There was much outrage on social media this morning after Jeremy Corbyn argues for "some kind of accommodation" with Argentina during his interview with Andrew Marr. Exactly what that mean and his reluctance to give the people who live there a veto was disturbing.
The Falkland Islands had no indigenous population (unless you count the penguins) when it was fought over and finally colonised by Britain way back when. It is some 800 miles away from the Argentinian coastline and despite their protestations does not belong to them in any shape or form. The population are British and that frankly should be the end of the matter.
But like all these anti-imperialist types Corbyn always defaults to the anti-Western, in this case anti-British case. Disturbing when he and others took Argentina's side during the Falklands war which had it been won by Argentina would have strengthened the very kind of fascist dictatorship these types they say they are against. The Junta lost power following their military defeat and democracy returned to Argentina.
Argentinian politicians still use the issue of what they call the "Malvinas" every time they run into trouble to deflect criticism of their regimes by appealing to base nationalism. The anti-imperialists in th UK seeing the UK (as always) as the villain jump on this for purely ideological reasons. The "enemy" is always at home". The line that the likes of Lydsey German takes for her mis-named Stop the War Coalition of which Corbyn was former Chair.
The anti-imperialists are always very selective about the concept of "self determination". The StWC did not stand against Russian aggression in the Ukraine or Putin's annexation of Crimea. It was all NATO's fault apparently.
The same goes in the Middle East. Israel cannot exist because it is an ally (in their words a tool) of imperialism supposedly oppressing "Palestinians" leading them to support the likes of Hamas ( not a liberation movement but an Islamist outfit, side with Hezbollah and refuse to condemn the use of bombs by Assad and only attack the West..for helping the Kurds survive in the north and the Iraqi's reclaim their country from the genocidal criminals of ISIS.
Most of them reject a two state solution to the Israel/Palestine conflict because it would (in the long term) defuse the conflict. The anti-imperialists do not seek peace. Only Israel's destruction and the defeat of the West.
How many of these types do you see on protests to free Tibet? None. Like the survival of Israel or the rights of the Falklanders, their interests are nothing compared to the defeat of so-called "imperialism".
These people are a mixture of ideologues, those who substitute these causes for their own failures and in the case of people like Corbyn, simply fools.
Corbyn's reaction to the Paris attacks and the rise of ISIS and their genocidal actions is simply naive to say the very least. In my view dangerous. When during this interview he refers to ISIS having "strong points" I can only despair.
Will someone remind him of their atrocities including mass murder, rape and slavery. They are evil. Like the Nazi's there can be compromise whatsoever. To suggest otherwise demeans the victims of these savages.