In 1982, the libertarian economist argued that the Argentine claim was superior to the British one and questioned the English presence
In his article “The Historical Claims to the Falklands”, published in May 1982, Rothbard referred to the work of legal historian Julius Goebel to reconstruct the history of the islands. He noted that France established a colony in 1764 and that, two years later, Spain acquired the settlement and placed the Falklands under the jurisdiction of the Viceroyalty of Buenos Aires.
Rothbard also pointed out that, after independence, Argentina claimed and exercised acts of possession over the islands, including sending a frigate in 1820 and establishing a colony under Luis Vernet. His analysis concluded that the Argentine position had greater historical and legal support than the British one.
The libertarian described the illegal occupation of 1833 as a British invasion and argued that Britain had forcibly expelled the Argentine authorities. He also questioned the self-determination argument used by London to justify its presence on the islands.
Rothbard returned to the Falklands in June 1982 with “More on the Falklands” and revisited the topic again in November-December of that year with “Falkland Followup”, maintaining his criticisms of British imperialism and the illegal presence of the United Kingdom in the archipelago.
Murray N. Rothbard, one of the leading intellectual figures of libertarian thought and President Javier Milei, publicly held a favorable position regarding Argentina's claim over the Falkland Islands in 1982 and harshly questioned the British presence in the archipelago.
In various articles published during the Falklands War in The Libertarian Forum, a magazine he directed, Rothbard analyzed the dispute from a historical, legal, and anti-imperialist perspective. In one of those texts, he stated that, according to international law, “the Argentine claims are far superior to the British ones”, and recalled that in 1833 Britain used force to expel the Argentine government that was exercising authority over the islands.
The economist also used a geographical argument to question the British presence. He pointed out that the Falklands are located just a few hundred miles from the Argentine coast, while the United Kingdom is about 8,000 miles away, and he made a strong statement against London: “What the hell are the Brits doing there?”. The original uses the English expression “what in blazes are the Brits doing there, anyway?”.
