The Malvinas are a remote self-governing British Overseas Territory in the South Atlantic, situated about 300 miles from Argentina.
The position of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) regarding the sovereignty dispute over the Malvinas Islands can be analysed as the result of a convergence between the doctrinal principles of its foreign policy and its historical connection with the agendas of the Global South. Within this framework, Chinese support for Argentina’s position on the South Atlantic archipelago is articulated around recurring axes of Beijing’s diplomacy, among them territorial integrity and the principle of non-interference, which have been consistently present in its international projection since 1949.
Doctrinal Foundations of the PRC
The foreign policy of the People’s Republic of China has historically been structured around the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, enunciated in 1954, among which the territorial integrity of states occupies a central place. Within this framework, the Malvinas question is addressed by Chinese diplomacy as a sovereignty dispute linked to decolonisation processes, in line with the general principles of international law. In this regard, the British occupation of 1833 is referenced as the antecedent of a situation not yet resolved in terms of sovereignty.
This doctrinal framework also generates a notable functional symmetry with Beijing’s own sensitivities regarding Taiwan: just as China rejects any invocation of the principle of self-determination that might support the formal independence of the island, it also tends to question the applicability of that principle—invoked by the United Kingdom in relation to the island population—in cases where sovereignty claims are based on arguments of territorial and historical continuity.
Bilateral Antecedents and Regulatory Framework Before 1982
The establishment of diplomatic relations between Argentina and the People’s Republic of China in February 1972 initiated a relationship that, from its very beginnings, incorporated the Malvinas question as a point of convergence. In the context of the Cold War, bilateral rapprochement responded to partially differentiated logics: while Argentina sought to diversify its external relations, China aimed to expand its presence in Latin America following its recognition as the legitimate representative at the United Nations through General Assembly Resolution 2758 (1971), which included its incorporation into the Security Council. Within this framework, both parties found common ground around principles related to sovereignty, territorial integrity, and decolonisation processes. The PRC’s participation in the G77 contributed to reinforcing these convergences in the multilateral sphere.
The Chinese Position During the 1982 War
The outbreak of the armed conflict on April 2, 1982, placed the People’s Republic of China in a situation where its foreign policy guidelines regarding the rejection of the use of force coexisted with its stance on a sovereignty dispute framed within the debates on decolonisation. This situation was reflected in its abstention during the vote on April 3, 1982, on Security Council Resolution 502.
This abstention falls within the general framework of its international conduct, characterised by non-interference in internal affairs and reference to normative principles of the international system. In that context, the People’s Republic of China neither exercised its veto power nor supported the resolution. Subsequently, on October 4, 1982, it expressed its support for an initiative presented before the United Nations General Assembly aimed at resuming negotiations on the sovereignty question.
Consolidation of Post-War Support: From Rhetoric to Strategic Dimension
The post-war period marked the transition from declarative support toward an architecture of systematic backing, with concrete expressions at both the multilateral and bilateral levels. At the multilateral level, the PRC has consistently voted alongside the G77 on all resolutions of the Special Committee on Decolonization urging the United Kingdom to resume sovereignty negotiations, reaffirming that this support constitutes—as declared by the Vice Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, Jiang Shusheng, in December 2011—a position characterized by a high degree of continuity in Chinese foreign policy.
At the bilateral level, the strategic dimension of the relationship gained greater institutionalisation with the establishment of the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership between both states in 2014. In February 2022, on the occasion of the Beijing Winter Olympics, a high-level joint declaration was signed in which the People’s Republic of China reaffirmed its position of support for Argentina’s claim over the Malvinas Islands, while Argentina reiterated its adherence to the one-China principle.
Normative Convergences, Strategic Interests, and Future Conditions
The analysis of the People’s Republic of China’s position on the Malvinas question allows for the identification of a sustained presence of structural principles of its foreign policy, among which territorial integrity, non-interference in internal affairs, and an interpretation of the principle of self-determination in the context of sovereignty disputes stand out. Within this framework, the treatment of the question falls within broader patterns of Chinese international conduct, characterised by reference to norms of international law and to processes addressed within the United Nations framework. This continuity allows the Chinese position to be situated within a more general scheme of state behaviour, in which decisions on territorial disputes are articulated with long-term doctrinal principles and with their projection in the international system.
Title Image Courtesy: Naturetrek
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed by the author do not necessarily reflect the views of the Government of India and the Defence Research and Studies.
