Argentina is a Maritime State. The Authorities of the Argentine governments do not seem to understand it, even those who are responsible for the Argentine sea, its archipelagos and the exploitation of resources, and there are several reasons why we understand that the National State does not exercise political sovereignty and due control and Southwest Atlantic Administration. We could also expand on the lack of adequate administration of the Paraná River and the Río de la Plata; but, it is not the object of this writing and, although they have converging negative effects, officials continue not to regulate fluvial and maritime political issues, which is why, in this last area, Argentine natural resources are plundered by the United Kingdom , China, Spain, Taiwan and South Korea, who together with Japan capture 85% of the distance fishing in a subsidized way, without control of the flag States, without an agreement with Argentina (the coastal State) and, of the world total of 37 million hours of fishing occupy about 25 million hours (César Lerena "The responsibility of the government on the illegal fishing of Argentine migratory resources in Malvinas and the high seas" 4/15/2022).

Matters related to territorial sovereignty; to natural resources; economic; environmental; food; social and cultural aspects of the sea and the Argentine archipelagos limit the autonomy of the Nation; they impede national development and impoverish the Argentine people and, very particularly, the coastal populations, weakening not only Argentine sovereignty in the maritime territory, but also in continental Patagonia, whose population density is among the lowest in the country.

We will demonstrate in this writing that foreigners occupy, manage and exploit the Southwest Atlantic and, from the Malvinas, the United Kingdom controls access to the Indian Ocean and the Pacific, advances in the constitution of a Regional Center (hub) in Malvinas, in addition to strengthening its projection towards Antarctica, all effects that for Argentina can be immeasurable.

The lack of active policies of the Argentine State in the Southwest Atlantic.

With regard to Malvinas, South Georgia and the South Sandwich (hereinafter Malvinas), Argentina has carried out a policy of declamation of rights, resigning in third countries and multilateral organizations the actions aimed at reintegrating the possession of the archipelagos usurped by the Kingdom. Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (hereinafter United Kingdom). Beyond the direct action that the recovery of Malvinas meant in 1982, the axes of national policy have been limited to requesting dialogue on the negotiation with the United Kingdom regarding the (full) sovereignty of Malvinas; to cooperate unilaterally with the islanders (flights, etc.) and to request the support of third parties for Argentine rights. The results of this policy are visible: Almost 190 years ago (1833) when the British invaded the Malvinas, this English occupation was limited to 11,410 km2 and, until 1982, British control was reduced to this area (20,007 km2 with the other islands). plus three miles of territorial sea; although, Argentine vessels could continue fishing outside these spaces. Currently, the United Kingdom has occupied 1,639,900 Km2 and, in dispute, 3,857,278 Km2; that is, a total of 5,497,178 km2 of Argentine territory. Read well: 5,497,178 Km2, almost double the Argentine continental territory (without Antarctica). For much less (11,410 km2) we carried out the recovery of Malvinas in 1982; we were on the verge of an armed conflict in 1907/8 with Uruguay and Brazil over a few km2 of Uruguay's territorial sea (simplifying) or with Chile in 1977 where both countries carried out troop movements for the sovereignty of some islands and islets (especially the Picton, Nueva and Lennox, of a total of 396.5 km2) to the south of the Beagle Channel and the adjacent marine spaces, which although they enter the Atlantic, reach much smaller surfaces than those indicated above (simplifying) and many other examples that we could cite. Argentina is not in a position to resolve the issue through arms, but from there to total paralysis there is an abyss. The Argentine governments are frozen in the Malvinas issue and keep the Argentine people de-Malvinized.

I wonder what San Martin would say that he liberated Peru and Chile? smaller territories of those occupied or in dispute with the United Kingdom. Or Rosas and Mansilla who carried out the Battle of Obligado in 1845? that gave rise to the death of some 200 Argentines or “caudillos and patriots” in a single day? who fought and worked to bring about national independence.

