The finding and founding of the Falklands
Looking back, the British Empire can often feel alien and distant. The patriotic imagery of Britannia in Bronze; the Union Flag billowing over India; soldiers in pith helmets drinking tonic water - just over a century ago, such depictions of our country were commonplace, reflective of the vast power of Great Britain in the 1800s - but now it can be hard to imagine such power ever existed. After the Second World War, winds of change swept across Africa and Asia and nations gained independence as bankrupt Britain skulked back into her rainswept homeland. Within a matter of decades, an Empire that had taken a third of a millennium to build ceased to exist, and with its disappearance, so too disappeared the role of Britain as an economic and political superpower.
Looking back, the British Empire can often feel alien and distant. The patriotic imagery of Britannia in Bronze; the Union Flag billowing over India; soldiers in pith helmets drinking tonic water - just over a century ago, such depictions of our country were commonplace, reflective of the vast power of Great Britain in the 1800s - but now it can be hard to imagine such power ever existed. After the Second World War, winds of change swept across Africa and Asia and nations gained independence as bankrupt Britain skulked back into her rainswept homeland. Within a matter of decades, an Empire that had taken a third of a millennium to build ceased to exist, and with its disappearance, so too disappeared the role of Britain as an economic and political superpower.
But, while Britain’s colonies were lost, remnants of Empire inevitably remain. These include a spattering of islands and holdings around the Globe, tiny and often sparsely populated. Some, like South Georgia and the Sandwich Islands are completely uninhabited, while others, like the Cayman Islands, primarily serve as tax havens. But if you have ever heard of one of Britain’s Overseas Territories, it is, in all likelihood, the Falkland Islands.
To find it, trace the coast of South America; this archipelago sits off the tip at Tierra del Fuego, just out of reach of Argentina’s Southern tail. Its population is just over 3000 as of 2018, more than half of whom live in the capital Stanley on East Falkland. Superficially, the islands seem to be of little interest, with barren mountainous terrain, littered with sheep, reminiscent of Scotland, or Wales perhaps. However, just thirty-seven years ago, these islands were at the centre of a global conflict, a conflict that would shake Britain from it’s postcolonial slumber and let Britannia rule the waves for just one month more.
To understand the cause of this conflict, it is necessary to understand the historical context of these islands. They were first colonised by Louis Antoine de Bougainville, who, while circumnavigating the world (for exploration was a trend at the time) bumped into the archipelago in 1764. He established a town, Port Louis, and claimed them for the French empire (for imperialist expansionism was also a trend). This holding was soon ceded to the Spanish as Porto Soledad. Meanwhile, John MacBride, a British captain, established Port Egmont on Saunders Island. As a Scot, he was likely attracted by the rainfall, which is described as “almost constant” on the Falklands Government website. Regardless of MacBride’s intentions, his ignorance of the Spanish settlement led to the interminable sovereignty dispute. The result was two European powers with claims on the same land - two historic enemies. When, in 1770, the two sides noticed each other, Spain reacted with abruptly 1400 troops and five frigates; Britain was also keen to go to war, for her ‘honour’ had been disrespected. The crisis was defused when Spain backed off, leaving the question of Sovereignty unanswered.
Remarkably, just four years later, Britain packed up and left. Happily, before they did, they left a stone that read: ‘These islands belong to us’. In 1811, Spain also left and, for a period, only gauchos and penguins roamed the land. In 1833, Britain reasserted her claim. The Argentine Confederation, newly independent from Spain, disagreed vociferously. But, the year is 1833, and Britannia rules the waves, so there is little Argentina can do.
Tensions in the 20th century
Britain’s unquestionable authority over the islands declined along with its naval power. In the 1960s, Argentina reasserted its claim on the islands, this time going through the UN and citing decolonisation protocols. Britain was uncompromisingly forthright in maintaining control over the islands. It is important to remember that Britain wasn’t indifferent to the UN protocols, but that in the Falkland Islands they were faced with a unique situation. A colony thousands of miles from home, yes, but also a colony inhabited by near-entirely British families who had arrived 150 years before. If the right to self-determination was granted, the locals would have most certainly been determined not to join Argentina, and determined to stay a colony of the UK. In fact, in 1980, there were discussions about the transfer of sovereignty due to the high costs of the territory, but the influence of the Falklands Lobby in Parliament was too great; MPs were not going to allow this two century spat to end in humiliation.
