UK plans defence of Falklands as planes are sent to Mali

Jan 13, 2013

Additional troops, warship and combat aircraft could be dispatched to the Falkland Islands

DEFENCE chiefs have reportedly drawn up new contingency plans designed to protect the Falklands Islands from hostile action by Argentina.

In March, islanders will vote on whether or not they want to remain an overseas territory of the UK. Intelligence chiefs have warned David Cameron that a resounding ‘yes’ vote could trigger an aggressive stunt from Argentina. Possibilities include planting their flag on the island or disrupting British oil and gas exploration.

As a result, UK defence chiefs are considering a series of military options, says the Sunday Telegraph. Additional troops, another warship and extra RAF Typhoon combat aircraft could be dispatched to the region before March.

Other options are said to include a “show of force” such as conducting naval exercises in the South Atlantic. This could involve the deployment of the Royal Navy’s Response Task Force Group, a flotilla comprising destroyers, a frigate, a submarine and commandos.

No orders have been given to any military units at this stage but “prudent planning” is taking place, a senior defence source told the Telegraph.

Around 1,500 troops are permanently based on the islands, along with four RAF Typhoon jets and anti-aircraft and artillery batteries.

Despite the increasing hostile rhetoric from Argentine President Cristina Kirchner, the British government believes that Buenos Aries currently lacks both the political will and military capability to recapture the islands. But just last week Cameron insisted that Britain would not shirk from defending the islands if Argentina attempted another invasion.

Meanwhile, Downing Street has announced that it will send two transport planes to Mali to assist French military operations against al-Qaeda-linked rebels.

No 10 insists no British troops will join the military mission – but there is a risk attached, says The Observer. The decision involves Britain in “a fresh conflict that could provoke terrorist reprisals against European targets”.

Sign up for our daily newsletter

Disqus - noscript

The Argentine's must ask themselves - does Canada have a problem with St Pierre and Miquelon being so close to its borders? Does the Doman Republic have a problem with Puerto Rico? Does Morocco have a problem with the Canary Islands belonging to Spain? Then why shouldn't 3,000 Falkland Islanders be able to live nearly 400 miles away from Argentina without being harassed by a hostile Argentine government?

In a letter to his sister in 1934 Charles Darwin wrote "We invaded the Islands, killed all the argentines..". David Cameron needs a war because his credit is over. I don't think the british public opinion know the whole truth: in the Malvinas Islands there's a military dictatorship run by the british government. The 'islanders' (implanted colonial population) has no vote nor voice, they can't even elect a governor, not even speak against the british troops because they are disappeared.

Argentina only ask for dialogue, like in all the UN resolutions since 1960, dialogue. Argentina's not asking the United Kingdom to 'return' the Islands, but to dialogue in peace.

In my opinion, the best way it'll be a binational territory, conserving the british culture of the Islands (in continental Argentina there are more than the double of british population than in the Islands). But, like Cameron said, he wants to be Prime Minister until 2020, but as long as the economy of the 'Kingdom' keeps going down he'll need another war to remain in power.

Inaccurate... Talking does not work with Argentina, this is the problem, Argentina need to remove this from their constitution. Britain had possession "of the uninhabited islands" prior to Argentina's existence, basically its impossible to get this message through to Argentina, the UN are not interested in Kirchners opinion because it makes no sense, they decide instead to sit on the fence, although Argentina wont be part of the UN or IMF in 10 years, it will just be another rouge nation with no democracy. Kirchners personal wealth is from the blood of Argentines who where disappeared under the last Junta, the Kirchner family took advantage of property deals at this time hence why shes worth £11.5m, its about time Argentina had a proper Argentine leader.

Are you british or just another anti-patriotic argentinean? Haha. There're lots of them, they'd love to live in London but they live in the flooded neighborhood of Belgrano, haha (54% LTA!! Jajaj).

I added data and real information in my message, everyone can search for the Darwin's letter, the Comrad painting, and the UN resolutions.

Your opinions aren't based on anything real or sustantial. I think the same goes for british politicians, they know that they 'stole' the Malvinas Islands (in fact, they killed all the argentines there..), and that's why they don't want to sit and talk. History books are on our side.

Do you know anything about Argentina? There's no criminalisation of inmigrants in here, everybody can live in this country and access to all the public and totally free education and health. We have an unique freedom of speech (the UN said this), a revolutionary law of redistribution of wealth (now Brazil and India wanted to copy it), and leading bills on gender equality (same-sex marriage and adoption, transgender identity, etc), and so on and so on.

