[Marxism] First things first [Re: British Government Refuses To Discuss Sovereignty of Mal

Nestor Gorojovsky nmgoro at gmail.com
Tue Mar 31 06:38:28 MDT 2009


Jscotlive at aol.com escribió:
> A few things worth remembering about the war over the Malvinas in  1982 are 
> as follows:
>  
> i) The skill and courage of the Argentinean fighter pilots, who despite  
> suffering high casualties continued to fly in low to attack British ships  
> anchored in the bay. Their courage was attested to by the British. Ironically, I  
> seem to recall that the Argentinean pilots may have been British  trained.

The Arg Navy was educated in the tradition of Nelson.Unfortunately, they 
did not substitute "Argentina" for "Britain" in the famous "Britain 
expects every man to fulfill his duty". This does not exclude great 
fighters and the BIM 5, based in Tierra del Fuego, was as heroic as 
admirably outstanding. But the high command was responsible for lack of 
naval effort in an obvious air and naval war. The Navy pressed against 
the plans by the Air Force to harass British transports on their way to 
Malvinas.

The Arg Army had been educated in what by the early years of the 19th 
Century was demed to be the best army in the world, the German Army. 
After 1955, it began to be trained by US and *particularly* French 
experts in anti-subversive war (even battle gear was changed to look 
like USAmerican gear). The French Military Mission in Buenos Aires, 
established 1956, is one of the best leads to the brutality of Arg 
torturers during the whole period between 1956 and 1983. Of course, in a 
country that had been traversing a chronic civil war between 1811 and 
1880, there had been a long homegrown tradition. But the contribution of 
French thugs was outstanding enough to be considered at least as 
important as the local one.

The Arg Air Force, created by Perón -who was a heir to the great Arg 
patriot General Mosconi, a man that due to a confrontation with the 
Standard Oil started the national Argentinean oil company YPF in the 
1920s and was the head of the Air branch of the Army- had been trained 
in the feats of the French military pilots. Later on, it became the most 
creative force and literally invented new ways to wage an air war. There 
was little British training of Arg pilots. The Air Force was one of the 
most important mainstays in the effort of self-centered 
industrialization that started with Peronism during the late 40s. The 
city of Córdoba was completely transformed by the industrial 
implantation by the Air Force in 1952.

>  
> ii) The sinking of the Belgrano by a British submarine as it was heading  
> away from the 200 mile exclusion zone which the British had placed around the  
> island. I think 2-250 sailors drowned in the sinking and the disgusting  
> triumphalist headline of 'Gotcha' which appeared in Murdoch's Sun newspaper the  next 
> day in the UK summed up the jingoism and nationalism which had been whipped  
> up by the Thatcher government at the time.

This was, of course, a war crime. The most important thing with the 
sinking was that it had been devised as a means to make sure there would 
BE a war. By the time of the murder, there were important negotiations 
led by the President of Peru.

>  
> iii) The vulnerability of British ships to the Exocet ship to ship  missiles 
> used by the Argentineans. These were French made and they were  responsible 
> for sinking 2 or 3 British destroyers and escorts.

The missiles were reworked in Arg by Arg technicians and both air-to-sea 
and land-to-sea "Arg" Exocets were created during the war, with not so 
bad a result. In fact, the British were lucky enough that our missiles 
had not been prepared to fight against an imperialist navy but against 
those of our neighbors. Thus, the light shields of the British ship 
allowed the missiles and torpedoes to break the shield but they did not 
explode because the shield was not heavy enough. Another consequence of 
the pro-imperialist trend in our Armed Forces after 1955.

>  
> iv) Rumours of American mercenaries fighting for the  Argentineans, 
> subsequently captured during the Battle of Goose  Green by British paras and executed 
> due to the scandal such an incident  would have created if it got out. I 
> researched this rumour a few years  ago, looking to perhaps do a story on it, but 
> all I could find were a few  random claims by British soldiers who'd served in 
> the war but did not  themselves see or come across any Americans. Their 
> statements consisted of  rumours among the troops, citing that certain telescopic 
> rifles only  available to US military personnel at the time were found after the 
> battle and  the skill of the Argentinean snipers, which they attributed to  
> the possibility that they were in fact American. Then again, perhaps this  is 
> another example of the congenital racism of all imperialist armies, which  
> refuse to acknowledge that non Europeans can fight as well as they can.

I can bear personal witness on this. In 1980, I met my high-school 
friend Oscar Martínez, one of the most important experts in physics in 
Argentina, child to a liberal family (and of Jewish mother, BTW). He was 
working at the scientific area of the Armed Forces, helping to design 
laser-guided rifles. Of course telescopic rifles, etc., were normal 
weaponry in Argentina. Many soldiers have told me that British soldiers 
  stole the battle gear of Arg dead soldiers because it would be a 
better fit to the local conditions than the gear provided by NATO. This 
battle gear was designed locally.

>  
> Finally, any honest accounting of the war would admit that the Argentineans  
> lost the war more than the British won it. A military junta more concerned 
> with  maintaining itself in power failed to prosecute the war beyond a certain 
> point,  keeping Argentina's best troops back in case needed against their own 
> people,  etc. I think they miscalculated the willingness of Thatcher to assemble 
> and  despatch a military task force 18,000 miles in order to fight over a few 
> hundred  islanders and sheep. Of course the fact is that in the South 
> Atlantic there  are significant oil and gas deposits.

This is exactly the conclusion that the imperialists did not want 
Argentineans to reach. That is why any debate on the war and why it was 
lost was precluded in Argentina. As to best troops, they were not kept 
at home against ourselves but stationed on the Chilean border...

Reasons behind the British imperialists´ interest for Malvinas (and 
"South Georgia") is that these islans control the best access to 
Antarctica as well as the single alternative passage between the 
Atlantic and the Pacific, if Panama gets closed down. And, of course, 
they are an advanced control point against Argentina herself. When, in 
as early a date as 1884, the Argentinean Navy commander Augusto Laserre 
founded Ushuaia in Tierra del Fuego, he had it very clear that British 
missions based in Malvinas were not just preaching Protestant Bibles but 
also setting a precedent for future British claims on the area.

It should be remembered that in as late a date as 1905 the British Crown 
claimed sovereignty on ALL OF LATIN AMERICA SOUTH OF THE 55th PARALLEL.

BTW: Argentina and Chile are the only coutnries in the world that 
recognize each other sovereignty rights on Antarctica. A quiz: under 
whose Presidency was the agreement reached? Was the Arg Foreign Minister 
of the time of Socialist origin?

> ________________________________________________




More information about the Marxism mailing list