Political Science

The conflict that ignited in the Spring of 1982 between Great Britain and Argentina had made the world upside down. Even in the present generation, there are a lot of emotions which are triggered whenever the Falkland Islands, the British or the Argentine name is used  or even mentioned.  

Falklands War which is also known as Falklands Conflict or Crisis was a war between Argentina and United Kingdom in battle with the disputed Falkland Islands and South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands. Falkland Islands, which is the main reason of the conflict between the two countries, lies 300 miles east of the Street of Magellan at the southern end of South America and 8000 miles away from the United Kingdom.

The war, which lasted for 74 days, was started when the Argentine invaded and occupied the Falkland Islands and South Georgia on April 2, 1982. This was considered as the most recent conflict by the United Kingdom in the absence of the allied states and the lone war in the Argentina since the 1880s.

It is believed that the main reason of the conflict between the two countries was the protracted diplomatic confrontation on the sovereignty of the islands. Argentinas invasion of the islands was considered by its people as a re-occupation of its own territory. The reason of the United Kingdom, on the other hand, on its declaration of war against the opposing country was an invasion of a British dependent territory. This conflict between UK and Argentina resulted into the deaths of hundreds of British and Argentine soldiers, airmen, sailors and even innocent civilian Falklanders and the massive destruction of the naval ships and aircrafts of both country.

This paper tries to explain the embedded reasons of the conflict encountered by the United Kingdom and Argentina which resulted to the war for the possession of the disputed Falkland Islands. It also highlights the influences, lessons learned and impact of the campaign in the many aspects of both country engaged in the war which created a great chaos and threat to the peace of the world for several years.  

The campaign military or strategic success
Questions as to whether the Falklands War should be considered as a military or a strategic success should be clarified and answered as well. In this sense, it would first be appropriate to differentiate the terms military success and strategic success in the context of the aforementioned war since the use of such terms may differ from one case or point to another. To further expound, military success would refer to being able to win the war through the superiority of the military force, which of course directly pertains to the factors such as military training and individual skill, the number or the relative size of troops, as well as technological dominance and the availability of effective weaponry. On the other hand, strategic success refers to a victory that has been achieved mainly through means of intelligent and practical planning in terms of how forces should be utilized and efficiently situated instead of mainly relying upon sheer power and troop size. Hence, in order to determine the answer to the question of whether the Falklands War should be regarded as a military success or a strategic success, aspects such as the troop size and military power should first be taken into account and evaluated.

In terms of military prowess, the British forces were not necessarily superior to their Argentine counterparts. As a matter of fact, in terms of number and size of military forces present at the Falklands, the Argentine forces were considerably superior to the British forces and thus being outnumbered was a significant concern for the latter. Aside from being outnumbered, the technological advantages as well as the availability of weaponry were another advantage that the Argentine military had against the British forces. In particular, the Argentine forces were superior in critical military areas such as in air to surface capabilities. In addition to such, the British were also confronted with another problem that transcends more than the sheer size of the Argentine military. Specifically, the area or locations wherein the war would be fought was not advantageous for the British either and thus problems regarding communication and the duration of travel manifested in relation to this, the British had initially maintained a false optimism regarding their capability to win a war regardless of such distances. In general, it is not difficult to realize that that in terms of core military aspects and factors, the Argentine forces was superior to the British forces during the course of the Falklands War thus, if the British were not able to discover other means of winning the war other than military size and weaponry, then it would be most expected that Argentina would have emerged as victorious.

Given such points, it is evident that the British were not able to achieve victory through military superiority in relation to size and other advantages. Thus, strategic success becomes a more likely answer to the aforementioned question. To further explain, there were numerous instances wherein the Argentine forces should have gained key strategic advantages but were not able to. On the other hand, the British military forces were determined to prevent the Argentine military from gaining such advantages and were also focused upon both taking advantage or every possible aspect and finding ways of circumventing potential areas of weakness. A significant example of such is in terms of how British air forces effectively preoccupied the air forces of Argentina and as a result prevented air to surface attacks from devastating the British naval fleet. In addition to such, excellent use of available advanced weaponry may also be considered as another aspect through which Britain was able to take advantage during the war. To further explain, while as mentioned beforehand, Argentina was superior in terms of number, the British was able to use certain weaponry and tactics such as the Milan and parachutes through an alternative yet highly effective manner. Besides such examples, there are of course other notable strategic approaches that the British forces accomplished throughout the course of the Falklands War. Thus, from the points emphasized above, it would seem that the British succeeded mainly by being able to actualize effective strategies.  

