PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Falkland Islands: Sovereignty - 8 September 2026 (Commons/Commons Chamber)

(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs if he will make a statement on comments from the Argentinian President and President Donald Trump regarding the UK’s sovereignty over the Falkland Islands.

As my right hon. Friends the Foreign Secretary and the Defence Secretary have made clear, the UK remains steadfast in its support for the Falkland Islanders’ right to self-determination. There can be no doubt that the Falkland Islands are British for as long as they want to be. Falkland Islanders have made their views very clear in a referendum in 2013, at the United Nations year after year and to anyone who makes the effort to engage directly with the community. The UK also supports the right of Falkland Islanders to develop their natural resources for their own economic benefit. That is an integral part of their right to self-determination.

This is not the first time that an Argentine Government have made economic threats against the islanders, yet those threats have not prevented the community’s remarkable economic development over the years. The measures announced by President Milei will not change the UK’s unwavering commitment to the islanders.

The UK wants to continue to maintain a modern and constructive relationship with Argentina across a range of shared interests. However, there can be no doubt about our commitment to the Falkland Islanders, their democratic rights and the UK’s sovereignty over the Falkland Islands. The Government will continue to work closely with the Falkland Islands Government to defend their rights now and into the future.

The US is our closest ally. It, too, is in no doubt about our unwavering support for the islanders.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, for granting this urgent question.

As surely as night follows day, another Argentine President facing economic trouble at home has tried to distract attention by threatening British sovereignty. This is a President who, I remind colleagues, was praised by the Leader of the Opposition. When asked whether Britain needed our own Milei, and whether she was such a politician, she replied, “Yes and yes”. Meanwhile, President Trump, so loudly cheered by Members of Reform and the Conservatives, has also declared that the US is considering changing its stance on British sovereignty over the Falklands. The decision of sovereignty over the Falklands does not belong to President Milei or to President Trump; it belongs to the people of the Falklands alone. They have spoken unequivocally and we should support them.

The renewed threat to the Falklands should sharpen Ministers’ minds as to the mounting security challenges facing our overseas territories. The world is more unstable now than at any point since the end of the cold war, yet our threadbare Navy and hollowed armed forces are perilously overstretched. Meeting the threats to our sovereign territories requires genuine investment. Can the Minister update the House on what steps will be taken to increase our defence spending rapidly, and on whether the Government are considering Liberal Democrat proposals for defence bonds, investing in our critical capabilities and restoring British deterrence?

President Milei has now threatened sanctions and criminal charges on energy companies operating offshore from the Falklands, including British firms. That would be a direct—

Order. Mr Cartlidge, I let it go the first time, but you have just had three goes there. Please, somebody else has to come in and speak, and I am sure your Front-Bench spokesperson will ask the relevant questions without you having to shout down the Member speaking.

That would be a direct economic attack on operations from British sovereign territory. Is the Minister preparing retaliatory measures and sanctions in the event that British companies operating around the Falklands are targeted? The Government must be resolute in defending Britain’s interests and the people of the Falklands. Has the Minister called in both the Argentine and US ambassadors to make it clear that British sovereignty over the Falklands is non-negotiable? If she has not, will she?

The hon. Gentleman is completely right that we are in a volatile world, but one thing is absolutely unchanging: the United Kingdom’s position on the Falkland Islands, which is of long standing. The Falkland Islands are a British overseas territory and will remain so for as long as the islanders wish. As I stated in my opening remarks, we want a constructive relationship with Argentina, but we are absolutely clear, and they are in no doubt, about our position on this question. On defence spending more broadly, the Prime Minister and the Chancellor remain committed to fully funding the defence investment plan and to meeting our NATO commitment of 3.5% of GDP on defence by 2035.

I call the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

The Israeli Minister Ben Gvir has said, “It is time for the state of Israel to publicly recognise that the Falkland Islands are Argentine territory under occupation”, and that we, the British, are not merely occupying the territory but, in carrying out oil drilling there, are stealing money from the Argentine people. Does the Minister think he knows that the Argentine Government agree with him and, as a result, have filed criminal complaints against Navitas Petroleum, which is of course an Israeli company? Does she think he knows that the company was very happy to sign a deal with the UK to explore the Sea Lion oil project in the British Falkland Islands? Or does she think that Ben Gvir was just too busy thinking of new ways to inflict ever yet more cruelty on the Palestinian people?

