Public Opinion With No Falklands War

Ever since the Falklands War, public opinion regarding ownership of the islands has become extremely polarized; with the populace of Britain and Argentina both being divided into two camps that fervently favour or reject handing the islands back to the Argentines. What would this public opinion look like if, say, the Falklands War never occured?

Especially in Britain; would we have a larger, more influential group of people pushing for returning the Falklands/Malvinas to Argentina?

Would those that oppose them be as fervent as they are in OTL?

Would there have been any attempts to actually exchange the islands?

Or would nobody really care with the pre-1982 status quo continuing to present day?
 
The Falklands would remain in the ranks of the Pitcairn Islands and Montserrat as places which the average Briton has never heard of, much less realised they're British territory and holds strong feelings about. Heck, there are only two other British Overseas Territories which are well known - Gibraltar because the Spanish keep making a fuss about it, and Bermuda because of the triangle. And most folks don't even realise that Bermuda is British!
 

shiftygiant

Gone Fishin'
There wouldn't be a full exchange, however if I remember correctly before the war there was a plan to form a co-operational agreement with Argentina?
 
Ever since the Falklands War, public opinion regarding ownership of the islands has become extremely polarized; with the populace of Britain and Argentina both being divided into two camps that fervently favour or reject handing the islands back to the Argentines. What would this public opinion look like if, say, the Falklands War never occured?

Especially in Britain; would we have a larger, more influential group of people pushing for returning the Falklands/Malvinas to Argentina?

Would those that oppose them be as fervent as they are in OTL?

Would there have been any attempts to actually exchange the islands?

Or would nobody really care with the pre-1982 status quo continuing to present day?


you lost me at 'handing the islands back'

;-)
 
There wouldn't be a full exchange, however if I remember correctly before the war there was a plan to form a co-operational agreement with Argentina?

Whilst I couldn't find anything regarding a 'co-operational agreement', I did find on Wikipedia this statement;

Concerned at the expense of maintaining the Falkland Islands in an era of budget cuts, the UK again considered transferring sovereignty to Argentina in the early Thatcher government.[57] Substantive sovereignty talks again ended by 1981, and the dispute escalated with passing time.[58]

Is this what you were talking about, or this the 'co-operational agreement' some other accord that I just can't find any info on?
 
Especially in Britain; would we have a larger, more influential group of people pushing for returning the Falklands/Malvinas to Argentina?

Would those that oppose them be as fervent as they are in OTL?

Would there have been any attempts to actually exchange the islands?

Or would nobody really care with the pre-1982 status quo continuing to present day?

Probably no one would care, at least amongst the general public, it would probably be a situation similar to the one we have with Gibraltar now. People in Parliament might care, but I imagine the debate would still be a minor one and not attract such strong divisions with the political symbolism of the Falklands gone.
I have heard it said that many in the British government might actually prefer to give it back if there were no political connotations and the islanders were in favour, as it a drain on resources since it now has too be kept defended even though they are basically worthless.
Obviously though, they have defenses there because it was invaded a few decades ago, so if the war never happened there would be little to none of that there now, and therefore less motivation to want to give it back.
 
Without the invasion I suspect that sovereignty of the Falklands is transferred to Argentina within the first decade of democratic government. So, mid to late 90's.
 
Without the invasion I suspect that sovereignty of the Falklands is transferred to Argentina within the first decade of democratic government. So, mid to late 90's.

I always got the feeling that the Junta wanted (needed?) something more dramatic than a simple hand over and that democratic regimes really find the Flaklands (I am going to leave that typo alone) better as a distraction.

That said I can quite easily see, without the war, one of the more efficient democratic administrations gaining de jure sovereignty. I do wonder though if one of the things that puts the Argentines off is that the arrangement between the British Government and the Islanders is that the UK fronts up most of the costs and the Islanders get the goodies, such as there are and might be, to themselves?
 
I always got the feeling that the Junta wanted (needed?) something more dramatic than a simple hand over and that democratic regimes really find the Flaklands (I am going to leave that typo alone) better as a distraction.
I think so too, I think that the general POD here is probably the Junta deciding go launch an invasion of the Beagle Islands and Chilean Tierra del Fuego rather than the Falklands. Though I'm not sure what the details of it would be possibly beyond a more naval oriented defence review in 1981.
That said I can quite easily see, without the war, one of the more efficient democratic administrations gaining de jure sovereignty. I do wonder though if one of the things that puts the Argentines off is that the arrangement between the British Government and the Islanders is that the UK fronts up most of the costs and the Islanders get the goodies, such as there are and might be, to themselves?
AFAIK and I might be wrong, the Falklands are self-sufficient with the exception of defence spending and I doubt that that exception would put the Argentinians off since they seem relatively unconcerned about the defence of the rest of their country.
 

Don Quijote

Banned
Especially in Britain; would we have a larger, more influential group of people pushing for returning the Falklands/Malvinas to Argentina?

Do we have any group pushing for the Falklands to be given to Argentina? I know Corbyn wouldn't mind but he's not campaigning for it.
 

shiftygiant

Gone Fishin'
Whilst I couldn't find anything regarding a 'co-operational agreement', I did find on Wikipedia this statement;

Is this what you were talking about, or this the 'co-operational agreement' some other accord that I just can't find any info on?

No, that's that one. Feel a bit silly, I must have mixed it with the current Corbyn thing.

Do we have any group pushing for the Falklands to be given to Argentina? I know Corbyn wouldn't mind but he's not campaigning for it.

If we hold Corbyn as the high mark and most mainstream part of this side of the debate, then it's simply "Let's treat it like Northern Ireland".

The Islands being given to Argentina is nil. Exchange is unlikely (what will they be exchanged with/for?), and given the history of the Islands, there is no real reason to 'give them back', as they were never recognized as being Argentinian except when they invaded in the 80's. The Northern Ireland style deal is the furthest you could push, and even then it's going to come down to what the Islanders want and what they choose.
 
Top