A number of experts though point out that another factor, arguably leading to the success of strategies, may be considered as well such factor is commonly regarded luck,. Considering that the British were not always focused upon forming strategies and taking advantage of key aspects throughout the Falklands War, unexplainable outcomes such as why certain approaches did not fail would expectedly come into mind. To further emphasize such a point, it was for a fact that the British government was not entirely unaware that being involved in such a war is a significant gamble for Britain in terms of achieving victory due to numerous factors however, for in various instances throughout the war as well, Argentina was not able to effectively gain strategic advantages which, with the sheer size of the Argentine military, could have been easily achieved. Regardless of whether luck is indeed a valid factor to consider in terms of how the British forces were able to attain victory in such a war, it is without doubt that the Falklands war may be most appropriately considered as mainly a strategic success for the British instead of having won through military superiority.

The type of war or campaign that British forces configured before 1980s
As mentioned earlier, the Falkland war was enacted upon the invasion of the Argentine forces into the territories of Falkland islands and South Georgia, areas which at that moment were under the custody of the United Kingdom. Hence, British forces immediately reacted to such kind of activity and have readied the entirety of their nation for a war that aimed to retrieve the governance over islands which they believe are properties of their kingdom. Consequently, the UK army applied the expertise of their war men and the technological advantages of their equipments in order to fulfill their goal of retrieving their islands and winning back their pride as a nation. But despite their great desire, the British forces knew that they were outnumbered and their skills were inferior as compared to their Argentine opponents. Hence, the British force employed changes on the military facets of their country and to further elucidate these  alterations, it will be necessary to first describe the type of war or campaign that the British forces configured before the 1980s.

Prior to the 1980s, the British Military forces was characterized by constant improvements on the features of their military materials, equipments, and most specially, with the upgrading of the quality of their military men. Two areas of the military force which  are worthy of emphasis and elaboration were the aviation and naval departments.

The aviation department of the British Military force was governed by the Royal Air Force (RAF). These two institutions initiated advancements in the military aviation history of Britain. It was in September 24, 1910 when the first British aircraft reconnaissance was made during the British Armys autumn maneuverer in order to locate the Blue Army. This first venture has actually failed because the team captain was captured by the enemies but it has significantly marked the start of aerial reconnaissance in warfare.

Following this event in February 28, 1911 was the authorization of the Air Battalion of the Royal Engineers, a group that was designed to create a framework of skilled military aviators which  functions as reserve units during moments of war. Succeeding advancements in aviation were seen in the administration of trainings on ballooning, kiting, telegraphy, photography, meteorology, bomb-dropping, musketry, gunnery and artillery cooperation. Moreover, additional combat exercises were given to the members of the British Air Force in order to further hone their skills.

The naval department of the British Military force before 1980s, on the other hand, was characterized by the usage of high-tech submarines coupled with the employment of nuclear power. Polaris was specifically the name of the submarines that were utilized for military attacks during the 1970s. Four Polaris were owned by the British force and each had 16 missiles per submarine. Furthermore, 48 warheads were present per submarine which enabled these military equipments to execute a submarine targeting capability of 16 chances at a time. Hence, it can be inferred that the British Naval department was indeed among the highly developing and ultimately promising military groups at that time as supported by their strong nuclear capabilities. However, the development of the Article VI of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) which stated that United Kingdom, and four other nations, were legally entitled to possess nuclear weapons but were encouraged to pursue nuclear disarmament. The said Article seemed to have restricted the proliferation of the nuclear-based marine technology but Lord Chalfont, British Prime Minister in 1960s, emphasized that there is no international agreement which calls upon anyone to promote the elimination of nuclear weapons except in the context of general and complete disarmament.

