THE PRESS MONDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 1986. Fishing round the Falklands

Press, 10 November 1986, Page 20

THE PRESS MONDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 1986. Fishing round the Falklands

The dispute over a fisheries zone round the Falkland Islands demonstrates that the issues which gave rise to the Falklands war are still alive. Argentina occupied the Falkland Islands in 1982 and Britain went to war and retook the territory. The military Government of Argentina was overthrown after Argentina was defeated in the war. The new civilian and democratic Government has shown no sign of attempting to recapture the islands, but equally has shown no sign of renouncing Argentina’s claim. The British have left a military force in the islands and would, no doubt, be as determined in defending the islands as they were in 1982. The fishing dispute has blown up over the intention of the British Government to establish an interim conservation and management zone with a radius of 150 miles around the Falklands. Argentina is viewing this British move as an attempt by Britain to assert its sovereignty over the islands. Argentina’s protests are being backed by a number of Latin American Governments. Argentina has taken the further step of signing fishing agreements with the Soviet Union and Bulgaria for areas which would include part of the zone Britain has defined. Argentina is likely to find backing for the fishing agreements and considerable difficulty could arise should the British challenge a fishing vessel from the Soviet Union or from Bulgaria.

In fact, Britain appears to have been eminently reasonable about the conservation zone. It feels the need to protect the zone, not as part of a plan to assert sovereignty, but because there has been over-fishing in the South Atlantic. Fishing fleets from the north Atlantic have been forced to look for fish in other parts of the world as fish stocks have

been greatly depleted in the northern hemisphere. Had someone not attempted to impose conservation measures, the stocks of fish round the Falklands would have been plundered. The British showed sensitivity to the feelings of the Argentinians and sought co-operation with Argentina to find a solution to the fisheries problem without prejudicing the question of sovereignty over the Falklands.

The British went further and sought a study of the fisheries from the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. Not all countries agreed to the F.A.O. study. Britain attempted to reach an internationally agreed position. Britain has surely attempted to act responsibly over the conservation zone. The declaration of the zone itself, and the further claim on behalf of the Falkland Islands to a fisheries limit of 200 miles, is certainly an indication that Britain considers that it has legal rights to the Falkland Islands. That Britain was prepared to seek international co-operation is an indication that Britain was not using the law of the sea to reinforce its sovereignty. Argentina missed an opportunity to cooperate, thereby making it clear that it did not regard Britain’s claim as absolute. In time, the Falkland Islanders, almost all of them of British stock, may decide that they could have a tolerable future in a formal link with Argentina. Their experiences during the brief Argentinian occupation, however, hardly encourage this view at present. In the meantime, Argentina would itself be acting with more sense if it admitted that there was an urgent need to promote conservation of fisheries and treated it as a regional issue to be sorted out by the parties on the spot. Instead, Argentina is choosing confrontation.