In the occupied spaces, the United Kingdom exploits oil resources and captures an average of 325,000 tons of fishery resources per year, worth about 1.5 billion dollars FOB that, in the final trade, are transformed into about 6 billion per year (Mercado Central de Valencia, 10/2022). Faced with this scenario, and as long as the United Kingdom does not agree to negotiate the full sovereignty of Malvinas, Argentina must declare a "Fishing and Environmental Emergency Zone in Malvinas and the corresponding waters" in response to the violation by the United Kingdom of the Res. 31/49 of the United Nations and Argentina's impossibility to control catches, as a coastal State (CONVEMAR), along with evaluating the application of a "biological boycott" to avoid the depredation of squid (Illex argentinus ) that migrates to the Malvinas area.

On the other hand, between 350 and 500 Chinese, Spanish, British, Korean, Taiwanese, etc. annually they extract 1,080,000 tons of migratory fishing resources originating from the Exclusive Economic Zone (hereinafter EEZ) of Argentina, with the total passivity of the successive Argentine governments. All this means serious damage to all Argentines. In the first place, the development of continental Patagonia is prevented; on the other hand, about 50 thousand direct jobs are lost; thirdly, there is an economic evasion of the order of US$4,000/year FOB (which in the final trade becomes about US$24,000) and unfair competition in the international market with the products of companies based in Argentina; fourthly, uncontrolled fishing causes an imbalance and unsustainability of the ecosystem, with direct effects on catches in the Argentine EEZ and, finally, the waste of quality fishing discards for social purposes that would ensure the protein diet of the population. six million Argentine children and adolescents per day, every day, all year round, where "according to the latest INDEC report, some 5.5 million children under 14 years of age do not cover their basic needs" (Santiago Rojas, Perfil, 30.3. 2022). In this last aspect, the ineffectiveness of the government is criminal, since it does not even act to take advantage of the discards of the Argentine fleet.

The Malvinas Secretariat of the Argentine Foreign Ministry and the Malvinas National Council created by Law 27,558 on 08/04/2020 have not departed from the aforementioned declarations and have not proposed to the National Executive Power -which it supposedly advises- the execution of no policy that puts into action the prescriptions of the First Transitory Provision of the National Constitution. Several of its members have participated in the elaboration and promotion of ruinous Agreements (Madrid, New York, etc.) and even its member Marcelo Kohen -accompanying the policies of Foreign Ministers Malcorra and Faurie who signed the Foradori-Duncan Pact- in 2018 proposed a plan to the islanders (Infobae, 2018/CARI, 2018) that, among other issues, would allow them to continue determining who can or cannot settle in the Islands and, the holding of a referendum, which would have enabled them to choose if they wanted to be British or Argentinean, an issue that violates the aforementioned Transitory Provision and, which would have been sufficient justification for not including it in the aforementioned Council (among other more serious sanctions); but no, not only was he included in that PEN Advisory Body, but he was also promoted to join the International Court of Justice; seat, which finally remained in the hands of the Brazilian candidate Leonardo Nemer Caldeira, to whom, surely, a similar opinion could not occur to him, which violates all the Argentine arguments and the United Nations resolutions themselves, which reject any participation of the implanted islanders. The neutrality and impartiality required of those who use that judicial chair could never admit such a plan in favor of British interests.

It is necessary to reaffirm the State Policy provided for in the First Transitory Provision of the National Constitution ("...recover the territories and the full exercise of sovereignty...") and in the face of an Argentine sea that has become foreign, to create the "Ministry of the Sea and Islands of the South Atlantic” such as Peru, France, Portugal, Canada, Korea and Indonesia, where all marine, insular, merchant, river, port, fishing, naval, research and technology, development and consumption policies are designed and executed or, in failing that, create a new "National Maritime Territory" with the corresponding political, economic and executive Agreement with the Province of Tierra del Fuego, in those areas of its jurisdiction and domain.

By the way, the Madrid I and II Agreements that limit naval and air national defense action should be repealed/discarded; In fact, it enables the capture of Argentine fishing resources and, supposes, the existence of a dialogue between the parties -without weakening the sovereignty- that Argentina claims; the Foradori-Duncan Pact that refers to removing all obstacles to development of Malvinas and on matters related to Antarctica and, the so-called New York Agreement (Law 25,290) that gives rise to the interference of the Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMO) on the spaces of Argentine jurisdiction and domain -including the Ports- and the migratory resources originating from the Argentine ZEE and, which would give rise to the British claim to co-administer the Southwest Atlantic.

