The Question of Malvinas and the Bicentennial

7/28/2019 The Question of Malvinas and the Bicentennial

1/281

1


2/281

The Question of Malvinas and the Bicentennial

2

Translated byThe Translations Directorate of theLibrary of the National CongressTranslators: Seipel Renata, Izetta Nora,Testa Claudia, Suaya Carola, Llull Gabriela

The Question of Malvinas and the Bicentennial (compiled by: AgustnM. Romero). Buenos Aires: Malvinas Parliamentary ObservatoryCommittee, Honorable House of Deputies of the Nation.

152 p. ; 30 cm.

ISBN 978-950-691-076-1.

1. Malvinas War. 2. Argentina Relationships with Great Britain. 3.Malvinas (Islands, Argentina) History. 4. Argentina Foreign Affairs. 5.Sovereignty Malvinas (Islands, Argentina). I. Romero, Agustn M., comp.II. Argentina. Congress. House of Deputies. Malvinas ParliamentaryObservatory Committee, ed. III. Library of the National Congress(Argentina), ed.

Director: Bernardino I. Cabezas

Compiler: Agustn M. Romero

The opinions, ideas, doctrines, concepts and facts herein stated are theexclusive responsibility of the authors. Agustn M. RomeroPrinted in Argentina. Deposit made under Law 11723, April 2011


3/281

3

The Question of Malvinas

and the Bicentennial

Malvinas Parliamentary Observatory Committee

Honorable House of Deputies of the Nation


4/281


4


5/281

5

AUTHORITIES OF THE HONORABLE HOUSE OF

DEPUTIES OF THE NATION 128TH SESSION

PresidentEduardo Alfredo Fellner

Deputy for Jujuy

First Vice-PresidentRicardo Luis Alfonsn

Deputy for Buenos Aires

Second Vice-PresidentPatricia Susana FadelDeputy for Mendoza

Third Vice-PresidentFederico Ramn Puerta

Deputy for Misiones

Parliamentary SecretaryEnrique Hidalgo

Administrative SecretaryRicardo Jos Vzquez

Operational Coordinating SecretaryJorge Armando Ocampos

Assistant Parliamentary SecretaryMarta Alicia Luchetta

Assistant Administrative SecretaryAndrs Daniel Eleit

Assistant Coordinating SecretaryEduardo Santn


6/281


6

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS

HOUSE OF DEPUTIES

PresidentAlfredo Atanasof

First Vice PresidentRuperto Eduardo Godoy

Second Vice PresidentMargarita Rosa Stolbizer

SecretariesGloria Bidegain

Omar Chafi Flix

Horacio Rodolfo Quiroga

Marcelo Eduardo Lpez Arias


7/281

7

MEMBERS

Ricardo Luis AlfonsnEduardo Pablo Amadeo

Nlida Belous

Rosana Andrea Bertone

Patricia Bullrich

Ricardo Buryaile

Mariel Calchaqui

Norah Susana Castaldo

Luis Francisco Jorge CigognaAlicia Marcela Comelli

Carlos Marcelo Comi

Roy Cortina

Juliana Di Tullio

Liliana Fadul

Hiplito Faustinelli

Carlos Alberto Favario

Irma Adriana GarcaCarlos Salomn Heller

Cynthia Liliana HottonFernando Adolfo Iglesias

Daniel Katz

Julio Rubn Ledesma

Mara Laura Leguizamn

Marta Gabriela Michetti

Pedro Omar Molas

Carmen Rosa Nebreda

Jorge Alberto ObeidCristian Rodolfo Olivia

Alberto Nicols Paredes Urquiza

Federico Pinedo

Agustn Alberto Portela

Juan Carlos Sluga

Fernando Ezequiel Solanas

Silvia Beatriz Vzquez

Mariano Federico WestJorge Ral Yoma


8/281


8

ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE OF THE LIBRARY

OF THE NATIONAL CONGRESS

PresidentSenator Roxana Itat Latorre

SecretariesSenator Juan Carlos Marino

Senator Carlos Alberto Verna

Deputy Juan Carlos Gioja

Deputy Miguel A. Giubergia

Members

Senator Marina Raquel RiofroSenator Ernesto Ricardo Sanz

Senator Luis Alberto Viana

Deputy Mara Virginia Linares

Deputy Ana Zulema Luna de Marcos

Deputy Carmen Rosa Nebreda

General Coordinating DirectorBernardino I. Cabezas


9/281

9

AUTHORITIES OF THE PARLAMENTARYS

OBSERVATORY OF MALVINAS QUESTION

PresidentAlfredo Atanasof

Vice PresidentRuperto Godoy

MembersRosana Bertone

Federico Pinedo

Nilda Belouz

Liliana FadulNorma Castaldo

Hugo Perie

Academic MembersLic. Agustn M. Romero

Dr. Ernesto Lpez

Dra. Lilian Del Castillo-Laborde

Lic. Carlos Daniel Esteban

Lic. Federico Lorenz

SecretaryAgustn M. Romero


10/281


10


11/281

11

Preface

Alfredo Atanasof

Malvinas: The Big Challenge of the ArgentineCongress in the Year of the Bicentennial

Ruperto Godoy

Defending Argentine interests in the South AtlanticArea

Jorge Taiana

The Question of Malvinas in the Year of theBicentennial

Nilda GarrThe Question of Malvinas from the National Defenseperspective

Alberto Sileoni

Malvinas as an educational policy

Federico Pinedo

204, 200, 194 and 177

Jorge ArgelloUnited Nations: The Question of Malvinas, apending Question

14

18

24

30

34

44

56

66

INDEX


12/281


12

82

94

106

116

128

140

164

Rafael Bielsa

Argentine Malvinas Islands, Kelpers oil?

Juan Archibaldo Lans

When the English doubted their rights

Fernando Petrella

The Question of Malvinas and the Bicentennial of theArgentine Republic

Eduardo Airaldi

The Question of Malvinas Islands in multilateraldiplomacy

Agustn M. Romero

Bases to formulate an Argentine Foreign Policy forMalvinas

Federico Lorenz

Representations of the enemy during Malvinas War. Acontribution to the Bicentennial

Alfredo Bruno Bologna

The situation of Malvinas Islands at the beginning of the

Bicentennial of the Argentine Independence


13/281

13

Juan Cruz Vzquez

Malvinas in the Bicentennial: in search of thecollective story

Alejandro Kaufman

Malvinas and memory, dictatorship and democracy

Marcelo Luis Vernet

Malvinas: towards an integrating conception

Lior Zylberman

It was not a spectacular war. Malvinas war andcinematography

Juan Recce

Malvinas: Argentina and the challenge ofredefining its strategic identity. From the KelperSmall and Medium Size Enterprise to theEuropean strategic enclave

Toms M. Giudici

Malvinas in the Argentine press: from the creationof the PoliticalMilitary Commandery to the USS Lexington

190

204

218

242

258

268


14/281


14

This book, The Question of Malvinas and the Bicentennial isthe result of more than one year of hard work. Its corollary is acontribution to the debate about one of the most important subjectsthat affects Argentine national feelings.This work is intended to reflect the plurality of ideas, approaches andpolitical opinions regarding the Question of Malvinas, according tothe multidisciplinary view that the subject deserves, vindicating, at alltimes, the lawful rights of the Argentine Republic in the dispute aboutthe sovereignty over the Islands and adjoining Southern maritime areas.That is why at the Malvinas Parliamentary Observatory Committee wehave been working in order to help our country to achieve the aim ofthe First Transitional Provision of the Argentine Constitution: to recoverthe sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands and to defend and promote

Argentine interests in the South Atlantic and our Antarctic area.The singularity of this book lies mainly in that it contains articles

written by three incumbent National Ministers; National Deputies fromdifferent political parties, the representative of the Argentine Republicto the United Nations, two former Ministers of Foreign Affairs and the

views of distinguished diplomats, academics and intellectuals with

international prestige. There is no other book dealing with a central

PREFACE


15/281

15

aspect of public policies of such great value and importance.In this book readers will find diverse articles with the views ofexperts in international relations, as well as opinions and ideas fromhistorical, political and social analyses. I want to express my gratitudeto the authors that collaborated with their research so that this bookmay become an obligatory reference on the subject that we call, in abrief way: The Question of Malvinas.Besides, the bilingual nature of this work enlarges its significance.This will allow researchers, diplomats and journalists from all aroundthe world to receive a serious and founded contribution dealing withdiverse aspects of Argentine national interests in Antarctica and theSouth Atlantic area.Finally, I would like to remark the work and dedication of theLibrary of the National Congress, to thank the General CoordinationDirectorate which got involved in the project from the very beginning,the Planning and Modernization Directorate from which we alwaysreceived selfless solutions, the Translations Directorate for itscooperation and its wide research work, and also the Subdirectorateof Publications for allowing this work to come true. To all of them

and to each one in particular, thank you very much.

