With a POD of no later then 1982. Had Argentines used their balls. Instead of making a war with Britain regarding Falklands, what if Argentina had just pressured Britain into a Hong Kong-styled deal regarding Falklands that Argentina will recognize the British rule in Falklands for 15 years in exchange of a joint oil exploration in Falkland seas that benefits Argentina's economy then after 15 years Britain gives the Falklands to Argentina and colonize the Falklands with the Argentines.
Hong Kong-styled deal between Argentina and Britain regarding Falklands
- Thread starter Joseph Solis in Australia
- Start date
Why on earth would Britain accept this deal? British ownership of the Falklands guarantees 100% of oil revenue (well, the islanders themselves get a lot of it, but you know what I mean), its pretty hard to pressurise a much bigger and more powerful nation, and successive British governments have claimed they will respect the islander's wishes, which I doubt would include new Argentinian neighbours. Unless Britain somehow bankrupts itself on an even grander scale than it did when it went to the IMF, and is desperate for money, they will not accept such a deal. The Conservatives would never make such a deal, and I would guess Labour would be more about self-determination for islanders, which would rule out such a move. Unless there are massive, massive changes, its ASB.
Utterly, utterly impossible.
There are absolutely no circumstances where this would even be discussed.
None.
Regards,
Frank
There are absolutely no circumstances where this would even be discussed.
None.
Regards,
Frank
Why in the world would Britain agree to such a deal? It already owned the Falklands.
Oh and that went terribly well for the Argentines didn't it?
If Britain thinks they can retake the Falklands in 1982 they're gunna be even more secure in the 70s or whenever Argentina 'pressures' the UK into anything.
Apart from invading the Falklands (Which the UK thinks and can defend/retake) what tips the balance of power in favour of Argentina?
Actually, I think economics swung a bigger stick than Argentina ever could.
You have to look at England in the 1970's. Economically, they weren't in great shape. England had spent the last couple of decades dismantling its Empire. India, the cash cow of the entire thing, had gone in 1946.
After that you were left with Dominions like Canada, Australia, South Africa and New Zealand that were basically independent, or non-economic territories. Pretty much all of the Empire's African holdings were abandoned in the 1960's.
Through the 1970's, the British Empire withdrew from its remaining middle east holdings, Aden and Bahrain, as well as from the Pacific, Fiji and Vanuatu.
By 1980, all that was really left was Hong Kong, which was due to expire when the lease was up, and a few odds and ends, little far flung islands, many of them uninhabited or barely inhabited. Mostly of no economic or political significance, but damned expensive to maintain.
The Falkland Islands were in the 1970's and early 1980's were basically a giant white elephant. Literally on the other side of the planet, extraordinarily expensive. The entire population could be fit into a corner of a suburb in London, all it produced was sheep and the British could get wool cheaper and easier. The potential of offshore oil was unknown and decades away.
I think the British back in the day were actually looking for ways to get shed of the damned thing. The political problem was a local population which couldn't sustain independence on its own, and was looking pretty askance at the notion of joining up with Argentina.
Had Argentina made an agreement with Britain to submit its claim to international arbitration or mediation, and had it been able to offer credible guarantees of civil rights and economic support to soothe the Falklanders (or at least British consequences) I can tell you two things: 1) The British would not have fought their case very hard; 2) Upon loosing, the Brits would have been out the door before you heard it swing.
As it was, the Argentines saddled themselves with a psychopathically violent and vile regime whose evil was matched only bit its incompetence. That regime, having disgraced itself in the eyes of the civilized world then proceeded to go after the Falklands in the absolutely worst way and in a fashion calculated to inspire British presence for another 50 years.
You have to look at England in the 1970's. Economically, they weren't in great shape. England had spent the last couple of decades dismantling its Empire. India, the cash cow of the entire thing, had gone in 1946.
After that you were left with Dominions like Canada, Australia, South Africa and New Zealand that were basically independent, or non-economic territories. Pretty much all of the Empire's African holdings were abandoned in the 1960's.
Through the 1970's, the British Empire withdrew from its remaining middle east holdings, Aden and Bahrain, as well as from the Pacific, Fiji and Vanuatu.
By 1980, all that was really left was Hong Kong, which was due to expire when the lease was up, and a few odds and ends, little far flung islands, many of them uninhabited or barely inhabited. Mostly of no economic or political significance, but damned expensive to maintain.
The Falkland Islands were in the 1970's and early 1980's were basically a giant white elephant. Literally on the other side of the planet, extraordinarily expensive. The entire population could be fit into a corner of a suburb in London, all it produced was sheep and the British could get wool cheaper and easier. The potential of offshore oil was unknown and decades away.
