WI: Successful Operation Algeciras (Argentina attacks Gibraltar)

During the Falklands War, Argentina plotted to attack a British naval vessel at Gibraltar in an effort to divert British ships from the South Atlantic. The plan was to launch divers armed with limpet mines from the Spanish town of Algeciras and have them swim to Gibraltar, where they would attach the mines to the ship, swim back to Algeciras, and watch the fireworks. A four-man Argentine special forces team was deployed to Algeciras, where they monitored British naval traffic for potential targets. Several opportunities presented themselves, but each were passed over for a number of reasons.

After the British sunk the Belgrano, however, Buenos Aires finally gave the commandos permission to attack. The HMS Ariadne, a Leander-class frigate that had arrived in Gibraltar earlier that day, was to be the target.

Fortunately for the Brits and unfortunately for the Argies, the Spanish police were tipped off to the presence of four suspicious men. As the country had been going through a period of political upheaval after the end of the Fascist regime and the 1982 World Cup was to be held in Madrid, the Spanish police were on their guard for any terrorist activity. Fearing that the suspicious group of men were some form of terrorist cell, Spanish police arrested all four. Upon learning that they were actually Argentine servicemen, Madrid quietly arranged for them to be flown back to Buenos Aires to avoid sparking tensions with either Britain or Argentina.

So, what if the Argies are not apprehended and successfully attack the Ariadne?
 
Last edited:

Philip

Donor
During the Falklands War, Argentina plotted to attack a British naval vessel at Gibraltar in an effort to divert British ships from the South Atlantic. The plan was to launch divers armed with limpet mines from the Spanish town of Algeciras and have them swim to Gibraltar, where they would attach the mines to the ship, swim back to Algeciras, and watch the fireworks.

This would be a major mistake. Unlike the invasion of the Falklands, an attack on Gibraltar will trigger Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty.
 
Argentina pisses literally everyone off. The Falkland war turns from two middle powers having what amounts to a slap boxing match to an actual, earnest war between the UK at least and Argentina, which might even lead to British boots on the ground in Argentina.
 
This would be a major mistake. Unlike the invasion of the Falklands, an attack on Gibraltar will trigger Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty.
Technically, no. Operation Algeciras was to be carried out by survivors of the Montoneros guerrilla, not by members of the Argentine Armed Forces. So the Argentine government could see the fireworks on TV and say "Oh, that wasn't us. That was done by patriotic terrorists". Whether that would fly or not depends on NATO governments, specially French and American ones (the other countries with carriers). Essentially, the presidents and prime ministers will decide whether they claim to buy the excuse or not.

I see two possible outcomes: One, NATO accept the story about patriotic terrorists and the war goes more or less as in OTL, with the British down one destroyer. Two, France and or the USA get directly involved. With the French (let alone American) more powerful carrier aviation, the Argentine Junta might decide they can surrender without loosing too much face internally. But they were deluded. I think they'd keep fighting if on France sends its navy, but they'd reconsider if the USA gets directly involved. OTOH, the commandos tasked with the operation were arrested by the Spanish police on May 31st and the war ended on June 14th. So even if other NATO members choose to get involved, their ships may not arrive to the theater of operation before the war ends anyway.
 

Philip

Donor
Technically, no. Operation Algeciras was to be carried out by survivors of the Montoneros guerrilla, not by members of the Argentine Armed Forces.

It was planned by the Junta, Adm Anaya to be precise. It was not an independent operation. The use of illegal combatants instead regular forces just increases the anger of UK, US, and others.

It ensures that the Junta will be forced to surrender without any chance of convincing the British that the islands are not worth the effort.

The outstanding question is if the British demand that Argentina renounce any claims on the Falklands rather than accepting status quo ante.
 
Retaliatory strikes on the Argentine mainland will be the quickest British response.

Regarding NATO, given the context and the nature of the attack, unless Washington actively wants to kill any escalation (actively like ignore the press on both sides of the Atlantic, ignore the opinions of intelligence agencies and publicly defend the Junta), the Argies don't have a leg to stand on.

I have no idea what support the likes of the US and France would provide however. I can see the RN looking to sink Argentine ships in port in direct revenge, SAS making raids.

Even if NATO support is relegated merely to the moral it will seriously impact the Argentine will to fight and Britain might demand (and thanks to Reagan, get) an official recognition of British control of the Falkland Islands.
 
Argentina pisses literally everyone off. The Falkland war turns from two middle powers having what amounts to a slap boxing match to an actual, earnest war between the UK at least and Argentina, which might even lead to British boots on the ground in Argentina.
Not sure the British would want the rest of NATO to get involved in the actual shooting... But I'd expect they'd be more than happy to use the incident to wrangle extra logistics support, intelligence and supplies...
 
