With support from the University of Richmond

History News Network puts current events into historical perspective. Subscribe to our newsletter for new perspectives on the ways history continues to resonate in the present. Explore our archive of thousands of original op-eds and curated stories from around the web. Join us to learn more about the past, now.

Dominic Sandbrook: Argentina is living in a nationalist dreamland

[Dominic Sandbrook’s latest book, State of Emergency (Penguin), will be published later this year.]

Loafing around Budapest last week during a welcome break from our miserable economic headlines, I found myself in the gift shop of one of the Hungarian capital’s oldest churches. Amid the postcards, statues and religious icons, my eye was drawn to a fine, brightly coloured map of Hungary hanging on the wall — mine for just a few thousand forints. It was no antique, but there was something odd about it, and it took me a moment to realise that the borders were all wrong. The map showed not Hungary as it is today, but “Greater Hungary”, complete with the territories lost after the First World War, including modern Slovakia and Transylvania. It was a nationalist fantasy — the kind of map that would no doubt appeal to Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, the President of Argentina.

Given that the last row over the sovereignty of the Falklands cost the lives of more than 600 young South Americans and brought down the Argentine Government, the omens for Mrs Kirchner’s latest foray into international diplomacy are not exactly promising. Like her predecessors, she clearly has at least one eye on domestic opinion, and presumably thinks that sabre-rattling over supposedly “illegal” oil drilling off the Falklands will obscure such trifling matters as her country’s dreadful economic problems and her own family’s involvement in a corruption scandal.

Yet the interesting question is why the Argentine public — like the man who drew that Hungarian map — are so easily roused about the ownership of land with which they have such little real connection. For better or worse, the Falklands have been solidly British since 1833, which is to say they have been British for about as long as Belgium has existed as an independent nation. While the nationalist Hungarian cartographer has the excuse that there are still Magyar-speakers in Romania and Slovakia, there are very few Argentine nationalists wandering the streets of Port Stanley. And while some commentators argue that mere geography means that the Falklands ought to be Argentine, the same principle would make the Channel Islands French, Malta Italian and Alaska Canadian.

What the latest Falklands furore reminds us, in fact, is how simultaneously potent and ridiculous territorial ambitions can be. Despite the posts on internet message boards from Argentinians insisting that they simply want “justice” from the evil British Empire, Mrs Kirchner’s threats ultimately boil down to old-fashioned blood-and-soil nationalism. Since narrow-minded nationalist irredentism has largely fallen out of favour in Western Europe, except in corners of Northern Ireland and the Basque Country, we frequently fail to recognise it when we see it; and since we now prefer to flagellate ourselves for our imperial past, we are often slow to call it by its proper name. But in the final analysis there is not much to choose between Argentine politicians eyeing up South Georgia and Hungarian skinheads wishing they still owned Bratislava.

The odd thing, though, is that anybody should be surprised. National irredentism has long been one of the most powerful weapons in a politician’s armoury...
Read entire article at Times (UK)