Dear Delegates,

Welcome to VICS XXV, and to Fighting for the Falklands: Brink of War! We’re so excited to be your Chair & Crisis Director & can’t wait to see what you accomplish during committee. We hope that your conference experience will prove both challenging and rewarding throughout our sessions together, and know you come equipped to handle the crises before you.

My name is Grant GianGrasso, and I’ll be your committee Chair. As a first-year originally from Buffalo, New York, this will be my first VICS! I hope to double major in

Neuroscience and French in the years to come. Before coming to UVA, I loved competing as

Captain of my high school’s MUN team, mostly doing crisis, and now feel super excited to be on the other side of committee.

My name is Hannah Saiontz, and I’ll be your Crisis Director. I’m a second year student from Baltimore, Maryland, and I’m planning on double majoring in Economics and PPL

(philosophy, politics, and law) with a minor in Psychology. I started competing in MUN my sophomore year of high school and continued to stay active since then. I’ve worked as an assistant CD & been a delegate many times, and I’m so excited to have the opportunity to be your Crisis Director!

If you have any questions regarding this background guide, committee, or the conference in general, please feel free to reach out to either of us. We’re both very approachable and would be glad to help you work through any issues you run into. Otherwise, we’re looking forward to a great conference and getting to know all of you!

Sincerely,

Grant, [email protected] ​ Hannah, [email protected] ​ Introduction

The 1982 conflict between the United

Kingdom and the Republic of known as the represents a pivotal historical development in the realm of colonialism, sovereignty, and short-term warfare. Prompted by the Argentine invasion of Britain’s off the southeast coast of South America, the ten-week standoff tested a declining colonial power’s resolve and willingness to continue defending her territories - a challenge to which the U.K. rose readily. The British victory in the outcome of the Falklands War reminded the world her people would not easily relinquish authority over their remaining holdings across the globe, and served as a swift rebuke of

Argentina’s territorial ambitions. But what would have happened if events had taken a different turn? What if diplomacy, attempted before the onset of hostilities, had prevailed? Or consider, for example, that Argentina’s persistence in war had pushed the British to attrition? In the

Falklands Committee, set March 25th, 1982, exactly 39 years to the day before VICS 2021, you will decide whether aggression warrants war, whether time will favor one belligerent or the other, and ultimately how history plays out in the south of the Atlantic. Delegates will take on the roles of leaders in the Argentinian government and military. From the date you commence debate, history stops, and you control the past.

Turning Point - Eyeing the Falklands

The Falkland Islands comprise an archipelago of over two hundred landmasses approximately three hundred miles east of the Strait of Magellan. The territory is dominated by its two major islands, East Falkland and West Falkland, around which lay peppered the many smaller islands. In total, the land area covered by the Falklands resembles the size of the state of

Connecticut. The largest municipality, Stanley, situated on East Falkland, doubles as the capital

“city.” With regard to population density,

the number of inhabitants throughout the

entire territory hovers always below five

thousand people. Almost all of these

residents may trace their heritage back to

British settlers, and the vast majority therefore speak English.

In terms of resources and terrain, the Falkland Islands seem lacking at first glance. The climate stays far from conducive to farming with a temperature that oscillates between forty and fifty degrees year-round; mediocre amounts of precipitation fall across the islands’ dry surface, completely devoid of trees but furnished instead with several grass species that blanket a landscape of rolling hills. As such, no mammals inhabit the Falklands which are indigenous, and the majority of land-based wildlife includes numerous bird species.

One may question, then, why Argentina set its sights on control of the Falkland Islands?

In fact, not only did the country make advances toward a takeover in 1982 and during the preceding years, but had also laid claims to the islands since its nascent, post-independence years following the nation’s revolutionary victory against in 1818. The value for Britain proved to be the Falklands’ export of wool: the pastures of the islands’ hills turned out to suit grazing sheep quite nicely.

