No matter whether being attacked as representing "settlers" by the Argentinean President Cristina Kirchner or being exalted as "a clear democratic expression of the islanders' wishes" by British Foreign Secretary William Hague, the referendum on Malvinas (known as the Falklands in the UK) sparked off a new round of debates and disputes.

Ever since Argentina was thoroughly defeated in the Malvinas War in 1982, leading to the subsequent collapse of its military junta, the South American country has never renounced its claim to the archipelago.

But three decades on, Argentina is still keeping the hope of negotiations open, while the UK remains tough. 

In fact, under several resolutions passed by the UN General Assembly calling for negotiations over the islands' future, the Argentinean government has put forward a few constructive plans, such as a lease-back idea similar to Hong Kong and the dispatch of a UN peacekeeping force on the islands.

Nevertheless, the UK, enraged by the formerly arrogant and rash Argentinean government, has made a sturdy commitment that it will never let go of the islands.

Yet in recent years, the warming-up between Argentina and the UK in terms of economy and the cooperation of natural resources has made it unnecessary to maintain a fierce grip. Argentina has realized and fulfilled the necessity of negotiation and the intervention of the international community, while the UK has not.

There may be other reasons why Argentina has raised the issue again. Perhaps it's a deflection strategy to distract the public from domestic recession. Calling for a peace talk is a correct choice which should be embraced by the UK as well. But the referendum held on the islands was not only a rebuff to Argentina's claim, but also complicated the situation.

The result of the referendum among the island residents was 99.99 percent in favor of remaining a territory of the UK, but Argentineans and other critics raised doubts about its legitimacy.

As an international, or at least a bilateral, issue, this referendum was never recognized by the international community or approved by the UN, much less Argentina.

Although wooed by the UK government in advance, the US distanced itself from this hot potato by announcing that it recognized "de facto UK administration" of the Malvinas, but "takes no position regarding sovereignty."

Other than that, China also declared its firm support for Argentina, a country founded by Spanish settlers who massacred or enslaved most of the local population, in its battle against colonialism.

Argentina has been forced into a disadvantageous position because the referendum, covered by democracy, has coated the islands with the hypocrisy of the so-called will of the people. Instead of shouting slogans and asking for more sympathy, Argentina should resort to practical actions.

Digging into the deep reason why the UK refuses peace talks, it is mostly because Argentina is relatively puny compared to the UK, especially politically and militarily.

Argentina's priority should be winning back the bargaining chips and forcing the UK to go back to the negotiating table.

Besides bracing for a long struggle, it is high time that Argentina asserts sovereignty by effective actions, such as cruising the islands and protecting Argentinean fishery around the area.

These moves, if handled properly, will not spark military conflicts, but offer Argentina a bigger say.

What's more, Argentina should make full use of the security concerns and anti-colonial tradition that Latin American countries share, and then the joint power of this area could make the UK, and even the US, reconsider their bottom line.

The article was compiled by Global Times reporter Liu Zhun based on an interview with Sun Hongbo, an associate research fellow at the Institute of Latin American Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. liuzhun@globaltimes.com.cn