We completely and utterly reject the characterisation that my right hon. Friend describes. The UK supports the rights of the Falkland Islanders to develop their natural resources for their own economic benefit, because that is an integral part of their self-determination. The decision by the Falkland Islands Government to pursue hydrocarbon production is a commercial decision for them to make alongside the commercial companies involved.

I call the shadow Minister.

Let me say at the outset that we on the Conservative Benches are clear that the Falkland Islands are British, and they will remain British for as long as the Falkland Islanders wish them to be. British soldiers fought and died to defend our sovereignty and the freedom of the Falkland Islanders. That sacrifice will never be forgotten, and we will always stand by the people of the Falklands and their overwhelming desire to remain British. Before the summer recess, the Leader of the Opposition and I met Cheryl Roberts MLA and other representatives of the Falkland Islands Government. We were clear in reaffirming our unwavering support for the islanders and their right to self-determination.

Our continued connection with the Falklands is of vital importance, as a matter not just of history but of sovereignty, security and principle. The Government must therefore ensure that they are standing up unequivocally for the Falkland Islands and their choice to stay British. Therefore, what conversations have the Foreign Secretary and Ministers had with the United States Administration to ensure that our position and, above all, the democratic wishes of the Falkland Islanders are clearly understood? What direct representations has the Foreign Secretary made to the Argentinian Government following President Milei’s latest remarks? Is Argentina raising the future of the Falklands through diplomatic channels with His Majesty’s Government, or is it simply ramping up its language publicly? Argentina has threatened sanctions against companies involved in the lawful development of the Falkland Islands oil resources. What representations has the Foreign Secretary made in response, and what steps are the Government taking to protect those legitimate commercial interests and the Falkland Islanders’ rights to develop their own natural resources? There can be no negotiation over sovereignty unless and until the Falkland Islanders themselves wish it. The United Kingdom must stand with the Falkland Islands and the right of the islanders to self-determination.

I share the right hon. Lady’s conviction that the sacrifices of British armed forces personnel should never be forgotten in relation to this matter. I share, too, her desire to see the UK Government stand up unequivocally for the Falkland Islanders’ right to self-determination, which is exactly what we have been doing. We are in regular ministerial and senior official engagement with Argentina, which is why I can say with such conviction that it is in absolutely no doubt—and no Member of this House should be in any doubt—about the UK Government’s position. The future of the Falkland Islands is for the Falkland Islanders to determine, and nobody else.

I welcome the Minister’s strong message today, standing alongside the Falkland Islanders in their desire to remain British. We have 14 overseas territories with over a quarter of a million people. May I ask that we take this opportunity to consider how we can better represent all those people for whom we as a Parliament, and as a Government, have a responsibility, for their health and education, and for the relationship between Britain and our overseas territories?

I can reassure my hon. Friend that work is ongoing across Government to ensure that everyone in the British overseas territories retains the full support of the UK Government. We are in regular dialogue with their representatives, and of course we continue to ensure that their rights to health and education and the other matters that he mentioned are uppermost in our minds at all times.

Do the Government accept that in order to deter any possibility of military action against the Falklands, it is important not to send the wrong signals? In 1982 there was the withdrawal of HMS Endurance specifically, but there were also huge anti-nuclear campaigns that sent the wrong message to aggressors around the world. Can the Government confirm that, this time, they will not send the wrong signals—over Diego Garcia, for example—or any suggestion that we do not have the naval and air assets to deter and, if necessary, to defend?

I am happy to confirm to the right hon. Gentleman that we are sending the most unequivocal message imaginable that the Falkland Islands are British for as long as they choose to be. It is also important to reassure the House that our forces in the south Atlantic are maintained at the appropriate level to ensure the defence of the Falkland Islands against any potential threat. The right hon. Member mentioned Diego Garcia, and I want to underscore for the House that that is a key strategic military asset for both the UK and the US. It has protected our shared security for nearly 60 years, and that is precisely why we did a deal to ensure that we could maintain the long-term operational control and security of Diego Garcia.

President Milei has coupled his renewed sovereignty claim with an increase in defence spending and plans to expand the naval base at Tierra del Fuego. In the light of these developments, can the Minister tell us if we have updated our threat assessments, and if the Falkland Islands’ air, land and maritime defences are adequate to ensure the islands’ and the islanders’ security?

I would like to thank my hon. Friend for his service. We are confident that the situation that we have in place with defensive capability is adequate for the threats faced.

When the Government deal with our allies and friends the Americans, they might remind them about the disputed islands that they are in charge of—Wake Island, Navassa Island, Bajo, Swains Island, Guantanamo Bay—all of which have been supported by the United Kingdom. Should we think about not supporting them? Of course not, but we might just mention them. When we retook the Falklands, the British Government had at their hands 52 frigates and destroyers and well over 100,000 soldiers and naval personnel. Does the Minister not think that the best message we could send would be to get our defences back up?

We are in ongoing conversation with our closest ally, as Members will appreciate, and the United States is crystal clear about our position. The right hon. Gentleman mentioned that we need to invest in our defence capabilities, and of course that is one of the primary responsibilities of the UK Government. I would gently remind him of the situation that we inherited. It is this Government that have made commitments to invest strongly in our armed forces, and we are proud to have done so.

Like many, I have a close allegiance to the Falkland Islands and the islanders. As a 19-year-old young British soldier, I did my first operational tour of duty in the islands in 1990 and subsequently went back in 1992. Does the Minister agree that while the Falkland Islanders state that they wish to be a UK overseas territory, they will always remain that? To put this into perspective, in the latest referendum, 99.8% of Falkland Islanders voted to support that position, on a 92% turnout. To put it into perspective again, only three islanders voted against.

I am sure the whole House will join me in thanking my hon. Friend for his service. It was an extraordinary sacrifice by him and his family, and we are deeply grateful for it. I could not agree more that the wishes of the Falkland Islanders could not be more clear and must be respected.

I do not know whether this is something I still need to declare, Mr Speaker, but I visited the Falkland Islands in 2003 as a guest of the Falkland Islands Government. They have never invited me back. It was apparent then that the principle of self-determination, on which we fought and for which British service people lost their lives, remained unchanged. I have seen nothing to change that view today. When the Minister speaks with the American ambassador, might she gently remind them that in 1982 the Americans were not exactly full-throated in their support of us at that point? It made no difference then and it should make no difference now.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his direct engagement with the Falkland Islanders—I know that such engagement is always appreciated by everyone in our British overseas territories—and as a direct result he has been able to impress on the House exactly what the Falkland Islanders want, which is their right to self-determination. He mentions our relationship with the United States. Because it is our closest ally, our relationship with the United States is one of candour, and it could not be clearer about our position, which is that the Falkland Islands will remain British for precisely as long as the Falkland Islanders want them to.

People in Portsmouth are incredibly angry about this. We waved those ships off in ’82, and so many families have a connection to someone who served. We know that 255 brave British personnel died defending the Falkland Islands, and 86 of them were from the Royal Navy. This issue is settled. Argentina was defeated and, above all, the Falkland Islanders have made their choice: they want to remain British. Does the Minister agree that the Argentinian Government and President Trump must stop this disgraceful, disrespectful interference and stop treating the Falkland Islands as a bargaining chip?

Can I start by thanking my hon. Friend for her work on the overseas territories, to which I know she is deeply committed? Can she please pass on, on behalf of the whole House, our thanks to her constituents for their bravery, courage and sacrifice? I could not agree with her more: this question is settled, because it is settled in the minds of the Falkland Islanders, who want to remain British, and they will do so with our support.

Sam Moody is my constituent. He is the chief executive of Rockhopper. During my time in this House, he has been absolutely scrupulous in following the laws of this country and respecting the Falkland Islanders. Will the Minister reassure him and the whole House that this Government will protect the interests of Rockhopper, whatever commercial arrangements it has in place, knowing that Rockhopper has always complied with legislation and respected whichever Government have been in power?

Yes, of course, the right hon. Gentleman should feel free to pass on to Mr Moody the view of this House and of the British Government that it is part of the Falkland Islanders’ right to self-determination that they may develop their own natural resources. We stand four-square behind them in doing so, and we stand four-square behind the companies that are involved in doing so, too.

I thank the hon. Member for Bicester and Woodstock (Calum Miller) for securing this important question. Brave British servicepeople died defending the Falkland Islanders’ right to freedom and self-determination more than 40 years ago. We must never forget. Will the Minister confirm that this Labour Government will do the right thing and never compromise when it comes to defending British sovereign territory in the Falklands?