At least around 1982, Argentina’s interest in the Falklands derived from several factors involving the islands’ geographic location, the properties of the territory’s coastline, and a desperate need for a boost to national pride. The coordinates of the Falklands, placing the islands in proximity to the remainder of South America but with the additional advantage of an outsider’s vantage point, seemed appealing for strategic reasons. A military presence there, especially naval in nature, could prove useful in any future attack on Argentina from another country on the continent or elsewhere.

Furthermore, the archipelago configuration of the

British colony and its hill-encrusted surface provided a wealth of safe harbors in which submarines and battleships could be ensconced from the elements and enemies.

Besides the tactical allure of exerting authority over the Falklands, the Argentinians could consider the rich fisheries of the Falklands as an economic boon should they fall under the jurisdiction of the South American country’s merchants. And who knows? Perhaps oil lurked beneath the seabed just around the island territory. Finally, there was the fact to mull over that all envy for the Falklands would turn to nationalistic celebration if Argentina could reclaim that which it had sought for so long - and the Argentine dictator, President Leopoldo Galitieri, could benefit from a vindication of his mandate to govern in a time of intense political turmoil and dissent. Regarding the U.K., Britain’s interest in a Falkland presence was equally as complex as that of Argentina. First priority were the residents, who were British subjects historically afforded the full protection of the crown. Strategic considerations remained a close second interest to the British, for similar reasons as the Argentinians had. The importance of retaining control of a landmass where troops and supplies could be staged during a South American conflict, while it was unlikely to be needed, couldn’t be dismissed out of hand. As for the minor economic advantages of Falklands industry, they didn’t hold enough significance to constitute a true impetus to war.

Within Reach - Argentina’s Territorial Pursuits

Argentina’s rich history, rooted in Spanish colonialism, plays a paramount role in understanding both their fervent motivations to annex the Falkland Islands and their arguments pertaining to why they had a legal basis to do so. Argentina declared independence from Spain in

1816, in the midst of a long and bloody war against the colonial power from 1810-1818. In 1820, the seat of government at declared the

Falkland Islands a territory of Argentina. At that time, the ownership of the islands was disputed, having changed hands between Britain, France and Spain since the

Falklands’ discovery during the Age of Exploration. In

1774 the British had withdrawn from the islands for economic reasons but without renouncing their claim on them, leaving only a few scattered Spanish settlements occupying the island until they, too, left in 1811. So when the 1820 declaration that the new Republic of Argentina was to overtake the Falklands came along, the Argentine government faced little resistance. In 1833, British settlers returned to the Falklands and expelled the small Argentine contingents residing there. No conflict transpired, likely because control over the islands wasn’t as contentious of an issue then as it would eventually become, and the newly formed Argentine government had more immediate problems with which to deal. Britain maintained control over the Falklands, albeit in the face of opposing claims from Argentina, in a colonial manner until the end of the Second World War. That was when the United Nations, formed in the aftermath of the world’s deadliest conflict ever, began adjudicating issues of sovereignty with the primary goal of facilitating self-determination for various colonies. Making no exceptions for the holdings of the Allied Powers, the United Nations considered Britain’s control of the Falkland

Islands and other territories as undesirable as the Axis Powers’ attempts at establishing empires.

Yet, likely due to the relative insignificance of the Falklands relative to other spoils, it wouldn’t be until 1964 that a United Nations committee on decolonization actually heard arguments and recommendations pertaining to the fate of the Falklands.

Argentina maintained that her claim to the island colony stemmed from hundreds-of-years-old precedent: the Treaty of Tordesillas. Drafted in 1494 under the direction of Pope Alexander VI, the treaty provided for a method of dividing control of the New World discovered by Christopher Columbus only two years prior. A line drawn North to South partitioned the map of the Americas into an Eastern and Western part, the former ceded to Portugal and the latter handed over to Spain. Spain’s new lands included what became Argentina and the Falkland

Islands. Thus, Argentina asserted that they had a legitimate claim to the Falklands as a successor to Spain and heir to her former lands, at least more so than Britain did. The Argentinians additionally argued that the United Nation’s interest in the self-determination of colonies could not find fulfillment in British ownership of the Falklands, as the islands admittedly had a colonial relationship to the U.K.