Nor has it carried out a post-Brexit relationship policy with the European Union so that all fishery products originating in the Southwest Atlantic are certified in their origin and traceability by the coastal States of Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay, according to the FAO Area that appropriate, to end illegal fishing in the Malvinas and on the migratory resources of the corresponding ZEE.

While all this is happening, Argentina has no hypothesis of conflict (?); The government authorizes the incorporation of ships manufactured in Spain into the national fleet, while Galician companies fish illegally in Malvinas and neither companies of this nationality nor Korean, Taiwanese and British companies that fish in the Archipelago without authorization from the Government are sanctioned. Argentine State, they are not charged customs or capture rights, violating Laws 24,922; 26,386 and 27,564 that prohibit fishing in national territory without Argentine authorization, in an open breach of the duties of public officials of the Secretary of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries, the Secretary of Malvinas, the Undersecretary of Fisheries, the Federal Fisheries Council and the Director Fisheries Control. On the other hand, favoring the logistics of the islanders, the use of Argentine airspace is authorized for the Chilean company LATAM, which transports passengers, workers from the islands, various supplies and food.

Mexico, a country that is far from having the maritime and insular dispute and the fishing problem that Argentina has, enacted the General Fishing Law (2007 reformed in 2018, Art. 17) that indicates: “the Mexican State recognizes that Fishing is an activity that strengthens the food and territorial sovereignty of the Nation; a matter of National Security and a priority for national development”. Contrary to this, Argentina does not have sufficient naval and sea control equipment in accordance with the large marine areas that it has that, with a dissuasive nature, prevent illegal fishing and facilitate the pertinent agreements on the capture of migratory species originating from the Argentine EEZ and, in relation to the invasion suffered in Argentine territories by the United Kingdom and, the very important number of foreign ships in the region. Along with this, the National State does not inspect the transport of fishery products in the Argentine ZEE, the Common Fishing Zone and the Río de la Plata in those foreign vessels that carry out fishing in Malvinas and on the migratory resources originating from the Argentine ZEE captured. without control of the flag State and without the agreement of the coastal States of Eastern America that, in all cases, solely for this and other reasons, should be typified as coming from Illegal Fishing and, consequently, sanctioned and confiscated raw materials, fishing gear etc and, reform article 186 of the Argentine Penal Code in order to apply criminal sanctions to those responsible, as many laws in South America, the European Union and the United States do.

National governments have been unable to carry out a "Complementary Agreement to the Río de la Plata Treaty" to end the irregular use of Uruguayan ports, where logistical support is provided to vessels that carry out illegal fishing in the Southwest Atlantic; In the same way, sign an Additional Protocol to MERCOSUR to counterbalance the extracontinental presence in the Southwest Atlantic and, carry out a Call to the countries of South America and the Caribbean to apply a joint policy against the appropriation of migratory resources originating from the EEZs of the coastal States of the order of 7.8 million tons per year for about 11,770 million US dollars.

On the other hand, Argentina maintains Law 24,184 (4/11/2022) "for the protection and promotion of British investments in the country" and the United Kingdom has interests in large extensions of land, private airports and natural resources. essential as oil, gas, energy, food, etc. concessions of interior rivers and, it is behind lithium, despite the appropriation of the national territory and the natural resources of the Malvinas area and, for their part, the foreign fishing companies based in Argentina territorially weaken continental Patagonia by exporting with low value added, transferring the work to developed countries; reason why, catch quotas should be granted to these companies on the condition that the exports are with 100% added value and Argentine employment.

In case something was missing, Argentina admits the operation of foreign NGOs with interests in Malvinas (as we will detail later); organizations that even coordinate the strategic design of the control and administration of the sea and its resources, which is clearly inadmissible.

Finally, Argentina lacks a regime for the promotion of the merchant, river and fishing fleet that encourages national construction and puts an end to the importation of foreign ships; a national education plan that reaffirms from childhood and at the different levels of education the historical, geographic, legal rights and rights over the natural resources of Argentina of the insular and maritime territories of the Malvinas and Antarctica and, must implement campaigns of internal consumption of fishery products to take away of 4.8 kg. per capita/year to 20 kg., which is world average consumption; not only, because it would improve the health of nationals, but also, because it is not to be expected that Argentines -even officials- can pay attention to the sea if they do not know the benefits of the natural resources that it provides.

UK Actions in the South West Atlantic.

To what was said above, we add that the United Kingdom has a policy designed for all the Overseas Archipelagos that it considers part of the British Community of Nations and, among them, the one announced in 2017 regarding the establishment of a "Blue Belt" ) to the islands, under the pretext of protecting the environment around them, which in reality is nothing more than constituting areas of British marine control, such is the case of the 1,070,000 km2 “Ecological Sanctuary” established around the Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands in 2011; the Protection Zone (FOCZ) to the east of Malvinas of 109,993 km2 established in 1990; the determination of the GAP Area of ??4,000 km2 to the northwest of Malvinas where a large part of the squid that migrates to Malvinas is concentrated, established unilaterally by the United Kingdom in 1994; the extended continental shelf of 1,430,367 km2 in consolidated dispute with the United Kingdom since 2016; the presence -despite Law 26,659- of British oil companies or those linked to the islands west of Malvinas from the tender for the offshore exploitation of 100,000 km2 by the Argentine government in 2019 and the 164,000 km2 Blue Hole Marine Protected Area northeast of Malvinas, whose project is promoted and coordinated by the North American Foundation WCS (we will expand later). That is to say, a "Blue Belt" that will completely surround Malvinas, exercising strategic control prior to the Archipelagos and source of wealth infinitely greater than that of the Islands, and it is interesting to relate it to the fact that it is not a concern of the Kingdom. United the three thousand British implanted or the workers who live in Malvinas, but the projection to Antarctica and the strategic control of the South-South Atlantic.

As we have said, the United Kingdom exploits Argentine resources and works in line with establishing a Regional Logistics Center (hub) in Malvinas. To this end, it has built a port in the South Georgia Islands and has carried out the pertinent studies to build a new port in Malvinas and improves its logistics availability on the islands, in addition to having an airport for large aircraft. All of this will favor the operations of the large transport vessels that use the Strait of Magellan to access the Pacific given the impossibility of doing so through the Panama Canal; likewise, those transiting to and from the Indian Ocean and foreign fishing vessels operating in the Southwest Atlantic. In addition to promoting the interest of scientists from different nations who work in Antarctica and have the Malvinas as their base of support instead of Ushuaia. Argentina wake up!

At present, it uses the ports and airports of Uruguay to favor the fishing and oil operations of the Malvinas; as with Chile and Brazil; that is to say, it works consolidating relations with these countries, despite the rhetorical position of South America in favor of Argentina and the little interest of Argentine officials in bringing positions closer to their neighbors.

Through the British embassies in Argentina, the United Kingdom carries out various actions of cultural penetration (in addition to others that we suppose) to the point of promoting contests aimed at Argentine students in order for them to "meet their neighbors", a qualification that shows the English contempt for the rights of Argentines over their own territories occupied in an arrogant manner by this imperial force.

Finally, in a clear demonstration of the British objective of occupying this strategic space in the Southwest Atlantic, the United Kingdom maintains an absolutely disproportionate missile and naval military base on the Islands, which is contrary to the "Zone of Peace and Cooperation of the South Atlantic" signed by all the countries of West Africa and East America and approved in 1986 by Res. 41/11 of the United Nations.

Interference of foreign organizations in the strategic planning of the Argentine sea.

We have already referred in previous articles to the role played by the North American Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) Foundation in the political management to achieve the approval of the "Blue Hole" Marine Protected Area Law project in the Chamber of Deputies of the Nation and what negative effects this has in the biological, economic, social, environmental and sovereign field for Argentina (César Lerena “A foreign foundation that owns islands in Malvinas is the manager of the Blue Hole Law project”, 8/15/2022 and others ).

In this regard, we said that this project to establish a Marine Protected Area (AMP) beyond the 200 miles of the EEZ, of 164 thousand km2, lacks any political, economic and scientific-technical foundation; even less, when since 2014 it was analyzed and, with technical discrepancies, established within the ZEE and of only 12 thousand km2 (Falabella, V. Pág. 16 to 19 and 80, 2014). Also, that the proposal will not prevent illegal fishing by foreign vessels, but capture by national vessels, in addition to consolidating the "Blue Belt" that the British have promoted since 2017 around all the archipelagos. of the British Community of Nations, ensuring the control and exploitation of fishing resources, facilitating in Malvinas, the granting of illegal fishing permits, which currently allow the capture by foreign vessels of some 325 thousand tons per year. On the other hand, no funds were foreseen for the control and investigation tasks, where only the first tasks would require about 15 million dollars per year. Likewise, that Argentina exceeds its obligations with the "Strategic Plan for Biological Diversity 2011-2020" because due to unilateral reserves and the occupation of the Argentine sea by the United Kingdom, it has restricted an area equivalent to 52 % of your EEZ. The project, on the other hand, does not generate any economic or environmental benefit nor does it strengthen national sovereignty, rather violent, in addition to the fact that by article 77 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (CONVEMAR) Argentina does not has no obligation to take any action with respect to the ownership of the extended continental shelf and, therefore, no State can undertake activities in this area without its express consent.

We also said that -if necessary- a mere Resolution of the Undersecretary of Fisheries would prevent fishing with bottom trawling nets in those spaces of the extended platform and a Declaration of Marine Monument would suffice to prohibit bottom trawling in a few miles around the remains of the crew and the ARA San Juan.

That it is an unfounded, useless and costly project, which threatens national sovereignty and was promoted by the North American WCS Foundation, owner since 2001 of the Grand Jason and Steeple Jason Islands (Sebaldes or Sebaldinas for Argentina) in the Archipelago from Falklands; located northwest of Gran Malvina Island and 400 km from Patagonia (51º04'37'S-60º58'08'W) in the jurisdiction of Tierra del Fuego. A true affront: While we Argentines must have our passports visaed to access the Islands and we cannot rent, buy or carry out industrial or commercial investments in the Malvinas; The fishing of national vessels is not allowed and our flag airline has prevented regular flights to the Islands, a foreign Foundation with the support of North American, British, etc. capital. plans and coordinates the administration of the Argentine Southwest Atlantic, our territorial sea around the archipelagos; our EEZ and the exploitation of resources and the regulation of the marine environment and, in addition to all this -in case something was missing- the aforementioned WCS "manages these islands as private nature reserves, and works with the local government (NdA: illegal) to further protect the entire Jason Islands archipelago and surrounding marine area” (Christopher J. Mckenzie, Wildview, WCS, 8/15/2017).

A true delegation of functions from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Secretary of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries of the Nation, who admit and/or have promoted this foreignization of the administration of the Argentine sea, its archipelagos and its resources, and the privatization of strategic planning regarding the use of maritime spaces, the continental shelf and living resources. And of course, the responsibility of national legislators that they have the obligation to ensure the political, economic and food sovereignty of Argentines and, consequently, protect the territories and optimize the exploitation of resources.

These foreign foundations, through their subsidiaries, interfere in the very heart of government structures, defining the policies of the National State. This is evident shortly after reading “the Final Report of the “Workshop on the Implementation of National Marine Protected Areas, 2018” (p. 50, 2019) where WCS becomes the organizer and says: “The design of a National System of Marine Protected Areas Protected (SNAMP) requires defining what we want to conserve?, and deciding on national priorities for marine biodiversity throughout the Argentine Sea». In the aforementioned works, Ms. Falabella represents the North American WCS, although it is not clear if she also does so as a professional of the then Secretary of Environment and Sustainable Development, since in several passages the report refers to "strengthening the authority of application to be able to lead the management of a set of sites representative of the biodiversity of the Argentine Sea” (p. 12); “it is necessary to develop in general the governance and management capacity of the State” (p. 14) and, “governance is related to the power, policies, structures and processes used for decision-making in an area of ??responsibility ” (p. 38)» (César Lerena, Ob. Cit. 8/15/2022). The interference of this WCS Foundation in national planning regarding the sustainability of maritime resources is evident; a circumstance that is aggravated by the particular situation that this organization has interests in Malvinas and collaborates with the illegal government; government that grants illegal fishing permits, with which 325,000 tons are caught annually (including discards), producing the largest fishing depredation in the Southwest Atlantic since 1976.

The WCS Foundation has the support of OCEANS 5; organization that, with its "first grants, supported work in the UK Overseas Territories, Antarctica, the Arctic and several large EEZs, including the United States" (sic) including, among its partners and members, thirteen foundations from the United States, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands.

For what reason was it admitted that this project, framed in an internationalized marine environment and linked to an area occupied and disputed by the United Kingdom, was dealt with in the Chamber of Deputies without due evaluation of all the necessary background information and prior approval? of the Defense, Foreign Affairs, Natural Resources, Maritime Interests and Budget Committees?

It is absurd that the Argentine State admits the intervention of WCS in Malvinas and beyond the territory occupied by the United Kingdom, violating Law 26,386 and, giving opinions and promoting laws referring to the administration of the entire Southwest Atlantic, aggravating Argentine sovereignty and violating the First Transitory Provision of the National Constitution.

And what did the Federal Fisheries Council think about it, and very particularly the Ambassador of the Argentine Diplomatic Corps that is a member of it? Regarding the Deputy who promoted the project, we have already mentioned (César Lerena, Ob. cit. 8/15/2022) that this initiative, in addition to being erroneous, omits relevant issues that threaten the national interest.

We have already said in our seven previous writings on the subject, why was the Marine Protected Area (MPA) originally limited to 12,000 Km2 (2014) moved from the Argentine EEZ to the Blue Hole AMP on the high seas, which is favored with 164,000 km2? Km2? (2021); Wasn't it known that Chinese, Korean, Taiwanese and Spanish-British vessels with English licenses fish in the selected zone and that they cannot be reached by this MPA and that, as happened with the Agreement signed by Cavallo for Conservation (FOCZ) at the east of Malvinas in 1990, would it allow to consolidate the granting of licenses to the islanders and protect the northeast zone of Malvinas?; For what reason was a project discussed in session that was not approved in the respective Commissions and that does not provide the necessary funds for control and investigation tasks that, without taking into account the needs of naval equipment and investigation, only in terms of control and surveillance would require about 15 million dollars annually?; Didn't the authors of the project know that, due to a lack of sufficient means, the ocean patrol boats (OPV) recently acquired from France are moored at the Mar del Plata Naval Base, unable to control the vast Argentine sea, and that the Undersecretary of Fisheries and INIDEP has 17 articles in Law 24,922 -if the means were available- to carry out all the protection tasks of the extended continental shelf, prohibiting bottom trawling, without the need to dictate any new MPA?; that to protect the crew members and the remains of the Submarine ARA San Juan is enough a declaration of Marine National Monument?; Nor is it that by assigning the category of Strict Reserve “on” the platform, only national vessels will be prevented from fishing? What were the prior scientific requirements required by the FAO (2012) to establish an MPA not met? that there is no breach of the «Strategic Plan for Biological Diversity 2011-2020 commitment» because the United Kingdom established in 2011 a reserve of 1.07 million km2 around the South Georgia and Sandwich Islands and is restricted to an area of our country equivalent to 52% of the Argentine ZEE?; that the project will not have any economic benefit, nor will it prevent illegal fishing and that it will in no way strengthen national sovereignty, since by Article 77 of the Sea Convention no one could undertake any activity on the extended platform without the express consent of the Argentine state? Everything is very serious.

The Foreign Ministry, the Malvinas Secretariat and the authors of the project know (they should know) that in addition to the strategic interest of the United Kingdom, the WCS foundation is functional to that interest because it is particularly interested in the care of the “black-browed” albatrosses ( Thalassarche melanophris) that is found and nests on the islands of "their property" and, according to the report of the local affiliate of WCS, when describing the percentage of species to be conserved in the Blue Hole-ZEE, they reach "2.72" ( Pages 82-84), the highest percentage among the species analyzed and, "it is believed" (a scientifically unserious term that does not indicate evidence) that "longline fishing and trawling contribute to its decline."

The Argentine Malvinas and Fisheries authorities do not manage the Southwest Atlantic and the implications derived from the British occupation and, what is even worse, delegates the planning and coordination of activities in the sea and its resources to foreign organizations.

“A State without fishing can do nothing on the sea” (Manuel Belgrano).