Lic. Agustn M. Romero

Secretary of the Malvinas Parliamentary

Observatory Committee

The Question of Malvinas


16/281


16


17/281

17


18/281

18



19/281

19

Alfredo Atanasof

Malvinas: The Big Challenge of the Argentine Congress in the Bicentennial Year

Alfredo Atanasof *

Malvinas: The Big Challenge of theArgentine Congress in the Year of the Bicentennial

Eric Hobsbawm, recognised worldwide as one of the most important XXCentury historians pointed out in his autobiographyInteresting Timesthat Latin America had made forceful sense of what at first glance seemed

impossible, allowing what counterfactual speculations cannot achieve,to offer a true array of solutions to the historical situation.The Question of Malvinas is a historical situation for the ArgentineRepublic starting on 2 January 1833 when frigate Clio forced gunboatSarand to leave the islands -which did not belong to anybody- andannounced that the British flag would replace the Argentine oneon the following day. Jos Mara Pinedo protested but he could notresist a hugely superior force.

The British official history states that the transfer of control was bypersuasion, even though later on it was asserted that sending warships to the islands was aimed at reaffirming British sovereigntyover some islands that did not belong to anybody. This certainlyconfirmed that the region was taken by force from its former and trueowner, Argentina, which, from then onwards, systematically objectedto and protested against this clearly colonialist action.

* National Deputy, Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (2010-2012).


20/281

20


Argentinas immediate protest regarding the use of force for theclearly illegal occupation of part of our national territory, was also the

beginning of the first state policy of our nation, which was implementedunder different forms and to different extents, maintaining at alltimes- the legitimate purpose of recovering the islands.

As regards relative standpoints in international diplomacy, this policybore fruit, since the United Kingdom faced increasing difficulties toprove its historical and legal arguments before the different internationalorganizations where the case was taken, and the British public opinionbecame gradually disinterested in the subject.

The economic cost of supporting the islands at the beginning of the80s started to have a negative influence on different sectors of Britishpolicy, which began to consider this cost as senseless expenditures.In terms of real policy, the implementation of our state policyregarding the recovery of the islands, had brought them to asignificantly closer position, and the informal process to transferresponsibilities regarding communication, supplies and servicesrelated to the islands, continued to develop slowly but inexorably

within the Argentine Republic.However, in 1982, the decision of the military government that ruledour country to subordinate our historical state policy to the needsof the domestic political situation in a desperate attempt to stayin power, hiding behind a 149-year claim, making a strong appealto patriotism and basing their actions on the absolute historical

validity and legality of the claim while invoking international law andtaking the case to all international organizations gave the British

the possibility to dramatically modify the scenario where reason wassuperseded by force.While Sir Winston Churchill used the phrase Never in the field ofhuman conflict has so much been owed by so many to so few torefer to R.A.F. pilots and illustrate the British triumph in the Battleof England, during the Second World War, we could say that, in ourlong-standing struggle to recover the islands, Never have so few (themilitary dictatorship) done so much harm.

With the advent of democracy in 1983 and the full operation of


21/281

21

Alfredo Atanasof


institutions, we resumed -under different circumstances- our originalstrategy: a state policy for Malvinas. More than twenty five years of

uninterrupted democracy allow us to be a fully integrated nation,respected for the legitimacy of our government in the internationalcommunity. We exclusively resort to arguments based on historicalfacts and international law, using dialogue and negotiations with GreatBritain as the only way to settle the dispute. This allows us to workour way uphill, obtaining new statements and resolutions supportingour stance at international organizations.

After 1982, the United Kingdom decisively advanced a policy of

unilateral facts, systematically refusing to establish any dialogue withArgentina if it involved the issue of sovereignty or actions modifyingthe status quo of the dispute.It started by establishing an exclusion zone and widening theirso-called exclusive exploitation rights in the Argentine Sea. This

was followed by an indiscriminate sale of fishing licenses and, aftertrying to hold joint conversations on the subject of oil explorationin the 90s, the United Kingdom decided to start hydrocarbon search

operations in February 2010 by contracting an offshore platformbelonging to Black Rock consortium, directly or indirectly linkedto Borders & Southern, Desire Petroleum, Falkland Oil & Gas andRockhopper Exploration.

Argentina replied immediately by filing a whole set of protests beforeinternational fora, and even expressed its concern to Great Britainsmain historical ally, the United States of America, whose Secretary ofState urged both parties to resume dialogue and declared that the

United States was absolutely neutral in the dispute.What remains true is that if we take the facts into account, the Britishpolicy for the Islands seems to be strongly aimed at turning theminto an attractive area for economic exploitation that may appeal todifferent multinationals, dragging interests and companies fromdifferent countries, and at supporting and providing economicfeasibility to the contingency plan to which the British will resortonce they find it impossible to uphold their rights over Malvinas: theself-determination of the Islanders.


22/281

22


Let us now discuss the great challenge of the Argentine Parliament,since, in relation to a state policy, it is Parliament that must represent

all political expressions, and design policies to be implemented bydifferent administrations of the Executive Power, with the tactics theydeem more convenient.

We have the responsibility of thinking new policies because GreatBritain is at ease with the current state of affairs: they act, we protest.So we are urged to revert this operational logic once and for all.

All great western or eastern strategy manuals include, in differentways, the concept that knowing an opponent is the key to anticipating

its acts. That is why we cite Churchill again:...The best plan ofacquiring flexibility is to have three or four plans for all the possiblecontingencies, all worked out with the utmost detail. Then it is mucheasier to switch from one to the other as and where the cat jumps.Today the problem we are faced with is halting British intentionsto explore and eventually exploit hydrocarbons in our Islands,but, while addressing what is urgent, we must not lose sight of thecurrent strategic view of the conflict: they have the initiative and we

act accordingly.We should recover the initiative: this is our task, which requiresconstant work, perseverance, creativity, boldness and patience.Therefore, I believe that the Malvinas Parliamentary ObservatoryCommittee goes along these lines of thinking, as a key instrumentto generate ideas, studies, and theses to support the formulation ofpolicies that may materialize our legitimate claims over Malvinas andthe South Atlantic Islands.


23/281

23

Alfredo Atanasof



24/281


24


25/281

25

Ruperto Godoy

Defending Argentine interests in the South Atlantic Area

I am very pleased, as Vice-Chairman of the Committee on ForeignAffairs of the House of Deputies and as Chairman of the MalvinasParliamentary Observatory Committee to present this book, entitled

The Question of Malvinas and the Bicentennial.It has been some time now since we started working with a strongintent to prepare, within the context of the Argentine NationalCongress, a book with deep political and academic value addressingdifferent topics related to our strategic interests in the South Atlantic

Area. This work is intended to reflect the plurality of ideas, approachesand political opinions regarding the Question of Malvinas, vindicating,at all times, the lawful rights of the Argentine Republic in the dispute

about the sovereignty over the Islands and adjoining Southernmaritime areas. That is why at the Malvinas Parliamentary ObservatoryCommittee we have been working with respect for the interdisciplinaryspirit and political plurality, in order to help our country to achieve theaim of the First Transitional Provision of the Argentine Constitution: torecover sovereignty over Malvinas Islands.The Malvinas Parliamentary Observatory Committee is an example

Ruperto Godoy*


* National Deputy for the Province of San Juan 2007-2011.


26/281


26

that, starting from different political views, it is possible to pursue acommon objective, and provide that goal with enough significance to

turn it into a national cause or a State issue. The national deputiesthat are members of the Observatory belong to the diverse politicalparties that are represented in the lower house, however each onehas made his contribution so that this space fulfills their purposes,overcoming internal problems or struggles. I believe that this is anachievement that should be imitated in other political instances andinitiatives. Therefore, the ideas and opinions stated in this workbelong to their authors and do not imply support or agreement by

the rest of the politicians and academics of the Institution.At the Malvinas Parliamentary Observatory Committee we believethat the unilateral measures adopted by the United Kingdom arenot consistent with what has been resolved at the United Nations.Moreover, we demand that the sovereignty dispute between the

Argentine Republic and the United Kingdom of Great Britain andNorthern Ireland about Malvinas, Georgias del Sur and Sandwichdel Sur Islands and adjoining maritime areas be resolved as soon

as possible, according to the United Nations resolutions and thedeclarations of the Organization of American States, the MERCOSURand other regional and multilateral fora.