Britain rooted her justification for a continued presence in the Falklands in the simple fact that the English had occupied the islands since 1833 without interruption. The nation also pointed out that the vast majority of Falklanders could trace their heritage back to British settlers as a reason the relationship between colony and mother country couldn’t really be defined as colonial. Finally, in an effort to rebuke Argentina’s concerns regarding the United Nations goal to achieve widespread self-determination, the British submitted that Argentina’s annexation of the Falklands would prove no more beneficial to the Falklanders ability to self-govern that

British control did. Argentina’s dictatorial system of government and ethnic, linguistic, and cultural differences from the inhabitants of the Falklands couldn’t support anything but a repressive, colonialist chokehold on the territory.

In the end, the United Nations accomplished little to allay rising tensions between

Argentina and the U.K. In 1965, the aforementioned committee on decolonization approved a resolution encouraging the two parties to hold further negotiations over the Falklands. Minimal additional international action occurred to that end.

Argentina Before 1982

Argentina suffered from a tumultuous political history throughout its entire existence as an independent country, from its inception upon separation from Spain to the time period in which the Falklands Committee takes place. After achieving independence, the nation endured testing times as a centralized republic, fractured

confederation, and effective . Argentina

became embroiled in a political tug-of-war between

Unitarian and Federalist forces immediately in the wake

of her revolutionary conflict. The Federalists desired

Argentina to govern itself not unlike the ,

dividing into sovereign provinces that retained certain

rights and privileges under the common Federal government. On the other hand, the Unitarians wanted the central government, in the capital,

Buenos Aires, to hold consolidated power and govern more directly over the affairs of the provinces.

A number of smaller issues, such as the allocation of revenue from tariffs collected at the port of Buenos Aires, Argentina’s most important, further divided the two sides. Their disagreements culminated in several different governments arising after armed conflicts, but the salient result ended up being that a constitution emerged in 1853 making Argentina a federal republic. The constitution more or less lasted as Argentina’s system of governance until the

September of 1930, when the country’s armed forces ousted then-President Hipólito Yrigoyen, largely because of his perceived mishandling of the depression roiling the entire world at the time. The newly-established military regime found itself headed up by General José Félix

Uriburu for several years, after which time a conglomeration of putsches, so-called elections, and other transitions thrust the seat of power between conservative military dictators and slightly more liberal authoritarians. Argentines themselves later called the era “the .” Then, in 1946, Argentina’s most infamous leader arrived at the forefront of its politics: Juan

Perón.

Juan Perón ascended to power through popular, nationwide elections; however, he very much carried the support of the military throughout the final stages of his rise. Once in control of the government, Perón rapidly consolidated power, engaging in what history would eventually deem opportunistic, authoritarian practices. Some arguable favorable changes, like advocating for assisting the Allied Powers in the Second World

War while Minister of War, characterized Juan Perón’s approach to his leadership of Argentina.

The head of state remained popular with the general public on account of his plain-language style of public speaking, apparent concern with the issues facing the common laborer, and liberal social assistance programs and economic policies. Yet, Perón’s government began to gradually turn more and more conservative as outside forces negatively impacted Argentina’s economy.

Her exports, which had formed the foundation of the nation’s economic strength, could not keep pace with Argentina’s needs as raw materials for manufacturing became more expensive to

import. Resulting inflation, in conjunction with wage

stagnation for the common worker, decreased

discretionary income and thereby consumer spending.

Other powerful voices in Argentina spoke out against

Perón’s methods of leadership, to which he replied

with the build-up of a cult of personality, educational

reforms that purged schools and higher institutions of anything even slightly anti-Perón, and attacks on the Catholic Church (massively popular in

Argentina) to reduce its power when it confronted him and the Vatican City extended less support.

