A delegation of Argentine officials and lawyers traveled to Hamburg to request an interim measure before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea to halt the Sea Lion oil project, promoted by the United Kingdom in the Malvinas Islands. The government seeks to suspend activities related to the exploitation of the deposit while the dispute between the two countries is resolved.
The filing is taking place in parallel with an international arbitration that will have to examine the underlying claim. Speaking with Infobae a la Tarde, Nicolás Promanzio, an international relations specialist and defense expert, explained the scope of the Argentine strategy, the British arguments, and the consequences that a ruling favorable to Buenos Aires could have. He also analyzed Iran's decision to declare the Argentine Navy and Air Force terrorist organizations, in response to a measure by Javier Milei's government.
"We are talking about two different proceedings, or two different phases of the same matter, that are running in parallel," Promanzio explained about the procedures initiated by Argentina.
The first is an arbitration that will have to resolve the underlying dispute. According to him, it will be composed of five members: one appointed by each country and three others that the parties must agree upon. If they cannot reach an agreement, the appointment may be left to the Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.
Since that procedure still has to be comp…
AI Brief
Your highlights
A delegation of Argentine officials and lawyers traveled to Hamburg to request an injunction before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea to halt the Sea Lion oil project, promoted by the United Kingdom in the Malvinas Islands. The government seeks to suspend activities related to the exploitation of the oil field while the dispute between the two countries is being resolved. The filing runs in parallel with an international arbitration that will have to examine the underlying claim. In a conversation with Infobae a la Tarde, Nicolás Promanzio, an international relations specialist and defense expert, explained the scope of Argentina's strategy, the British arguments, and the consequences that a ruling favorable to Buenos Aires could have. He also analyzed Iran's decision to declare the Argentine Navy and Air Force terrorist organizations, in response to a measure by Javier Milei's government.
"We are talking about two separate proceedings, or two separate phases of the same matter, that are running in parallel," Promanzio explained about the procedures initiated by Argentina. The first is an arbitration that will have to resolve the underlying dispute. According to him, it will be composed of five members: one appointed by each country and three others that the parties must agree upon. If they cannot reach an agreement, the appointment may be left to the Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. Since that procedure has not yet been fully constituted, Argentina requested an interim measure to prevent the oil project from advancing while the main process unfolds.
Argentina requested an injunction before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea against the Sea Lion oil project in the Malvinas Islands.
The urgency of the filing is related to the project's timeline. Promanzio noted that Sea Lion includes the installation of 23 production wells, infrastructure that would begin to be deployed before the commercial extraction of oil, planned for 2028.
"Argentina has to prevent the islanders' per capita GDP from tripling when they start exploiting Malvinas oil," the specialist said.
The claim is based on the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The Argentine interpretation is that, while a dispute is being resolved, neither party may adopt unilateral measures that modify the existing situation, such as the exploitation of non-renewable natural resources.
"Unilaterally modifying — what is that? An exploitation that extracts non-renewable resources," Promanzio argued.
The specialist clarified that the filing does not seek to have the Law of the Sea Tribunal resolve the question of sovereignty over the islands, but rather to intervene on hydrocarbon activities. "Argentina is not bringing the underlying Malvinas question to the tribunal," he specified.
During the hearing in Hamburg, the United Kingdom questioned the body's jurisdiction and argued that Argentina is trying to introduce a sovereignty dispute into a forum that would not have jurisdiction to resolve it. London also argued that there is no urgency justifying the injunction, given that commercial production would not begin until 2028. The Argentine response points out that the installation of infrastructure will begin earlier and could generate consequences that are difficult to reverse.
An arbitration tribunal of five members will resolve the underlying territorial and maritime dispute between Argentina and the United Kingdom (Illustrative image Infobae)
"They tell you: there is no urgency if this is only starting in 2028. But what you're going to use starting in 2028, you're putting in place next year," Promanzio summarized.
The United Kingdom also noted that it has been carrying out exploration activities in the area since 1996. In response to that argument, the specialist distinguished the earlier exploratory work from the new development phase of the oil field. "What we say is that those were exploratory wells, not development wells," he explained.
