Argentina - nationalisation of YPF - link with Falklands?

[Figment]

Argentina is planning on nationalising YPF, which is currently own for 56% by Repsol, a Spanish oil company. They plan to simply annex 51% of the Repsol stock by passing a law in parliament. Spain is considering sanctions and other 'appropriate actions'.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/18/business/global/spain-weighs-response-to-nationalization-of-ypf.html

The reason they do this is because Argentina is apparently highly dependent on foreign energy sources and fuel is becoming increasingly expensive.


Now, in and on itself this is afaic theft, but I don't think it is the only reason and I'm not sure it will end there. Here are two theories.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/apr/01/falklands-oil?INTCMP=SRCH

Last month, there were already diplomatic clashes between the UK and Argentina over the Falklands, considering Argentina wants the islands as the surrounding territorial waters may hold unexploited natural resources.

I'm wondering if Argentina is planning another attempt at the Falklands and in that light both wants an oil company to exploit these natural resources for themselves and use the extra income to the benefit of the state budget, while with YPF, they would also annex any oil reserves currently in stock. Which means they would have access to oil in case of a war with the UK over the Falklands and whatever economic sanctions would occur.

Argentina, of course, still has a claim on the territory, even if it has never been part of Argentina, the first settlers were British and the people on the islands wish to remain part of the UK.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/mar/06/no-one-listen-falkland-islanders

They have also been harassing any ships that do business with the Falklands or make use of Falkland territorial waters (pretending it's illegal). They've done so by a policy of isolation, disallowing the use of any South American ports through an agreement with South American and Caribean nations.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/tensions-escalate-argentina-19-years-after-falklands-war

In the meantime, prospectors have yet to find oil anywhere near the Falklands. Question is, is there any at all?


The markets however, think the action by the Argentinian government has more to do with something else, that internal economic problems are so big, they are desperately close to defaulting:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/argentina-default-risk-surges-ypf-nationalization-cds-approach-1000-bps



So, my questions to you: How high will tensions rise and what will happen next? Will Argentina risk war with the UK again over the Falklands? Will Argentina default on the financial market? Would the UK be able to handle a war with Argentina at this time, as they lack aircraft carriers they had 29 years ago?

[ItsTheSheppy]

I'm not up on my British military policy. They don't have aircraft carriers?

[Figment]

I'm not up on my British military policy. They don't have aircraft carriers?

Afaik, not as many anymore, certainly not in the area (just one frigate or cruiser around there?). Think their new Falkland strategy has to be built around the local airstrip.

United Kingdom (1) HMS Illustrious: 22,000 ton STOVL carrier, commissioned in 1982. Originally there were three of her class but the other two have since been retired to save money. Regular RN fixed wing aircraft carrier operations ended after first Sea Harrier and then Harrier fighters were retired as a cost-saving measure, now operating as a Landing Platform Helicopter.

[MadPenguin]

Correct me if im wrong but from the reading i did when this was a hot topic, Britain has offered at least partial ownership of the Falklands to Argentina several times before, but Argentina always refused.
Now its discovered there is oil and their all like "oh its ours". Seems a little... scummy

[Vash02]

Britains military defence of the Falklands has been significantly increased since the 1982. there's a proper airfield now with four Typhoon fighter bombers patrolling.
There's also the new Type-45 frigate has been sent to guard the islands. The Type-45 is the most advanced AA ship in the world. That single frigate could take out South America's entire airforce.
Then there's always the unknown number of nuclear submarines that could be patrolling the waters.

So yeah, Falklands are pretty much secure. Argentina isnt going to take it by force.

On the political side of it, I'm thinking the president is just banging the drum and trying to get some support up for her government. She isnt serious about taking the islands back by diplomatic means. The UK has made it clear they wont allow Argentina to have them without the Islanders consent and she has done nothing but bully them so far.

[Warborn]

Argentinians are idiots for obsessing over the Falklands as they do. The place was uninhabited when the Europeans found and colonized it. For the government I guess it hasn't changed much since the junta days, being just a way to rally the country around an issue that isn't the economy or social issues or whatever else. Anyway, the Falkland Islanders do not want to become part of Argentina and the UK will keep them that way. So there is no issue there.

As for the nationalization of the oil assets in Argentina formerly owned by that Spanish company, it's robbery. Although I am left wondering whether there will even be a significant benefit for Argentinians in the aftermath of this at all. Seems like it could easily result in more harm than gain in the long run, treating private industry assets like that.

[Quovatis]

Ah yes, the same country that simply passes a law to seize money from individual retirement accounts because they think they are entitled to it. It's also the same country where giving your teenage daughter a boob job for their 16th birthday is acceptable too.

And yeah, Argentina is not going to take the Falklands. They got their asses kicked royally (pun intended) last time.

[Warborn]

Ah yes, the same country that simply passes a law to seize money from individual retirement accounts because they think they are entitled to it. It's also the same country where giving your teenage daughter a boob job for their 16th birthday is acceptable too.

So because the Spanish government did something stupid to its own citizens its okay for a foreign nation to seize the assets of a privately owned Spanish-based company?

And we should not start a competition about whose young people are more fucked up because all I would have to say is:
Child Beauty Pageants- Sad Faces and Fake Smiles - YouTube

[Quovatis]

So because the Spanish government did something stupid to its own citizens its okay for a foreign nation to seize the assets of a privately owned Spanish-based company?