At the Malvinas Parliamentary Observatory Committee we bear inmind that the British intent to consider Malvinas, Georgias del Surand Sandwich del Sur Islands as countries and territories to which PartFour of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (to becalled Treaty on European Union) and the EU Overseas Association

Decision can be applied, is inconsistent with the legitimate rights of theArgentine Republic to a sovereignty dispute over said archipelagos.Likewise, we share with all MERCOSUR member countries the visionof a common ideal: a Latin America free from colonialism. TheBritish dominion of the Malvinas Islands and adjoining waters is ananachronism that must cease immediately.For the last two years, we have been working to achieve the clearly designedpurpose of including the subject of Malvinas Islands in different aspectsand levels of the social, academic and political life of our country. In this


27/281

27

Ruperto Godoy


context, I would like to mention, among others, the following activities:

PARTICIPATION OF THE OBSERVATORY IN THE NATIONALCONGRESS OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

The Malvinas Parliamentary Observatory Committee participated inthe 9th National Congress of Political Science with a panel calledArgentine strategic interests in the South Atlantic Area. TheCongress was held in the city of Santa Fe, on August 19-22, 2009, and

was attended by more than 2,000 students from all the country, andacademics and lecturers from all over the continent.

DAY OF THE REAFFIRMATION OF ARGENTINE SOVEREIGN

RIGHTS OVER MALVINAS ISLANDS

A historic event, organized by the Malvinas Parliamentary ObservatoryCommittee, took place at the Delia Parodi Hall of the NationalCongress on June 10, 2009.Lic. Agustn Romero, Secretary of the Parliamentary Observatory,

welcomed the audience. The lecturers invited by the Malvinas

Parliamentary Observatory Committee included Argentinas Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs, Ambassador Victorio Taccetti; the FirstVicepresident of the House of Deputies, National Deputy PatriciaVaca Narvaja; National Deputy Rosana Bertone (Province of Tierradel Fuego); and PhD. Lilian del Castillo, scholar member of theObservatory.

ACTIVITIES DEVELOPED BY THE OBSERVATORY AT THE

PROVINCE OF TIERRA DEL FUEGOOn May 21, 2009, Lic. Agustn M. Romero, Secretary of the MalvinasParliamentary Observatory Committee was welcomed to the city ofUshuaia, among others, by its Major Mr. Sciurano, by the Presidentof the Ushuaia Union of Malvinas War Veterans, Ramn Lpez, andby Colonel Guillermo Estvez, in charge of the naval base of the city.During the meetings, different issues about Malvinas Islands wereanalyzed and future cooperation projects were exchanged.


28/281


28

THE OBSERVATORY AT THE 2009 BOOK FAIR

The Malvinas Parliamentary Observatory Committee was presented

for the first time at the 35th Buenos Aires International Book Fair.The Observatory was present through a round table, coordinated bythe Observatory Secretary, Agustn M. Romero. The speakers at theround table were: myself, as Chairman of the Malvinas ParliamentaryObservatory Committee; Deputy Luciano Fabris; Ambassador Eduardo

Airaldi, General Director of the Malvinas and South Atlantic Office ofthe Ministry of Foreign Affairs and, Frida Armas, Coordinator of theCommittee on Outer Limits of the Continental Shelf (COPLA, by its

Spanish acronym).

REAFFIRMATION OF BILATERAL RELATIONS AT ANTARCTICA

On March 5, 2009, at the Antarctic Base Frei, the Committee onForeign Affairs and Worship of the Honorable House of Deputies ofthe Nation and its Chilean counterpart, the Committee on Foreign

Affairs, Interparliamentary Issues and Latin American Integration,prepared a joint declaration within the context of the First Antarctic

Parliamentary Meeting.

RECOGNITION OF THE OBSERVATORY TO MERCOSUR MEMBER

COUNTRIES

On November 17, 2009, the Delia Parodi Hall of the NationalCongress was the venue for a public recognition to MERCOSURfull and associate member countries for supporting the ArgentineRepublic in the sovereignty dispute over Malvinas Islands. Attendeesto this event included: the National Minister of Education, AlbertoSileoni; the Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs, Victorio Taccetti; theSecretary of International Affairs, Alfredo Forti, on behalf of theMinister of Defense Nilda Garr; the first Vice-president of the Houseof Deputies, Patricia Vaca Narvaja; national legislators of differentparties; and representatives of different civil organizations.


29/281

29

Ruperto Godoy


THE QUESTION OF MALVINAS NEW VIEWS AND STRATEGIES

ABOUT THE CONFLICT WITH GREAT BRITAIN

On April 15, 2010 a seminar was held at the National Congress,where Ambassador Jos Taccetti, Argentine Vice-Minister of ForeignAffairs, delivered the opening lecture, which was followed by threeround tables on strategic topics related to the South Atlantic Areaand the policy of Great Britain, among others subjects. Prestigiousacademics lectured the audience, which included national deputies,representatives of different political parties, national and provincialauthorities, and representatives of the diplomatic corps accredited in

our country.Finally, I would like to remark that at the Malvinas ParliamentaryObservatory Committee this distinction was an inspiration to startrecognizing people, institutions, non-governmental organizations,universities, study centers, among others, which have proved, indifferent ways, their commitment and determination in favor of

Argentine rights over Malvinas Islands and our interests in the SouthAtlantic Area.

To keep in touch with the Observatory:website: www.cuestionmalvinas.gov.arMail address: [email protected]: (54) 11 6310-7560 / 4384-8483


30/281


30


31/281

31

Jorge Taiana


In 2010 we will commemorate the Bicentennial of the ArgentineNation. It is a good opportunity to reaffirm our sovereignty overthe Malvinas, Georgias del Sur and Sandwich del Sur Islands and

adjoining maritime areas. This is a special occasion to rememberthat since the beginning of our life as an independent nation, thefirst governments of theProvincias Unidas del Ro de la Plata tookthe Malvinas Islands into account in different administrative acts,and considered them as part of the Argentine territory that wasbeing formed, inherited from Spain under the 1810 principle ofuti possidetis juris.Likewise, next year it will be the 190th anniversary of the public

act whereby Navy Officer David Jewett took possession of MalvinasIslands at Puerto Soledad, on behalf of theProvincias Unidas delRo de la Plata. This act did not bring about any official commentsby the United Kingdom during the process of recognition of the

Argentine Nation that concluded with the signature of the Treaty ofFriendship, Commerce and Navigation in 1825.During the 1820s, Argentine governments took different sovereignty

Jorge Taiana *


* Former Ministry of Foreign Affairs, International Trade and Worship 2005-2010.


32/281


32

actions over Malvinas Islands, such as the appointment of governors,enactment of laws on fishing resources, and granting of territorial

concessions.It is also worth mentioning that this year, a special series of poststamps of the Argentine Postal Service was issued to commemorate the180th anniversary of the promulgation by the Argentine governmentof the decree that established the Political and Military Commanderyof Malvinas on June 10, 1829.One hundred and seventy-six years have already passed since theBritish illegally usurped part of the Argentine national territory. On

January 3, 1833, the United Kingdom interrupted the continued andpacific sovereignty of the Argentine Republic over the archipelagowhen it occupied the islands by force. The United Kingdom expelledthe Argentine population and authorities that were settled there, andreplaced them with a colonial government and British population.

Argentina immediately protested against said act of force and hascontinued to assert its sovereign rights and to claim the restitution ofthe Islands since then.

