‘Winds of change’: How Milei is stirring Falklands claim amid Trump-UK spat 

Argentina’s President Javier Milei is capitalising on his country’s long-running claim to the Falkland Islands by coupling threats of sanctions over a major offshore oil project with lavish praise for Donald Trump, after the US president publicly questioned Washington’s position over the disputed UK territory.

Milei’s remarks come as relations between Trump and the UK government have deteriorated over the UK’s refusal to support US military action against Iran, and as the right-wing Milei increasingly positions Argentina as one of Washington’s closest ideological allies in Latin America.

The UK has administered the Falkland Islands, which Argentina calls Las Malvinas, since 1833. However, as the islands lie off its shores, Argentina claims sovereignty over them.

The US has traditionally supported the UK’s claim to the territory. But analysts say Trump’s willingness to question established US policy, even if mainly intended as leverage against London, could provide Milei with an opportunity to unite Argentinians around one of the country’s few enduring national causes.

The question of Argentina’s claim to the islands was raised again this week when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s son, Yair, accused the UK of hypocrisy and wrote on X in Spanish: “The Falkland Islands belong to Argentina.”

Here’s what we know.

What is the dispute over the Falkland Islands?

The Falklands are a self-governing British overseas territory in the South Atlantic, almost 13,000km (8,000 miles) from the UK.

Argentina says it inherited sovereignty over the islands from Spain in the 19th century. But Britain has administered the Falklands since 1833 and points both to that long presence and to the wishes of the islanders living there to justify its control. In a 2013 referendum, 1,513 of 1,517 voters backed remaining a British overseas territory.

The dispute erupted into war in 1982 when Argentina seized the islands.

The UK, under then-Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, sent a military force to retake the territory, with 74 days of fighting left 649 Argentine and 255 British service members dead.

What has Milei said now?

In a nationally televised speech on Thursday, Milei seized on Trump’s suggestion that Washington might reconsider its position on the islands, and heralded the “winds of change” he said were blowing in favour of Argentina’s claim to the Falkland Islands.

“The United States is considering this change in position because it knows that Argentina has a reliable partner, aligned with Western values, in a strategically important position that can be a valuable ally in the decades to come,” Milei said.

He also announced measures aimed at obstructing development of the Sea Lion oil project, about 220km (140 miles) north of the islands. The Sea Lion field sits in waters administered by the Falklands, and Argentina considers the project an illegal exploitation of resources in waters it claims as its own.

Rockhopper Exploration, a UK-based oil and gas exploration and production company with interests in the Falkland Islands, and Israel’s Navitas Petroleum are set to begin drilling in the coming months, with oil production expected to begin in 2028.

Milei also threatened tougher sanctions against companies involved in the project and announced new funding for a naval base in Tierra del Fuego, Argentina’s southernmost province, to strengthen the country’s military presence near the islands.

“Argentina will not stand idly by,” he said. “Any further advance on the Malvinas Islands will be considered a violation of our national security.”

“We can argue about my style. We can disagree over fiscal or exchange-rate policy,” Milei added. “But there are causes that rise above any political difference. The Malvinas is one of them.”

Trump has stopped short of outright endorsing Argentina’s claim to the islands, but he has repeatedly raised the possibility that Washington’s position on the islands could change.

In an interview with the right-wing GB News in the UK this week, Trump appeared to suggest he might not come to the UK’s aid if a conflict erupts with Argentina over the Falkland Islands.

He said the UK “was not there to help me” with the war with Iran.

“We didn’t need help, but I did ask NATO, and I asked your former leader, ‘Why didn’t you send a couple of ships?'”

Asked separately by the BBC if the longstanding US position on the UK’s claim to the Falklands was under review, Trump said: “I always review every position. That’s just one of many.”

Trump’s comments followed reports that US defence officials were considering using Washington’s position on the Falklands as leverage to pressure the UK to increase military spending, including the possibility of opposing UK sovereignty over the islands.

The idea has been around for some time. In April, a leaked Pentagon email proposed reviewing US support for the UK’s position on the Falklands as a way to pressure London over its refusal to support US military action against Iran.

Christoph Bluth, a professor at the University of Bradford in the UK, told Al Jazeera that the context is crucial.

“Trump has not endorsed Argentina’s sovereignty claim; he has merely said the US position is under review,” Bluth said.

He added that the idea appeared to have originated “inside the Pentagon as leverage against Britain over defence spending and its refusal to support US action against Iran, not from a reassessment of the Falklands dispute itself”.

How has the UK responded to all this?

The UK has reiterated its position. Defence Secretary Wes Streeting said the UK’s commitment to the islands was “unshakeable”, while a spokesperson for Prime Minister Andy Burnham said the islanders had a right to determine their own future and that the UK’s commitment was “unwavering”.

Matthew Benwell, a specialist on the Falklands and geopolitics, told Al Jazeera that Trump’s comments would cause unease in both London and Stanley, the Falklands capital, but cautioned against viewing them as a policy change.

“At this stage, these are just remarks from President Trump,” he said. Whether they lead to a change in the US sovereignty position or an explicit call for negotiations “remains to be seen”, he said, adding that such a shift looked unlikely for now.

How can Milei make this situation work in his favour?

Washington has historically recognised the UK’s de facto administration of the islands without formally taking a position on sovereignty.

That neutrality has mattered to London. Klaus Dodds, a professor at Royal Holloway, University of London, told Al Jazeera that the UK has traditionally been able to rely on having a closer relationship with Washington than Argentina does.

“Now that has changed,” he said. With Trump still in office and closely aligned with Milei, Dodds said the Argentinian president is likely to view the moment as an opportunity “to take advantage whenever and wherever he can”.

Milei has appeared repeatedly at pro-Trump events in the US, attended his second inauguration and been called Trump’s “favourite president”.

Last year, Trump authorised a $20bn financial lifeline package for Argentina, tying support to Milei’s party succeeding in legislative elections. After his La Libertad Avanza party won, Trump authorised additional imports of Argentinian beef to the US.

Eleonora Natale, an analyst focusing on Latin American politics, said any US openness towards Argentina on the Falklands had to be seen within that wider relationship.

“Milei has become one of Trump’s closest ideological allies in Latin America,” she told Al Jazeera, pointing to shared positions on security, migration and scepticism towards multilateral institutions.

Tilmann Altenberg, a reader in Hispanic Studies at Cardiff University, also cautioned against interpreting Trump’s remarks as a settled shift over sovereignty.

His comments, Altenberg said, were “first and foremost a reflection on the relationship between the US and the UK, rather than a deliberate shift in US policy” towards the islands.

But he said Milei may nevertheless see the current alignment as “a window of opportunity” to advance Argentina’s position and strengthen his hand ahead of the 2027 election.

Could US support actually affect the dispute?

Analysts said a genuine change in Washington’s position would be significant, but its practical effects would be limited.

Dodds said abandoning neutrality would mark a break with a “fundamental tenet of US policy post-1982” and could be read as Trump rewarding Milei while punishing the UK for refusing to support US operations against Iran.

Bluth said US backing could give Argentina greater international leverage and make companies more cautious about investing in oil projects around the Falklands.

But, he added, it “would not be a material change or oblige Britain to negotiate sovereignty”.

Buenos Aires cannot physically prevent production at the Sea Lion oil field, Bluth added, but it can use sanctions and legal pressure against companies involved in developing it.

Trump’s remarks may also have symbolic value in Argentina even before any formal US decision, Altenberg added. In Buenos Aires they “might be perceived as a sign that the sovereignty question could be tabled before the international community again soon”, he said.