more and more aggressive. Far from trying to have better relationships with the Falkland islanders they are becoming very confrontational.”
An MoD spokesman said: “There isn’t deemed to be a credible threat at the moment but if *intelligence suggests there was then *preparations would be made.”
The Mercosur trade ban – called to *represent solidarity with Argentina over its claim to sovereignty of the islands – will affect mostly fishing boats flying the *Falklands flag.
But there are fears it could lead to a full economic blockade of the islands.
The Foreign Office was in urgent *discussions with countries in the region. A spokesman said: “We are very concerned by this latest Argentine attempt to isolate the Falklands people and damage their *livelihoods.
"No one should doubt our determination to protect the islanders’ right to determine their own political future.”
Falklands Chamber of Commerce *president Roger Spink called for EU action to stop the ban. He added: “If we were Palestine, the European Union would be up in arms.”
Former Foreign Office minister Denis MacShane said: “South America knows Britain has fewer friends than ever because of David Cameron’s *isolationist approach in Europe. And thanks to defence cuts maritime power has been fatally weakened.”
Britain repelled a Falklands invasion by Argentina in 1982 and still has a military presence on the islands. Prince William will be stationed there in February as an RAF rescue pilot, a move that Argentina branded provocative.

[Knaur]

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...lands-ships.do

A nuclear submarine should be used to show Britain's determination to protect the Falklands following "aggressive" moves by Argentina, a former head of the Navy urged today.
Lord West also suggested carrying out a military exercise rehearsing reinforcing the South Atlantic islands to leave Buenos Aires in no doubt that the UK is prepared to defend them despite military cutbacks.
The peer branded a new agreement by Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay to ban ships flying the Falklands flag from their ports as "outrageous behaviour".
Condemning Argentina, Lord West told the Standard: "They are basically becoming more and more aggressive. I find that very worrying.
"Far from trying to settle in a grown-up way and having better and better relationships with the Falkland islanders, they are upping the ante and becoming very confrontational."
Lord West does not believe Buenos Aires will order another invasion nor that the UK should despatch more ships, planes or troops. But he suggested that a nuclear submarine patrolling the area should "stick its mast up" to signal Britain still has the military power and intention to safeguard the islands. "When one is there, we should make a point of making it clear that it is there," said the former First Sea Lord, who commanded HMS Ardent on which 22 crew were killed when it was hit by Argentinian planes in the Falklands conflict nearly 30 years ago.
The Foreign Office also condemned the port restriction deal by the South American trading bloc, Mercosur, which was agreed at a summit in the Uruguayan capital Montevideo.
"We are very concerned by this latest Argentine attempt to isolate the Falkland Islands people and damage their livelihoods, for which there is no justification," said a Foreign Office spokeswoman. "No one should doubt our determination to protect the Falkland islanders' right to determine their own political future."
British officials are still examining the practical impact of the Mercosur statement which is said to "mirror the language" used by the Union of South American Nations last year.
The dispute involves the fishing trade and a vast area of potentially mineral-rich South Atlantic waters. It has created a fresh diplomatic headache for Britain before the 30th anniversary next year of the recapturing of the islands following the Argentinian invasion. Roger Spink, president of the Falklands Chamber of Commerce, said they felt increasingly under blockade. He told the BBC: "If we were Palestine, the European Union would be up in arms."

[Angry Warthog]

Think of it this way. During the Falklands War, the British task force had 93 ships total (Though it did include the Royal Fleet Auxiliary and modified civilian ships). Today, the Royal Navy, including the RFA, has 98 ships. Lord Nelson must be turning in his grave.

[WABA]

February 06, 2012


Britain plays down Falkland Islands moves

• by: From correspondents in London
• From: AFP
• February 06, 2012 7:22AM

BRITAIN has sought to play down military moves around the Falkland Islands, as the foreign minister refused to comment on reports it has moved a nuclear submarine to the tense South Atlantic.

Britain's Daily Mail newspaper on Saturday claimed Prime Minister David Cameron has personally approved plans to send one of the Royal Navy's most advanced Trafalgar-class nuclear submarines to the disputed archipelago.

Speaking on Sky News overnight, Foreign Secretary William Hague declined to confirm or deny the deployment.
"We don't normally make any comment on the deployment of our submarines," he said. "But our naval vessels regularly visit the South Atlantic."

Argentina's defence minister, Arturo Puricelli, on Saturday described the reported deployment as an "unnecessary display of firepower".

Tension has soared between the two countries in recent weeks as the thirtieth anniversary of a brief but violent war over the windswept islands approaches.


Related Coverage

• Argentina furious at Prince William The Daily Telegraph, 1 hour ago
• Riotous response to Prince William The Daily Telegraph, 1 day ago
• Prince's mission raises tensions Adelaide Now, 1 day ago
• Prince William lands on Falkland Islands The Daily Telegraph, 1 day ago
• Prince William deploys to the Falklands The Australian, 2 days ago

Prince William, the second in line to the British throne, this week began a six-week mission with the Royal Air Force (RAF) in the Falklands, a move that has infuriated Argentina.
The 29-year-old has been sent to the archipelago as part of his duties as an RAF Sea King helicopter pilot, a deployment Britain says is routine but Argentina has slammed as a "provocation".

Britain has further ratcheted tensions by announcing that it is to send HMS Dauntless, a state-of-the-art warship, to the South Atlantic.

Mr Hague overnight dismissed the deployments as "entirely routine military movements".
"Prince William is also on a routine deployment that is part of his job," he added. "We will resist the diplomatic efforts of Argentina to raise the temperature on this."

