Politics
House Dem says she regrets voting for Laken Riley Act
Rep. Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.) said at a BLN town hall Thursday that she regrets her vote in favor of the Laken Riley Act. “As I’ve thought about it over the past couple of months, I probably would have voted differently. It’s a vote that I regret,” Hayes said at the forum…
Read More
“It’s a soccer match. Nothing more to it. Period.”
That’s how Argentina coach Lionel Scaloni described his team’s upcoming World Cup semifinal against England to journalists.
No one believes him, least of all Argentinians themselves.
For many in the South American nation, the match is more than a stepping stone toward the World Cup title. It is a long-awaited chance to restore their national pride, over four decades after the British established de facto control over a cluster of islands in the South Atlantic.
For Argentina’s President Javier Milei, the timing couldn’t be better. Unpopular at home over multiple corruption scandals and rampant inflation, yet buoyed by his close alliance with U.S. President Donald Trump, he has sought to rally Argentinians around the flag by breathing new life into the dispute which claimed 649 Argentine and 255 British lives.
“Argentina is a very polarized country, like so much of the Americas. But this is an issue that unites everyone,” said Rebecca Bill Chavez, who served as deputy assistant secretary of defense for western hemisphere affairs under former President Barack Obama.
“It doesn’t matter in Argentina: Left, right, center — you’re all for the Malvinas, as they call it,” Bill Chavez adds, referencing the name Argentinians use for the Falklands.
On Saturday, five days before the match, Argentina’s Foreign Minister Pablo Quirno came out swinging with a lengthy opinion piece in the conservative daily “La Nación.”
The Malvinas, he argued, were Argentinian “by history, by right, and by conviction” and the Brits guilty of an “illegal occupation.”
On the eve of the game, the country’s vice president, Victoria Villarruel, amped up the rhetoric in a post on X that referred to England as “invaders” and “usurping pirates.”
It is the latest in a series of jabs at Westminster, marking a notable shift for the government of Milei, who distinguished himself from his predecessors by taking a relatively moderate — and domestically sensitive — stance on the Falklands.
He has openly praised Margaret Thatcher, the British prime minister who sent troops to the islands in 1982. And he seemed to accept the results of a 2013 referendum in which 99.8 percent of the Falklands’ residents voted to remain under British rule (only three people voted against).
One day, Milei fantasized in a speech on Veterans Day in April just last year, the islanders might find Argentina so attractive that they’d “vote for us” voluntarily.
But that was then.
This April he announced on X that the Falklands “were, are and will always be Argentine.”
The jingoistic post came hours after Reuters reported that an internal Pentagon memo had suggested Washington could review its diplomatic support for the British position on the Falklands in retaliation for its foot-dragging on Iran.
Milei’s brashness, and the absence of a U.S. response, is evidence of his close relationship with the White House under Trump, notes Bill Chavez.
“In the past, if an Argentine government had made such a statement, I think it would have caused real tension in the U.S.-Argentine relationship,” she said.
But she cautions that neither the leaked memo nor American support for Argentina’s acquisition of F16s in 2025 under the Biden administration indicates an actual shift in U.S. policy on the Falklands.
For Milei, the Falklands issue is not straightforward either.
If the topic becomes too central, “Milei loses,” said Andrés Gilio of Opina Argentina, a pollster.
In a survey it conducted in April, an overwhelming majority of respondents, 79 percent, argued the country should pursue sovereignty over the islands “without concessions.”
“Either Milei ‘Malvinizes’ his discourse, aligning himself with public opinion but straining relations with the United States and blurring his ideological profile, or he remains faithful to his ideas, downplaying the sovereignty claim, at the risk of going against most of society’s wishes,” said Gilio.
So far, Milei has pressed the Falklands issue in international forums while refraining from a real confrontation.
The Argentinian Foreign Ministry declined to comment in time for this article’s publication.
Argentina has faced England five times at the World Cup, rarely without drama. Seared into Argentina’s national memory is the 1986 quarterfinal, just four years after the Falklands war, when Diego Maradona scored two historic goals.
“Although before the match we kept saying that football had nothing to do with the Falklands War,” Maradona would later write in his biography, “we knew that many young Argentine boys had died there, that they had been killed like little birds.”
This time around, Argentina’s players and fans have been anything but subtle, invoking the conflict long before they were drawn to face England. After winning against Egypt, the team’s players were filmed belting out a song calling for an Argentine World Cup victory, “for Malvinas,” in a video since gone viral.
Off-pitch, there have been skirmishes between British and Argentinian fans even as jubilant Argentine supporters have celebrated victories by singing “Whoever doesn’t jump is an Englishman.” As a precaution, FIFA has barred two of its English referees from officiating any Argentina matches.
Asked about the flaring tensions, a spokesperson for British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said this week that “The Falkland Islanders are British with the right to determine their own future.” Starmer, he said, was “solely focused on the semi-final and securing a spot in the final.”
But perhaps the strongest plea for restraint has come from Argentinian veterans.
“Sport is not war,” the April 2 veterans group wrote in a statement widely circulated by Argentinian media on Monday.
“The World Cup semifinal is a sporting event of global significance, not an armed act of revenge or historical compensation.”
The House of Commons was exercised on Wednesday about the prospect of England beating Argentina in tonight’s World Cup semifinal.
Ahead of Keir Starmer’s last Prime Minister’s Questions as premier before he exits the top job, Commons Speaker Lindsay Hoyle — the normally impartial chair — said he hoped the PM will be “bringing home” World Cup victory to widespread cheers.
Starmer, a huge soccer fan who cheers for Arsenal in the Premier League, opened PMQs by stressing his “important appointment with the television” this evening to watch the match live.
Opposition Conservative MP Graham Stuart compared the prime minister to England superstar Jude Bellingham by “scoring the winning goal, leading our team to victory,” though Starmer had “now been handed a red card by the 400 dodgy referees behind him,” referring to the 2024 election win before a Labour rebellion that helped topple him.
The PM continued on the subject of red cards by saying “I can’t tell him how much incoming I had … to get the England red card adjusted,” after President Donald Trump’s intervention to help overturn the suspension of U.S. striker Folarin Balogun.
Starmer said he didn’t follow the U.S. president’s example, after Jarell Quansah was sent off against Mexico and suspended.
It’s win or bust for England and Argentina in Atlanta tonight.
But in one area of global affairs — in a part of the world very familiar to leaders in London and Buenos Aires — both are about to lose.
As first reported by the Financial Times, developers are prepping to drill the Sea Lion oil field north of the Falklands, the tiny archipelago and British Overseas Territory over which Argentina and Britain went to war in 1982.
Any windfall from an oil boom — and developers reckon revenues could run to hundreds of millions of pounds a year — would be directed to the Falklands government, much to the annoyance of Argentinian President Javier Milei, who insisted any resources “belong to Argentina.”
Not that Brits will look on particularly happily. Oil field cash flowing into Falklands’ coffers (and not to the British state) will be a reminder that the fossil fuel economy in the North Sea, once a powerhouse for jobs and Treasury income, is dwindling fast.
By 2034, according to Navitas Petroleum, co-owners of the Sea Lion field, its revenues could be worth £280 million to the island. By that point, the FT noted, its annual value to the Falklands would outstrip U.K. oil and gas revenues, which are set to dip to just £100 million by 2031.
The Falklands’ government is likely to use the money to rebuild knackered energy infrastructure. Meanwhile, lobby group Offshore Energies UK says, the decline of the North Sea is already costing a thousand jobs a month.
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship10 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words