I confirm to my hon. Friend that we will never, under any circumstances, compromise on the Falkland Islanders’ right to self-determination. I join her in commemorating all those who risked and lost their lives in the defence of that very principle.

The UK’s success in liberating the Falklands in 1982 was achieved when we had considerably greater naval resources, but it also could not have been achieved without the support of the Reagan Administration. Does the Minister not agree that that shows why it is extremely important to maintain close relations with the United States and not do anything to put those in jeopardy?

The United States remains our closest ally, and we will continue to engage with it while being absolutely clear with it about our position. No one should be in any doubt, least of all the people of the Falkland Islands, about our steadfast and unwavering commitment to the Falkland Islanders’ self-determination. We will continue to impress that on the United States Government.

The Minister is understandably burdened by the need to be diplomatic. Is the reality not that President Trump can review whatever position he likes, and the Argentinian Government can make whatever threats they like, but it does not make a jot of difference to this country, because the Falkland Islands will remain British?

I can confirm that the Falkland Islands will remain British because the right of the Falkland Islanders to self-determination is absolute.

The Falkland Islands are not just British. They are part of Britain, and an attack on any part of Britain would be an article 5 situation. Yet Donald Trump, when pressed on it the other day, was far from clear on whether we can rely on US support. What are the Government doing to tighten our defence relationship with European and other allies who do understand and share our belief in collective defence?

All Members of the House will know that we are in ongoing dialogue with our European partners, and, crucially, we are committed to investing in our own defence. That is why this Government have made such strong commitments to continue defence investment.

I join my hon. Friend in remembering Lance Corporal Thomas. His constituents should be reassured, as indeed should everyone in the Falkland Islands, that we are absolutely committed to Falkland Islanders’ right to self-determination, we are committed to their defence and we are committed to them remaining British.

The Falkland Islands were British long before Argentina even came into existence, but the key is building a diplomatic ability to ensure that that message goes home loud and clear. What efforts are the Minister and other Ministers in the Foreign Office making to build that diplomatic alliance, so that we do not get into a position in which military action is necessary?

This is a matter of all our diplomatic relationships being brought to bear. The key is that the message goes out from this House today, loud and clear—and is heard unequivocally by the people of the Falkland Islands—that we stand with them in remaining British for as long as it takes.

Further to the points made by my hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth East (Tom Hayes), it is important that we talk here and that we have diplomacy, but what practical actions are the Foreign Office and the Ministry of Defence taking to ensure that there is a review of physical defence and security, so that we send a clear message to the Argentinians that they can go no further—that the words are too much, but they should go no further?

We are confident that our defensive capabilities in the south Atlantic are equal to the task.

The problem is that the Argentinians can smell weakness because of our approach to the Iranians’ attacks on two British bases earlier this year. Will the Minister therefore be clear that, in the light of Iranian threats to our bases this time round, we will not just seek to intercept the missiles attacking them, but attack targets in Iran if they attack our bases? That sort of signal of intent is required in relation to our overseas territories.

This Government could not have been clearer about the work that we are doing to defend our bases, and we will keep it up.

Over recess, I had the privilege of visiting the islands with Members of this House and the other place. There, we met the Falkland Islands Government and our British service personnel, and also paid tribute to those who gave the ultimate sacrifice. Whatever the posturing of an Argentinian President or an Israeli Minister, the Falkland Islands remain proudly British. Will the Minister join me in thanking all those service personnel on the islands for their contribution to UK defence?

I thank my hon. Friend for his visit, which will have been deeply appreciated by Falkland Islanders. I join him in commemorating and thanking everyone involved in the defence of the islands and our service personnel, wherever they are in the world.

There is an air of total unreality hanging over this debate. Successive Governments have run down our Royal Navy to its present enfeebled state, they have conspired to surrender other British sovereign territory and we have a Government who procrastinate about signing off a new oil field in the North sea—let alone about one in the south Atlantic. Argentina senses total weakness. When will the Government step up and set out how they will rebuild our Royal Navy and meet the 3% of GDP target for our armed forces, so we can stand tall and defend ourselves and our sovereign interests once more?

This Labour Government will not take any lectures about how we should defend our interests and stand up for Britain from a party that has been fawning over Vladimir Putin.

