Victor Davis Hanson: The U.S. Should Stand by Britain in the Falkland Islands
[Victor Davis Hanson is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, the editor of Makers of Ancient Strategy: From the Persian Wars to the Fall of Rome, and the author of The Father of Us All: War and History, Ancient and Modern.]
Almost 30 years after losing a war over the Falkland Islands, Argentina is once again warning Britain that it still wants back what it calls the Malvinas.
Argentina is now angry over a British company’s oil exploration off the windswept islands in what it considers its South Atlantic backyard....
In response to all this, the Obama administration announced that it would remain neutral. Aside from the fact that the Falkland Islanders wish to remain British — and aside from our history of supporting Britain’s claim, including during the 1982 war — there are lots of reasons why our neutrality here is a bad idea.
Britain is a longstanding NATO member. It has bled side-by-side with America in two world wars, Korea, and two conflicts in Iraq, and continues to do so in Afghanistan. The United Kingdom still shares close linguistic, cultural, and historical affinities with the United States.
We do not support all that the British do; nor do they always support us. But our centuries-old friendship should earn Britain special support from us in its disputes, even in the relatively unimportant Falklands mess. If Britain is not considered an ally, then America no longer has real allies....
After the horrific carnage of the First World War, utopians wrongly swore that rival European alliances had alone caused the war, and so created the League of Nations. Enlightened world citizens legislating peace would do a better job than nationalist politicians who crudely had once sought security through balancing power and forging alliances. Hitler and the far more lethal Second World War followed instead....
So, until human nature changes, there are always going to be some nations that are more aggressive than others, seeking to take what they can by force. Groups of like-minded others will resist them for both principle and their own self-protection. And the majority of “neutral” countries will keep quiet, waiting to see who proves the stronger — and then opportunistically joining the eventual winner....
Read entire article at National Review
Almost 30 years after losing a war over the Falkland Islands, Argentina is once again warning Britain that it still wants back what it calls the Malvinas.
Argentina is now angry over a British company’s oil exploration off the windswept islands in what it considers its South Atlantic backyard....
In response to all this, the Obama administration announced that it would remain neutral. Aside from the fact that the Falkland Islanders wish to remain British — and aside from our history of supporting Britain’s claim, including during the 1982 war — there are lots of reasons why our neutrality here is a bad idea.
Britain is a longstanding NATO member. It has bled side-by-side with America in two world wars, Korea, and two conflicts in Iraq, and continues to do so in Afghanistan. The United Kingdom still shares close linguistic, cultural, and historical affinities with the United States.
We do not support all that the British do; nor do they always support us. But our centuries-old friendship should earn Britain special support from us in its disputes, even in the relatively unimportant Falklands mess. If Britain is not considered an ally, then America no longer has real allies....
After the horrific carnage of the First World War, utopians wrongly swore that rival European alliances had alone caused the war, and so created the League of Nations. Enlightened world citizens legislating peace would do a better job than nationalist politicians who crudely had once sought security through balancing power and forging alliances. Hitler and the far more lethal Second World War followed instead....
So, until human nature changes, there are always going to be some nations that are more aggressive than others, seeking to take what they can by force. Groups of like-minded others will resist them for both principle and their own self-protection. And the majority of “neutral” countries will keep quiet, waiting to see who proves the stronger — and then opportunistically joining the eventual winner....