The international community has recognized the legitimacy of theArgentine claim. The United Nations General Assembly adoptedResolution 2065 (XX) in 1965 recognizing the existence of asovereignty dispute regarding the Question of Malvinas Islands,defined it as a type of colonialism, and requested both parties tothe controversy to resume bilateral negotiations as soon as possiblein order to find a peaceful and final solution to the dispute.Since then, all resolutions of the United Nations and the Organization

of American States, as well as other international, regional and inter-regional fora, have repeated said request.Argentina has repeatedly shown its willingness to engage inconstructive, sincere and open dialogue to improve bilateralcooperation, especially through temporary understandings under thesovereignty formula, provided that cooperation on practical aspectsrelated with the illegally occupied territories contributes to create anappropriate context to resume sovereignty negotiations.However, this purpose has not been achieved and it has been deeply


33/281

33

Jorge Taiana


affected by the British unwillingness to face the issue of sovereigntyunder the terms of United Nations resolutions, and by continued

British unilateral actions related to the dispute, which not onlyviolate the letter and spirit of said understandings but also contradictthe United Nations call under General Assembly Resolution 31/49(1976) - to abstain from introducing unilateral modifications to thematter while the Islands remain involved in the process recommendedin the relevant resolutions.Notwithstanding all the above, the Argentine government willcontinue to repeat, in all multilateral fora and bilateral meetings,

its permanent will to resume bilateral negotiations with the UnitedKingdom as soon as possible, in order to find a peaceful and finalsolution to the sovereignty dispute, according to the call of theinternational community and the universal desire for a world free fromcolonialism.


34/281


34


35/281

35

Nilda Garr

The Question of Malvinas from the National Defense perspective

The defeat at the Malvinas War in 1982 not only unveiled the professionalincompetence of the military dictatorship but also, and above all, revealedthe terrible danger entailed by a simplistic reading of international

dynamics, if interpreted through wrong strategic estimates.From the specific view of National Defense, of the Defense System, ingeneral, and of the Military Instrument, in particular, it can be assertedthat the frustrating experience of the Malvinas war evidenced the mostunacceptable deficiencies and inconsistencies in Defense Strategy. Italso proved the absence of the most basic professional capacity ofmilitary leaders, which was not surpassed by those who courageouslygave their lives for their country. Indeed, one of the reasons for

the disastrous military campaign, as was admitted in the famousRattenbach Report, was the lack of responsibility with which such amilitary power (ranking second in NATO) was confronted, withoutmeeting the necessary technical and professional conditions, both interms of organization and military functioning and equipment.The return to democracy in 1983 and the reinstatement of civilcontrol over the military under Law 23554 on National Defenseexcluded the military from the inappropriate roles they had been

Nilda Garr *


* Former Minister of Defense 2005-2010.


36/281


36

playing in domestic and foreign policy, reallocating the leadership ofthe political decision-making process to the authorities legitimately

elected by the people. The process of regional integration, in turn,put an end to conflict hypotheses with neighboring countries,opening up a space to reconsider National Defense policies beyondthe traditional assumptions of threats to territorial integrity, as wellas to establish a regional and international context that was radicallydifferent from that of the late 80s.In the 90s, the insertion of Argentina into the world was thought interms of the policy of economic liberalization, under a country model

that followed the grounds of the so-called Washington Consensus.Consequently, National Defense was assigned a role determinedby its alignment with the foreign policy of United States, the singleglobal superpower after the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991.The collapse of this country model during the 2001-2002 crisis alsoevidenced the changing character of the strategy of internationalinsertion of the country in the last decade of the 20th century, as wellas the deadlock of the military reform that had started with democracy.

The economic recovery that started in 2003 made it necessary tointroduce structural reforms in the national policy, in accordance withsocial transformations in the country and changes in the internationalcontext. The regulation of the Law on Defense and the modernizationprocess of the Armed Forces are consistent with these reforms.

THE LESSONS OF MALVINASAlmost thirty years after the painful event of Malvinas, and in the

year of the Bicentennial, we witness a change of paradigm as regardsour National Defense. The efficient political leadership of NationalDefense affairs, as well as the ongoing modernization process of ourdefense system, irrefutably prove the existence of this change. TheMalvinas military experience contrasts with the current progress of ourDefense System, which -under precise and explicit political directivesand parameters- now conforms to the paradigm of a modern Military,

with effectively integrated Armed Forces through joint actions,joint military plans, a joint military doctrine, and joint training and


37/281

37

Nilda Garr


education. These aresine qua non requirements for the fulfillmentof the missions assigned to our Armed Forces, in particular, for the

fulfillment of its raison dtre: the Defense of the Nation.The traumatic experience of the Malvinas War taught us severallessons that have been fully implemented in the above mentionedmodernization process. As admitted in Decree 727/2006, regulatingthe Law on Defense, the single conventional war experience of ourcountry during the 20th century duly and undoubtedly proved therelevance of strategic planning and joint military actions.In that context, the consolidation of the governmental institutional

system as regards defense entails the final organic articulation ofits parts, each of which must be exclusively devoted to performingthe functions that have led to its creation. Along these lines, theestablishment of the National Defense Council (CODENA, by itsSpanish acronym) -the main assistance and advisory body to thePresident of the Nation as regards the analysis of the basic guidelinesof the national defense policy, through the design and preparation ofreports, assessments, opinions and/or projects to determine potential

risk situations that may affect sovereignty and territorial integrity- isa key institutional aspect of the defense system, as provided for bylawmakers at the time of creating the system.The Ministry of Defense has fully accepted the role of permanent

working body of said Council, through the Secretariat of the NationalDefense Council (SECODENA, by its Spanish acronym), whichoperates within it, thus ensuring continuity and systematization whenaddressing issues falling under the jurisdiction of said Council.

Within the context of the Bicentennial, Argentina is faced with thechallenge of defining a strategic vision for the 21th Century. In thissense, the government of Cristina Fernndez de Kirchner has given asignificant step forward with Decree 1714/2009, which approves theDirective on the National Defense Policy. The Question of MalvinasIslands is included in said Directive. In fact, after recalling that theBritish illegal usurpation of our territory persists as a colonial enclave,it states that the Defense Policy of the Argentine Republic ratifiesits legitimate and non-prescribing sovereignty over the MALVINAS,


38/281


38

GEORGIAS DEL SUR AND SANDWICH DEL SUR ISLANDS, as well asthe corresponding maritime and insular areas, since they form part

of the national territory. Likewise, it also states that the recovery ofsaid territories and the full exercise of sovereignty, according to theprinciples of international law, are a permanent and unwaivable goalof the Argentine people: in this regard, it must be highlighted thatthe Argentine Government has focused on resuming sovereigntynegotiations by insisting, before international and regionalorganizations and the international community as a whole, on callingthe United Kingdom to resume negotiations, under the terms of

resolutions and declarations of the United Nations Organization andthe Organization of American States.In this context, the Argentine Republic rejects and objects to Britishunilateral actions in the disputed area, since they contradict theprovisional understandings under the sovereignty formula and theUnited Nations resolutions urging both parties to resume negotiationsaimed at solving the sovereignty dispute, especially UN General

Assembly Resolution 31/49, which urges the parties to abstain from

introducing unilateral modifications to the matter while the Islandsremain involved in the process recommended by the UNO in itsresolutions on the Question of Malvinas.In this sense, it must be taken into account that the United Kingdomintends to enlarge its alleged territorial sovereignty over theMALVINAS, GEORGIAS DEL SUR AND SANDWICH DEL SUR ISLANDSand over the Antarctic Region to three hundred and fifty (350) seamiles, based on Article 76 of the Convention on the Law of the Sea.

On the other hand, the lack of joint action and logistics by naval,air and land forces during the South Atlantic conflict was anotherpainful show of inefficiency that we cannot allow to happen again.Therefore, since the Law of Defense was regulated, the institutionalreorganization of the defense system assigned a vital role to the JointChiefs of Staff (EMCO, by its Spanish acronym), which is the highestbody providing military assistance and advice to the President of theNation, and which is responsible for military strategic planning.It is the Joint Chiefs of Staff who must lead the process of planning,


39/281

39

Nilda Garr


the definition of a doctrine and the establishment of training methodsthat make it possible to integrate forces and attain the maximum

operational capacity of the military.

THE MALVINAS SITUATION TODAY AND ITS REPERCUSSIONS ONDEFENSE MATTERSUnfortunately, the innumerable calls by the international communityto resume bilateral talks to solve the sovereignty dispute over MalvinasIslands have been systematically ignored by the United Kingdom.Even worse is the succession of British unilateral actions regarding

fishing and oil exploration licenses, which, among other reasons, ledthe Argentine government to terminate as from March 27, 2007-the Joint Argentine-British Declaration of September 27, 1995. SaidDeclaration had been signed under the sovereignty safeguard formula,and dealt with Cooperation over Offshore Activities in the South

West Atlantic, regarding hydrocarbon exploration and exploitationin the area subject to the sovereignty dispute.Likewise, the permanent British military deployment on the Islands is

also regrettable, including the introduction of sophisticated militaryequipment such as four superjet Typhoon in 2009-, contrary to UNGeneral Assembly Resolution 31/49, which urges both parties to thesovereignty dispute over Malvinas Islands not to make unilateralmodifications in the situation.

