And today the Falklands … still on the news. And I don’t have anything to say about it. The government of Argentina only knows about either rejecting the Falkland islanders, the British government of, if convenient, the international society and legal order. The British government, sometimes proactive, sometimes reactive. Proactive in inviting the Falkland islanders to ANY negotiations; reactive, to any declaration coming from the Argentinean government.
Does it not seem just a little bit too similar to 1982 dialectic? Both Argentina and the United Kingdom were (and are) going through deep crisis. It was very convenient for both of them at that time (is it the same now?) for personal internal agendas. Ms Margaret Thatcher and the Military Junta; Mr David Cameron and Ms Cristina Fernández de Kirchner: the characters seem different. But wait a minute, the play is the same! So it is not that the characters are different but the actors! We are in presence of the same play with the same script played again in the same theatre but now by different actors and actresses.
For a view re. Falklands’ conflict see the first article of this blog:
Falklands: an Argentinean invention? A British solution?
In the meantime, what do their public think of it? What do Falkland Islanders have to say about it? What do Argentineans think of the Britons and the Falkland Islanders? What do the Britons know about Argentina and the Falklands?
It happens now often than not that some take their side depending on their nationality or country of origin without really knowing much about what they are referring to. And not only about the Falklands but in regards a culture as a whole: the English are… the British are … (for instance, do they know English and British mean something different? That the Union Jack and the English flag are two different flags?). And on the other side, the Argentineans are… (When did you go to Buenos Aires? Have you been to Mar del Plata? Do you know there are places in Patagonia where people speak and study in both Welsh and Spanish?). And of course, the Falkland Islands: the islanders, those people … has anyone met a Falkland Islander? Has anyone been to the Falkland Islands? Do you know they have families there that work, pay taxes and send their children to school? Yes, they have children too! Amazing!
Media and social media is part of our daily life but they exist as long as we use and/or buy them. Governments come and go. We vote them, they come; we don’t vote them, they go. They’re our representatives; they’re high ranked civil servants, but civil servants. Unfortunately, some of them cannot separate the public side from the private side, and it is then when private, selfish interests come into play. So next time we read or see a speech, let’s try to have a critical eye and dissociate that what is simply orientated by selfish, one sided interests from that reflecting what population, the people they represent, want.
Why? Kofi A. Annan, in his ‘Two concepts of sovereignty’ said it clearly when referring to international intervention in humanitarian crises and it’s perfectly applicable here: “Because, despite all the difficulties of putting it into practice, it does show that humankind today is less willing than in the past to tolerate suffering in its midst, and more willing to do something about it.” (The Economist, 18 September 1999).
It‘s true, we’re either citizens of one or another country. However, we’re far more than that. We’re part of a broader net called mankind. It’s the time to work together. It’s the time to leave behind selfish policies or speeches. It’s time to address serious issues with serious agendas by mature representatives. All of us, Argentineans, Britons and Falkland Islanders deserve better.