Argentina
19 March,
16:55 2
Christina
Fernandez de Kirchner has asked fellow countryman Pope Francis, a vocal
proponent of Argentinean sovereignty over Las Malvinas, for his intervention
in solving the question of the disputed Las Malvinas, or as the British call
them the Falklands. The question over the islands brings to question the
Catholic Church’s Doctrine of Discovery and shows that they may still be
playing a role in what is nothing more than the stealing of lands. While
Argentina’s claims hold more water than those of the UK, which is attempting
to hold on to one of its last vestiges of empire, other questions do arise.
The
President of Argentina Christina Fernandez de Kirchner has asked the new
head of the Catholic Church, Pope Francis to intervene in the conflict over
Las Malvinas, or the Falklands, an issue which apparently unites the
Argentinean president and the spiritual leader who is also from Argentina.
One the
eve of his coronation the Pope granted the president a private audience and
she became the first head of state to meet with the Pope in Vatican City.
President
Fernandez de Kirchner has condemned the British militarization of the South
Atlantic and this was her reason for asking for the intervention of the Holy
See, in particular the Pope, her hope being that the Pope may assist in
opening up channels for a dialogue on the issue and averting any possible
confrontation over the Argentinean territory, claimed by the United Kingdom.
The
Catholic Church has intervened in conflicts in the region in the past,
namely in 1978 when Pope John Paul II helped to defuse a conflict between
Argentina and Chile over several islands in Patagonia and the Beagle
Channel.
During the
meeting with the Argentinean Pope, the first non-European Pope in 1,300
years, the president is being quoted as having said: “Now the situation is
different because Britain and Argentina are two democratic countries with
governments elected by the people. The only thing we ask is that we can sit
down and negotiate.”
In the
past Pope Francis, the former Argentinean Cardinal Bergoglio, has been vocal
in his support of the sovereignty of the Las Malvinas Islands and has called
for, the vindication of the soldiers who fought against Britain, saying the
islands were usurped by Britain.
The
question over the possession of Las Malvinas is one that is of great
historical importance and goes back hundreds of years to the very invasions
of the “New World” by the Europeans, to the period of the British Empire and
the Catholic Church’s Doctrine of Discovery, which allowed European
“Christians” to steal the lands and riches of the indigenous people’s for
their respective crowns in Europe.
Since it
was this Doctrine of Discovery that has allowed for Europeans to continue to
possess and squabble over lands that in reality were stolen, and in the case
of Las Malvinas belong to neither the Argentineans nor the British, the Pope
is probably the most relevant figure to mitigate a resolution to the
conflict.
If we go
back to the history of the islands, they have been claimed on and off by
Britain since the mid 1770s with supposed possession of the islands passing
back and forth and including French and other claims. Even Luis Vernet an
Argentinean hero who was proclaimed the Military and Civil Commander of
Falkland Islands and the Islands near Cape Horn by the Republic of Buenos
Aires in 1829, was apparently playing both sides of the fence in his control
over the islands, attempting to please both British and Argentinean
interests.
The United
States was also involved in the conflict culminating in the destruction of
the settlement on the islands by the USS Lexington after Vernet seized three
US warships, the USS Breakwater, USS Superior and USS Harriet in 1831.
When the
British expelled the population of the islands in 1833, according to
historical records, only 22 people remained in the major city of Port Louis.
This included 12 Argentineans, 4 Charrúa Indians from Uruguay, 2 British
nationals, 2 Germans, one French citizen and one person from Jamaica.
In 1834
Charles Darwin made his second visit to the islands commenting: “After the
possession of these miserable islands had been contested by France, Spain,
and England, they were left uninhabited. The government of Buenos Aires then
sold them to a private individual, but likewise used them, as old Spain had
done before, for a penal settlement. England claimed her right and seized
them. The Englishman who was left in charge of the flag was consequently
murdered. A British officer was next sent, unsupported by any power: and
when we arrived, we found him in charge of a population, of which rather
more than half were runaway rebels and murderers.”
If we
judge ownership of the islands by the actual original population, leaving
the indigenous issue aside for the time being, and not by the whims of
ambitious colonial powers who needed the islands due to their strategic
location, then of course the islands belong to Argentina and perhaps in part
to the Charrúa Indians from Uruguay.
In stark
reality, with all political niceties aside, if we take the account of
Charles Darwin at full value then, as with North America, Australia and
other empirical conquests, the question is one of whether British murderers,
criminals, outcasts, pirates and every sort of scum, and their descendants,
who have been squatting on lands not their own for hundreds of years, can
really be called the owners of said lands.
As for Las
Malvinas, asking these very descendents, as would be the case with the
descendants of the same Europeans who call themselves “Americans”, who the
land belongs to, is the same as asking an 8th generation
squatter if they in fact own the home they live in. It is a farce.
|