The country I was referring to is Argentina, actually. I don't agree with what Argentina is doing.

[Figment]

Well, the nationalisation of YPF is now official as the Argentinian parliament approved it.

Also, a riot about the new Argentinian promotional advert for the Olympics :
Argentina - Spot tv sulle Olimpiadi per ribadire sovranità Falkland (02.05.12) - YouTube

It ends with the words "To compete on English soil, we train on Argentine soil".

Not sure about you lot, but they do seem to want tensions to rise further, I wonder how many of these provocations we'll get in the future.



It's funny. Chavez once claimed the Antilles because they'd supposedly be in Venezuelan territorial waters, but as you can see... they are not:

http://openlandscapes.zalf.de/ImagesWiki/Fig1_CARSEA.jpg

Sea borders are typically either up to 200km off shore, or halfway in between two nations. Otherwise France and England could claim each other (again) as well, so that's a bit silly claim. >.>

Seems to me Chavez is mostly upset with US troops being stationed at the airfield there for the 'War on Drugs'. Apparently annexation has crossed their minds a couple times, but they haven't because it would be too expensive. Why? Well, the islands have no economy of their own really aside from tourism and are pretty much reliant on the Netherlands to pump money into it. basically, any attempt at annexation would mean nothing but cost, plus could result in a war with Columbia and the USA, as the USA would not want to relinquish that strategic position, plus a NATO partner would be attacked.

On top of that, like with the Falklands, these islands have no cultural connections to the nearby mainland, unlike say... Gibraltar. Quite curious if that'll ever become Spanish territory again, as Hong Kong was 'returned' to China (theoretically they could also have returned it to Taiwan really :P).

[Vash02]

Shouldnt the Olympics censor them for bringing political disputes in to the games?

Either way, what a douchebag thing to do. See the steps he is dancing on at 0:38? Thats a British WW1 war memorial.

[Figment]

It would IMO be justified if the Olympic committy would ban them from the games for a year over this. A warning and a lawsuit is the least tbh.

[Warborn]

I wouldn't ban them if it were up to me. The athletes ought not to be punished for their government's posturing.

[Figment]

Athletes from Argentina are now by default a political tool, more than athletes. Plus at least one cooperated with the provocative advert.

Sanctions always hit the populace of a country, now it would only hit athletes.

[Kipper]

Sabre rattling. As was pointed out above, the Type 45 destroyer could sink the Argentine navy on its own, it's very design stems from the loss of ships to surface missiles and air attacks from the first conflict.

The fact that an Astute submarine may or may not pop up anywhere around there, again, highly advanced kit if not the worlds most advanced. That would ruin your day if you tried to operate ships that it didn't want you to.

The Typhoon is a very modern aircraft too, what are the argentines flying?

Any attack would have to be done by surprise and quickly take the airbase, but I don't see how that will happen - and keeping hold of it would be another matter entirely since reinforcement would be difficult indeed.

As for diplomacy - I fully support the notion that the established population of the islands, which are self governing, choose to remain part of the UK. While that remains the case, an argument cannot be made to sell them out.

I think it's a matter of great stupidity that the UK has been left without a fixed-wing aircraft carrier for a decade, by the scrapping of Ark Royal - but I don't think it would matter too much in this instance.

I hope it doesn't come to anything though, I find military tech fascinating and awesome, but I don't like to see it used in anger unless its absolutely necessary.

[Warborn]

Athletes from Argentina are now by default a political tool, more than athletes. Plus at least one cooperated with the provocative advert.

Sanctions always hit the populace of a country, now it would only hit athletes.

Sanctions targeting the populace of a country are despicable, which is sort of my point. I don't know what the circumstances around that guy in the video participating are, but either way, it's just the Olympics. Seriously. It's just a bunch of people running around and sweating. Everyone knows Argentina is being retarded with respect to the Falklands and nothing will come of it, so hopefully it's ignored like it ought to be.

[Figment]

I disagree. The Olympics are about being non-political. By allowing this you're telling the Chinese they can bring their politics to the game.

This goes against the very essence of the Olympian spirit. In the Classic Era, the Olympic Games were a time of non-politics, non-warfare so all focus would be on the sports, regardless of politics.

Argentina is trying to take the Olympics hostage by openly abusing them to make a political statement and with it breaks the Olympic convention.

[Warborn]

The Ancient Greeks were cunts and the Olympics is just a bunch of stupid games. Unless Argentina makes an ad threatening war and has Olympians from their country taking part, then it's water off a duck's back.

As for the Chinese or, really, anyone and how they go about their business, the world basically doesn't care now, so why should we care during the Olympics? Yeah, China sucks. Well, so do a lot of places. You aren't going to change that by making their athletes lose their chance to compete.

[Figment]

China is just an example.

[Kipper]

As boring as I find most Olympic sports, I do kind of think that as many nations as possible should be invited to take part. Its not the people of certain countries that are objectionable, many times it's just the leaders. Sometimes elected, sometimes not.

I hope that sport appeals to moderate people, makes them look around the world and say "hey, we should do more to make our country like that!" and do what is in their power to make their lot better.