Based on the aforementioned facts, it is rightful to say that the type of war or campaign that the British Air Force have configured before the 1980s was characterized by intense military training across all fields but most special attention was given to the naval and aviation departments as supported by the idea hat these departments are the ones which were likely to provide sturdy framework for the whole British Military Force.

The results or consequences of the campaign
The outcome and consequences of the Falklands War or the campaign may be divided into four sub-aspects. In particular, the consequences of the war may be perceived from a non-specific perspective, from the view of the inhabitants of the Falklands, from one that focuses upon Britain, and from another that emphasizes the outcome for Argentina. Of course, such a categorization of consequences would be most appropriate in attempting to provide an thorough discussion of the Falklands War. From a non-specific perspective, one of the most prominent consequences of the Falklands War or the campaign for both Argentina and Britain is in terms of the significant amount  of combat related losses through the destruction of various naval ships and aircrafts. As expected from such, not only did both nations suffer losses in terms of funds and military technology, but there have been considerable losses in terms of life as well. In addition, costs in terms of ammunition, as exemplified through the prices of the advanced missiles, used throughout the war would also be another significant basis of expenditure for both Argentina and Britain. In this sense, the initial outcome of war, for both regardless of the nation that attained victory throughout the campaign is not entirely positive in an economic perspective.

As previously mentioned, the results or consequences of the Falklands War may also be assessed through the perspective of the Falklandians. As commonly considered by historians as a significant transformation of the Falklands, upon being acquired by the British after the war, the Falklands was converted into a highly defended British fortress. Expectedly, peace would be among the most immediately noticeable effects of such a decision by the British government and in effect the inhabitants of the Falklands have positively benefited. As a matter of fact, not only did such means of protection become present throughout the Falklands, the people throughout the area also positively accepted the economic support offered and maintained by the United Kingdom in particular, among the first means of stimulating the economy of the Falklands was through the establishment of exclusive fishing zones. Hence, due to such decisions and actions by the British government, the Falkland Islands as well as its inhabitants were able to attain a level of prosperity and freedom that has not been experienced before in the area. Specifically, not only did the Falklands positively grow as a self sustaining area, in just a short span of several years the Falklands became synonymous with both wealth and exclusivity instead of being originally labeled as impoverished.

While the outcome of the war or the campaign may have been generally positive for the inhabitants of the Falklands, Argentina on the other hand, not being able to achieve victory despite considerable efforts, faced negative consequences right after the conclusion of the Falklands War. To further expound, after the loss, the citizens of Argentina was greatly angered by the outcome which led to massive gatherings and riots against the Argentine military and government which have been publicly labeled as cowards by commoners. Due to such Argentina was thrown into a phase of instability especially in terms of leadership and governance. Of course, if the masses would initiate unified actions against the leaders of the nation, then conflict and unexpected results would follow. Specifically, the loss of Argentina in the Falklands War resulted into repercussions such as the presence of mob based attacks to the authorities and leaders of the nation, the loss of military powers, and eventually the shift of the mode of governance from dictatorship to democracy as a result of such conflicts. Therefore, given such consequences it would only be appropriate to conclude the the Falklands War only led to further conflicts for Argentina however, the changes brought forth from such national conflicts, regardless of whether beneficial or detrimental, cannot be directly considered as consequences of the campaign.

Finally, as for the victor of the Falklands War, Britain, the consequences of the campaign was entirely positive. As matter of fact, the British forces were received in a grand and genuinely enthusiastic manner upon arriving at their homeland after the war. Such a reception is quite expected though since, as discussed beforehand, the war was not merely a means to lay claim to the Falklands for the British but is rather a symbol of preserving their honor and beliefs as well as establishing faith in the government. Aside from gaining the support of the masses and preserving such values, winning the Falklands War also brought forth other beneficial effects to the British. Among the most notable of such, is that the British forces gained further renown throughout the world in terms of its military capabilities. In particular, considering that the initial outlook regarding the chances of attaining victory in the war was not entirely positive, the British forces still managed to prove that winning the Falklands War is indeed possible as a matter of fact, even the Soviet Union acknowledged that the British military capability should never be underestimated as they have done so in past evaluation procedures. Hence, given such points, it may be concluded that the Falklands War indeed had highly diverse results and consequences depending upon the perspective or focus through which such outcomes are discussed.  