As stated in the protest letter submitted by the Argentine governmentat that time, this new deployment emphasizes the continued Britishmilitary presence on Argentine land and maritime spaces. The illegitimate

British occupation of our territory and especially the military presencecontinue to be repeatedly rejected by the Argentine Republic.But said military presence, comprising one of the largest contingents ofBritish troops outside the United Kingdom, goes against the Argentinegoal -shared with other countries of the region- of keeping South Americaand the South Atlantic Sea as a peaceful region. Recent multilateralpronouncements ratify this idea, particularly those that have been issued

within the context of the South American Defense Council.Also at said Council, more precisely during the last meeting of


40/281


40

the Council executive layer, held in Quito in January 2010, wherediscussions focused on the procedures to enforce promotion,

reliability and security measures agreed by member countries of theUnion of South American Nations (UNASUR, by its Spanish acronym),the Argentine delegation -led by the Defense Ministry- encouragedand obtained consensus to include an express reference to theQuestion of Malvinas, in the clause dealing with the GUARANTEETO PRESERVE SOUTH AMERICA AS AN AREA FREE OF NUCLEAR

WEAPONS AND TO USE NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY WITH PEACEFULPURPOSES ONLY. Said clause read as follows:

UNASUR member countries, in fulfillment of the Treaty on the Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean(Treaty of Tlatelolco) and of other conventions on the subject,pledge to preserve South America as an area free of nuclear weaponsand guarantee that nuclear technology will be used with peacefulpurposes only.In compliance with the above, said member countries shall:

- Guarantee that the nuclear facilities and materials under theirjurisdictions will be used with peaceful purposes only and, pledgeto refrain from carrying out, fostering or authorizing, directly orindirectly, the use, manufacturing, production, possession or controlof any nuclear weapon, as well as from participating in said activitiesin any way whatsoever.- Pledge to prohibit and prevent in their territories the use, storing,installation, building, or any other form of possession of nuclear

weapons.UNASUR member countries shall adopt the necessary measures todemand respect and compliance with this commitment by otherStates, especially States Possessing Nuclear Weapons, including thecollective request for them to withdraw the Interpretive Declarationsto Protocols I and II of the Treaty of Tlatelolco, thus guaranteeingthat the territories of UNASUR Member Countries, including thoseunder dispute, like Malvinas, Georgias del Sur and Sandwich del SurIslands, are preserved as areas free from nuclear weapons.


41/281

41

Nilda Garr


Argentina makes every effort to assert the national position onthe islands which, following the signing of the Treaty of Lisbon,

includes a protest before the European Union in each bilateral ormultilateral statement, especially when the counterpart supportssaid statement. Thus, for example, in the recent Argentine-Brazilian

Joint Presidential Declaration (Brasilia, November 18, 2009), bothpresidents expressed their concern for the presence in the region ofmilitary bases of extra-regional powers. This situation is incompatible

with the principles of respect for sovereignty and for territorialintegrity of the States within the region.

The unilateral actions of the United Kingdom contradict the Madridagreements. Following the Joint 1989-1990 Madrid Declarationssigned with the United Kingdom, different temporary understandingson practical matters related to the South Atlantic area were reachedunder the sovereignty safeguard formula, through several jointdeclarations and exchanges of notes. These documents refer tomeasures to encourage mutual trust in military matters to avoidincidents; preservation of fishing resources; hydrocarbon exploration

and exploitation; air and maritime communications between theArgentine continental territory and the islands; access to Argentinepassport holders to the islands; building of a monument for the

Argentine fallen in the 1982 Malvinas war; exchange of informationon the outer limits of the continental shelf; preparation of a feasibilitystudy on demining the Malvinas Islands and an analysis of theirtoponymy. Said understandings are provisional, dealing with thecreation of a modus vivendi for the area under dispute and intended

to generate the conditions to resume sovereignty negotiations.But the systematic denial of the United Kingdom, added to the reluctanceto continue holding meetings of the forum where all issues related todisputed territories must be discussed (the South Atlantic WorkingGroup - SAWG), have hindered the development of a cooperationagenda in defense. Furthermore, the Ministry of Defense, in fullcoordination with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, has refused to resumenegotiations about cooperation in defense the last round was held inDecember 2006 until SAWG meetings are restored to normal.


42/281


42

CONCLUSIONAs established in our National Constitution, the Argentine Nation

ratifies its legitimate and non-prescribing sovereignty over theMalvinas, Georgias del Sur and Sandwich del Sur Islands and overthe corresponding maritime and insular zones, since they form anintegral part of the national territory. The recovery of said territoriesand the full exercise of sovereignty, respecting the way of life of theirinhabitants and according to the principles of international law, are apermanent and unwaivable goal of the Argentine people.In this context, the national defense policy is based on a strictly

defensive strategy, intended to contribute to peace and internationalsecurity, together with other countries of the region and friendlynations, within the framework of the United Nations. Therefore, weexpect the United Kingdom to review its unilateral position on itsillegitimate presence in the Malvinas, Georgias and Sandwich delSur Islands, and to accede to dialogue as requested by our countryand the international community, through the institutional channelstimely agreed upon, in order to unfailingly ensure peace and stability

in the American South Atlantic Area.


43/281

43

Nilda Garr



44/281


44


45/281

45

Alberto Sileoni


INTRODUCTIONMalvinas Islands represent one of those memories of pride and pain.They are the islands usurped by Great Britain in 1833, the memory

of teachers saying that they are Argentine, the political strugglesgenerated by them, the war fought in the context of the Stateterrorism, the pain for victims, the social difficulties related to theprotection of Malvinas war veterans- And, above all, they represent theunbearable fact of the still present colonialism and the persistence ofthe unwaivable claim of the Argentine sovereignty on that territory.In the year of the Bicentennial we know that the Question ofMalvinas, apart from being associated to a diplomatic question, raises

a reflection on our history and on ourselves.The complexity of this subject was and still is present in the designof the educational policies that we have been developing since2003. How to teach the subject of Malvinas? How to speak aboutthe Argentine sovereignty and, at the same time, tell the story of the1982 war carried out by the last military dictatorship? How to analyzethe specific episode of the war without forgetting that it is a causethat comes from the bottom of the national history? How to transmit,

Alberto Sileoni *


* Former Minister of Education of the Nation 2009-2011


46/281


46

through Malvinas, the defense of our properties and the love for ourhomeland?

The new National Education Act establishes that the subject mustbe present in the classrooms of the whole country with all itscomplexity. In its section 92, it commits the national Governmentand the provincial ministries to support, through the teaching of the

Argentine rights, the sovereignty claim of our country over Malvinasislands and other archipelagos of the South Atlantic. In the samesection, the question is associated to the promotion of teaching ofrecent history as a mechanism to consolidate a society respectful of

democracy and human rights. In this way, the educational space addsto the first temporary provision of the National Constitution, whichestablishes that: The Argentine Nation ratifies its legitimate and non-prescribing sovereignty over the Malvinas, Georgias del Sur andSandwich del Sur Islands and over the corresponding maritime andinsular zones, as they are an integral part of the National territory.The recovery of said territories and the full exercise of sovereignty,respectful of the way of life of their inhabitants and according to the

principles of international law, are a permanent and unwaivable goalof the Argentine people.From the Ministry of Education of the Nation we propose differentactions -production of materials, training, inclusion in the curriculadesign- in order to promote the reflection on this subject, as apossibility of recognizing us as a part of the national history, rich inregional shades and contrasts, and in agreements and disagreements.

A history that is ours even though it still lacks a synthesis, because

discussions are still open as well as the injuries caused by a past full ofviolence and frustrations, but also of collective hopes and dreams.In this section we propose to briefly review two aspects:1- The Question of Malvinas in the Argentine school, the ways in

which Malvinas was taught until 1982.2- The Question of Malvinas in the present educational agenda,the submission of some proposals about Malvinas developed by theMinistry of Education of the Nation from 2003 up to now, within theframework of its educational policies about the recent past.