Deposed and forced to flee the country in 1955 by the military who had helped rocket him to power, Juan Perón relinquished his authority to yet another slew of military generals-turned-Presidents. While some leaders attempted to repair Argentina’s economic disaster through government programs, price controls, and all manner of other governmental micro-managing monetary policies (despite that the governments were staunchly right-wing), inflation nevertheless continued and the state of the Argentinian citizen diminished. on efforts to rectify the crisis proved ineffective and only succeeded in plunging the strained government into deeper debt. But dissent voiced to each new regime always received a swift and severe response, with Argentina’s notorious “” of the 1970s under General

Videla involving the kidnapping, and interrogation, and consequent deaths of 10,000 to

30,000 citizens. Many decried the human rights violations that resulted in thousands of friends and neighbors never returning after arrests by the secret police, known afterward as “the

Disappeared.”

1982 - Brink of War

Videla himself couldn’t convince the military of his ability to save the Argentinian state as a military dictatorship, and a man by the name of General Viola replaced him. His time in office didn’t last long, for similar reasons as Videla’s. Viola’s successor, General Leopoldo

Galtieri, attracts the spotlight of the Falklands Committee. For you, Galtieri’s generals and ministers, will advise him on the most important events of his career, and decide whether he

merits praise, or instead the fate of so many Argentine dictators

before him… or worse.

Leopoldo Galtieri came into office in December of 1981

with widespread support thanks to a promise - a guarantee that he

would retake the Falkland Islands for the glory of Argentina, in a

time when the everyday Argentine citizen needed a victory to prop

up his or her patriotism. Recently, in 1977, the International Court

of Justice’s decision to deny Argentina’s claim to the Beagle

Channel Islands in favor of Chile had meant that an interest in the

Falklands was on the minds of most Argentinians, not just a desperate attempt by Galtieri to see if pervasive discontent could be appeased.

Galtieri faced the exact problems that plagued his predecessors: a failing economy and broad dissent against military rule. Galtieri approached the economy with what one could call a more laissez-faire attitude, hoping that deregulation would allow market forces to recover from smothering government policies. He also permitted more protests and dissent, as stifling of dissent had ironically invited more dissent. Unfortunately for Galtieri, economic improvement did not arrive as quickly as he would have liked, and the lessening of crackdowns on dissent encouraged protestors and others to see if they could force more reform. In March of 1982,

Galtieri felt like making good on his campaign promise might be the silver bullet to make the issues beleaguering him disappear like a political opponent.

March 1982 - Key Events and Possible Options

As stated in the introduction, the Falklands Committee will begin set on March 25th,

1982, 39 years to the day before the first committee session. Any historical developments prior to this date may be assumed to have occurred as recorded. Any developments on or after March

25th should not be referenced in committee, and studying them will prove useful only to the extent that delegates may feel inclined to inform their actions with what happened in the real

Falklands War (however, creativity is encouraged and will be looked upon favorably). Of particular importance remain the following events:

● Friday, March 19th: A contingent of Argentine scrap metal workers, thought by

some to be infiltrated by the Argentine military, raises an Argentine flag on the

island of South Georgia at the whaling station of the port of Leith (the islands of

South Georgia and the Sandwich Islands are British territories near the Falkland

Islands).

● Sunday, March 21st: The British ship HMS Endurance leaves Stanley, East ​ ​ Falkland with Royal Marines and air support to respond to the incursion

apparently begun two days before on South Georgia.

● Monday, March 22nd: The Argentine workers’ ship, Bahia Buen Suceso, leaves ​ ​ South Georgia at the direction of the British military, but leaves forty-eight

workers behind. ● Wednesday, March 24th: The HMS Endurance and associated forces stay at Leith ​ ​ to monitor worker activity.