Negotiation could allow the Argentines to have a settlement around their military cemetery on East Falkland (Isla Soledad), while keeping the Falklands British.
The British offered to send the bodies back but Argentina refused on the basis the Falklands belonged to Argentina. It's sending something of a mixed message, then, if that's NOW going to be used as a way to grab a piece of them. IOW I'd leave that out of it as it just confuses the issue. Alternatively it would be better for Argentina to have those bodies exhumed and returned and then use THAT as a way to try to come to some form of agreement if one can be reached although, again, what basis discussions would take place remains to be seen.
I'd imagine the British could reduce military spending in the South Atlantic, and get 99.95% of what they what, as they hold a pretty strong hand.
It seems to me that allowing an Argentine settlement on the islands would mean increasing military spending, not decreasing it. There's nothing Argentina can do that would justify decreasing military spending beyond renouncing their claim, which is really the only thing the UK would ideally like from them. The status quo is fine from our perspective, the matter is already settled. It's everyone else that wants 'resolution'.
I don't know what arrangements are in place for Argentines to visit graves on the Falklands, but I would hope family members are able to. Of course, if Argentina allowed regular flights/ships to go between Argentina and The Falklands, it would be an easier proposition. So there's a sensible first step that would benefit both sides. A settlement around a military cemetery in a country you have no sovereignty over? I can't think of any rational precedent for that.
Well, there are many overseas cemeteries which Britain and a lot of other countries maintain, aren't there. My grandfather's brother is buried in Duisans, just outside Arras in France and we don't have any sovereignty over France but the point is we're not CLAIMING any sovereignty over it, either. None of this would be an issue if not for that.
That's true, but I don't think that's what Chesco is suggesting; he seems to want some kind of Argentinian "settlement" around the cemetery. Britain clearly doesn't have an issue with the existence of an Argentinian cemetery in the Falklands, and of course there are examples where there are non-British cemeteries in Britain, like the USAF cemetery in Madingley, near Cambridge.
Indeed... and in the situation where they're ALSO claiming sovereignty that's a non-starter I'd say. If the position were normalised that could change, of course, as you suggest.
Yes, and they are identified as American by the flag. The British not only forbid the Argentine flag in the cemetery, but also forbid anything that has the name Argentina on it, anywhere in the islands, including books. If a relative of a war veteran wants to visit the cemetery, they have to go through a cumbersome process to even be able to visit. They also search them to make sure that they have nothing on them that even mentions Argentina by name, never mind a flag. The only Argentine symbol allowed in the cemetery is a figure of the virgin Mary. The virgin is a replica of Our Lady of Lujan -a sacred figure to many in Argentina and I'd imagine to Catholics in Britain as well- recognized by the Vatican as "Heavenly Patronness of Argentina". Sadly, it has been vandalized and shot with bullets, presumably because it represents Argentina. The cemetery itself has also been vandalized. Some say by the locals, some say by the British military, but nobody knows. In addition, more than half of the graves remain unidentified, and Britain refuses to make efforts to identify the remains of those laying there, or to allow Argentine experts to do it. There is also a widespread belief among families of those who are buried there that even those graves that are identified are most likely wrong. Families of those presumably buried there have united to request reasonable identification efforts, but so far they've gotten nowhere. There are claims of sovereignty, and then there is human decency.
Well, that goes back to my point about returning any remains back to Argentina, doesn't it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentine_Military_Cemetery#cite_note-4 "After the war the British government offered to return the bodies of the Argentinian dead to Argentina for burial, but their government refused. They said that these islands were part of Argentina, and the bodies would remain here. For the Falkland islanders, these graves are daily reminder that Argentina refuses to drop its claim their homeland." So it could be argued that the Argentines are using the dead bodies of their own soldiers to strengthen any future claims for the Islands. I think what this really shows is that nobody comes out of this looking good. But, on the other point, a better comparison isn't to American war graves in France of the soldiers there as liberators, it's to German war graves in France which are marked but, again, Germany isn't still saying it's entitled to any part of Franc, is it. Most of this comes back to that simple, straightforward issue.
Britain also claims the territory, that doesn't mean we prevent the families of fallen servicemen from repatriating their remains for political reasons.
I agree... ditch that and we can move forward... in this and many other areas. The reality is it's only EVER been an entirely manufactured dispute. There's NEVER been any logical argument to say it belongs to Argentina and it's a matter dreamt up to create a feeling of loss and unfairness by the Argentine political class to distract the attention of their people away from their failings of their leadership.
The Argentine government position is that the islands are part of the province of Tierra del Fuego. Personally, I think Buenos Aires would be wise to treat the islands as a separate province. That said, a child born in the islands automatically gets two citizenships at birth, which I think is a pretty good deal.
Also made rather more cumbersome by the lack of direct transportation connections between The Falklands and Argentina. As far as the last sentence goes, I seem to recall an Argentinian athlete filming a somewhat provocative ad on the Falklands: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-17946838
"4. Don’t mention the war" http://www.telegraph.co.uk/expat/ed...=Edi_Exp_New_2016_04_19&utm_campaign=DM111138
It just seems odd in this day and age of self-determination for peoples thoughout the world that Argentina wants to impose colonialism upon the peaceful people of the Falkland Islands. Seems that, unlike the UK, Argentina hasn't given up on its imperial past and continues to want to subject a people, against their will. Argentina, through Spain, (and Italy) does have a longer imperial history than the UK - so it must be harder for them to shake it off.
You really aren't trying to compare the invasion of the Falklands by Argentina to American and British forces of two world wars are you? After WWII, after Germany had invaded counties that patently didn't want them. (Much like the invasion of the Falklands.) One didn't see many german flags flying.