Every time Argentina's leaders start cutting up rough over the Falkland Islands, Whitehall's response is to dismiss it as populist grand-standing designed to win votes. The mandarins wearily insist that there's no way the Argentines are seriously considering another invasion to reclaim the islands known to them as Las Malvinas.
The days when the country was ruled by a military junta desperate to improve its fortunes through jingoistic acts are long gone, they say. Today, Argentina is a democracy committed to the rule of law — and that includes international treaties concerning British sovereignty over the Falklands. Besides, Argentina no longer has the military firepower to conquer the islands by force, as it attempted to do in 1982.
The main reason that, 30 years ago, General Galtieri, the Argentine dictator, very nearly succeeded in capturing the Falklands was the Foreign Office's disastrous misreading of the signals from Buenos Aires, which were dismissed as inconsequential sabre-rattling. It is always a good idea to avoid complacency when dealing with issues pertaining to national sovereignty, which is why British Prime Minister David Cameron's decision to convene a special session of the National Security Council to discuss the Falklands' security makes good sense.
No one ever gets criticised for being properly prepared. For, far-fetched as it might seem, it is possible that the latest diplomatic spat between London and Buenos Aires might spill over into something rather more serious. Britain's defence of the Falklands is predicated on the twin assumptions that its military presence acts as a suitable deterrent to Argentine military adventurism, and that the Argentines have no interest in revisiting old battlegrounds.
The four RAF Typhoon interceptors on permanent stand-by at Mount Pleasant Airfield are more than capable of seeing off any conventional attack by air or sea. A Royal Navy warship patrols the area, usually with submarine support, while the Army provides a permanent garrison whose ranks are shortly to be joined by the Duke of Cambridge in his capacity as a search-and-rescue helicopter pilot. The Duke's six-week deployment, which starts next month, has raised hackles in Buenos Aires, where it has been called a ‘provocative act'.
The possibility that the Argentines might try to pull off a daring operation to capture the islands cannot be fully discounted. I remember a former commander of the Falklands garrison telling me that the best time for the Argentines to invade was a Friday night, when the RAF pilots liked to enjoy some well-earned rest and relaxation in the mess bar. On a more serious note, Major-General Julian Thompson, who commanded Britain's victorious military campaign in 1982, gave a recent talk during which he set out a convincing scenario in which the Argentines capture or destroy the Mount Pleasant air strip, therefore denying Britain the ability to send reinforcements. With no aircraft carrier available until 2025, the prospects of staging a repeat of the naval task force that liberated the islands in 1982 are zero.
More likely, the next battle for the Falklands will be won or lost over an international conference table, and on that basis the advantage is very much with Buenos Aires. As William Hague discovered during his visit to Brazil recently, Argentina enjoys the support of its Latin American neighbours over the issue, to the extent that both Chile and Uruguay have recently caused problems for Royal Navy warships seeking to resupply at their ports.
Nor can we be sure that the Foreign Office, which has displayed an ambivalent attitude towards this relic of empire, will put up a robust defence. These days, as Hague's trip illustrates, the priority is to develop strong trading ties with the vibrant economies of Latin America, not to reopen old diplomatic wounds. There will undoubtedly be those in Whitehall who argue that Britain is paying too high a price for protecting British sovereignty over the Falklands.
— The Telegraph Group Limited, London 2012