The influence of the post-campaign to subsequent defense policy and inter-service cooperation
The Falklands war, which was fought during the 1980s between Britain and Argentina in order to determine the ownership of the Falklands island and the island of South Georgia, has rendered a number of effects and influences to the defense policy and inter-service cooperation. Prior to the discussion of these effects, it is worth to mention that military men believe that the said war was a strong symbol of Britains need for out-of-power source and capabilities. Moreover, military men believe that Falklands war would have not been fulfilled if not because of the numerous aberrations that were made on the Nautical aspects of the country. These irregularities include the general British incapability to withdraw from overseas commitments that were actually not in direct accordance to the governmental laws and national programs of United Kingdom during that time. Theoretically, the UK force had the choice of not involving themselves from the confusion of the Falkland territorial features, just like what they did with the disinclined investment to the defence of the other nearby islands. Hence, it is believed by military men and other political people of that time that the Falklands war was a result of the domestic political unrest and governmental pressures in response to Argentine invasion. In like manner, the subsequent effect of this kind of mentality to the inter-service cooperation of Britain was to make the British people more, specially its military force, to avoid stark choices of defence view and territorial issues and to choose an over-all incrementalist approach. This effect can be further explained by looking at the dimensions of the Cold War in 1990 wherein the European forces were stricter on giving military defences and other nautical services to the ally countries.

With respect to the defence policy of the United Kingdom, it was further strengthened by the occurrence of the Falklands war because the government and the military departments focused more on the sharpening of its naval, aerial and land combats.  

Lessons learned from the Falklands war
Since the Falklands War is definitely among the most well discussed wars in recent times, it is of course expected that various lessons have been learned throughout the course of such a historic battle. In this sense, the lessons learned from a general perspective gained from the Falklands War may be accordingly divided into several categories. Specifically, the lessons may be classified as either in terms of the significance of strategy, the implications of advanced warfare technology, and the likelihood of successful negotiations throughout and after the Falklands War. In order to discuss such categories with sufficient depth and detail, it would be necessary to present an overview of each for clarification. In terms of the significance of strategy, lessons pertaining to how strategy may have altered the flow the course and outcome of the Falklands War would be emphasized. In this sense, the importance of winning a war through effective approaches and plans would be expounded upon. The next category, which pertains to advanced weaponry, is rather self explanatory. The Falklands War may in part be regarded as a showcase of how certain advances in weaponry may be applied for actual use to bring forth favorable and unexpected results. The third lesson pertains to the possibility of having successful negotiations throughout different points of the Falklands War, which in the case of the aforesaid war was rather pessimistic in terms of the outcome.

In terms of the lessons learned from the war in regarding strategy, as emphasized from previous points of discussion the war was mainly determined through excellent strategies designed and executed by the British. To explain, it is for a fact that the distance from the British mainland as well as key aspects such as air superiority were considerable obstacles that the British forces should surmount in order to at least increase the chances of attaining success. Despite such challenges, the British forces eventually gained victory in the Falklands War. Such success was attained, as experts point out, through the effective and relatively fast paced actions of the British forces in eliminating the defenses of the Argentine military and also in eliminating any possible superiority that the Argentine forces possess. Of course, it was only necessary that the British develop such effective strategies in order to prevent the considerable initial disadvantages from resulting into casualties, losses, and even defeat. Thus, a key lesson that may be gained from the analysis of the Falklands War is that there are cases wherein strategy may be of greater importance than key advantages in the battlefield and that strategy is also vital in gaining or maintaining such advantages. Of course though, it would be necessary to clarify the fact that even though the Argentine forces had the initial advantage in terms of number and access, the British forces albeit at a disadvantage were still of comparable level in terms of skill and technology.