This summer, along with other Members of this House and the other place, I got to escape the heatwave here and enjoy some blessed relief in the cold weather of the Falklands, where we enjoyed the incredibly warm welcome of the Falkland Islanders. Our troops and servicepeople down there are doing incredible work and are resolute in their defence of the Falkland Islands. It was clear to me how strongly the Falkland Islanders feel that they are British, and that matches the feeling of my constituents. Can the Minister assure me that she is having conversations with the MOD, our forces and the Falklands Islands Government, to ensure that we have the right level of defence and deterrence to face this new and escalating nonsense rhetoric from Argentina?

Yes, I can confirm to my hon. Friend that we are in ongoing conversation about exactly that. I thank him for his visit; I cannot stress enough to the House how deeply Falkland Islanders appreciate it when people come to visit and can then impress on this House our unified position that the Falkland Islands are British and will remain so.

Currently, the Royal Navy has an offshore patrol vessel permanently stationed in the Falkland Islands, but given the threat that is being faced and our need to demonstrate resolve—the sort of thing that, sadly, we did not demonstrate in the early 1980s, which led to miscalculation—will the Minister consider speaking to her MOD colleagues to see whether naval assets might at least pay a visit to the Falkland Islands, with a significant platform?

As I stated previously, we are confident that our defensive forces in the south Atlantic are equal to the task. In terms of conveying resolve, it is incredibly important that an absolutely united message is sent from this House to partners in all capitals and to the Falkland Islanders that we are resolute in their defence.

The hon. Member for Bicester and Woodstock (Calum Miller) is absolutely right to say that what is behind this is the deep unpopularity of President Milei; it is not anything actually that the UK has done. It is to the credit of this House that we are entirely united, whichever party we are from, in saying that the Falkland Islands are British and will remain so. Does my hon. Friend agree that those who try to make political points to separate us actually do those who oppose us a favour, and that what they should do is say that the UK Government, His Majesty’s Opposition and all of us in this House are entirely united on this subject?

I very much agree with my hon. Friend that a huge disservice is done to the people of the Falkland Islands and to our service personnel any time that politicking takes place, instead of an absolutely united and unwavering conviction emanating from this House.

I pay tribute to all the Falkland Islands veterans in my own constituency and, indeed, around the country, and to the hon. Member for South Ribble (Mr Foster), who is no longer in his place. Is it not the case that we should all be seeking to de-escalate the rhetoric, but at the same time send a very strong signal—a resolve—to President Milei, that if we are required to do so, this country will once again defend the Falkland Islands militarily and, in between that, certainly defend it economically?

I could not agree with the right hon. Gentleman more in so far as the important thing in this debate is clarity, which is why I am saying with such conviction: our unwavering position as a UK Government in a volatile world is that the Falkland Islands are British and will remain British.

The House speaks with one voice when it comes to the Falklands being British. Like colleagues across the House, I represent many veterans in Newcastle-under-Lyme who served in the Falklands, and I thank them for their service. I am grateful to the Minister for her answers to date, but can I suggest that a Minister of the Crown gets on a plane and goes down to the Falklands to stand in solidarity with the people there as the Union flag is flown—and the sooner the better?

May I please pass on to my hon. Friend’s constituents our thanks for their service, too? Ministers have visited and do so regularly. We are in ongoing dialogue with representatives of the Falkland Islanders. Again, I think it is very important that the message goes out from this House that the Falkland Islands are British and will stay so.

Can the Minister confirm that the Government are reviewing the military infrastructure and surveillance capabilities on the islands in response to Argentina’s announced plans to bolster its military presence?

As the hon. Gentleman would expect, we do not go into operational detail about our defence capabilities, but I can reassure the House that the Government are confident that our defence capabilities are as he would hope and as we need them to be.

In 1982, the people of Chatham and Chatham dockyard waved off the boats that went to safeguard our territory in the south Pacific. HMS Medway, a ship named after our river in Chatham, is there today, with its sailors working to protect and secure that territory. Will the Minister pay testament to the hard work of the Royal Navy to defend the territory? What further advice and security can she give to ensure that we have the right defence posture to counter any aggression?

I pay tribute to everyone serving on HMS Medway and, indeed, all our armed forces personnel, and offer them our unwavering commitment to their protection and the protection of all British territories overseas.

