More like this
Britain protested over US official’s ‘Malvinas’ barb
Whitehall angered afterUS State Dept spokesmancalls the Falklands by theirArgentine name
BRITAIN was forced to issue at least three formal diplomatic protests to the United States last month after a State Department official called the Falklands ‘Las Malvinas’, the Argentine name for the disputed islands.
Until now the British embassy in Washington has said it only spoke to US officials informally about their position on the Falklands after Argentina accused Britain of violating its sovereignty by drilling for oil in the ocean off the islands.
But the Times claims today that ‘demarches’ were made after a State Department spokesman answered the question of why the US was remaining neutral despite Britain’s long history of ownership of the Falkland Islands by saying “whatever you want to call them” and then calling them the “Islas Malvinas”.
A British embassy official told the Times that “nobody has been writing any formal letters” and claimed Britain was “genuinely quite relaxed”, but in truth London has grown increasingly worried about the United States’ attitude towards the Falklands.
Tensions increased after Secretary of State Hillary Clinton turned what should have been a 10-minute encounter with Argentinian president Cristina Fernández de Kirchner on the fringes of a conference in Uruguay into a two-hour meeting in Buenos Aires.
At the meeting, Clinton encouraged negotiations between Britain and Argentina – something London had already ruled out.
The Obama administration is facing increasing criticism of its handling of the issue from American conservatives. Richard Perle, the assistant Secretary for Defence in 1982 when President Reagan provided intelligence to Britain during the Falklands War, told the Times: “I think using the description Malvinas is offensive to British interests.”
And while British embassy officials may be quite relaxed about the ‘Malvinas’ spat, the same cannot be said of their counterparts in Whitehall.
The Wall Street Journal ran an editorial supporting the British position yesterday. It quoted a “senior Whitehall official” as saying: "After everything we have done with the Americans since September 11, the least we expected was a bit of moral support from Washington. But Mrs Clinton appears to have her own agenda on this issue." ·
Comments are now closed on this article
Comments
Well, as an American, I can tell guys that most Americans don't support this position. Many of the fools who did vote for Obama never suspected how bad his agenda is. This has nothing to do with oil companies, who are also on his hit list, but more with an extreme left agenda of attacking anything connected to the Western European civilization.
I appreciate the sacrifice of the British in our long alliance. I apologize on behalf of the idiots who voted for Obama and his supporters (many of whom were European, the same ones who he gives the shaft to).
Those of us who weren't fooled by him will keep up the fight to remove him from office.
Americans need to do some research. Falkland Islanders have their own government and constitution. They have stated, to the UN, their wish to continue their association with the UK rather than submit to the colonialism of Argentina. The United States needs to recognise this. In the political arena, words are important. For the Falkland Islands and the United Kingdom the name of the territory is "the Falkland Islands". Reference to the "Malvinas" implies a recognised Argentine claim to the territory. This is not acceptable either to the United Kingdom or the Government of the Falkland Islands. If the United States cannot recognise the progression of nations and territories and provide proper support then perhaps they are no friends of Britain.
Ok...no problem. But from now on we British should refer to Hawaii as the Sandwich Islands, especially considering they are not exactly close to mainland USA and were discovered by the British!
The Obama administration has lost credibility,and Clinton is simply showing her contempt for a weak and daily weakening man.Beware Democrats the US needs us more than we need you.
Why do people still delude themselves into thinking we ever meant
or mean anything to the USA, [apart from gun fodder]. It breaks my heart to hear of our soldiers deaths in another illegal war, but while we have our grovelling brown nosed politicians thinking they like us ...so it will keep happening..
Were about as important to the U.S. as the poor Palestinians are to the rest of the Arab world.
Britain should suggest that the USA return the land they have stolen from the indigenous people. America is quick to tell other nations to give away their territories, but still treats the many first nations (or Indians) in a dreadful manner. As the Bible says, before you mention the "mote" in another's eye, take care of the "beam" in your own.
Only the oil companies are likely to benefit from any oil finds in the Falklands/Malvinas any one who believes anything different is a fool. Britain's claim to the Falklands is tenuous to say the least and it should be returned to its most likely legitimate owner, Argentina. The people of Hong Kong were handed over to Communist China without a vote so the wishes of the people of the islands are irrelevent to the issue. This is nothing less old fashioned British Empire posturing, full of sound and fury signifying nothing.
Oh please...Since when did Mrs Clinton have an agenda of her own?
Let's face it the US State Department official called our Falklands Islands â??Las Malvinasâ?? because the US actually want the British out of there. Once the Argentines control the area the US will be all over the Argentines like a sad rash from a cheap shaving lotion.
We need to stick two fingers up - firmly in the direction of the White House and tell them to get their nose out of our business.
You'd think they'd help an ally but now our army is fighting their wars it just doesn't matter.
If America's oil was anywhere else they'd take no interest in the situation but because the Falklands Govt wish to enter the world of petroleum we see their less than transparant actions.
Ooh, the 'British' Government are suddenly becoming all 'tough' and anxious to protect British interests, just before a general election too, well my my! Does this mean that the British people are going to have a referendum on whether or not we wish as a people to get out of the totalitarian EUSSR? Will the much transgressed borders to our struggling and bankrupt nation be closed to the unwanted swarms of foreign invaders, as every single person I know wishes them to be (including the immigrants already here)? No is the answer. Our cowardly politicians are still too terrified of the 'r' word to do anything other than grovel to outsiders and spew out hate at those who object to this temporarily bloodless genocide. Ah well, as there has to be an end point initiated by the people eventually, we'll just have to get ready for old Enoch's 'rivers of blood'.