The decision on the injunction could be known toward the end of November or early December, according to the estimates mentioned by Promanzio. A favorable ruling would be binding for both countries, which are parties to UNCLOS. However, the specialist warned that there is no international mechanism that guarantees by force compliance with judicial decisions. "There is no world police," he noted.
Possible British noncompliance could generate diplomatic, legal, and commercial consequences. Promanzio considered that noncompliance would carry a significant cost in terms of credibility and international trust. "It would be a very high cost to assume, especially in terms of trust and prestige," he assessed.
He also warned about the impact an injunction could have on the companies involved. Offshore operations require investments, insurance, and international suppliers, so an adverse decision could jeopardize the project's development. "It would be a level of distrust so high that it would make the project unviable in the short term," he said.
Iran declared the Argentine Navy and Air Force terrorist organizations, in response to Javier Milei's government's decision to include the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and the Quds Force in that same category. For Nicolás Promanzio, the measure constitutes mainly a formal reprisal and does not change the level of risk the country faces.
"This does not increase the risk of an attack by Iran on either the Air Force or the Navy. That same risk remains the same as before," he explained. Even so, he clarified that the threat is not nonexistent and ruled out that the declaration has activated new institutional mechanisms within the Iranian regime to plan operations against Argentine military installations.
The precedent dates back to March, when Milei's administration added the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to the Public Registry of Persons and Entities Linked to Terrorist Acts and their Financing (RePET). The measure enabled financial and operational restrictions against the organization and its members. The Argentine government based its decision on the Iranian force's record and on the judicial investigations into the attacks on the Israeli Embassy in 1992 and the AMIA in 1994. The Argentine judiciary attributed responsibility to Iran and Hezbollah for the attacks.
Tehran justified its response on the principle of reciprocity and called Buenos Aires's decision a "hostile act." Promanzio considered that the reaction should also be analyzed in light of Iran's current situation, after the attacks it suffered during the year and the outbreak of conflicts with several countries in the region.
The Iranian government classified the Argentine Navy and Air Force as terrorist organizations under the principle of reciprocity (Majid Asgaripour/WANA via REUTERS)
"We are at the back of the waiting list," he said, referring to the regime's current priorities. Therefore, he interpreted that the declaration against the Argentine forces responds more to a matter of reciprocity than to a decision to modify its military strategy toward Buenos Aires.
However, the specialist warned that the nature of the Iranian regime should not be underestimated. He explained that it is an Islamic theocracy, with a power structure and decision-making logic different from those of modern Western states. He also noted that Iran retains significant military capabilities, particularly in ballistic missiles. According to his analysis, although the attacks suffered during the year reduced part of its operational capacity, the country still has a considerable arsenal.
The distinction Promanzio drew is that the declaration against the Navy and Air Force does not, in itself, represent a new threat scenario for Argentina, although it does not eliminate the risks arising from the Iranian regime's capacity for action either.
– Infobae accompanies you every day on YouTube with interviews, analysis, and the most important news, in an accessible and dynamic format.
• From 7 to 9: Infobae al Amanecer: Nacho Giron, Luciana Rubinska, and Belén Escobar.
• From 9 to 12: Infobae a las Nueve: Gonzalo Sánchez, Tatiana Schapiro, Ramón Indart, and Cecilia Boufflet.
• From 12 to 15: Infobae al Mediodía: Maru Duffard, Andrei Serbin Pont, Fede Mayol, and Facundo Kablan.
• From 15 to 18: Infobae a la Tarde: Manu Jove, Maia Jastreblansky, and Paula Guardia Bourdin; rotating during the week: Marcos Shaw, Lara López Calvo, and Tomás Trapé.
• From 18 to 21: Infobae al Regreso: Gonzalo Aziz, Diego Iglesias, Malena de los Ríos, and Matías Barbería; rotating during the week: Gustavo Lazzari, Martín Tetaz, and Mica Mendelevich.
Follow us on our YouTube channel @infobae.