LESSONS IN

REALPOLITIK

Why does the importance of the situation regarding the

Falkland Islands in the South Atlantic not concern Argentina?

 

By Sir Charlattam

Silence often speaks louder than words, and that is precisely what we saw during the United Nations sessions, specifically between the British Prime Minister, Andy Burnham, and Donald Trump, on the Falklands issue. The British leader’s complaints to his counterpart on the matter received no clear response, and this has been interpreted in various ways, depending on the interests of each side. For the British, it is a sign that Trump has moved on from the issue, whilst for the deluded supporters of Buenos Aires’ current stance, it is seen as tacit support for Milei.

In Washington, there are two positions on the situation regarding the South Atlantic islands, both of which are gaining momentum once again. The staunch supporters of the British Crown versus the pragmatists who now see Trump’s rhetorical manoeuvres as a way of teaching London a lesson for its reluctance to collaborate with the military campaign against the Islamic Republic of Iran. I must certainly digress here. Following an urgent request from the Saudi monarchy, Andy Burnham’s government has pledged military assistance from the RAF (and it remains to be seen what this entails) in an attempt to curb the Yemenis, whose mercenary forces are giving them a thorough thrashing.

Milei and his supporters would fall into the first category, even though he currently presents himself as an ultramontane nationalist. In fact, he is so implausible that British officials themselves and in particular their representatives in Buenos Aires treat him as if he were nothing more than an anecdote. Assuming that Milei is more astute than he appears, his behaviour is unconvincing.

At first glance, this is a card game amongst liars that disregards the rules, and this is where Milei has erred in believing that Donald Trump will act in his favour over the issue of the islands. There is no doubt that Trump is interested, but not just in the islands, but in the entire South Atlantic and everything within it. Milei is merely a temporary factor who facilitates his plans and whom, were it otherwise, he would swiftly order to be eliminated. He is also mistaken and very dangerously so in believing that the child-murdering butcher of Tel Aviv will back him up in reprimanding Israeli companies such as NAVITAS PETROLEUM, which are set to begin exploiting the oil in the maritime basin surrounding the islands. Netanyahu and his supporters have their fingers in every pie in the region and are not going to lose the profits from their investments because of such an insignificant delusional figure.

Argentina is a sheep’s paradise for a small pack of wolves, and it is very easy to understand what this means. Buenos Aires has neither the political capacity, let alone the military capacity, to do anything about it; and if you do not understand what this implies, just recall what happened to the submarine ‘San Juan’ and what the government of then-President Mauricio Macri should have done. What did it do? Nothing mate!

The state of defence infrastructure and the military industry in Argentina can be described as non-existent; at best, one might say it exists but is very basic. It does not develop its own products that show any sign of competition within the regional industry, let alone pose any threat to Port Stanley. MI6 is well aware of this, and not necessarily because it carries out complex or dangerous espionage operations. With long-standing and newer sources within the country’s political, media and military structures, London has a detailed and regular overview of Argentina’s military capabilities. Since April 1982, this has become an unavoidable task for the Secretary of Defence and, by extension, the Foreign Office.

At present, the South Atlantic Triangle is a highly strategic geographical area in the face of a potential conflict that NATO is eagerly seeking to provoke against Russia. Should this happen, the British (NATO) base at Stanley would be a legitimate target for Oreshnik hypersonic missiles, and these will not be deterred by the bluster of a libertarian clown showing clear signs of chronic hysteria.

As the head of a (supposedly sovereign) state, Milei seems to be guided more by his own confessional and ideological preferences than by the mandate his citizens gave him when they voted for him. And that is no exaggeration. His positions are more in line with the geopolitics of the Washington-Brussels-Tel Aviv axis than with an independent stance that respects strategic coherence. On this last point, note the vast incongruity between the harsh reality of politics and what Milei believes in his mad head, a view perpetuated by sycophants (in both the political class and the media) left, right and centre.

Not only Milei, but also the circle of Anglophiles in politics and the media, are utterly ignorant of the deep and close ties that exist between Washington and London. Both in military matters and in relation to the intelligence community, there is an intricate network that would not be severed by outdated governments or leaders such as the one currently sitting in the Oval Office of the White House. Donald Trump is merely a passing president, a caricature of the current political and social situation in the US, and certainly not even remotely representative of the interests of the deep state. Indeed, at this very moment and as a result of his blind allegiance to Netanyahu and the revisionists in Washington the US could find itself in a far more complicated position should war break out in Europe.

Someone in Buenos Aires has asked: ‘Is the Southern Command fleet really going to go head-to-head with the Royal Navy on behalf of the Argentines?’ If that is what Milei and his circle of strategists advising him believe, then as well as being gullible, they are guilty of incompetence unless, of course, they are fully aware that they are handing over the country completely bound hand and foot.