Change was also happening in Argentina. In 1976, a coup d'etat had overthrown the government, followed by the imposition of martial law. Jorge Rafael Videla became the President of Argentina, and policy towards British possessions in the South Atlantic changed. In November, the Argentine army landed on the uninhabited Southern Thule, one of the South Sandwich Islands, and boldly constructed a military base complete with helicopter pad and radio transmitter, called Corbeta Uruguay. When the news reached Westminster, Prime Minister James Callaghan of the Labour Party faced a choice. British land had been invaded and there were fears it was the start of Argentine encroachment that would lead to aggression in the Falklands. Should he send the military to forcibly remove the Argentinians? Or should he leave the base and prevent the potential loss of life, hoping that there would be no further Argentine action? Callaghan was indecisive, but his unpopularity led him to call upon the Navy, hoping it would gain him points in the polls.
In many ways, this military intervention, Operation Journeyman, was the forgotten prelude to the war of 1982. Several ships sailed south, as well as HMS Dreadnought, the UK’s first nuclear submarine. A look at the vessels sent might give the onlooker the impression that Callaghan had taken decisive action against the aggressors, but this could not be further from the truth. Because though the frigates were laden with firepower, the government was so afraid of war that it had ordered they shouldn’t be used. While the show of military might stopped further Argentine expansion, Argentine commandos remained based at Southern Thule until after the Falklands War.
Scared into submission, Argentina kept a low profile until 1982, when President Leopoldo Galtieri, hated by his people for the awful conditions they had been subjected too, was eager for an easy popularity boost. For that, he looked eastward, to the Falkland Islands, which had been a national embarrassment for decades. If he could just reclaim them, raise the blue and white flag on their shores, his problems would be solved. And what was the use of a military Junta if it didn’t use the military?
Argies attack and Stanley surrenders
On the 19th March, tensions reached breaking point when scrap metal merchants, who had been infiltrated by the Argentine Marines, landed on Southern Georgia. The British Antarctic Survey team stationed there reported vandalism of English signs and evidence that the intruders were armed. A diplomatic crisis ensued, and while the ship that had brought the merchants left, a group of them stayed on the Island. Acting on advice from Whitehall, the Governor of the Falklands deployed HMS Endurance from Stanley harbour, an ice patrol vessel. However, this shocking act of force was only to portend what was to come. Galtieri, fearing that the UK would increase military presence following the events of South Georgia, gave the order to seize the Falklands.
On the 19th March, tensions reached breaking point when scrap metal merchants, who had been infiltrated by the Argentine Marines, landed on Southern Georgia. The British Antarctic Survey team stationed there reported vandalism of English signs and evidence that the intruders were armed. A diplomatic crisis ensued, and while the ship that had brought the merchants left, a group of them stayed on the Island. Acting on advice from Whitehall, the Governor of the Falklands deployed HMS Endurance from Stanley harbour, an ice patrol vessel. However, this shocking act of force was only to portend what was to come. Galtieri, fearing that the UK would increase military presence following the events of South Georgia, gave the order to seize the Falklands.
At 3:30 pm on the 1st of April 1982, Governor Rex Hunt received a message from the Government that ‘an Argentine task force could be assembling at dawn tomorrow’ - this was no April fools prank. He had just 57 Royal Marines to defend the islands, after the HMS Endurance had left with 22. That night, the well equipped Argentine forces of 600 men invaded in Operation Rosario. Amphibious landings in and around Stanley were met with nominal defence and within hours, with only one fatality - an Argentine Major shot outside Government House - the Falklands surrendered. In the last telex exchange with London, the Falklands operator announced “We have lots of new friends”.
In Buenos Aires, the streets were filled with celebrating Argentinians.
In London, the Government was in a state of shock.
In the Sun, the headline read simply “SURRENDER!”.
Galtieri was a hero. He had restored not just the Falklands, but Argentinian pride. Now Argentinians could say ‘Las Malvinas son Argentinas’ with reality on their side. This is where the story should have ended - had Callaghan remained in power perhaps it is where it would have ended. But across the waves, Britain had elected perhaps the perfect politician to stand against this injustice. Margaret Thatcher was a controversial PM who divided opinion at home and abroad, but everyone agreed that she was tough. And toughness was a necessity if Britain were to fight and win a war more that 10,000km from home.
The Empire Strikes Back
On the 4th of April, the UN passed resolution 502, condemning the aggression and compelling Argentina to withdraw their troops. However, it was clear they would not be removed so easily. After the UK Parliament approved retaliation, a war cabinet was set up on the 6th, with Thatcher at its helm. Furthermore, it was clear that Britain did not stand alone in their decision to act with force, as members of the Commonwealth and European Union declared their support for the British. New Zealand Prime Minister asserted in The Times that “Argentina must not be appeased”, while the French initiated an arms trade embargo. The United States was placed in a more difficult situation, as they feared the USSR could side with Argentina if they were involved - furthermore, they had supported the Junta’s rise to power. After Thatcher bluntly rejected Reagan’s suggestion to leave the Argentinians be, he instead offered her some gunboats to help - but the friction was said to mar their relationship thereafter.
