Was Thatcher Able to Manage Parliament Effectively during the Falklands War Conflict - Essay Example

WAS THATCHER ABLE TO MANAGE PARLIAMENT EFFECTIVELY DURING THE COURSE OF THE FALKLANDS WAR CONFLICT? Insert name: Module: Institution: Date: Introduction This essay will focus on the Falkland War; it will start by discussing the immediate origin of the conflict before embarking on the diplomacy that was initiated to bring the war at halt and the contribution of Margaret Thatcher through the influence of parliament. The study will also focus on both economic and political aims of the parties that were involved in the war and how the war proved a victorious means for each side (Lowell 177). The topic on the contribution of Margaret Thatcher on the sovereignty of the Falklands still remains an open top for discussion in the present day. Her Government proved to be one of the successful regimes in the history of British. The Isles populace holds more thanks to Thatcher Government and it will not be audacious to affirm that if a referendum was held on the topic, the number of votes in support of Thatcher influence the success at the Islands would be almost 100%. Development of a Crisis. All along, Argentina had been scheming for some years following the British occupation of the Falkland Islands; however the issue turned to a head on when they brought forward the matter of sovereignty at the UN meeting in 1964. The British sovereignty at the Island was non-negotiable, although they allowed for discussions because of contact linking the Falkland Islands and Argentina, besides the affairs concerning the wellbeing of the Islanders (Middlebrook 29). Its was in 1966 when Foreign Secretary to hold a dialogue on the subject of the Falklands crisis with representatives in Buenos Ares and later a convention on the same issue was held in London. The British tactic throughout these deliberations was meant to calm the possible complexities and in actual fact uphold their existing position. The Argentina delegates, on the other hand, expected nothing less than a return of the Malvinas to their sovereignty. According to Freedman (33), the two sides had taken a different and completely a mutually exclusive stand from the start, for their political and tactical aims. After the deliberations the British openly declared that they had no tactical, political or economic objectives in the Falkland Islands, which was not true. The mounting tension was not only felt by the two governments, but also by the members of the public especially in Argentina and the Islanders. It was in late 1964 when Argentina aircraft landed at Port Stanley and fixed their flag, and later in a couple of years Argentine airliner that was presumed to be hijacked landed on the Island besides suspicions of the move that Argentine government failed to accept any connection in the matter. The two moves witnessed contributed to elevate the continuation of a British colony at the Island by positioning a platoon of marines on the eastern part of Falkland Islands. Later in 1966 the British parliament under the suggested a 30 years chill on negotiations, after which the islanders were to be guaranteed autonomy of crafting a decision regarding their own future, a move that was opposed by the Argentine as it failed to address their direct political, tactical and economic objectives by taking back islands (Lowell 179). In the beginning of the following year, Britain agreed that, that they would concede autonomy of the Island to Argentina under convinced circumstances. The conditions were that the wished of the islanders would be paramount by making the Islands people be sacrosanct, which was the main foreign policy of British. The islanders themselves lobbied to stay put as a British territory, something that forced the parliament to discount the entire proposals to the contrary. On the other hand, the Argentina, autonomy was the main agenda; as a result, the two countries intensified a collision course because of their respective political agendas. It was somehow strange when two nations resumed their talks in 1970s despite their opposing political agendas that seemed to be strongly deep-rooted and mutually exclusive. Deliberations on the matter was concluded by an agreement of improving communications between Argentina and Islanders, making them to freely move in Argentina because of issuance of passports and also benefit from a variety of financial incentives (Kinney 51). This made Argentina to assume that they had made imperative concessions from their opponents (British) who had not reiterated any more. But later in the year, 1974, British advocated for a condominium which called for a mutual control of the Falklands Islands, something that islanders agreed on contrary to the Argentina believe that 1970 concession had influenced them to their side, which was not a true. The Argentina Government became tired of the British proposals and decided to seek a political solution through international interventions and reinforced their stand on the matter. This was evident, through its ruling for a possibility of invasion. In 1976, the Argentina air force fired against British and attempted to board its vessel. The matter worsened with a military coup in Argentina in the same year. During the British patrol in the Falkland Islands, revealed presence of Argentineans military there, this was a clear violation on British territory. Britain failed to respond harshly on the matter and sort an official protest. The military base was permitted to be there unchallenged for the next five years (Freedman 61). The election in Great Britain saw the election of Conservative Party in power under the leadership of Margaret Thatcher as a Prime Minister. This revived the issue of lease at the islands which was wished-for in 1975 by British; the aim being that official