In addition to lessons regarding strategy, the potential of advanced weaponry in winning a war was also another point of realization in which not only have Argentina and Britain learned of efficiency of such weaponry but the whole world as well. A most relevant example of such would be in terms of the cost-effectiveness of advanced weaponry in relation to destructive potential. Specifically, throughout the Falklands War, relatively low cost yet advanced missiles such as the Exocet, as utilized by the Argentine forces, were known to have eliminated destroyer-class British ships which cost several thousand times more than the missiles. As one may expect, other examples of the destructive capabilities of advanced weaponry and vehicles are present as well especially throughout the period wherein the British forces gained air based dominance. While at first the Argentine air forces dominated both air to air and air to surface aspects of combat, the British eventually gained advantages in such areas due to the presence of sidewinder missiles and the arrival of the Harrier VSTOL jets overcame the skill and number superiority of the Argentine forces.  Therefore, from the given points, it is clear that superiority in terms of military technology may prove to be a more significant aspect, in certain instances, than the relative skill and number of the army in determining both the progress and outcome of war.    

Lessons pertaining to the likelihood of successful negotiations throughout the course of conflict may also be derived from the Falklands War. Initially, before the actual war broke out or rather prior to the Argentine invasion of the Falklands, negotiations and talks as to how peace may be maintained by both Britain and Argentina have been conducted through the aid of the United Nations. As expected, such negotiations were not able to result in positive outcomes as the idea of a possible Falklands War still transitioned into reality and thus became part of world history. Throughout the course of the Falklands War though, the possibility to initiate in peaceful negotiations was not entirely eliminated. For one, the United Nations, especially the Security Council, still supported the suggestion that the Argentine forces should withdraw to prevent further violence in addition to such, the United States also attempted to play a role in establishing peace once more between the two warring nations.   However, even with the evident potential of cutting further losses neither Argentine nor Britain, considered to comply with suggested resolutions and agreements at the exact moment. Always, one of the aforementioned countries would not agree with the demands of the other. Hence, from such failed attempts at attaining compliance with resolutions for peace, it becomes apparent that having success with such resolutions is rather difficult to achieve especially if war has already began and both nations have the capability and willingness to continue military conflict so as to attain a profitable or valuable end.    

The future impact of the Falklands war in the present condition of UK and Argentina
It is apparent that despite having no current military conflict between Britain, or rather the United Kingdom and Argentina have not occurred ever since the conclusion of the Falklands War concerns was not entirely resolved. As a matter of fact, even though the British has firmly established the Falklands as part of their sovereignty, the Argentine government still continuously expresses claim to the islands. Such a point has been emphasized since it is vital in evaluating the future impact of the Falklands War to both the United Kingdom and Argentina and in proving that indeed conflict resolution regarding sovereignty has not been achieved. Initially, the Falklands War was a reflection of how both nations considered aspects such as defending their property, global peace, and of course preserving ideologies and honor, in establishing a reason as to why such a war is necessary for both nations, considerations regarding economic benefits to be gained from obtaining the Falklands have not been thought of as a significant reason to initiate war. From such, it is rather interesting to determine whether such reasons have been maintained throughout the decades that have passed since the war and since the British has gained complete control over the islands.

Prior to discussing the future impact of the Falklands War from a contemporary point of view, it would be essential to provide an overview of what the leaders of the United Kingdom perceived as the future impact of the war immediately after its conclusion. For one, change, specifically in terms of the various facets of the defense forces have been originally perceived as the foremost future impact from the outcome of the Falklands War to further expound, such changes in terms of the military forces have been perceived as necessary in meeting national security requirements. In this sense, after the conclusion of the Falklands War, the British government considered an improvement and redesign of the military structure as a necessary goal since various realizations regarding the significance of maintaining military superiority have been developed due to the war. To further provide detail regarding such a point, the British assumed that a focus in establishing a dominant military presence is vital for further enhancing both stability and peace in Britain but also throughout Europe. Of course, as already aforementioned, repercussions from such a decision are present especially in the form of potential of financial concerns. In relation to this, the British government instead considered such a decision as an opportunity in enhancing the economy as the number of jobs would be increased in effect. Hence, eventually developing a superior military force for purposes of security, despite facing a myriad of challenges, was key future impacts perceived during such times. Decades after the Falklands War though, it is only appropriate to anticipate that the future impacts may have significantly changed, not only for Britain but for Argentina as well.

