There is no evidence he is going to do any such thing.
The article (or, rather, the title of the article) on which that notion is based is shoddy clickbait claptrap.
Regarding which:
Now you are just making things up to suit you.
The editor and author
[1] of
the article you cited appear to have done the same thing.
The author of the article begins with the statement, "
Javier Milei has said that Argentina has non-negotiable' sovereignty over the Falkland Islands" [sic the apostrophe]. The title of the article (
'Argentina has non-negotiable sovereignty over the Falklands', country's new right-wing president Javier Milei declares) presents the author's statement as if it was a direct quote from Milei - yet nowhere in the article is any evidence of or support for this provided.
Just the opposite, in fact - as when the author himself writes, "
Milei's position could be seen as relatively conciliatory", or when Milei himself is quoted as saying, "
we have to make every effort to recover the islands through diplomatic channels". IOW: At best, the content of the article does not support the claim made in the title, and at worst, it actually contradicts it.
And then there's this:
But Diana Mondino also said that the will of the Falklanders themselves must be respected.
"In such a process we can’t leave out those people who live in the Islands, we must include the interests of people living in the Island," she said.
Who is Diana Mondino? Why are her thoughts relevant to the issue? The article is so incompetently written and edited that she is
never even identified (nor is she ever referred to again, either before or after those two sentences). It turns out Mondino is a
"Senior Economic Advisor" to Milei. I had to look that up myself because the so-called "journalist" and/or "editor" responsible for the article couldn't even be bothered to tell us. (This kind of thing is a hallmark of hasty, thoughtless, and arbitrary cut-and-paste "journalism".)
After that Mondino bit, there's a bland blurb from the Argentina government's official website, followed by a bunch of fluff that has nothing at all to do with the Falklands issue (and which appears to exist only for the sake of lazily padding out the article).
But even putting all that aside by ignoring that this was just another poorly written, slapdash assembly-line "article" with a provocative clickbait title (a title which failed to be warranted by or substantiated in the article's content), and granting - just for the sake of argument - that Milei did actually say, "Argentina has non-negotiable sovereignty over the Falklands" (or assuming, again
arguendo, that this is not an inaccurate or uncharitable mis-translation of something else he said), the assertion that "non-negotiable means force will be used if diplomacy fails" simply does not follow. It can easily and merely mean that Argentine sovereignty over the Falklands is not something Milei would be willing to trade as a concession in any diplomatic rapprochement with Britain. Furthermore, that sense of "non-negotiable" (again, assuming a correct and accurate translation) is the far more reasonable and to-be-expected understanding of the term, given that Argentina is obviously in no position whatsoever to forcibly assert its claim of "sovereignty" with even the faintest hope of any effectiveness (let alone success).
[1] Who may or may not be
the same person. (And if, as I suspect, they are the same, then that is yet another hallmark of poor practice.)
