If the Argies promised the islanders self-determination then I honestly don't see why we can't hand over sovereignty.

Oh and let's hand back Gibraltar while we're at it.

First of all, the Islanders have self-determination already. Everybody has it. It's one of the fundamental rights specified in the UN Human Rights Convention. Secondly, every time the Islanders have been asked, the large majority have said they wished to remain under british sovereignty. So 'giving back' the Islands to Argentina would in fact be a breach of their right to self-determination, not in any sense a promotion of it.
They want to be British. They don't want to be Argentine. They've made it pretty bloody clear every time anybody has even vaguely asked them. So the people in favour of handing soveregenty to Argentina are in fact taking away one of their basic human rights. So well done there.
And on an entirely pragmatic level, if UKG did hand control over to Argentina and the Falklanders then said 'Actually, no, we'd really much rather be British thanks', then the Argentine government would be happy to hand control back? Do you really think any guarantee on a piece of paper would actually be worth a damn in that case?


Totally different kettle of fish, that - much more akin to Hong Kong than the Falklands, historically. However in theory the same rules apply - GB can't just 'hand back' Gibraltar to Spain. The locals have a right to self-determination. UKGov would have to actually ask the Gibraltarians what they want to happen, and then follow that. They'd (in theory) have three options - stay British, become Spanish or become entirely independent and effectively become a UN protectorate. This happened a couple of times when the Balkans broke up.

Jon

I wonder if Mr Penn has ever been told to mind his own business.

Fair points Jon, except I'd also wager that the British people have the right to decide whether they want to continue to retain sovereignty over those territories. Much like I also think the English should be able to decide if they want shot of Scotland.

You'd think there would be, but its not actually enshrined in the convention. I guess the logic is if you want to give up a colony and declare it independent, nobody can stop you anyway. You just stop doing stuff for them and tell them to get on with it. As I said to someone a few days ago, it's pretty much impossible to force someone to stop ignoring you.

Whether 'self determination' can be applied to the English specifically is a very interesting question. Alex Salmond certainly seems to believe it applies to the Scots and nobody seems to be immediately denying it, so I suppose it applies equally to the English. Self-determination doesn't mean independence per se, it just means having the choice and having that choice accepted by everyone else. How you would resolve the question of what would happen if the Scots and English both voted on dissolution and one side voted yes and the other voted no, that's the big question. Better to only give one side or the other the choice, even though technically that's rather.. wrong.

On a less tangential note, the point is this - Argentina don't get to decide who 'owns' The Falklands. Technically, the UK doesn't get to decide who owns The Falklands either. The Islanders do. The problem Argentina has is that it's pretty well known which way the current Islanders would vote if asked. It seems to me the whole thing with the sabre rattling and blockades is entirely the wrong tack. What Argentina should be doing is going all out to make the Islanders want to be part of Argentina. If they could show that was the case to a level the UN would ratify, then they'd pretty force the UK government to hand over administration of the Islands without a shot being fired. Quite why nobody in the Argentine government seems to have figured this out any time in the last 30 years... well, it says a lot about politics, really.

Jon

Maybe common sense. How likely do you reckon the Argentines think it will be to win the hearts and minds of a colony they invaded?

They continue to make a lot of noise about war crimes committed by the British, against captured soldiers, but there are a fair few rumours about rough handling of the islanders at the hands of the invaders.

I don't see that as an easy sell.

They should probably start with regular shipments of fresh vegetables.

Or the Penguin edition of the Joy of Sex.

Why not just ship the residents of the Falklands to a remote Scottish island? The climate would be the same, we could ignore them like we do now, and we won't have to worry about them being invaded.

give it back to the french its originally a french island

my dads been to falklands, he said its so boring there that everyone drinks every single day

To be fair on those criteria we should be giving freedom to Sheffield.

Jon

Carefull now, you'll have David Blunket after you.

Fixed