Currently, the British have considered the possibility of gathering oil throughout various sites on the Falklands. To further expound, the British have estimated around 18 billion barrels to be found from the Falklands which literally translates into positive economic growth for both the United Kingdom and the inhabitants of Falkland Islands regardless of the specific scale of such growth. It is a generally known fact that oil is among the most valued resources throughout the world. In effect, such possibilities may further increase the chances of another significant dispute regarding claims to the island, despite the fact that as previously mentioned preceding concerns regarding such have not yet been appropriately resolved. If oil would indeed be retrieved from Falklands, then it is possible that Argentina would further increase its interest in claiming the Falklands. In fact, Argentina is already responding negatively to the possibility of the British being able to convert areas of the Falklands into oil drilling sites. To further explain, means so as to partly cripple the planned oil drilling operations have been initiated by Argentina such as withdrawing support for oil exploration with Britain in addition, Argentina has also established rules that would considerably limit the interaction of the oil firms in Argentina with the Falklands oil project.  

Given that such actions have already been done, it is evident that the will of Argentina to regain Falklands as part of Argentinean territory is more than just renewed claims written in paper. Among different countries, and according to the technical aspects of defining sovereignty, there is still a belief that various nations perceive the Falklands as still part of Argentina. In this sense, although public perception may often consider Falklands as a part of Britain, Argentina still has global support in pursuing their claim. However, it is most certain as well that the citizens of the Falklands are not entirely in support of the idea that Argentina would eventually reclaim the Falklands for aside from being mainly composed of individuals from British descent it is clear that the Falklands population prefer to stay under the British rule. Also, regardless of the manner in which the Argentine government would attempt to reclaim the Falklands, it would be rather expected that the British would not express complacency with such a matter. Considering that the British claim to the Falklands has been supposedly established through the outcome of the Falklands War then consistently defending the British claim to the Falklands would be as likely as the attempts of Argentina to reclaim it.

While the ordeal of establishing sovereignty is still a constant concern of both Argentina and Britain, support for more constructive outcomes have never been eliminated throughout the years as well. There have been initiatives or suggestions to share the Falklands among the two aforementioned nations for the benefit of each. Specifically, while the British would gain from the reduced need to maintain a significant military presence in the area, the Argentine government may profit from such a decision in terms of improving the stability of the Argentine economy. While various negotiations have been suggested to be considered by both the Argentine and the British governments, there is still a reluctance to comply with various terms and technicalities similar to what transpired throughout the Falklands War. In particular, while the Argentine government is currently more open to negotiations, the British government still firmly points out there is no doubt that the Falkland Islands is under British sovereignty. Therefore, while the Falklands War may have transpired and has been concluded decades ago, concerns over sovereignty has definitely not been resolved and given the increasing economic potential to the Falklands and the current global economic crisis, it would be most predictable that such concerns may bring forth continuous conflicts and disagreements between the two nations at present and in the future as well.

Conclusion
Though the British government has been considering nowadays the possession of the Falklands Islands sovereignty, Argentina is still profoundly expressing their claim to the island.  This means that eventhough both parties considered before that the war between them was already resolved, it can be deducted that the battle between the United Kingdom and Argentina for the possession to Falklands Islands is not yet put to its end. Nevertheless, though there is no clear manifestation of the resolution of the war between the two countries, there is one important thing that was left by the Falkland war not only to the people involved but also to the whole world. Falklands War, unlike any other war which was ignited for the economic benefit of the powerful countries, served as a reflection of how both nations tried to defend their property, maintain global peace and preserve ideologies and honor.