The Falklands have a future; but does the Decolonization Committee?

16 Jun

Following Thursday’s unprecedented appearance by the President of Argentina, Cristina Fernandez, at the little known Decolonisation Committee meeting in the United Nations building in New York, the Committee’s supposedly impartial Chairman, tasked with assisting the peoples of the non-self governing territories to attain self-determination, called the Falkland’s referendum, “a political manoeuvre.”

Ecuadorian, Diego Morejón Pazmiño, revealing the bias within this South and Latin American dominated side-show of a Committee was dismissive of the Falklanders’ use of a referendum to proclaim their desires, but effused over the visit of Kirchner at a forum usually reserved for middle-ranking diplomats, calling it “historic.”

“The referendum is a political ploy by the English Government just in moments in which there is a certain symbolism for the Falklands issue; because it is an anniversary of the war. The position of England is not of an administering Power, it is that of an occupying power. There are two elements, self-determination and territorial integrity of States. It cannot be a form of colonization when there is a principle of territorial integrity, which is applicable to the Falklands case.”

The Decolonisation Committee (C24) was originally set up 51 years ago to oversee the process of decolonization. Its composition has changed many times, but is now so heavily biased towards South America that the Administering Powers of the old colonies pay it scant attention. The C24 has no power to deal with sovereignty issues, and its only remit is to assist the peoples of the non-self governing territories to self-determination. A fundamental human right its Chair would deny to the Falkland Islanders.

The real question is, after two decades of failure, what is the future of the United Nation’s Decolonization Committee?

Advertisements

6 Responses to “The Falklands have a future; but does the Decolonization Committee?”

  1. Steve June 16, 2012 at 8:46 am #

    Somebody doesn’t realise that England has the same precedent on the world stage as Kentucky. Pathetic.

  2. Claire June 16, 2012 at 3:21 pm #

    This is a shameful dereliction of duty by the chair of the decolonisation committee.

    His role is to provide impartial guidance to the committee in their work to ‘decolonise’ the remaining ‘colonies’, in accordance with the principles of democracy and self-determination.

    Instead he has wilfully chosen to accept a whole host of statements made by the Argentine president that are demonstrably proven to be lies, and indeed has congratulated her on this stance. Furthermore, he has directly witnessed the emptiness of her claim to ‘just want to talk’ by her refusal to accept a letter of invitation offered to the Argentine delegation by the representatives of the Falkland Islands during the meeting.

    Even more damningly, he has weighed down in favour of territorial integrity over self-determination and in doing so has advocated the very colonialism that the committee purports to reject.

    Members of UN committees, and most notably their chairmen, are required to be impartial, statesmanlike and focused on the clear remit of their task.

    This individual has manifestly failed to demonstrate any of those qualities. He should be removed from his position.

  3. Ivor Aldwinkle June 16, 2012 at 8:12 pm #

    When you’re in a fledgling country like Gibraltar or the Falklands, it is important to experience the hate of morally bankrupt family-dictatorships like Argentina, the ire of tin-pot banana republics like Ecuador and the disdain of human-rights violators like Syria in very very very biased UN committees. Because, only then can you learn that modern diplomacy involves buying a lot of high tech weaponry and keeping them up to date and not having a dialog with some gauchos who have already decided they want to drop you out of a plane into the sea, like french nuns.

    • Facundo January 28, 2014 at 3:08 pm #

      Muchos lectores británicos opinan estupideces porque no tienen argumentos que puedan echar por tierra lo que la Comunidad Internacional, Comité de Descolonización hasta ahora no les han dado la razón a su país Gran Bretaña, desde hace 46 años.

  4. Facundo January 28, 2014 at 3:18 pm #

    Más de 150 países, 150 Presidentes, 150 Cancilleres, 150 Profesionales no les han reconocido soberanía alguna a Gran Bretaña en Malvinas. Hasta el gobierno de los EE.UU. no le reconoce soberanía británica, sí una administración de facto.
    La palabra en castellano “MALVINAS”, fue usada desde el presidente Obama hasta Hillary Clinton en sus discursos/ documentos. Y eso molestaron al gobierno británico porque su gran apoyo EE.UU. no lo apoya.
    De los 5 miembros permanentes de la ONU, 3 no les dan la razón a Gran Bretaña, Rusia, China y EE.UU.

    • Junius January 28, 2014 at 11:24 pm #

      If you had the support of 150 countries, then Argentina would be able to get a UN GA resolution in its favour. This is not the case however and there are now no ‘live’ Resolutions concerning the Falklands – the last being in 1988.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: