Proportionality in Jus ad Bellum The Falklands/Malvinas Case.

10
Proportionality in Jus ad Bellum The Falklands/Malvinas Case

Transcript of Proportionality in Jus ad Bellum The Falklands/Malvinas Case.

Page 1: Proportionality in Jus ad Bellum The Falklands/Malvinas Case.

Proportionality in Jus ad Bellum

The Falklands/Malvinas Case

Page 2: Proportionality in Jus ad Bellum The Falklands/Malvinas Case.

I. Background

A. Argentina in 1982: not minimally just (ruled by a brutal military junta)

B. Britain in 1982: minimally just (liberal democracy)

C. The dispute: Islands in the South Atlantic

Page 3: Proportionality in Jus ad Bellum The Falklands/Malvinas Case.

1. The Falklands (Malvinas)

a. About 2000 residentsb. Disputed between Spain and

Britain from 1748c. Argentine claim inherited

from Spaind. Both Argentina and UK settle

c.1828, but Argentine settlement largely destroyed by US British control since 1833

e. Approx. 2000 inhabitants (not British citizens as of 1982, but sympathetic to UK)

Page 4: Proportionality in Jus ad Bellum The Falklands/Malvinas Case.

2. South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands

• British claim from 1775 discovery, administer as dependency of Falklands

• Argentina claims in early 20th century (as dependency of Malvinas)

• All islands are unpopulated (perhaps 20 scientists or others at any one time)

Page 5: Proportionality in Jus ad Bellum The Falklands/Malvinas Case.

II. Argentine actions

A. Seizure of South Georgia1. Events

a. 19 March 1982 – Group of Argentines land on South Georgia and raise Argentine flag

b. Both sides send ships to the area.

c. 25 March – Argentina lands 100 soldiers

d. 31 March -- Britain lands 22 Marines

e. 3 April – “Battle” of Grytviken (pop: 11). 2 Argentines killed; all 22 British Marines surrender (1 wounded)

Page 6: Proportionality in Jus ad Bellum The Falklands/Malvinas Case.

2. Was war just?

• Just Cause: British territorial sovereignty violated and 1 Marine wounded

• Rightful Intention: Assume goal is to restore British sovereignty. (Politics probably plays a role as well, given the recession in Britain)

• Public Declaration by Lawful Authority: Met by British announcements

• Last Resort: Britain negotiated after flag-raising and continued negotiations after occupation, but Argentina refused to leave or submit the dispute to the World Court for arbitration

• Probability of Success: Not certain, but certainly possible for Britain to win

• Proportionality: Is Grytviken worth a war?

Page 7: Proportionality in Jus ad Bellum The Falklands/Malvinas Case.

B. Invasion of the Falklands

1. Eventsa. 2 April: Hundreds of Argentine Marines land

and surround British garrison (around 70 men).

b. 1 Argentine killed. No British casualties.

c. British garrison surrenders.

2. Do the wishes of the 2000 islanders make war a proportional response?

Page 8: Proportionality in Jus ad Bellum The Falklands/Malvinas Case.

III. War and its Consequences

A. Britain retakes islands by force

B. Material losses1. Britain: Six ships and 34

aircraft destroyed, £2.778 billion (about £1.4 million per Falklander)

2. Argentina: 1 cruiser, 1 submarine, several transport boats, 109 aircraft, monetary costs unknown

Page 9: Proportionality in Jus ad Bellum The Falklands/Malvinas Case.

C. Casualties1. Combat Deaths

a. 633 Argentine military dead, about half from sinking of General Belgrano. 1188 more wounded.

b. 256 British military dead. 777 more wounded.

c. 19 civilians killed (16 Argentine civilian sailors, 3 British women on the Falklands hit by friendly fire)

2. Postwar deathsa. PTSD common on both sides

after warb. By 2002, 264 British veterans

and 454 Argentine veterans had committed suicide

Page 10: Proportionality in Jus ad Bellum The Falklands/Malvinas Case.

Was it worth it?

• Remember: This was a small war (not even a war by my criteria)