This is a discussion on Argentinian blockade of the falklands within the Navy & Maritime forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Argentina to blockade Falkland waters in dispute over oil rights
Argentina has declared that it is taking control over all ...
Argentina to blockade Falkland waters in dispute over oil rights
Argentina has declared that it is taking control over all shipping between its coast and the Falklands, in effect awarding itself the power to blockade the disputed islands.
According to a decree issued by President Kirchner last night, all ships sailing through the waters claimed by Argentina must hold a permit. The measure seems likely to deepen a row over conflicting claims to oil beds lying inside the Falkland Islands’ territorial waters.
Argentina still claims sovereignty over the islands it calls “Las Malvinas” nearly three decades after the end of the Falklands conflict in which more than 1,000 people died. Tensions over the islands remained buried until the discovery of potentially rich energy reserves in the Falklands’ seabed. Argentina protested to Britain this month over plans to begin offshore drilling near the islands.
Yesterday’s decree amounts to an Argentine move to control all traffic from South America towards the islands, including an oil rig due to arrive today and start drilling next year.
Times Archive, 1982: Fleet assembles for Falklands action
The Government is assembling a naval task force in response to Argentina's seizure of the Falkland Islands
* 200-mile war zone around Falklands
* A day of tension and elation
* Ceasefire agreed
Any boat that wants to travel between ports on the Argentine mainland to the Islas Malvinas, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands. . . must first ask for permission from the Argentine Government,” Aníbal Fernández, the Cabinet chief, said.
He added that the decree would force all ships bound for the islands or travelling through waters claimed by Argentina to obtain the new permit.
Argentina is trying to prevent British companies exploiting what experts say could be substantial oil reserves. Buenos Aires is enraged by Britain’s refusal to stop explorations in the face of its long-standing sovereignty claim. Last week it detained a ship, the Thor Leader, which it said had been illegally transporting pipes to the Falklands.
The impending arrival of the Ocean Guardian rig has increased tensions, amid reports from waiting crew members on the islands that it had been shadowed by Argentine jets during the final stage of its journey from the Scottish Highlands.
Last week Argentina vowed to take its complaint against Britain to the United Nations. Jorge Taiana, the Foreign Minister, warned that his Government would take “all necessary steps” to defend its claim on the islands, 300 miles from the coastline.
Geological studies estimate that up to 60 billion barrels of oil could be buried in the seabed around the Falklands, making it a reserve on the scale of the North Sea, which has so far produced 40 billion barrels. The majority of the exploration rights have been awarded to London-based Desire Petroleum, which will drill in the area for the first time since Royal Dutch Shell abandoned its bid in 1998.
The islanders have tried to shrug off the prospect of a new conflict. “There has been an economic blockade of the Falklands from Argentina for many years,” Roger Spink, the director of the Falkland Islands Company, said. “It’s something we’ve come to expect.”
Britain has more than 1,000 military personnel on land and more than 300 at sea around the Falklands, as well as four Typhoon jets, a destroyer and a patrol boat.
SOURCE;The Times,today
well,i wonder what this will all lead to and what britains response wil be if the blockade goes ahead and british ships start being intercepted???
A blockade is an act of war so Britain would be within her rights under international law to use force against Argentina, in the event that Argentina does blockade the islands. However, elections are coming up in the UK so I doubt the Labour government is going to do anything before then; we will see how the Conservatives handle the issue if they are elected into power. If a conflict does erupt it would be one more nail in the coffin of the "Democratic Peace" theory.
I must state though that I think a conflict is unlikely, not because of the aforementioned democratic peace theory, or because NATO will get involved (it won't due to the conflict's, if it occurs, location south of the Tropic of Cancer, outside of NATO's purview). I consider the conflict unlikely due to the disparity in military effectiveness/readiness between the two states. Argentina, knowing they are outmatched, will most likely back down if/when the British respond forcefully to the supposed blockade.
Frankly, another war in the South Atlantic is exactly what the Labor Party would desire before the upcoming elections. Argentina has proven in its past and currently it doesn't know how to live peacefully with its neighbors.
Frankly, another war in the South Atlantic is exactly what the Labor Party would desire before the upcoming elections. Argentina has proven in its past and currently it doesn't know how to live peacefully with its neighbors.
Thats exactly what I was about to say.
Are you kidding me? This is a political gift if ever you could be handed one. MOD will be rubbing its hands together too. Nothing turns back the clock on defence budget cuts like the necessitation of force projection.
Are you kidding me? This is a political gift if ever you could be handed one. MOD will be rubbing its hands together too. Nothing turns back the clock on defence budget cuts like the necessitation of force projection.
One assumes cooler heads will prevail.
The Falklands since 82 has become a static aircraft carrier complete with protected hard-standing for fighter aircraft, supporting ground infrastructure and over a 1000+ military personnel in-place supported 100% by an indigenous population, which has doubled in the last 28 years. The UK C17 fleet can have the QRF Battalion moved to the Islands (plus additional CAP support) within 24-48 hours. PARA's are currently fulfilling that role, the Goose Green / Wireless Ridge battle honours are embedded in their subconscious.