The Falklands, known as Las Malvinas in Spanish, have been held by Britain since 1833 but are also claimed by Argentina.

On April 2, 1982, the then-ruling junta in Argentina invaded the Falklands, sparking a 74-day war with Britain that cost the lives of 649 Argentine and 255 British troops.

London retained control and has vowed to defend the islands as long as the inhabitants want to be part of Britain.

[Knaur]

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/no-falkland...014841447.html

David Cameron has marked the 30th anniversary of the invasion of the Falklands by saying Britain will continue to protect the islanders' right to choose their future.

Three decades after Argentinian troops seized Port Stanley, the capital, the Prime Minister paid tribute to the task force sent by Margaret Thatcher to defend the islands.

Recent months have seen tensions rising between London and Buenos Aires , with President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner's government loudly asserting its sovereignty claim to Las Malvinas, as it calls the archipelago.
In a gesture of reconciliation, Mr Cameron said in a statement to mark the occasion that the anniversary should be a day to remember the 649 Argentinians who died in the conflict as well as the 255 British armed forces personnel who were killed.
But he said Britain would not compromise on the islanders' right to self-determination.

"Thirty years ago today the people of the Falkland Islands suffered an act of aggression that sought to rob them of their freedom and their way of life," he said.
"Today is a day for commemoration and reflection: a day to remember all those who lost their lives in the conflict - the members of our Armed Forces, as well as the Argentinian personnel who died.
"Today, we salute the heroism of the Task Force which set sail to free the islands.
"We are rightly proud of the role Britain played in righting a profound wrong. And the people of the Falkland Islands can be justly proud of the prosperous and secure future they have built for their islands since 1982.
"Britain remains staunchly committed to upholding the right of the Falkland Islanders, and of the Falkland Islanders alone, to determine their own future.

"That was the fundamental principle that was at stake 30 years ago: and that is the principle which we solemnly re-affirm today."


The 74-day conflict ended with a ceasefire and the surrender of an Argentinian commander at Port Stanley on June 14, 1982.
A service to mark the 30th anniversary is being held at the National Arboretum in Staffordshire.

Umm, agreed with the rest but since when did commemoration events start honouring hostile enemy forces and equating them with one's own martyrs?!

[WABA]

• Falklands will hold referendum on whether to remain British territory

Minister of State Jeremy Browne at the Legislative Assembly in Stanley, Falkland Islands yesterday.

By TOM PETERKIN
Published on Wednesday 13 June 2012 00:00


The Falkland Islands is to hold a referendum on its “political status” – hoping to finally bring an end to the bitter dispute with Argentina over the islands’ sovereignty, the government there has announced.

Almost exactly 30 years after the islands were liberated by UK troops from an invading Argentinian army, the islanders are to be asked to vote on its sovereign status – in a move that should underline their desire to remain a British territory.
Despite the successful British military campaign, Buenos Aires continues to set its sights on claiming the islands it calls Las Malvinas.
But the Falkland Islands government said it hopes a referendum will send a firm message to Argentinian president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner that islanders want to remain British.
The Falkland Islands are 7,780 miles from the UK, but have been under British control since 1833 – apart from the 74 days of Argentinian occupation in 1982.
Gavin Short, chairman of the Falklands’ Legislative Assembly, said: “We are holding this referendum not because we have any doubts about who we are and what future we want, but to show the world just how certain we are about it.
“I have no doubt that the people of the Falklands wish for the islands to remain a self-governing overseas territory of the United Kingdom.
“We certainly have no desire to be ruled by the government in Buenos Aires, a fact that is immediately obvious to anyone who has visited the islands and heard our views. But we are aware that not everybody is able to come to these beautiful islands and see this reality for themselves.”
He added: “The Argentine government deploys misleading rhetoric that wrongly implies that we have no strong views or even that we are being held hostage by the UK military. This is simply absurd.”
Just over half of the 3,000 people living in the Falklands are on the electoral roll. The poll will be organised by the Falkland Islands government and will take place in the first half of next year.
Mr Short said: “We have thought carefully about how to convey a strong message to the outside world that expresses the views of the Falklands people in a clear, democratic and incontestable way.
“So we have decided, with the full support of the British Government, to hold a referendum on the Falkland Islands to eliminate any possible doubt about our wishes.”
The Falklands government said it intends to invite international observers to verify the outcome of the referendum, details of which will be announced in the coming weeks.
Tension over the islands’ identity has heightened recently. Last week Ms de Kirchner announced that Buenos Aires would be launching criminal proceedings against UK oil firms that are operating off the Falklands’ coastline, saying they were working illegally.
Britain has accused Argentina of implementing a number of economic blockades on the small, isolated islands and of acting in a “domineering way”. British officials are adamant that there will be no change in the UK’s sovereignty of the islands unless and until the Falklanders themselves wish it.
David Cameron said Britain would “respect and defend” the outcome of the referendum.
“I have always said that it is up to the Falkland islanders themselves to choose whether they want to be British,” he said.

[ishmael]

The once mighty Britannia! Those British officered the Arab Legion in 1948.
Maybe the treatment of Jews during mandate and the refusal to aid in destruction of camps during WW2 has come to call. As many Christians says, God reward the helpers of the chosen people and punishes the enemies.

[Knaur]

I don't think the refrendum will change the situation anyway. I expect Falklanders to vote overwhelmingly in support of Britain.