Like other Members, I had the privilege of going to the Falkland Islands last month. I thank the Commander British Forces South Atlantic Islands and all his staff for their welcome and professionalism. While there are clearly domestic issues going on in Argentina, the cold hand of China is not far from sight, whether it be illegal fishing in the blue hole, secret missile bases in Neuquén, or nefarious activity in Antarctica. What discussions has the Minister had with European and US counterparts about dealing with the threat that China poses, given that it is in all our interests in the free western world that the Falkland Islands remain British in perpetuity?

As I have already stated to the House, we are in ongoing dialogue through all our diplomatic relations to stress to people in every capital—but, most of all, to the people of the Falkland Islands—that the Falkland Islands remain British and always will.

It is concerning to hear the sabre-rattling from Argentina towards a self-governing population who overwhelmingly identify as British. It is not just the United States that is fanning the flames, however. Israel’s sanctioned Minister of National Security has called for Israel to recognise the Falklands as Argentinian, and its President has stated:

“Israel will act against Britain.”

Ignoring the irony of an Israeli Minister accusing another country of illegal occupation, what discussions has the Foreign Secretary had on this matter with our supposed ally, which is trying to undermine British sovereignty?

We make clear to all our partners, all our allies and, indeed, people in every capital of the world that the Falklands Islands are British. We are resolute in that, and that position will not change.

The Minister has spoken about sovereignty, and she is right, and she will be aware that under the Offshore Minerals Ordinance 1994, any decision on exploration has to come to this country. It just so happens that the very Energy Secretary who banned new licences in the UK will now be that decision holder. Can she rule out that if the Falklands asks for exploration in its area on oil and gas, this Government will not block it?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that it is an integral part of a country’s self-determination that it can develop its own natural resources for its own economic benefit. That will be a decision for the Falkland Islanders. Indeed, Falkland Islands representatives have already made decisions about exactly that matter.

It is clear to the British public that the special relationship between the UK and the US is more special for the UK than it is for the US under Trump. With the US extending threats, bullying and tariff threats, it is akin to an abusive relationship. Will the Minister unequivocally confirm that Britain will not tolerate intimidation and blackmail by the US, Israel or others, and that British sovereignty matters more than our relationship with hostile states that are committing blatant, horrific violations of international law?

The United States is and will remain our closest ally. We have been clear with it, we have been clear with this House, and we have been clear most of all with the people of the Falkland Islands that the Falkland Islands are British.

I am glad to see the Government adopting a robust posture when it comes to the Falkland Islands, but this time last year at the UN General Assembly, when the President of Argentina staked a claim on the Falkland Islands, neither the former Minister for the overseas territories, the hon. Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty), nor the former Foreign Secretary, the right hon. Member for Pontefract, Castleford and Knottingley (Yvette Cooper), had anything to say about the matter. I would like some assurances that the Prime Minister will tackle President Milei at the UN General Assembly later this month.

The Minister talks about the military capability in the Falklands, but I gently remind her that three of the offshore patrol vessels that we currently have rotating through the Falklands are due to be sold to the Uruguayan navy in the next 18 months, and four of the Typhoons that we have down there—the Tranche 1s—are due to be decommissioned next year. As a staging post to get to the Falkland Islands, the Ascension Island is a key location, but it is shared as a base with the US. Is she confident that the US would have no problems whatsoever with our using that base should we need to take military action against Argentina?

I reject the hon. Gentleman’s characterisation. United Kingdom Ministers have been clear in every international forum in which we are present about our position on this matter, and I am pleased to underscore and repeat it today: the Falkland Islands are British.

I thank the Minister for her strong and resolute answers. Following the deeply concerning decision surrounding the Chagos Islands, the good people of the Falkland Islands need more than just warm words; they need iron-clad guarantees. The Minister has stood firm at the Dispatch Box today and declared unequivocally that the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands is non-negotiable. President Trump must stand by the United Kingdom. Will the Minister ensure that the international community is under absolutely no illusions that we beat the Argentinians when it mattered, that the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland can and will do that again if necessary, and that those islands will remain British for as long as their people wish?

There can be no doubt in any capital in the world and, most importantly, in the Falkland Islands that the Falkland Islands are British. Their right to self-determination is absolute, and the UK Government stand as a guarantor of exactly that.