The task is made all the more difficult by the fact the Argentine part of the war effort was run so incompetently, that their military only has the vaguest ideas of where it left its mines, the practice of the day being to lob mines haphazardly from helicopters with no strategic thought process, as far away from Argentine defensive positions as possible, in the vain hope that the liberating British forces would walk through these areas, rather than attack the main concentration of Argentine defenses around the capital, Stanley.
As a result mine fields have tended to be found in a rather informal manner, as demonstrated in this helpful educational video below:
Apart from demonstrating that the Argentine occupation forces were thoroughly unmotivated and lack-luster in defending what was supposedly a sacred integral part of the Argentine motherland, ripped away from its bosom by brutal British imperialists, the mine issue demonstrates the bizarre and contradictory approach Argentina has with its sovereignty claim to the Falklands.
Argentine Politicians have for years been quite happy to publicly condemn with great gusto such great injustices as the "plundering of Argentine resources" by Falklands fishing vessels or the newly controversial current hydrocarbon drilling campaign, or wail with indignant nationalist fury about the (now infamous) "unprovoked aggression" by the evil colonial British military test firing rapiers missiles from the islands. In fact just about any action the islanders have done from attending a conference on sustainable fisheries to being accepted into the world bowls association, has warranted the usual bullshit about some kind of violation of international treaties and UN resolutions, a conclusion reached usually by only the most abstract interpretations as is logically possible without inducing some kind of hallucinogenic drug.
But over mine clearance there is a very awkward and telling silence from the normally jihadi like rants of the Malvinists.There appears to be a genuine reluctance to identify clearing Argentine mines in the islands, with their notion that the Islands are sovereign Argentine territory.
Even as the clearing has gone on, Argentina hasn't even made so much as a pip, or even once offered to help to clear its own mines from what we are repeatedly told is an integral part of the Argentine republic.
This inevitably leads us to one logical conclusion: the Argentine republic has a very selective attitude to sovereignty of the islands, and seemingly only selectively chooses when the islands are an integral part of the republic, and when they are not, the mining issue is one such examples of this selective attitude.
If the Argentine republic did truly beleive its won rhetoric and insisted that the Islands are an integral part of the great and most glorious republic, they would have been clambering over the tables at the Ottawa convention demanding that they, the true owners of the islands, not the British usurpers, should be de-mining the islands.
But why has such an action not happened?
The first reason can be found within the context of the Ottawa convention of 1996, which banned landmines, specifically paragraph one of article five of the convention, which states:
"Each state party undertakes to destroy or ensure the destruction of all anti-personnel mines in mined areas under its jurisdiction or control, as soon as possible but not later than 10 years after the entry into force of this convention for that state party"
So this specifically sets in law that the Islands are indeed under British sovereignty, and are certainly not an integral part of the Argentine republic as they so publicly wish the world to beleive, the fact that Argentina has never once protested at this article in the convention would seem to suggest that even Argentina accepts that the Islands are not its sovereign territory.
This is indeed a rather embarrassing contradiction for the Argentine govt which in recent years has publicly implemented decrees attempting to control shipping between the islands and mainland South America and has now started issuing fines of up to $7,000 to people traveling from the islands who do not admit on immigration forms that the islands are part of the Argentine republic, the fact that this contradiction has received virtually no coverage in the Argentine press adds weight to the idea that this is an embarrassing contradiction ignored in the hope that by ignoring it, it isn't true.
Another reason for the inability of Argentina to put her mouth were her words are over mine issues, are of course elections and declining popularity of the leader of the day, essentially the Falklands only becomes a nationalist public issue in Argentina when the current president is losing popularity and an election is round the corner. Obviously de-mining is not a popular nationalist issue that will get you votes, especially when the external enemy and rapist of the beautiful glorious republic, is clearing YOUR mines, from what YOU publicly proclaim to be YOUR land! But decrying hydro carbon exploration, military exercises and god knows what else, from YOUR land is a populist nationalist issue, and bound to get you votes and popularity esspecially among a population who have been pretty much brought up with only a singular and very narrow narrative about the Falklands issue, and the nationalist vote although very short-term is an easy vote winner, and a very quick vote winner, especially when evil nasty external enemies are involved threatening the great and glorious motherland.
So it seems that Argentina's irredentist claim to the Falklands is blighted by the twin evils of the need to shore up wavering presidential popularity with nationalist rhetoric, and the rather amateurish and undeveloped approach that Argentina currently has with resolving disputes with other countries.
Quite a bit different to the narrative Argentina wishes to present us, and her people, that the whole claim is and has been about "recovering" lost land, or indeed the current flawed logic that the islands are still somehow a part of Argentina, despite them not being anything close. This is indeed a recipe for failure in Argentina's attempt to gain sovereignty over the islands, whereas the UK has been relatively consistent and simple with its claim (continuous British sovereignty, and self-determination of the inhabitants) Argentina has not, and its claim continually fluctuates depending upon the domestic well being or whatever regime is in power in Argentina, if Argentina cannot be consistent with its claim on a matter as simple as mines, it begs questions as to whether the entire claim is consistent or even legitimate, it is quite clear, at least to this writer, that Argentina's claim is motivated by irrational nationalism and pride rather than anything benign such as reclaiming "that which was lost" a view supported by Myron Weiner (refer to general meanings 1: irredentism) who stated that no irredentist claim is motivated for benign purposes, and certainly the lack of inaction and contradictions by Argentina over de-mining shows how contemptible her claim really is, and what it is at face value, a sinister extremist-nationalist motivated claim, to excercise national ego and a good way to shore up failing public support close to election time, or to hide embarrassing political scandals.
Stand by for more contradictions of note in the future.
