Only a few weeks ago, the Question of the Malvinas Islands once again took center stage on the international agenda.
The Organization of American States (OAS), the United Nations Special Committee on Decolonization (C24), and the States Parties and Associated States of Mercosur reiterated their call for Argentina and the United Kingdom to resume negotiations to resolve the sovereignty dispute through peaceful means.
This renewed support offers an opportunity to reflect on a cause that shapes our history, defines our present, and speaks to the future of our Nation.
Each new pronouncement confirms that the Question of the Malvinas Islands remains unresolved and very much alive. It also invites us to ask what Malvinas truly means to Argentina. The answer, naturally, extends far beyond any commemoration.
April 2 and June 10 mark defining moments in our national memory. However, the responsibility to safeguard our sovereign rights transcends any anniversary.
Malvinas is a cause that demands our commitment every day. And it is that conviction which inspires every step of our foreign policy.
The recent pronouncements at the OAS and the UN are of enormous political and diplomatic significance.
At those forums, it was once again clearly reaffirmed that a sovereignty dispute exists between the Argentine Republic and the UK over the Malvinas, South Georgia, and the South Sandwich Islands, and the surrounding maritime areas.
Also that this dispute must be resolved through bilateral negotiations, by peaceful means, and in accordance with international law.
Resolutions do not, in themselves, solve the dispute. Their value lies in the fact that they keep alive the obligation to negotiate, as established by the UN, and make increasingly evident the UK’s decision to continue disregarding that mandate.
Maintaining this position requires sustained effort. Every consensus achieved demands active, persistent, and technically sound diplomacy. It requires work. It has to be built. It must be defended.
At the Argentine Foreign Affairs Ministry, we advance our national position at every multilateral forum, engage in dialogue with governments from all regions, explain the legal basis of our claim, present our arguments regarding the inapplicability of the principle of self-determination to this case, and strengthen a network of shared positions that keeps an essential truth alive.
Malvinas is not a solitary cause. History, law, and the community of nations converge in upholding the legitimacy of our claim.
A just cause
Malvinas strikes a profound chord with our nation because it transcends any merely cartographic reading. It embodies our territorial integrity, our oceanic projection, our bicontinental identity, our wealth, and our projection into the South Atlantic.
Argentina cannot be conceived without these dimensions. The South Atlantic constitutes our nation’s strategic depth. It is there that Patagonia, the sea, Antarctica, our continental shelf, and a decisive part of our future come together.
Based on that conviction, Argentinian President Javier Milei has reaffirmed the legitimate and non-renounceable nature of our claim.
Guided by that mandate, I am honored, as foreign affairs minister, to undertake the commitment to uphold this cause with firmness and perseverance.
This is not merely another item on the foreign policy agenda. It is an institutional responsibility that binds us to the National Constitution, to our history, and to every Argentine who understands that sovereignty is defended through action.
That responsibility also requires us to demonstrate, time and again, why international law supports Argentina’s position.
Our claim rests on historical and legal foundations that Argentina has upheld continuously since its independence.
As successor to Spain’s rights, in accordance with the principle of state succession, Argentina exercised effective authority over the islands, formally took possession of them in 1820, and created the Political and Military Commandancy in 1829.
In 1833, the UK occupied the islands through an act of force to which our country never consented, violated Argentina’s territorial integrity, expelled our national authorities and the population lawfully established there, populated the territory with its own settlers, and prevented Argentine citizens from settling there.
That event gave rise to a colonial situation that continues to this day. Argentina never consented to that occupation and has maintained a constant and peaceful protest grounded in law.
Along the same lines, United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2065, adopted in 1965, marked a turning point.
It formally recognized the existence of a sovereignty dispute. It also established the bilateral negotiations path as the means of resolving it, bearing in mind the interests of the Malvinas Islands’ inhabitants.
Since then, the international community has recognized an ineluctable legal fact: there exists a sovereignty dispute that remains to be resolved.
There is a mistaken belief that the 1982 South Atlantic conflict brought the sovereignty dispute to an end. The facts show otherwise.
Barely five months after the cessation of hostilities, the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution 37/9, calling upon Argentina and the UK to resume negotiations.
The conflict neither altered the legal nature of the dispute nor resolved it. The international community reaffirmed then, as it continues to do today, that a peaceful solution remains the only path forward.
Nor is the Question of the Malvinas Islands merely another case of decolonization or a case to which the principle of self-determination applies. It is a special and particular colonial situation originating in the violation of Argentina’s territorial integrity.
The passage of time does not turn illegitimate occupation into sovereignty. Nor will it disrupt the territorial unity of the Argentine Republic.
It should be noted that the UN recognizes both the principle of self-determination of peoples and the principle of territorial integrity of states. The UN itself determines which principle applies depending on the particular circumstances of each case.
More than six decades ago, ambassador José María Ruda summarized this issue with clarity that continues to resonate today, stating that the Question of the Malvinas Islands concerns the principle of territorial integrity of the Argentine Republic.
That was precisely the interpretation adopted by the General Assembly, which determined that the dispute arose from the occupation of part of Argentine territory through force in 1833.