47/281

47

Alberto Sileoni


1. THE QUESTION OF MALVINAS IN THE ARGENTINE SCHOOLDuring the twentieth century, the permanent argentine claims

made before different international agencies constituted what isknown as the Question of Malvinas, that is: the diplomatic, historicaland legal context that sustains the position of our country. It is aprocess that went through different instances and that, at present,faces unprecedented challenges that are the product of the new

world scenario. The President of the Nation, Cristina Fernndez, hascategorically reaffirmed the permanent and unwaivable nature of thelegitimate will of the Argentine Republic to recover, by pacific means,

the exercise of sovereignty over Malvinas, Georgias and Sandwichdel Sur Islands and the adjoining maritime spaces. In the speechshe gave at the inauguration ceremony on December 10, 2007 at theNational Congress before the Legislative Assembly, she reaffirmedonce more, our unwaivable and irrevocable claim to sovereignty overour Malvinas Islands, where there is a situation of colonial enclavedenounced before the United Nations and that it is time to complyonce more with the mandate of those United Nations of which we

are part. At the same time, the Argentine Government reaffirmsthe respect for the islanders way of life guaranteed by the NationalConstitution and the commitment to consider their interests.The display of this dimension, the diplomaticquestion, was accompaniedthroughout our history by the development of the Question of Malvinas,that is to say, the strong presence of the archipelago and the claim forsovereignty in a wide and varied range of political, cultural and socialforces. The usurpation of Malvinas Islands on January 3, 1833 was in

different moments a symbol of several things: of the British imperialism,of the Creole resistance embodied in the gaucho Rivero, of thepossibility always expected- of a national accomplishment. That processhad several remarkable moments, from the school discipline that movedus to write in the blackboard that Malvinas Islands were, are and shall be

Argentine, to the Condor Operation led by a group of young Peronistsin 1966, during the dictatorship of Juan Carlos Ongana, going throughthe massive publishing of the work of Paul Groussac distributed due tothe decision of the Socialist Senator Alfredo Palacios.


48/281


48

Up to April 2, 1982 the public school had a privileged role in thatprocess. It taught and transmitted the history of Malvinas, through

a disciplinary approach mainly in the interrelation between theteaching of History and Geography- and through a series of rituals(commemorations, national anthems, acts, etc.) which proposedto act the homeland in the framework of school. The classrooms

were places of construction and, at the same time, echo boxes of thenational feeling generated by the islands. Education had a main role,among other things, because of the intimate and long-standing natureof the relationship between public school and national causes.

In this sense, it may be interesting to review some documentary andtestimonial sources that allow us to perceive that presence, whichis not strain free. For example, in 1964, during the government of

Arturo Illia when in the cultural and political field, a new structure ofsensitivity characterized by nationalism, left ideas and Peronism review

was beginning to appear a note addressed to rectors and headmastersof educational institutions proposed to teach the subject of Malvinas

with an anti-imperialistic tone. During History, Geography, Civic

Instruction and Democratic Education classes it was recommended todevote 10 minutes to read the news about the subject.The note said: I have the pleasure of addressing to that Rector/

Headmaster Office to remind you that next September 8, at the Meeting

of the 24, the future of our Malvinas Islands shall be considered. The

Representatives of the foreign powers, at that act, shall consider the

problems inherent to colonialism and peoples self-determination and,

in that agenda, the Malvinas Islands shall be included in the British

colonies. The Argentine Republic can not and must not accept thisdecision because Malvinas Islands are a piece of its territory that was

seized by force (.). ). Our country must not spare efforts to prevent the

mentioned purpose and to achieve the final recovery of its islands. For

this purpose, apart from every effort made by our Government in pursuit

of this achievement, it is very important due to the psychological force

of this action- to explain to the students of the educational institutions

of the country the vicissitudes that the nation is experiencing, under

the threat of the definite loss of a piece of its soil.


49/281

49

Alberto Sileoni


The Argentine military dictatorship (1976-1983) gave a new andcontroversial meaning to the cause of Malvinas. Between April 2 and

June 14, 1982, the Argentine Republic had a military confrontationwith Great Britain for the sovereignty of the islands. A disembarkationforce subdued the British garrison and raised the national flag that

waived in the islands until the British forces, in turn, defeated theArgentine troops and reestablished the colonial situation. The defeatin that conflict was, undoubtedly, one of the facts that forced theso-called Process of National Organization to leave the power andopened a space for the transition to democracy.

Malvinas war was a critical question in a diplomatic conflict thatdated from more than a century and a half and that emerged from theplundering of a part of the Argentine national territory by an imperialistpower. When the Argentine military dictatorship disembarked in theislands it was appealing to a national feeling deeply rooted in theculture and politics. It did so to produce an action of force that endedup with a humiliating defeat and, above all, with the loss of hundredsof lives destroyed by a corrupt government.

But, undoubtedly, the intimate imbrications between the dictatorshipand a vindication that was considered fair by society radicallymodified the circulation way of Malvinas cause. Was it possible togo on speaking about Malvinas in the same way? How to incorporateto that speech the pain for the victims and the defeat in the war? Whatcould be said about the social behavior? How to sustain a nationalspeech when Malvinas marks were unequally printed in the nationalterritory? How to invoke the same national past that the perpetrators

of the State Terrorism had hoisted?A teacher of Santiago del Estero province, whose testimony was takenby the Program Education and Memory of the Ministry of Educationin one of its training campaigns, synthesized these dilemmas in herown experience of life: To speak about Malvinas causes pain. Iknow that many people may not understand what I want to expressbecause I am one of those Argentine persons who suffered in theflesh that paradox of what the construction of the national beingmeant, that feeling that led us to define the meaning of homeland


50/281


50

during the seventies. And I say in the flesh because I was educatedin a school system in which the idea of the homeland heroes was

instilled in us by means of symbols, virtual signs where the idea ofthe Malvinas Islands are Argentine entered my life from the firstgrade. I still remember Miss Rosa telling us the story as a tale aboutGaucho Rivero. And afterwards the disappointment of the defeatin the war. We went from the vigorous imperialism of April 2 to thepain of the surrender, which leaves a mark when one is a teenagerand thinks that fair causes must win as it happens in children tales.

And later on the silence.

In 1982, more than seven out of ten Argentinians who fought inMalvinas were the children of a nation educated in the public system,the same one described by the testimony. They were complying withthe civic duty of the compulsory military service. They were mainly

young men between 18 and 20 years old that came from the mostdiverse places of the Republic, some descended from the originalpeoples, others from immigrants, they had different ideologies andreligions and shared the common situation of the war. They faced the

possibility of death under very hard environmental conditions becausethey had learnt to do it in the name of an idea called homeland.The symbol of the islands concentrates two elements of deep andcontroversial meanings: on one hand, those elements linked to thenational and Latin American identity and, on the other hand, thedebates generated by the period of the military dictatorship and theprevious years where Malvinas war is one of the most moving and atthe same time frustrating episodes. That is why, perhaps, it has been

so difficult, after the defeat, to say an official word about Malvinas.However, every April 2, the force of the event emerges with powerin the small communities that make up each school. As in other

Argentine episodes, those who kept its memory alive, struggling atthe same time against generalizations and simplifications and, aboveall, against forgetfulness, were the most affected by the war.

2. MALVINAS IN THE PRESENT EDUCATIONAL AGENDATo combat the silence that saddens the teacher of Santiago del Estero,


51/281

51

Alberto Sileoni


to understand the force of the event that emerges every April 2, tokeep alive the memory of those who died in Malvinas and, above

all, to think again in the way of building a nation that has justice asits horizon, since 2003 the educational policies of the Ministry ofEducation of the Nation aimed at teaching the subject of Malvinas

with a strictness that did not exist since the war of 1982.Here we want to remark the main actions undertaken to transmitthe subject of Malvinas to the new generations in the frameworkof school, mainly developed since the enactment of the new Acton National Education but with more emphasis since the thirtieth

anniversary of the military coup.The Program Education and Memory, created on the thirtiethanniversary of the last military coup, had as one of its central themesthe subject of Malvinas, under the title Malvinas war: Senses inconflict. According to this conflict, it displayed its work lines:- the production of material for the different educational levels,- the elaboration of specific pedagogical strategies,- the inclusion of the subject in the curricular design,

- the call for the production of investigations on the local marks ofmemory in the different regions of the country,- the teachers training.The Ministry of Education produced, distributed and used as a basisfor the teachers training meetings different materials elaboratedby Education and Memory. The first one, published for the 25anniversary of the war, was a school poster based on a letter sentfrom the islands in 1982, by the teacher-soldier Julio Cao, who

died in combat. It is a highly emotional text that Cao sends to theheadmistress of his school and that includes a passage addressed toher pupils of third grade. We have had no time to say good-byeand this has worried me many nights here in Malvinas, where I amcomplying with my duty as a soldier: to defend our flag, he says inthe passage addressed to the children. He dares to confess to theheadmistress that during the attacks, the soldiers entrust themselvesto God and wait. I do not know if I trembled from cold or fear, butI trembled, he writes.