This is pathetic sabre rattling form a Government in deep trouble. The Argentine armed forces have deteriorated since 82, the UK military is smaller, but better equipped and has been fighting wars for the last six years plus. There will be no taking back of the Falklands by either the Argentina's or Brit's because the status quo ain't going to change.
This 'sabre rattling' is a gift for the RN though and reinforces the need for expeditionary warfare capabilities.
How fast can the Brits mobilise a task force to avert, say a commando style operation by the Argentines on the British Island forces? Are the Argentines left with any of their Etenards?
How fast can the Brits mobilise a task force to avert, say a commando style operation by the Argentines on the British Island forces? Are the Argentines left with any of their Etenards?
As I mentioned the QRF is on 24 hours to move. There are a thousand plus troops on the Island plus Typhoon, Rapier and SHORAD.
How are the Commando's going to get there and shut-down the resident Infantry Company Battle Group now on medium alert state? Suprise is out the window because the Argentines have already 'rattled their very rusty sabre' and poked Northwood and GCHQ into action. A UK SSN will take less than 15 days to reach the South Atlantic, once in theatre it will confine the Argentine Navy to port. Even if they are foolish enough to attempt a suprise landing by Herc, they still have to train an SF flight capable of flying low and hard at night over long distances, plus conceal the take off from monitored runways on the mainland - ain't going to happen, sorry.
I don't think after the last conflict the UK will delay dispatching a submarine. Any attempt to blockade the Falklands will most likely see many soldiers and aircraft flown south quickly. The British have not changed their minds whatsoever about keeping the Falklands. If they are worth keeping, they are worth defending.
As I mentioned the QRF is on 24 hours to move. There are a thousand plus troops on the Island plus Typhoon, Rapier and SHORAD.
How are the Commando's going to get there and shut-down the resident Infantry Company Battle Group now on medium alert state? Suprise is out the window because the Argentines have already 'rattled their very rusty sabre' and poked Northwood and GCHQ into action. A UK SSN will take less than 15 days to reach the South Atlantic, once in theatre it will confine the Argentine Navy to port. Even if they are foolish enough to attempt a suprise landing by Herc, they still have to train an SF flight capable of flying low and hard at night over long distances, plus conceal the take off from monitored runways on the mainland - ain't going to happen, sorry.
Needn't feel sorry.
The Arg's have already lost the game and they probably know it. They are even less capable then 1982 to surprise the Brits, however, having said that and on the same note, this period is probably their best chance to secure the FI before the new carriers and JSFs come on board.
The forces the RN have thee are much greater than in 1982, a patrol boat and HMS York are there and i bet a submarine has been sent south. I wouldn't be surprised if the Typhoon detachment gets strengthened.
Perfect timing for the RN anyway, yup we still need a navy folks.
The forces the RN have thee are much greater than in 1982, a patrol boat and HMS York are there and i bet a submarine has been sent south. I wouldn't be surprised if the Typhoon detachment gets strengthened.
Perfect timing for the RN anyway, yup we still need a navy folks.
couldnt agree more.all of our forces are vital for different reasons and there is dimwit tendancy in the uk to only focus on hat is happening militarily right now.....this will help to refocus those minds on other dangerous possibiliuties out there other than an insurgent problem in Afghanistan.
my view on this matter is that a reinvasion is unlikely and is a virtually impossibility for the Argentinians,however a blockade would be much more difficult to deal with.
lets say the Argentine navy block or detain the british oil rig on route to its destination or do the same to merchant shipping entering the area,what would the british do?.....does the labour govt have the backbone to actually use limited force?
lets not forget that this wont wait until the elections later in the year,the oil rig is just about to leave international waters and enter falklands territory which the Argentinians claim as their own....this is the potential flashpoint in the next few days and i will be interested to see how it develops and how the british are intending to protect the rigs and its support vessels
Argentina has ordered all shipping to the Falkland islands via Argentinean ports & (claimed) territorial waters to obtain prior permission. That is not a blockade. It is an assertion of sovereignty. To be a blockade, it would have to be a ban on traffic, enforced by armed patrols. There is neither a ban nor any enforcement.
As already stated, a blockade would be an act of war. The Kirchners aren't that stupid.
As mentioned above this is all posturing from a government that is in deep trouble and I expect it to blow over in a few days. But this should kill off any questions about whether or not Britain still needs the Queen Elizabeth class carriers!
I wouldn't be surprised if Chavez sounds off about this in the coming days. A year or 2 ago he was boasting about how his new force of Flankers with Brahmos type missiles could have interdicted the RN task force in 1982! In the medium to long term I wonder if a Chavez type figure could come to power in Argentina and take a far more agressive stand over the Falklands?