I really think the british are very disinformed about this issue, and I know most of the people in Britain aren't as proud as you of its colonial past/present.

Complete nonsense, Charles Darwin was well dead in 1934. The Falklands are not a military dictatorship. The troops are only there because the Argentine invaded a sovereign British territory populated by a British population. I've been there you obviously haven't.
Britain was having a peaceful dialogue with Argentina up until the time the actual Argentine military dictatorship invaded the Falklands.

Another FACT for you, the first to land on the islands and claim them were the French, the second were the British, the so called Argentine claim is based on a British privateer who, to avoid being hung as a pirate, after attacking ships of nations Britain was at peace with decided to claim the islands on behalf of Argentina, making himself governor in the process.

Quite understandably the British government of the time wasn't going to let that go!

The Argentine invasion killed off any chance of a handover or power sharing agreement with Britain because the islanders don't trust a single word the Argentine government says.

the real reason for the Argentine government's sudden interest, is a purely political manouever covering up their own disatrous performance at home and the hope that there might be something worth having like oil in the area rather than just penguins and sheep.

Yes I do know quite a bit about Argentina, have been ther many times and I like the country.

But this Falklands thing serves to illustrate how far from understanding proper political and personal freedoms you are.

This argument has nothing to do with colonialism its do with the PEOPLE who live on the islands and their right to self determination, something that Argentina hasn't got, ask your native population how much self determination they get.

Argentina has no right, historical or otherwise to try and force a group of people to leave or change nationality just to suit Argentina's outdated ideas of colonialism. Your invasion of the Falklands was exactly that, colonialism by force.

Britain has given the islanders the rights to choose which way they go, its entirely Argentina's fault that that vote is likely to go in favour of staying a Crown dependency.

Charles Darwin wrote in 1934 when he died in 1882? As for that quote on the Internet I can't find any legitimate websites saying this just conjecture. I think your brainwashed. The people who live there don't want to be a part of Argentina so is it not up to them? If you want to have a proximity ownership argument should England not own France as our ancestors Norman? Shouldn't Argentina with all their European roots give back South America to the natives? Hypocrites?

The 'people who live in the islands' are IMPLANTED by a colonial power. But Argentina recognized that they live there, that they have a culture, and at least five generations have grown there.

The United Nations says once and once again: The Malvinas Islands conflict is about sovereignty, not about self-determination.

Argentina doesn't want to change the nationality of the islanders. There're 5000 british people living in continental Argentina, according to your logic we should nationalise them too..

Argentina just want to sit and DIALOGUE, TALK, is it really that hard? I guess it is with a country that believes the world belong to them..

In fact, according to historic documents revealed by the MI6, Reagan almost pushed the war criminal Margaret Thatcher to sit, dialogue, and look for an alternative to the Malvinas Islands issue. Let me tell you more, in the 70s, Britain and Perón were having secret talks to share the administration of the islands.

I think in the future we'll see that: a binational administration of the islands. The islanders will keep their culture but they'll have a double citizenship. It won't be long until we can see that.

Let me ask you something: why the United Kingdom surrender its Hong Kong administration but it refuses to do the same with the Malvinas Islands?

Obviosly you don't know anything about this issue, and also you seem so proud of being a colonialist.. It's a shame

"the real reason for the Argentine government's sudden interest, is a purely political manouever covering up their own disatrous performance at home and the hope that there might be something worth having like oil in the area rather than just penguins and sheep'

Sure, sure.. What about David Cameron? At least 94% of the population wanted him out of the government. In Argentina, 56% would vote again for Cristina Kirchner.

The Malvinas Islands will be part of Argentina in less than a decade. Give peace a chance.

Wow!! how much now is the expenses from the UK tax payers to maintain the welfare life style of the kelpers, 50k or 60k per family per year? more than USD 300 millions in the military base? and until to day no any single drop of Oil. I think in the future is better for the kelpers looking for any country with an open immigration law.:))

Actually Canada does have a few problems with St Pierre & Miquelon as do all other examples you mentioned. The Malvinas case is by far the worst one, due to historical and geographical realities.

Argentina must decide whether it want a nuclear strike on its capital,this is not 1981 there country will be uninhabitable for 10,000 years