[Extractivism Talks #8]: Javier Milei and Argentina’s Collapse

The Extractivism Talks #08 is on Argentinean president Javier #Milei and the ongoing collapse of the country’s status quo.

In this talk, we took stock of the first year of Milei’s presidency and how the Argentinean state has been disrupted on many levels. Since his rise to power in December 2023, the ultra-liberal, conservative leader has been altering environmental preservation laws, cutting ministries and state departments, pushing privatisations and weakening social protection – particularly for women, LGBTQI+ and social movements. These changes have interrelated global dimensions as the rivalry between powers like China and the United States reheats while the international race for natural resources needed for the energy transition emerges.

#Argentina is home to many resources needed for the energy transition, particularly lithium. The debate explored how Milei has been capitalising on both domestic discontent and a growing competitive international context to promote a harsh #neoliberalization of the economy and an abrupt reduction of the role of the #state.

The talk gave special attention to how his presidency relates to unforeseen levels of extractivist operations through #deregulation, privatisation, opening new #mining pits, removing barriers to agribusiness, introducing #fracking, and repressing anti #extractivist social movements.

[JA-pnji]

As regards the United Kingdom, the British [historic] claim to sovereignty over the Falkland Islands it is based on the argument that “Britain has “continuously, peacefully and effectively inhabited and administered” the Islands since 1833. It also bases its case on the principle of self-determination, that people of territories such as the Falklands have the right to choose their own future and status.

The British however admit that the Falklands is an archipelago consisting of 778 islands and islets. Of these, only two are populated, and yet the UK exercises control over a further uninhabited 776 islands. The residents of the island [who are not indigenous to the territory, so cannot claim customary/historical aboriginal economic rights to fishing nearby waters or to temporary habitation of uninhabited islands] can only exercise self-determination over the land they reside on [and/or derive economic sustenance]. As they are not a sovereign state and the Falklands is not a contiguous territory, their residency rights cannot extend to nearby unoccupied islands and adjoining seas.
In short, the UK cannot use them as a proxy to claim territorial rights over unoccupied islands. The sovereign protection granted by the UK government can only concern the actual land the residents are on.

Secondly, regarding historic title, this is no different from the French argument about claims of the Juan de Nova, and Bassas da India, in the Madagascan Channel and the Chinese '9-dash' argument of the SCS that they exercised control before the independence of the modern nation-states of Madagascar/Mauritius, Philippines, and Argentina. If Chinese historic claims are overruled then neither the UK nor France should be allowed to underpin their claims based on historic title.