Ha... check this out:
Written by Rodolfo Terragno (Biography
I just used Google Translate for a quick translation, there are some mistakes but the idea is perfectly manifested.
"Hard to believe they dont understand: By declaring themselves british, the islanders will give the reason to Argentina.
The right of self-determination belongs to the people, not to people.
This is recognized in international law
A group to belong to the colonial state "is not a people and, therefore, not entitled to self-determination" (Rosalyn Higgins, British, former
president of the International Court of Justice).
Population and people are two different things. To become a village, the inhabitants of a territory should "regard themselves as a distinct society
of American society occupying that territory" (Hurst Hannum, Berkeley).
These people need to have a "cultural identity" that clearly differentiates the country to which they belong (Anthony Simpson, International
Commission of Jurists, Geneva).
Should be (or descend) people "indigenous", ie groups living in the islands before the colonial invasion (Wolfgang F. Danspeck Grubel,
Self-Determination Institute, Liechestein).
We need to be considered "victims" of "oppression" and want to "separate" the colonial power. (Pete Radan, Macquarie University).
The British diplomat Denzil Dunnett (Royal Institute of International Affairs, London) recalled, in a paper published by International Affaires, the
position he held, on this subject, former British Prime Minister Edward Heath (conservative predecessor Margaret Thatcher). Based on these principles
of international law, said in Parliament that the people of the Falklands have no right to self-determination.
The islanders, is expected to vote as they vote, they prove to not meet any of the requirements to enjoy that right. They will say:
They want to belong to the colonial state.
Not consider themselves distinct from society in the UK.
They have no cultural identity.
No descendants of an indigenous people.
They do not feel victims of oppression.
Do not want independence.
Demonstrate, well, something that Argentina has always maintained: that they are not a people islanders and therefore no right of
As British, who are and have been proclaimed, they could not be arbitrators in a dispute between his country and Argentina.
It is noteworthy that the President and other political figures were outraged by the announcement of the plebiscite.
Argentina should celebrate that is the reason.
But does the opposite.
Speaking at the Decolonization Committee of the United Nations, Mrs. Kirchner asked "Why [the British] will not pose a referendum on Iraq and
Afghanistan?". This implies that they should do in those countries and, in Indeed, it would be desirable that they be given to Iraqis and Afghans the
right to choose their destiny. those if they are people with genuine right to self determination.
It was unfortunate them (or stop believing they are) in the same plane as the inhabitants of the Falklands.
No doubt Mrs. Kirchner would not equate. Perhaps the trend has betrayed his impromptu speech, even in diplomatic issues that require measuring each
In any case, it's time for Argentina to warn when the attitudes of the UK and the islanders the damage, and when inadvertently favor.
British law no longer considers the inhabitants of the archipelago, as he had for a long time, "citizens of an overseas territory". The reputation
of UK citizens.
These citizens, residents in the South Atlantic, feel proud to be British and now may ratify their membership with the vote.
When British law says what it says, and the inhabitants of the islands with their vote accepted that condition, everything goes in favor of
The islanders are declared part of the UK does not mean that their country belongs to the ground beneath their feet. They can not be judge and
What they do is prove (unwittingly) that the right of self-determination did not attend."
Original letter written in spanish can be found here: