En ningún momento, Inglaterra objetó el establecimiento argentino en las Islas Malvinas, a pesar de actos jurídicos de extrema importancia llevados a cabo entre los dos países, tales como la firma del Tratado de Amistad, Comercio y Navegación de febrero 1825.
Este instrumento no contiene reserva alguna por parte del gobierno británico sobre las Islas Malvinas, a pesar de las acciones llevadas a cabo públicamente y autorizadas por Buenos Aires en 1820, para dar un solo ejemplo que ilustre la situación.
Al tratar de forzar cualquier argumento falaz y malicioso con miras a lograr justificar y confundir acciones nunca llevadas a cabo por Argentina- como por ejemplo, “abandonar” el reclamo de soberanía-, se distorsiona el alcance de la Convención de 1850 entre Argentina y Gran Bretaña, la cual fue firmada por ambas naciones de buena fe.
Este acuerdo estaba destinado a poner fin al bloqueo naval impuesto por el Reino Unido y Francia en el Río de la Plata. Todas- absolutamente todas- sus disposiciones se refieren a la necesidad de resolver la situación en el Río de la Plata y reanudar el comercio y la estabilidad política. No tiene relación alguna con las Islas Malvinas.
Tanto es así que en 1849, después de la firma del Convenio, Rosas se refirió al reclamo de soberanía sobre las islas en su mensaje a la Legislatura.
La cuestión quedó pendiente y esto fue reconocido expresamente por el Secretario de Relaciones Exteriores británico en 1849.
Argentina, por su parte, siguió planteando la cuestión en los diferentes niveles de gobierno y se convirtió en un tema de debate en el Congreso de la Nación. En 1884, en vista de la falta de respuesta ante las repetidas protestas, Argentina propuso llevar el tema a arbitraje internacional. La propuesta fue rechazada por el Reino Unido, sin brindar ningún tipo de razones de su negativa.
11 October, 2015 at 11:05 pm
The Treaty was not ratified until 1850. No comment was thereafter made to the legislature for 91 years. Why do you deliberately distort the truth?
Click to access 7-1850-to-1899.pdf
LikeLike
12 October, 2015 at 4:40 am
There was no mention to the Malvinas. What document have you read? Or did you make it up as you did with the Tiempo Argentno article? You are really desperate.
LikeLike
12 October, 2015 at 9:57 am
It is the lack of a mention which is important.
“The treaty of peace leaves every thing in the state in which it found it, unless there be some express stipulation to the contrary. The existing state of possession is maintained, except so far as altered by the terms of the treaty. If nothing be said about the conquered country or places, they remain with the conqueror, and his title cannot afterwards be called in question.” [Elements of International Law: with a sketch of the history of the science Henry Wheaton 1836. cf. Elements of International Law and Laws of War H. W. Halleck 1866 p.353]
“The Convention of Settlement was an international agreement between Britain and Argentina. It was a peace treaty, so by ratifying it in 1850, Argentina accepted that the Falklands were legitimately British and no longer regarded them as Argentine territory.” [Pascoe & Pepper 2012]
Even your own politicians and historians are aware of this, and always were.
“8º: (No escrita). Inglaterra se quedaba con las islas Malvinas” [Carlos Pereyra 1919 p.206 (p.222 of the 1944 edition)]
“ .. a concession to Britain or a culpable oversight?” [Deputy Absalon Rojas, speaking in the Argentine Congress on July 19th, 1950 quoted in Cuando Rosas quiso ser inglés Alfredo R. Burnet-Merlín 1974.]
“Rosas signed the treaty of friendship with Queen Victoria. There it says: “Under this convention perfect friendship between Her Britannic Majesty’s Government and the Government of the Confederation, is restored”. In no article or detail of the document is there any proviso for the restitution of the islands iniquitously usurped.” [ Historia de las Islas Malvinas Juan José Cresto 2011]
That you know so little is the most surprising thing.
https://falklandstimeline.wordpress.com/
LikeLike
17 October, 2015 at 11:24 pm
Lorton, you speak about distorted facts? You are a paid troll. We know who you are, we all know who you are: http://tn.com.ar/politica/snowden-s-documents-the-internal-manual-that-explains-how-to-manipulate-people-through-internet-oper_592092
LikeLike
22 October, 2015 at 5:50 pm
And why, Mr. Lorton, are mentions in the Congress so important? Why aren’t comments and mentions from Presidents, Foreign Ministers, Public Officers, etc not as important? That’s the distortion right there.
LikeLike
23 October, 2015 at 6:43 pm
Lorton has some comprehension problems.
LikeLike
23 October, 2015 at 9:02 pm
I beg to differ, he’s very conscious that his arguments have holes. But he has a mission to fulfill. Probably his last one.
LikeLike
26 October, 2015 at 9:58 pm
Who are you talking about?
LikeLike
27 October, 2015 at 5:55 am
Roger Lorton of course
LikeLike
13 October, 2015 at 1:12 am
Junius! And why did you take 165 to resort to such a “true” argument if that is the case? Are you suggesting that the FCO and UK machinery was not aware of such a “fact”? On the contrary, don’t try to fool people with this TODAY when, besides, Argentina did make it clear the treaty had not solved the controversy. The message to the Legislature AFTER the Convention is but one of the many FACTS your own government os well knows. Too late buddy. Come to terms with reality
LikeLike
13 October, 2015 at 8:39 pm
The UK was not aware of SO MANY FACTS for SO MANY YEARS for Lorton, Mauricio. See: it seems the UK was wrong for ages until they came along. Bravo. Nobody buys that.
LikeLike
13 October, 2015 at 10:45 pm
The UK has been fully aware of the facts which is why the UK has been rejecting the claims of Argentina since 1829
LikeLike
13 October, 2015 at 1:14 am
Besides, your source is “Pascoe and Pepper” on this? Have you found such a magical surrealist argument elsewhere?
LikeLiked by 1 person
13 October, 2015 at 10:46 pm
I have many sources –
https://falklandstimeline.wordpress.com/bibliography/
LikeLike
14 October, 2015 at 9:24 pm
Señor, creo que sus fuentes están viciadas de nulidad. Le pido que lea la correspondencia entre las potencias que está presente en la Cronologia Legal Anotada de Ferrer Vieyra. Atte,Adriana constanzi.-
LikeLike
17 October, 2015 at 10:18 pm
My sources Adriana – https://falklandstimeline.wordpress.com/bibliography/
LikeLike
17 October, 2015 at 11:16 pm
As always, Lorton- the paid troll- spreads his lies, as part of the Quito Plan that seeks to gain support in the public opinion by twisting and distorting facts. We know who you are, Lorton and you are busted: http://tn.com.ar/politica/snowden-s-documents-the-internal-manual-that-explains-how-to-manipulate-people-through-internet-oper_592092
LikeLike
17 October, 2015 at 11:27 pm
The Intercept, Snowden, TN, Arguello and now Malvineros have revealed who you are: http://tn.com.ar/politica/snowden-s-documents-the-internal-manual-that-explains-how-to-manipulate-people-through-internet-oper_592092
Busted Lorton.
LikeLike
19 October, 2015 at 6:20 am
Dream on children. Not that I’d turn down a pay cheque if one was on offer LOL
LikeLike
19 October, 2015 at 3:46 pm
So it proves my point. Your credibility is zero. You are nobody. You are busted.
LikeLike
10 November, 2015 at 11:44 am
junius=lordtrash is a PIAD LIAR!
LikeLike