The Spectator likens Milei's Falklands push to Galtieri's

An opinion column published on Wednesday in the British weekly The Spectator likens Argentine President Javier Milei's campaign over the Falklands to that of dictator Leopoldo Galtieri in 1982, with the difference, its author argues, that the current government is using legal rather than military means. The piece, by law professor Andrew Tettenborn, is an argument of opinion rather than a report of new facts. The columnist calls “lawfare” — the use of legal instruments for political ends — the arbitration Argentina announced on Monday over the Sea Lion oil project. He argues that the real aim is to reopen the sovereignty question, that Milei sees the United Kingdom as weak and divided, and that he is seeking a distraction from domestic difficulties. These are the author's assessments; he also directs personal characterisations at British Prime Minister Andy Burnham and at Milei himself. The legal core of the column is its most concrete part: the author argues that Argentina's claim is in substance a territorial sovereignty dispute and that the international law of the sea tribunal has made clear it does not see that as its role. In previous cases, tribunals constituted under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea have declined to rule on sovereignty disputes, as in the 2015 arbitration between Mauritius and the United Kingdom over the Chagos Islands. The procedure Buenos Aires has announced is an Annex VII arbitration; from the Hamburg-based International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, Argentina would only seek provisional measures while the arbitral tribunal is constituted. The column contains inaccuracies. It places the environmental lawsuit against the project in Buenos Aires and suggests it was filed with Milei's tacit approval; it was filed on September 1, before the presidential address that launched the campaign, by the Falklands War Veterans Centre of La Plata and an association of environmental lawyers before the federal court in Río Grande, Tierra del Fuego. Nor is it confirmed that the criminal complaints cover Rockhopper executives, as the text states. Tettenborn advises the British government to reject the claim and “hold our nerve”, and argues that international courts have lost impartiality. The British statement issued the same Wednesday, however, expressly invokes the Law of the Sea Convention as the legal framework for oil activity in the archipelago. Argentina argues that unilateral exploitation contravenes UN General Assembly resolutions 2065 and 31/49 and that the residents' wishes do not settle the dispute. In the 2013 referendum, on a 92% turnout, 99.8% of voters chose to retain the status of a British overseas territory. Top Comments Disclaimer & comment rulesNo comments for this story Please log in or register (it’s free!) to comment. Login with Facebook