On Chavez's un-Socialistic criticism of British claims on the FalklandsArgentina rallies regional support over Falklands
I can understand Hugo Chavez stating that the ‘time for empires was over’ in his bid to support Argentina’s claim over the Falklands. However, is he also stating that proximity, or previous ownership of the said Islands is enough to legitimise a claim.
Then, would Saddam’s efforts to reclaim Kuwait a couple of decades ago, or China’s claim on Tibet and Xinjiang, or the Zionist claim on Palestinian land, be justified as well? And if all this is well and fine, then should the Falklands islands be returned to the Patagonian Indians whom may have reached the islands before European explorers? Or should a large portion of Argentina be returned to the descendants of the Incas who conquered present-day northwestern Argentina?
And what about Argentina’s claim to a vast expanse of ocean stretching to the Antarctic and including those waters upon which the Falkland islands are perched. Should Argentina, being next to the ocean, be allowed to appropriate a large expanse of it just because the other south American lands are not. What does Chavez have to say about this. I thought he was a socialist? And yet he seems to be on the side of the ‘haves’ who are claiming more on the basis of nothing other than proximity.
Chavez, and the similar minded ought to ask themselves if they believe that the ‘time for empires was over’ or that only empires based on proximity of the lands and waters should be accorded legitimacy.
C’mon el Presidente, let’s hear it.