autonomy of the islands be left in the hands of Argentina while British maintain the military base there and administer the islands. The suggestion was strongly opposed by the Falklanders, although the foreign office pursued the idea as Thatcher was advised by Lord Carrington that the matter was likely to have a political consequence at home. After serious lobbying by Prime Minister Thatcher in parliament and in the summit that was held in United State, the idea was dropped. Besides, the British delegates had little to offer during the summit to support their concessions over the sovereignty at the Islands. Later, in 1982 the Junta military in Argentina became displeased with the slow pace of the matter and stated in public that was pursuing a diplomatic solution on the issue which could grant them a sovereignty in the course of the year; as per their plan ruling out that invasion was possible unavoidable. Margaret Thatcher Initiatives The political career of Margaret Thatcher has remained to be the most outstanding in the current times. Born and brought up at Grantham, in Eastern England, she rose to become the first woman in the history of Western democracy to come to power of a Great Nation (Britain). Because of her sobriety in governance issues, she won the three consecutive terms and served as British Prime Minister from 1970 to 1990, something that is unsurpassed in modern times. Margaret Thatcher together with her counter in U.S., Ronald Reagan, was the co-founders of a school of conservative conviction politics. Her school of thought had a powerful and enduring effect on the British and United States politics and accorded her an international reputation, a profile that could only be comparable to that of Winston Churchill. Although, Thatcher came to leadership at a time when Britain was facing a lot of problems like looming recession and high unemployment rate, she streamlined her government pledges to check and reverse Britain's economic decline. In the short-run she managed to influence the parliament to loosen its stand on direct taxes by cutting it down to balance the budget. This was also seen as a measure to curb recession and decline unemployment level which was increases day after day. Her policies streamlined the political and economic setting of the country, for instance, her philosophy minimized state intervention, issues to do with free market and government ventures. The invasion by Argentines Junta military was a trying moment for Margaret Thatcher, as especially where she had planned to ignore foreign interventions and concentrate on domestic matters that were itching here people (Lowell 177). She convened the parliament and requested for a task force which was supposed to invade Argentina and conquer its foreign realm. The government approved this in the shortest time possible and the troops were dispatched. Emergence fund was also approved by the same parliament after a serious lobbying by Thatcher to support the task force in their mission. Her government streamlined all aspects of ranging from British politics, stimulation of the economy, reformation of key institutions of the country, and strengthened the country’s foreign policy as exemplified in the case at Falklands. She confronted the thought of declines in everything which had deeply been rooted in British Government ever since the Second World War, and focused on the pursuits of economic recovery with vigilance and determination. By successfully changing British economic and foreign policy in the right track, her governments supported the broader scope of international trends that widened and deepened between 1980s-1990s, a something that promoted democracy, growth and development of free markets hence reinforced its political and economic freedom in each continent (Freedman 78). The main objectives Strategic The strategic positioning of the Falkland Islands was of great significance, as it was easily accessed at any point. The islands was thought to be one of the very few bases where the British could monitor any activity in the Southern Atlantic region, similarly the location was very vital for British ally, the U.S (Lowell 41). This made U.S. to fully support the British pursuits in the Islands through their navy because they wanted the area to be in friendly hands. Thus British policy on the islands was indivisible bound within strategic thoughts. The Argentina point of view was in particular the reverse, as they did not want to stand for a military base near their seaboard. An equivalence of what they termed to be the position of the U.S. over Cuba throughout the Cold War period. The wish for Argentina to recuperate what they thought to be theirs, which is the Malvinas Islands, was not new, however the military coup failed to grant fresh impetus to the strategy, in additions to its appointment of the individuals who were did not fear to explore, and at last implement, the military alternative in attaining their objectives. Economic The economic goals also fueled the Falklands crisis for both sides, although some people have declined it as a cause of the conflict. For instance during 1966 the British informally notified the Argentina that it had no economic motives over the islands for the reason that it was mostly self sufficient. But, by 1975 the stand changed with time when the British Government appointed a panel to explore the economic opportunities within the islands. Lowell (81-83) points out that the findings by the panel suggested that the islands had immense fishing opportunities besides the possibilities of possessing oil and gas reserves, meaning that the British Government was not going to concede on the matter and pass its sphere of control. The Argentina on the other side were aware of the potential economic benefits of the region as exhibited in Buenos Ares suspicion, that their opponents