1975 - British Oil Invasion - Freezing of Relations

In light of the pressure, in July 1975 the UK proposed to the Argentina to discuss joint development of the South Atlantic. Argentina's Foreign Ministry accepted this possibility with the proviso that the agenda included the background for sovereignty.

The Foreign Office refused, but Argentina remained firm in his demand that the issue of sovereignty was central to any settlement discussion about economic exploitation.

By November negotiations were under virtual breakdown: the Argentine representative to the United Nations stated that in light of this, the country would not enforce their rights in the manner deemed most appropriate. This veiled threat of military action started to become common in Argentine diplomatic action.

 Following a British offer to open the agenda "other issues", the new Argentine Foreign Minister Manuel Arauz Castex, proposed amending the Shackleton mission to a binational action to eliminate its "unilateral and provocative" character.

This clear offer of joint development was distorted by the British, reducing to the possibility that Argentina proveyera only three technicians; with this action the United Kingdom had made his intentions clear to act unilaterally only.

 The tension between the two countries continued to escalate: the January 3, 1976 saw the arrival of Lord Shackleton to the Falklands. Argentina's Foreign Ministry did not miss the symbolism of dates (the invasion of 1833 had also occurred January 3), qualifying the "coincidence" of "hostile and inconsiderate."

On January 5, 1976 the government of Maria Estela Martinez de Peron issued a statement against what they considered a "unilateral rupture" of talks by the British:

Given this evidence, the Argentine Foreign Ministry estimates inadequate acquiesce to consider issues that face this reluctance, are insubstantial in relation to the real problem, and therefore not conducive to fair solution thereof.

As a result the people of the Republic must be warned that his government, together with the Armed Forces and other institutional arrangements that structure the Argentine State, unswervingly share that zeal for the defense of the dignity and rights of the Nation ; and act without precipitation but with all the persistence, prudence and energy necessary to achieve justice.

On 7 January, a Justicialist congressman proposed confiscate all British property in Argentina, without compensation, until Britain returned the islands.

Moved by this increased tension Britain tested a shy attempt to cool tempers, holding that discussion for sovereignty was a "sterile dispute" while inviting continue talks.

The Argentine refusal was unequivocal: stated that it refused to resume relations as British unilateral moves persist, and invited His Majesty's government to withdraw its ambassador from Buenos Aires, while reporting that the Argentine representative would not return to London.

Diplomatic relations entered a period of freezing, which abounded in both governments expressions of good will in order to mend ties.

In light of this delicate situation the Organization of American States was issued in favor of Argentina, arguing that prospective activities of the United Kingdom-which they described as "unilateral innovation" - violated UN Resolution 2065 and 3160, were a threat to hemispheric security and world peace; that Argentina had an unquestionable right to sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands and British actions were aimed at silencing the Argentine claims and hinder negotiations driven by that institution.