52/281


52

Throughout the text, Julio Cao expresses without exaltation but firmlywhat means the defense of the homeland for him: a duty with the others

and a service to the others, feelings that combine the experiences andlimitations of every man: cold, fear, anxiety.This production was followed by two books published during2009: Pensar Malvinas. Una seleccin de fuentes documentales,testimoniales, ficcionales y fotogrficas para trabajar en el aula y

Soldados, a book of poems written by the veteran Gustavo Caso Rosendithat was published together with a handbook for the teacher.Both materials aim at achieving one of the purposes of the Act

on National Education mentioned at the beginning of this article,which commits the National Government to sustain the teachingof the Argentine sovereignty over Malvinas Islands and the otherarchipelago of the South Atlantic and, at the same time, link it withthe transmission of the recent history as a mechanism to consolidatea society respectful of democracy and human rights.I did not go to the war thinking about Galtieri but about San Martn,says a veteran mentioned in one of the chapters ofPensar Malvinas.

I do not know why on earth/ I am writing/ with this blood that is sostrange/ and so overwhelmingly mine, writes Gustavo Caso RosendiinSoldados. The testimony and the poetic word concentrate someof the debates that the Ministry considers essential for the teachingof the Question of Malvinas. What place did the islands occupiedin the national imagination? Why was the Malvinas cause built asa metaphor of the nation? Which where the school strategies totransmit these ideas? What happened when the military dictatorship

appealed to that image to call for a war? What symbolic battles werefought after 1982 to institute Malvinas memories? What remainedof that metaphor of life in common after the experience of theState terrorism? What regional differences appeared at the time ofappropriating Malvinas experience? What can be said to the newgenerations about the subjects contained in these questions? Whatcan be done with this legacy from school?The bookLa Cuestin Malvinas en el marco del Bicentenario (TheQuestion of Malvinas and the Bicentennial) also includes as an


53/281

53

Alberto Sileoni


innovation two research works made by teacher training studentsof Corrientes province, one of Corrientes Capital City and the other

of Monte Caseros. In both cases, the generational and the territorialbelonging afford a new point of view about the war, the dictatorship,the veterans and the role of the school. The consideration of theselocal differences was and still is- one of the purposes of this Ministrysince, apart from bequeathing a past with sense to new generations,aims at contributing to the building of a national memory.Finally, another essential concern of the Program was the need to findthe most efficient ways to teach those subjects preventing the repetition

from drying the story. For this purpose, it was decided to work withimages both photographs and films-, because these ones, alwayspolysemous, represent a powerful resource to answer the questionsthat new generations may ask from their present concerns.

3. FINAL WORDSWe have reviewed the place of Malvinas at the Argentine school,we have seen how the experience of the State terrorism radically

modified the school aspiration of transmitting a past and we havepointed out which are the actions undertaken by this Ministry inorder to reestablish the social ties and formulate again a nationalspeech.

We think that more than a quarter of a century after the war, we haveto be able to reflect on that episode, as the best way to pay homage tothose who fought there, their families, their mates and our dead.Popular sovereignty is, too, the space of memory where we treasure

what we want to remember, the faces and careers we decide tohonor, the commitments we try to sustain, even when we know thatthis effort will mean a hard, long, difficult and uncertain task.

We hope that our educational policies contribute to support theawareness of the Argentine rights on Malvinas islands but, aboveall, the memory of the young soldiers and uniformed citizens that

went to the islands perhaps with the only baggage of what they hadlearned at school about the southern archipelago. Those frozen facesin the war photos of 1982 pose the question about the country that


54/281


54

we imagine for young people and about the country that they arebeginning to imagine. That exercise about the past and the present

has an essential space at school.The actions of the Ministry aim at designing policies that contributeto know the history of the islands, to feel them and love them as ours,to go beyond the present and find the best traditions that make upour national identity. To remember as when we were children andbegan our school life- that Malvinas are Argentine, that we shall goon vindicating our sovereignty over them and that those who died fortheir cause are heroes and shall live in our hearts, and that it shall be

our duty to transmit that testimony to new generations in order tokeep the memory of their generosity forever.


55/281

55

Alberto Sileoni



56/281


56


57/281

57

Federico Pinedo

204, 200, 194 and 177

SOVEREIGNTY AND NATIONIn some way, childhood landscapes, as well as the teachings of parentsor those who play their roles, are incorporated to our identity, that

is to say, to what we are individually. The homeland, the land of ourparents, the land we feel, shall also be the land of future generations,one of those identity elements that I do not know if I should defineas sentimental, irrational or spiritual. The homeland of a communityis a spiritual element of collective identity. Argentinians are the sonsof those who made their lives in Argentina and in that sense we are,in some way, the Argentina, because we have the capacity to beget

Argentinians who shall be, as us, sons of our land. The relationship

between man and land is so real as the one that exists between twolovers. Nobody would say that that relationship does not exist or thatit is not very important. That is why so many persons have died orshall die for the homeland cause.Having been born in Buenos Aires city, I would lie if I say that I am notmoved when coming from abroad I set foot again in my homeland,

whether I do it in the high plains, in Misiones, in Mendoza or in

Federico Pinedo *

204, 200, 194 and 177

* National Deputy 2007-2011, head of the PRO Caucus and of the Joint Caucus Propuesta

Federal (Federal Proposal).


58/281


58

Ushuaia. Even from the plane, it is moving to see the Andes coveredwith snow in front of Cuyo or the valleys and mountains towards

Lima. That element that constitutes our nationality and our peoplethat is our land moves us as love.Thus, we may understand why Malvinas is part of each of us, ofeach of our people. It is not as some would say- something that welearnt or an invention; it is something that we are. Those who donot understand the essence, the contents, the force of that nationalfeeling shall not be able to explain the countless struggles fought bymen, not for a piece of land, but for their homeland, whether it is

Armenian or Ukrainian, Arabian or Jewish, Chinese or Mongolian,Polish or French. When national borders are fairly and lawfullydelimited, patriotic feelings channel themselves into those limits.

Argentinians do not miss the lands that an accepted arbitration awardgave to our neighbors; when we set foot on those lands, our heartfeels that it is over Brazil or Chile and has peace, whether we haveagreed or not with an interpretation or decision. But in conflicts, inorder to have interior peace, the healing presence of justice and law

is required.

TOWARDS THE BICENTENNIALTwo hundred and four years ago, Spanish and Creole people rejectedfor the first time the British invader, expelling them from the RiverPlate beaches that they had tried to conquer for their crown. Thestruggle against the invasion generated the national spirit that a few

years later would give rise to our South American nation. Thus, it is

almost impossible that we may accept another invasion of the samecolonialist power as the one that took place some time ago overMalvinas Islands and their adjoining sea.Our nation celebrates two hundred years, since its inhabitantsdecided to govern themselves. One hundred and ninety-four yearssince its declaration of independence from any other world power,

which was recognized by the British Prime Minister, George Canning.But together with those glorious days of our bicentennial, we alwaysremember the one hundred and seventy-seven years of the injury