For that reason, it never considered the principle of self-determination applicable and has instead consistently held that a solution must be reached through negotiations between the parties, bearing in mind the interests of the inhabitants of the islands.
‘We must not fall into the referendum trap’
The same reasoning explains why the UN distinguishes between the islands’ inhabitants’ interests and their wishes regarding sovereignty.
Our National Constitution provides that recovery of the full exercise of sovereignty must be achieved while respecting the way of life of the islanders and in compliance with the principles of international law. That commitment is permanent.
It is an entirely different matter to claim that a population artificially implanted by the occupying power may determine the sovereignty of the disputed territory.
For that reason, no referendum unilaterally organized by the UK can produce legal effects concerning a dispute that must be resolved exclusively between Argentina and the UK through negotiations. We must not fall into the referendum trap.
The strength of our rights
At the OAS, our region once again adopted by acclamation a declaration stating that the Question of the Malvinas Islands is a matter of enduring hemispheric concern.
At the C24, all the Latin American countries that are members of the committee co-sponsored the resolution, which was adopted by consensus.
This is further reinforced by the continued support of Mercosur, CELAC, the Ibero-American Summits, the Brasilia Consensus, the Zone of Peace and Cooperation of the South Atlantic, the Group of 77 and China, SICA, and other multilateral fora.
To all those countries that stand with us, I convey the gratitude of the Argentine Republic. Their commitment to international law strengthens the diplomatic capital that enables us to keep our claim alive and to raise the political cost of British indifference.
There is another, equally important consideration. The UN has not merely urged Argentina and the UK to negotiate.
Ever since Resolution 31/49, they have expressly requested that both parties refrain from introducing unilateral modifications while the dispute remains unresolved. The meaning of this mandate is unequivocal.
Neither party may take advantage of the situation to consolidate factual circumstances or make decisions over resources whose ownership remains contested.
Despite this, the UK has continued to ignore this call for decades, engaging in the exploration and exploitation of natural resources, granting licenses, and maintaining a disproportionate military presence.
Argentina has responded to these affronts with the same consistency it has maintained in its diplomatic position. Argentina’s laws prohibit hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation on the Argentine continental shelf without prior authorization from Argentine authorities, and those who engage in such activities are subject to penalties.
This decision seeks to protect resources that belong to all Argentine citizens and whose use may not be fully decided on until the dispute has been settled lawfully. Protecting our natural resources is also protecting an essential part of Argentina’s wealth.
The magnitude of the deployment of British troops speaks volumes. The islands are home to around 3,000 residents, and there are approximately 1,200 British military personnel deployed. This ratio reflects the tactical nature of the occupation.
For the UK, the Malvinas are not an expression of its identity. They are a strategic enclave used to preserve military, economic and geopolitical interests in one of the most relevant regions in the Southern Hemisphere.
The Sea Lion project is one of the clearest demonstrations of the UK’s violation of the above-mentioned international mandate.
In December 2025, Rockhopper Exploration PLC and Navitas Petroleum Development and Production Ltd. announced a purported final decision to invest in the development of this field in the Northern Malvinas Basin, relying on invalid licenses issued by illegitimate authorities.
Every unilateral action by the UK confirms that the dispute remains unresolved. Every international declaration and resolution is a reminder that there is only one acceptable way to resolve it.
Argentina has rejected this unilateral act, reserving all of its rights and making it clear that anyone who engages in or facilitates illegal activities in areas under dispute will be subject to administrative and criminal penalties, as well as other types of action in domestic and international jurisdictions.
Protecting our territorial integrity is also protecting Argentina’s maritime domain.
A greater cause
The Malvinas also live in the memory of our veterans, the families of the fallen, and every Argentine household where this name is spoken with respect. They have instilled this cause with a moral dimension that no public officer may forget.
Every diplomatic achievement we make also contributes to honoring this legacy. Their sacrifice demands that our public conduct and foreign policy be worthy of their example.
We will therefore carry on. We will be present at the UN, the OAS, and every multilateral forum and bilateral discussion where our rights need to be defended. We will respond unequivocally to every unilateral action, whatever its form.
We will do so firmly and guided by the conviction that just causes require strategic patience, national unity, and perseverance.
Argentina’s commitment to negotiations remains unaltered. I am convinced that the solution will be peaceful, diplomatic, and in accordance with international law. This willingness coexists with an immutable certainty.
Argentina’s claim is not affected by the passage of time, nor will it be relinquished or abandoned.
The Malvinas are part of our history, our territory, our sea, our memory, and our destiny. Their cause is an intergenerational promise. It is the voice of a nation that knows how to wait without giving up and how to assert its claims without giving in.
Every day, I renew this mandate knowing that there can hardly be a greater honor for a foreign minister than spreading the voice of this legitimate cause around the world and championing it with the same passion with which millions of fellow Argentines embrace it.
Therein lies one of the greatest honors and commitments for any Argentine citizen. That is my own commitment.
By history, by right, and by conviction, the Malvinas are Argentine.
The author is Argentina’s minister of foreign affairs, international trade, and worship.
