Letter: Falklands' future

Sir: I cordially disagree with the letters from Sir Rex Hunt and Dominic Kirkham ("Falklands claims", 22 March) and Jan Cheeks (24 March).

Sir Rex suggests that the Argentine claim is weakened by the fact that the islands are 200 miles away from the mainland. What, then, could one say about Britain's own claim, when they are more than 6,500 miles away from London?

Implications that Argentina has acquiesced in the colonial occupation are well off the mark. Since the first day in 1833, my country has unfailingly protested and contested such a situation.

Furthermore, it must be stressed that the International Court of Justice as early as 1975 recognised that the right to self-determination cannot be construed as enjoying absolute priority in relation to other principles of international law (ICJ, advisory opinion, 16 October 1975). As the British judge of the court, Dame Rosalyn Higgins, wrote: "Attractive an aphorism though [self-determination] is, it still has to be said that the territorial issue does come first. Until it is determined where territorial sovereignty lies, it is impossible to see if the inhabitants have a right to self- determination" (Dame Rosalyn Higgins, Problems and Process - International Law and How We Use It, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1994).

All this is fully in line with the UN doctrine and practice on decolonisation and its many specific resolutions on the South Atlantic problem.

In fact on 27 November 1985 the UN expressly rejected two proposals to apply the principle of self-determination to the "Falkland/Malvinas question".

Be it as it may, it is clear that it is in the best interest of everyone that this issue be resolved through direct amicable negotiations between Argentina and Britain. To this, Argentina is firmly committed.

ROGELIO PFIRTER

Ambassador

Embassy of the Argentine Republic

London W1