On the 4th of April, the UN passed resolution 502, condemning the aggression and compelling Argentina to withdraw their troops. However, it was clear they would not be removed so easily. After the UK Parliament approved retaliation, a war cabinet was set up on the 6th, with Thatcher at its helm. Furthermore, it was clear that Britain did not stand alone in their decision to act with force, as members of the Commonwealth and European Union declared their support for the British. New Zealand Prime Minister asserted in The Times that “Argentina must not be appeased”, while the French initiated an arms trade embargo. The United States was placed in a more difficult situation, as they feared the USSR could side with Argentina if they were involved - furthermore, they had supported the Junta’s rise to power. After Thatcher bluntly rejected Reagan’s suggestion to leave the Argentinians be, he instead offered her some gunboats to help - but the friction was said to mar their relationship thereafter.
A task force of 127 ships set sail south in early April, some of them requisitioned merchant ships, including a P&O cruise liner. The Central Atlantic British holding of Ascension Island was used as a refuelling station. On account of the distance, it took the fleet almost a month to arrive. Ahead of them a smaller air force retook South Georgia.
Military operations on the Islands commenced on May 1st with the Black Buck Raids, as Vulcans flew in from Ascension Island and bombed airfields, intending to prevent fast jets from using the runway. That same day, British Sea Harriers operating from HMS Invincible shot down two Argentine jets.
However, real progress was not made by the British until the next day, with the sinking of the ARA General Belgrano by nuclear submarine HMS Conqueror. The 323 Argentine deaths as a result of the attack led to a complete Argentine Naval withdrawal, as their ships docked for the rest of the war on the Islands or returned to Argentina. Nonetheless, the sinking was highly controversial, as the ship was likely located outside of the maritime exclusion zone established by the British, and therefore some deem it a war crime. In spite of the casualties, the headline of the Sun the next day read “GOTCHA!”. Clearly the British tabloid industry was going to milk the jingoistic tendencies of their reader base for profit. Their spirits were sunk two days later with the sinking of HMS Sheffield, killing 20 and bringing home to the British public that this conflict was not mere abstraction, but all out war. Further sinkings in the following days meant the number of British fatalities was constantly growing.
The Argentine Navy may have been dealt with, but now the military faced an even bigger challenge. During the month Argentina had occupied the Islands, they had rigged it to explode with mines, which now littered the windswept crags and barren fields. After establishing a beachhead in the northwest of East Falkland (in Operation Sutton on 21st May), 500 men headed South to Darwin and Goose Green, where the Argentinians had developed a base. They engaged with an Argentinian force almost double their size at The Battle of Goose Green, but still emerged victorious with only 18 fatalities. The BBC World Service had accidentally broadcast news of the offensive before it had begun, which had alerted the Argentinians, making the British victory even more remarkable. Critically, Argentine forces were largely conscripts less well versed in the art of war than the British commandos.
The British forces then began the march towards Stanley. Though morale was damaged after Argentine A-4 Skyhawks managed to bomb newly landed British forces who had not yet established air defences (“The Disaster at Bluff Cove”), killing 56 servicemen, a trend emerged where small groups of British forces would take on larger groups of Argentinians, but would be victorious regardless, and with minimal casualties. After weeks of yomping, the final assault on Stanley began on the 11th June. After three days of fighting, the Argentine hold on the final natural defence of Mount Tumbledown was faltering. In the tension, an Argentinian commander reportedly ordered his troops to shoot any locals who resisted house seizure for military purposes - luckily, none of his men did anything of the kind. On June 14th, the Argentinians surrendered and British troops marched into Stanley.
Las Malvinas ya no son Argentinas
In 1983, Thatcher visited and toured the battlefields, met with enthusiastic locals who proclaimed her their “liberator”. Argentina described the visit as “provocative and arrogant”, while she characterised it as a “personal pilgrimage”. Possibly it was especially poignant knowing she had sent 255 British soldiers to their death - it appears this guilt deeply affected her. Nonetheless, she was supported by the British public, and her landslide election victory in 1983 is largely attributed to the ‘Falklands Factor’. If the attack had occurred under a Labour government, would the Falklanders be speaking in Spanish today? Perhaps. In 2007, Thatcher said that in "the struggle against evil... we can all today draw hope and strength" from the Falklands victory. But was the war worth the loss of life? Such a question is difficult to answer, but may need to be considered in the future as tensions arise with other British Overseas Territories such as the Chagos Islands.