This post might have had more resonance if it were written from the Falkland Islands, where a plebiscite was held a week ago, but a hostel in Istanbul will have to do.
Last Sunday, Falklanders were asked whether or not they wished their island - and home - to remain a British Overseas Territory. 99.8% of people voted 'yes'. Argentina's government immediately - actually, beforehand, preempting the result - announced the referendum to be 'invalid'.
In other words, the people of the Falklands seemingly do not have the same rights as other peoples in other nations. Whilst popular votes in Argentina are a democratic right and a cornerstone of government and society, the same purportedly cannot be said of the Falklands.
For Falklanders, a popular vote is declared 'invalid'. Let us be clear about this assertion. The government of Argentina is declaring that the entire population of a territory - the only inhabitants for two centuries and the only ones ever to have lived there for more than a generation - have no right to decide their own future.
Presumably, in their view, Argentina's government do hold that right. Thus what is being asserted is that the rights of an entire people are worth less than a neighbouring country's tenacious reiteration of a two-hundred-year-old claim which has never been conclusively verified one way or the other.
We could have a long discussion about those claims. I could cite some 17th century treaty; perhaps Argentine readers could cite some other one. This is ridiculous behaviour.
And I'm not suggesting that every Argentine takes the view of their government, any more than every Briton takes the view that we should close our borders or leave the EU. However, it is apparent that many do.
I would ask those Argentine readers - provided they are interested in justice, as opposed to nationalist flag-waving - to consider what they are really demanding. Are they actually asserting that Falkanders don't have the same rights as other peoples? Do they really expect, in 2013, to turn this island and its people into an Argentinian colony? Or, if they are not calling for colonialism, would they like to expel an entire population from their homes in order to adhere to a disputed, centuries-old agreement between a colonial power and a colonial administration which no longer exists as it did then?
If Argentina is the progressive nation it seems to be - I often wish Britain could be as open-minded - then Argentines need to ask themselves a serious question.
Are they calling for a return to colonialism? If not, are they calling for the expulsion of an entire people from their homes? If not, then what? Or is it possible that they haven't quite thought through the implications of what they are calling for at all?