Thirty five years ago Argentina opted to invade the Falkland Islands, located in close proximity to South America. Bringing to a climax years of disputed claim to the archipelago of more than 700 islands, the invasion couldn’t have come at a worse time for the Conservative government in the United Kingdom. The invasion on April 02, 1982 earned the wrath of the establishment as Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher declared that the Argentine action had ‘not a shred of justification, nor a scrap of legality.’ Her unrelenting stance of freeing the islands of Argentine occupation was fueled on several levels. From her disbelief that Argentina would actually resort to a military seizure and outrage that British territory was forcibly occupied, Thatcher entered the fray quoting Queen Victoria that for failure, ‘the possibilities do not exist.’
National interest and Britain’s standing in the world were at stake and Thatcher was determined to ensure that the invading forces would be thwarted. From assembling the South Atlantic sub-committee of the Overseas and Defence Committee, which functioned as the small War Cabinet, to dispatching a naval task force, dealing with rising casualties and choreographing the passing of Resolution 502 at the United Nations, the responsibility of action was borne by the Prime Minister. The victory she sought and achieved in June 1982 resonated at Downing Street as well as in many corridors of power around the world. Britain had won, her reputation was intact, and her national interest had been preserved.
The battle had been for islands, named after Antony Carr, fifth Viscount of Falklands, and former Treasurer of the Navy who funded the expedition of John Strong in 1690. The Viscount himself took his name from a small Scottish village in Fife. Buried at Westminster Abbey in May 1694, he had been committed a few months earlier to the Tower of London for peculation. Falklands, therefore embraced a strange sense of irony, yet the deed of military seizure was what came in for outright condemnation by states across the world.
The anniversary of the invasion last week passed minus attention. What did achieve headlines was the Scottish First Minister and her visit to the United States. Aimed at shoring up US-Scottish relations it was chiefly directed towards heightening the independence campaign amid growing strains between Scotland and Westminster. The five-day visit took Nicola Sturgeon to the UN, Stanford university and included a meeting with the Governor of California. Addressing the UN, in its basement, the First Minister laid out her views on Scotland amidst rumblings on the effects of Brexit. Wanting ‘Scotland to be independent not from any insular or separatist motivation, but because (she) believes that countries should govern themselves,’ Sturgeon went global, just days after parliamentarians voted 69-59 in favour of seeking a second referendum on Scottish independence.
With Autumn 2018 and Spring 2019 set as the desired period for such an eventuality, the First Minister wasted no time. Having written to Prime Minister May, she left for America to drum up public support in a country whose President welcomed Brexit. Against all odds, her taking on issues of climate change, women and Syria, is an attempt to position herself as a stateswoman rather than mere liberation seeker, who argues the Scottish model is exceptional.
David Cameron held the referendum. Theresa May invoked Article 50. Both actions deemed necessary by Brexit campaigners to preserve British sovereignty, uphold national interest and ensure the preservation of all things British. Cameron and May believed they were acting in the best interests of the British. Yet the extent of coverage of such action remains questionable. Sturgeon, too, is resolute in her stance and has set out to preserve ‘Scotland’s place in the world.’ Thus Sturgeon, more than May, appears capable of filling The Iron Lady’s shoes.
While Falklands and Scotland are devoid of similarity and circumstance, the uniting factor remains national interest. Whether defeating an outside force, as with Argentina, or grappling with developments within the Union, as evidenced in the aftermath of the 2016 referendum, Britain has embarked on a journey of proving once again her forthright nature, stoic ability and single-handed determination. Over Falklands, the British rallied round the Union Jack. Over Scotland, St Andrew’s Cross appears to fly higher.
- Awarelogue Editorial