I think the British back in the day were actually looking for ways to get shed of the damned thing. The political problem was a local population which couldn't sustain independence on its own, and was looking pretty askance at the notion of joining up with Argentina.
Had Argentina made an agreement with Britain to submit its claim to international arbitration or mediation, and had it been able to offer credible guarantees of civil rights and economic support to soothe the Falklanders (or at least British consequences) I can tell you two things: 1) The British would not have fought their case very hard; 2) Upon loosing, the Brits would have been out the door before you heard it swing.
As it was, the Argentines saddled themselves with a psychopathically violent and vile regime whose evil was matched only bit its incompetence. That regime, having disgraced itself in the eyes of the civilized world then proceeded to go after the Falklands in the absolutely worst way and in a fashion calculated to inspire British presence for another 50 years.
Or a lot longer...
Some of the Brits have an odd attitude towards people who invade 'their' land they take it the wrong way and have long memories
Cook
Banned
15 years!
You’d just be getting finished exploration and test drilling and just getting ready for commercial drilling and the lease would expire. Bit of a winner for the South Americans but hardly something the British would appreciate.
Plus it runs something like this: ‘You’ve got what I want, and I want it so how about you give it to me and then we’ll both be happy?’
Well, what would be a better win-win solution for Argentina and Britain regarding the Falklands?
A Hong Kong styled deal?
A joint control of Falklands?
Or Argentina renounces Falkland claims in exchange of more British or Western investments then Argentina receives a part $$$ from oil drilling and Argentina transforms itself into a major oil producer and becomes the richest country in the world?
A Hong Kong styled deal?
A joint control of Falklands?
Or Argentina renounces Falkland claims in exchange of more British or Western investments then Argentina receives a part $$$ from oil drilling and Argentina transforms itself into a major oil producer and becomes the richest country in the world?
The question remains -- why would Britain agree to any of this? What can Argentina offer that would persuade Britain to give up anything? You seem to be operating on the premise that Argentina has some source of pressure or control over Britain and the Falklands that is more compelling than "I want."
Why would Britain do it? What would it gain? Argentine is not China, China is an economic superpower.
To shut up the Argies ones and for all about Falkland claims. It seems that Argentina wants $$$ to revive their declining economy that's why they want to claim Falklands. The win-win solution that I could see is that Argentina should renounce its claims in Falkland in exchange of British investment in Argentina then Argentina receives a part $$$ from oil drilling and Argentina transforms itself into a major oil producer and becomes the richest country in the world with the help of Britain and the rest of western nations. The oil revenues should be divided by 50-50 proportion, 50% goes to Argentina and 50% goes to Britain. Had Argentina used their balls, their economic problems will be fixed ones and for all.
Also HK was a leased territory from the very beginning. So not only is China a powerful opponent you wouldn't want to mess with, the Brits didn't have any right to stay. Thatcher supposedly brought the up idea of an extended lease in an informal meeting with Chinese diplomats in 1985. They bluntly said 'no' and that was that, nothing much more she could do.
In diplomatic terms that's exactly whats happening here just with the roles reversed. Britain has every right and interest to just say no.
Bar being 'near' Argentina, they have no claim outside of colonial Spain to the rocks and now with a garrison, a British public and establishment determined to retain them on patriotic grounds AND the prospect of economic bounty nothing of the sort will happen.
I do believe one day the Union Flag will be lowered from Port Stanley, its just a case of when the United States can be bothered to back Buenos Aires.
In diplomatic terms that's exactly whats happening here just with the roles reversed. Britain has every right and interest to just say no.
Bar being 'near' Argentina, they have no claim outside of colonial Spain to the rocks and now with a garrison, a British public and establishment determined to retain them on patriotic grounds AND the prospect of economic bounty nothing of the sort will happen.
I do believe one day the Union Flag will be lowered from Port Stanley, its just a case of when the United States can be bothered to back Buenos Aires.
Because it is the easiest win-win solution for Argentina and Britain regarding Falklands. It is also the easiest way to fix Argentina's economic miseries. It is also the easiest way for Britain to obtain petroleum. Argentina wants petrodollars while Britain wants to maintain control the Falklands as Falklanders wants to remain British forever. The easiest solution is to have Argentina give up Falkland claims in exchange of British investment in Argentina then Argentina receives a part $$$ from oil drilling and Argentina transforms itself into a major oil producer and becomes the richest country in the world with the help of Britain and the rest of western nations. Argentina and Britain will be both happy.