59/281

59

Federico Pinedo

204, 200, 194 and 177

caused by the colonialist usurpation of our insular and maritime landof the South Atlantic. It is time to make a balance and promote the

intervention of law and justice.In the nineteenth century the British Empire expanded itself throughoutthe world exhibiting the use of force. We suffered it in the flesh severaltimes in few years. 1806, the first invasion to the River Plate; 1807,the second invasion; 1833, military capture of Malvinas; in 1840, RiverPlate blockade together with France and capture of Martin Garciaisland. When in 1846 Viscount Palmerston took on the foreign affairsof the Empire, he made peace with Rosas, returned the island in the

middle of the river and ordered to salute the Argentine flag, withoutdepriving himself of mentioning that the actions of his countries hadbeen piracy actions, as H. S. Ferns remembers quoting H. L. Bulwer-Lytton.1 It is evident that if Malvinas Islands had been in the place

where Martn Garca Island is located, we would not be speaking todayabout sovereignty and the national flag would be waving over there.Only the Union Jack is waving because they were very far away.The reaction of Argentina to the international use of force was to seek

for the strengthening of the international law. That was clearly seenin the gorgeous intervention of Roque Senz Pea and his Ministerof Foreign Affairs Luis Mara Drago who, in several international andacademic forums promoted the doctrine that is named after ourMinister of Foreign Affairs, according to which it is not legitimate fora nation to use the force to obtain the compulsory payment of debtsby the creditors of its nationality. Drago doctrine was establishedon occasion of the blockade of Great Britain, Germany and Italy to

Venezuela in 1902 and derived in the acceptance of its principle byThe Hague International Conference in 1907, under the proposal ofthe United States and with the support of our country.Following this tradition, that is the tradition of a proud and self-confident government, today we should insist on generating legalalternatives for our conflict with Great Britain and for this purposethe first step must be mutual understanding and the second one, an

1 Ferns, H, S., in The Land that England Lost, published by Alistair Hennessy and John King,

British Academic Press, 1992, p. 52.


60/281


60

effort to focus on the problem and the ways to effectively solve it,instead of tying ourselves to grandiloquent words that separate us

from the contents that they should reflect.During the war of 1982, I had the opportunity of talking to aprominent British journalist of strong conservative origin. He askedme to different audiences- if it would be acceptable for Argentiniansto establish that the sovereignty of the island would pass to ourcountry the day of the death of the last living islander at that moment.Nationalist groups attacked him with the same ruthless severity ofabsolute and fundamentalist judgments. However, from our present

perspective, how happy we would be with that alternative!What I mean is that, if in the past our extreme conviction about oursovereignty made it unnecessary to think in different alternativesolutions, it is time to set in motion our brain with the same convictionbut with other circumstances, without separating the reason from theheart. In other terms, we must guard ourselves against persons thatcall themselves nationalist or, even more, national, who deprivethe nation of greater levels of effective sovereignty, putting their own

personal position over what may be the best national interest. Froma national and pro-Malvinas feeling (not so usual in these moments),I will try to expose some ideas.

THE SOUTH AMERICAN CHALLENGEIn order to analyze the question, we should note that Great Britainhas been abandoning its ancient Empire, from India to the dunestraveled by T. E. Lawrence by camel. It has also been reducing its

relevance in Argentina. If Argentina decides to undertake a nationalproject that is common to its main ideologies has a long way ahead.We should note that we have taken the decisive step of leaving thewar hypothesis against our neighbors, particularly Brazil and Chile.We should also note that this powerful event -revolutionary for ourforeign policy- will lead us to a greater supranational integration inthe South American region, which has already begun.This shall naturally have an influence on the conflict development.Does this mean that it is necessary to extremely toughen our


61/281

61

Federico Pinedo

204, 200, 194 and 177

traditional position, suspend the dialogue and just wait for a luckyfuture? I do not think so. I think that this circumstance will generate

an opportunity to start a dialogue with a minimum seriousness,something that today does not happen.I am convinced that foreign relations of a country are a reflection ofits domestic reality. For this reason, I think that in the South Americanintegration process there are many things to do to strengthen ourexternal position, which is where the national interest is really at stake.

What will give soundness and strength to the UNASUR (Union of SouthAmerican Nations) countries is the stability of rules and behaviors that

promote the essential elevation of the human dignity threshold andthe living conditions of our people; the pacific co-existence; medium-term predictability; educational growth; the circulation of persons andgoods to promote richness; tolerance and cultural plurality.It is very important to realize that our lives are not defined by thedifferent ideological positions (which are essential), but by the commonelements that ensure a peaceful coexistence. For this purpose, it isnecessary to praise the good things of others rather than the bad things

that, in our opinion, they have and it is also important to put emphasison the common construction (and on its necessary conditions), ratherthan on the destruction of those things that we dislike.Democracy is that. It is a mechanism directed to achieve a relatively wideconsensus, which requires to partially set aside personal ambitionsrather than a mechanism used by changing and circumstantialmajorities to do what they want abusing of a temporary position.This happens because nothing is everlasting, because change is the

essence of life and reality takes revenge of those who abuse of it.This is the reason of the increasing importance of the South Americanagreement on the respect for the State of Law, common gamerules, regional standards of social and economic organization, anindependent justice that ensures the effective compliance of rights,the recognition to each individual of what belongs to him, accordingto the definition of realistic and strict laws.Tolstoi and the already mentioned Lawrence of Arabia affirmed that

what ensures the attainment of big objectives and the creation of


62/281


62

richness is the decision of certain persons to face the risk and danger.So, the function of governments consists to a certain extent- in

reducing uncertainty levels in order to help entrepreneurs to makethe decision of requesting financial resources to savers who deprivethemselves of consuming, purchasing capital goods, generatingemployment and qualifying the staff, developing organizationscapable of understanding the desires and needs of their peers andof satisfying them. This is the moral content of the competition thatmust aim at a better and cheaper satisfaction of the desires of thirdparties and not to the elimination of second competitors.

A region with these characteristics shall naturally devote itself toimprove and significantly increase the quality of life of its inhabitants,but that shall not be everything. An amazing revolution is takingplace in the great powers of Asia, particularly in China and India,but also in many of their neighbors. The complementation of theireconomies with the potential of the central area of South America isevident. The great capacity of those countries to finance the buildingof the essential infrastructure to produce and transport goods shall

be a necessary step of a strong and sustained demand of products ofour region. This will generate a strategic realignment of internationalrelations. That is the context of our next years, during which we shallbe able to tackle our sovereignty problems in a constructive way.

A world virtually unexplored by human kind is that of the Antarcticsea and continent, where our coexistence with the United Kingdomand the inhabitants of our islands shall take place. The AntarcticTreaty generates an interesting coexistence space and poses a

challenge for South America. Could we agree with our neighbors onthe unification of our sovereignty demands and our public policiesin this respect, as General Leal, first Argentinian in setting foot in theSouth Pole, suggested in Marambio Base some time ago? Can westrengthen and ensure the sustainability of the maritime resourcesby means of joint agreements on rules and common defense withour South American partners? This also has an evident effect in thepeaceful power relation in the South Atlantic.


63/281

63

Federico Pinedo

204, 200, 194 and 177

LOOKING FOR AGREEMENTSThe first transitional provision of the National Constitution after

the reform of 1994, that ratifies the legitimate and non-prescribing(Argentine) sovereignty over Malvinas, Georgias del Sur and Sandwichdel Sur islands and the corresponding maritime and insular spaces,may be considered as an insurmountable limit for a flexible agreementthat could be negotiated on the sovereignty over the South Atlanticislands under British occupation. However, the second paragraphof that provision opens some doors to negotiations, limiting suchsovereignty and defining which is the non-prescribing and unwaivable

purpose of the Argentine people protected by our Constitution.Such paragraph provides that:The recovery of such territories and the full exercise of sovereignty-respecting the way of life of their inhabitants according to theprinciples of the International Law- are a non-prescribing andunwaivable objective of the Argentine people.

What evidently makes possible a negotiation with the United Kingdomabout the sovereignty over the islands is the constitutional limitation

of such sovereignty established by the principles of the internationallaw and, in particular, by the fact that the full exercise of thesovereignty over that territory includes the respect for the way oflife of its inhabitants, a way of life that is objectively included in thelegal system of the British metropolis. The objectivity of the presentBritish legal system not only imposes a limitation to Argentina butalso to the islanders will, establishing a legitimacy barrier to them.This gives rise to many possible alternatives to reach an agreement.

The way of life of the inhabitants of the islands may be interpreted asreferred to those who inhabit the islands at the time of the territoriesrecovery, in the terms of the constitutional clause, making possiblein this way to reach agreements such as the one referred to therecognition of the Argentine sovereignty with a simultaneous retro-rent of those territories to Great Britain by a determined

The Question of Malvinas and the Bicentennial

Documents

Transcript of The Question of Malvinas and the Bicentennial