were after oil. The significance of sighting oil reserves in the region could not be overplayed as a rationale of the mounting tensions in the Island. The thought of British ceding the control of the discovered oil reserves in the region to their opponent could have been termed politically unsound especially after a looming worldwide oil calamity. On the side of Argentineans, it was very unacceptable to abandon the potential oil reserves that were located some few miles off their seashore to a foreign power. Political The political shape of Great Britain had taken a new shape after the election of Margaret Thatcher as a new Prime Minister in 1979. Thatcher Government had a lot of issues to tackle ranging from Falkland crisis to inflation (a major point of concern). The oil prices had skyrocketed, something that was closely associated with Britain crisis with Iran, increasing inflationary forces. The increases in the interest rates and a swelling in VAT barely helped the domestic economic position of British industry, resulting into high rates of unemployment and recession (Lowell 177). The apparent domestic political effect was a huge blow to the fame of the latest Conservative Government and a considerable personal turn down in the fame of the Margaret Thatcher who was the Prime Minister. The rising level of unemployment resulted into public outcry which was exhibited through riots for instance in Brixton. The domestic problems hardly allowed British to actively participate in the Southern Atlantic matters. However, the Argentina invasion permitted the Thatcher government to shift their attention on looming domestic problems to foreign policy. Thatcher was enclosed herself in calls of patriotism which drew her peoples response and support on her side. She influenced the parliament to form a task force, something that was made with remarkable speed and was send to the Falklands. The send troops to the Islands did their level best in reclaiming the region for British, a move that was supported by United States indirectly. The recovery of the Falklands was hailed as a personal triumph for then Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher. To surprise of many, the victory of British on Islands wiped away the common feeling of profound political letdown to a resounding and awesome triumph in the end. The success at the Falklands crisis by British was a key triumph for the Thatcher Government. Confidence was restored in the hearts of many, as fame build up, regardless of the domestic condition not having changed any more. For the new political regime in Argentina, military junta, there only remaining option for them was to take over the Malvinas Islands. It’s indeed true that military regimes normally do not pleasure themselves on economic triumph, as exemplified at Argentina’s case. The regimes rely mostly on military strength; hence an invasion of the islands was the only remaining option for the Junta military for that case. The unobstructed landings on Southern Thule by the Junta military showed some sense that the islands was to be returned in the near future. Their early invasion was thought to stabilise the political condition in Argentina, beside the act to safeguard their autonomy in the Islands by barring the thought foreign imperialist powers. At first, the Argentineans viewed their invasion as a huge success, but it hastily resulted to ruin as they had underrated the wish of maintaining and controlling the Falklands by the British government. At last the attack by military junta affected them negatively as it was helpful for the Thatcher Government. Conclusion Regardless of the early achievements by the Argentina operations, the approach of military to take control the islands proved futile. The diplomatic deliberations that were being pursued by both the two nations at first in the recovery of the islands, lost meaning due to the invasion. Despite the fact that the Thatcher Government had began on the bad note because of its domestic predicaments; severe unemployment rate, the triumph at the warfare defended their territory and proved to be a resounding achievement for the Government and restored its lost glory among its citizens. In a synopsis, many would term the war as a significant success for the British, especially for the Thatcher regime and her party. According to Lowell (179) it can also be concluded that the victory also helped the Conservative Party to rule for long period in the history of Britain, a feat that many perceive could not be possible without the Falklands battle. Work Cited Beck Peter. The Falkland Islands as an International Problem. London: Routledge, 1988. Freedman Lawrence. Britain and the Falklands War. Oxford: Blackwell, 1988, pp.33-87 Lowell S. Gustafson. The Sovereignty Dispute over the Falkland (Malvinas) Islands. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988, pp.37-119 Max Hastings & Simon Jenkins. The Battle for the Falklands. London: University of Michigan press, 1983 Kinney Douglas. National interest, national honor: the diplomacy of the Falklands. London: Michigan University press, 1985, pp.51-77 Guillermo A. Makin. The Military in Argentine Politics 1880-1982, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 1983a, vol.12, no.1 Guillermo A. Makin. Argentine Approaches to the Falklands/Malvinas: was the Resort to Violence Foreseeable, International Affairs, 1983b, vol.59, no.3 Middlebrook Martin. Task Force: The Falkland Islands War, 1982, London: Routledge, 1987, pp.29-37 David Sanders. Government Popularity and the Falklands War: A Reassessment, British Journal of Political Science, 1987, vol.17, no.3 Lord Shackleton. Economic Survey of the Falkland Islands, vol’s 1-2, London, 1976 James H. Wylie. The Influence of British Arms: an Analysis of British Intervention since 1956, London: Allen & Unwin, 1984 Read More