Spain has always showed some support for Argentina, with an eye to make the Gibraltar case a similar one. Being used as a base for such an opp would most likely change their atitude.
 

WILDGEESE

Gone Fishin'
From what I've gathered from reading various sources, it was the UK's governments desire to keep the conflict "one on one" so to speak, mainly to improve the prestige of the country in the eyes of the world which had been slipping continually since Suez.

Not only that, an attack on Gib, would as some of the previous posters have said give the UK the green light to attack the Argie mainland which the UK had mostly tried to avoid for fear of escalation and provoking sympathetic nations in S. America into helping them out with men, aircraft and ships.

I might be wrong so apologies beforehand but I think Colombia, Ecuador, Peru & Venez, gave fuel tanks for Argie aircraft and various technical supplies. If the war escalated the UK would've easily found themselves facing an extra 100+ combat aircraft which could've have swung it for Argentina.

Regards filers.
 
If the war escalated the UK would've easily found themselves facing an extra 100+ combat aircraft which could've have swung it for Argentina.

If, by "escalate" you mean other NATO countries, or at least active combat-related US units, then I think those countries would start to think twice about getting involved in something that serious...
 
The Spanish police were ordered to destroy all associated records. At the last minute, when the men were at the airport, the police chief realised they had not taken the men's ID information and called to order photos of the men be taken. At the airport, the police charged with taking the photos thought it would look awkward to take mugshots in public and so a friendly, group photo of the commandos with the police guarding them was taken. This photo has not been found.

Cute!
 
Not sure the British would want the rest of NATO to get involved in the actual shooting... But I'd expect they'd be more than happy to use the incident to wrangle extra logistics support, intelligence and supplies...

The British would have been glad to accept 'indirect' support in the form of tanker aircraft. They were desperately short of tankers to support the Black Buck missions and having a few KC-135s (whether American or French) would have helped measurably. Also AWACS support whether from carrier based (E-2) or land based E-3 would have been helpful in protecting the fleet. Both the Tanker support as well as the AWACS would have been direct but non-leathal support that was desired but could not be supplied without some justification. There may also have been enhanced airlift offered in the form of C-5s or C-141B aircraft that could be air refueled to allow direct flights of supplies before the airport was available. I know there were a lot of supplies airlifted to Ascension including advanced AIM-9Ls but with an overt act it would have been 'Katy bar the Door' Reagan wanted to assist the British any way he could. As it was the Ramp at Ascension was pretty crowded with American flights bringing in equipment.
 
If, by "escalate" you mean other NATO countries, or at least active combat-related US units, then I think those countries would start to think twice about getting involved in something that serious...

I think that by “escalate” he means that Britain starts hitting targets on the Argentine mainland (something they largely avoided doing IOTL for a number of reasons).

I don’t know if the rest of Latin America intervenes if Britain hits the mainland, but I’m willing to bet weapons exports and aid to Argentina goes up a great deal, and greater effort is made to sink the Task Force.

On the other hand, I’ll go with the rest of the thread and suspect that an Argie attack on Gibraltar would probably result in even greater support of the British among the US and NATO, if not quite escalating to full-on NATO intervention.
 
The British would have been glad to accept 'indirect' support in the form of tanker aircraft. They were desperately short of tankers to support the Black Buck missions and having a few KC-135s (whether American or French) would have helped measurably.

It would have to be French, unless a quick modification of USAF KC-135 to probe and drogue could be done.
 
I don’t know if the rest of Latin America intervenes if Britain hits the mainland, but I’m willing to bet weapons exports and aid to Argentina goes up a great deal, and greater effort is made to sink the Task Force.

Note that Chile gave covert aide to the UK, because "Chile vs Argentina" was a thing back then (still is?). I wonder how that would play out, if things got hotter...
 
Note that Chile gave covert aide to the UK, because "Chile vs Argentina" was a thing back then (still is?). I wonder how that would play out, if things got hotter...

Chile could easily have been dragged into/intervened in the war.

Argentina was very concerned about a Chilean intervention during the Falklands War and kept a large number of troops tied down at the Chilean border for the duration of the war. Just four years prior Chile and Argentina had come within hours of going to war before what was all but a literal act of God (a sudden storm and eleventh-hour papal mediation) averted the crisis.

The UK and Chile made plans to use the latter nation as a base for SAS raids on the Argie mainland, but those were cancelled (most notably Operation Mikado).
 
Last edited:
Top