The damning revelation comes after the Prime Minister pledged to “bring the UK closer to Europe” following a meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz earlier this month.

The Labour leader visited Berlin to ratify the 2025 Kensington Treaty — a sweeping security pact designed to deepen both nations’ relationship against hostile powers.

During the trip to the German capital, Mr Burnham confirmed he was open to Germany joining the Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) — an initiative between Britain, Italy and Japan to develop a cutting-edge new fighter jet.

Mr Burnham also told the Commons last week it would be a “dereliction of duty” to turn down a closer relationship with Brussels ahead of a summit with the bloc next month.

Meanwhile, Argentina continues an aggressive posture toward the Falklands, with Mr Milei warning the United Nations General Assembly in New York his nation could be forced to “take matters into our own hands”.

As he demanded control of the British territory, the Argentine leader stressed he did not “believe in military solutions” to serve his country’s “national cause”.

Nevertheless, Mr Milei has overseen significant military expansion since coming to power, including the recent delivery of 12 F-16 Fighting Falcon fighter jets from Denmark, with another 12 planes set to be shipped in 2028.

Earlier this month, Argentina’s top military chief said Buenos Aires was seeking to acquire three new hunter-killer submarines for its navy.

Admiral Marcelo Dalle Nogare, Chief of the Joint Staff of Argentina’s Armed Forces, revealed Germany and France had both stepped forward to provide the boats.

“Whichever of the two options we choose, they are among the best submarines in the world today,” he told the Rotary Club of Buenos Aires on October 7.

The competing bids are from France’s Naval Group, which has proposed its Scorpène submarines, and Germany’s ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems (TKMS), which is offering its Type 209NG design.

According to Admiral Dalle Nogare, Paris and Berlin had offered to finance the submarine deal in full, with Buenos Aires repaying in instalments.

Neither government has publicly confirmed the reported financing arrangements. GB News can confirm TKMS has submitted an offer to Buenos Aires “based on the Argentine Navy’s requirements”.

The Kiel-based company told the People’s Channel it had not yet received any official communication from the Argentinian government, but added: “A decision in principle regarding the implementation of the programme is expected to be made in 2026.”

Argentina has a history of operating German-built Type 209 submarines, including the ARA Salta and ARA San Luis, acquired in the 1970s.

During the 1982 Falklands War, San Luis patrolled and launched torpedo attacks against British warships but scored no hits. Despite technical faults, it evaded British anti-submarine forces and remained in service until 1997.

Admiral Dalle Nogare informed the Rotary Club the “final decision will ultimately be a geopolitical one, based on interests and, above all, financing” and expected the boats to be delivered six years after the contract is signed.

France’s Naval Group and Germany’s TKMS are central to their respective nations’ defence industries, exporting submarines and other hardware worldwide. TKMS’s British subsidiary, Atlas UK, provides submersible countermeasures to the Royal Navy.

The French state currently holds a controlling majority stake in Naval Group, owning 62.25 per cent of the company’s shares at the end of 2024.

Although Germany’s government does not own TKMS, it retains a central role in deciding whether to export German-made military equipment.

As such, a deal to supply Argentina with three advanced submarines would require authorisation from the relevant government.

The German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy, which plays a central role in Germany’s arms-export licensing system, declined to comment on any government guarantees or financial arrangements with Argentina.

While discussing the proposed submarine acquisition, Admiral Dalle Nogare made an ominous prediction about the Falkland Islands, according to Argentinian publication El Cronista.

“I’ve always said that I believe the Falklands will eventually be recovered on the day it is no longer economically feasible for the United Kingdom to maintain them,” he claimed.

The potential deal to bolster Argentina’s fleet with three advanced European submarines sparked major concern and calls for the UK Government to act.

“It is shocking that France and Germany – two of our supposed closest allies – are considering financing three new ‘hunter-killer’ submarines for Argentina,” Reform UK MP Andrew Rossindell told Britain’s News Channel.

He accused Britain’s European partners of “rewarding threats of aggression, changing the balance of power in the South Atlantic, and undermining the security of the Falkland Islands”.

“The Government should summon the ambassadors of France and Germany, and demand a full account of their actions,” demanded Mr Rossindell, who previously served on the Nato parliamentary assembly UK delegation.

Mr Rossindell lodged a written question to the Ministry of Defence on the topic. The backbencher received what he described as a “non-answer” and “politicking” from ministers.

Armed Forces Minister Louise Sandher-Jones replied the UK “regularly engages with our French and German allies on a range of issues”.

“The Ministry of Defence is committed to maintaining a defensive military presence in the South Atlantic to ensure the protection of the Falkland Islands,” she added.

Robert Midgley, a spokesman for the Friends of the British Overseas Territories, fumed: “The potential rearming of Argentina by Nato allies is a diplomatic failure of the British state.

“The UK Government has allowed the threat to the Falkland Islands to grow. For the past year, diplomatic staff across South America have sounded the alarm over Argentine lobbying efforts to gain allies to rally against the Falkland Islands.

“The fact is, the UK has failed to protect our Overseas Territories; the Armed Forces are spread thin and unable to react to threats at pace.

“As ever, self-determination comes first, and the population of the Falklands have repeatedly voted against any transfer of sovereignty, which should be respected.”

Former Army officer Henry Bolton warned Britain’s eroded domestic defence capabilities meant it lacked the leverage to caution allies against making such deals with hostile countries.

“We’re so reliant on other nations getting involved (in our defence), including the Germans, that we can’t afford to pull the plug (on a potential deal),” he argued.

The former UK Independence Party leader added if European allies supplied Buenos Aires with submarines, it would represent “a step up in terms of acting against our interests”.

“Culturally and historically for the UK, French naval sales to Argentina carry heavy resonance,” former naval officer Stuart Fawcett commented.

“Most notably, the Exocet missile strikes that sank HMS Sheffield and SS Atlantic Conveyor, contributing to 46 British deaths (in 1982).

“That history looms large in public memory as we attempt to build a modernised bilateral relationship.”

Mr Midgley also claimed adding three new submarines to Argentina’s fleet could quickly change the security dynamic in the South Atlantic.

“The current defences of the Falkland Islands are much more advanced than the current Argentine threat and capable of repelling it, but if Argentina continues to re-arm and develop, then it may outpace and have the ability to overwhelm the current British forces on the Falklands,” he said.

A robust British defence force is currently stationed on the Falklands, including a squadron of Typhoon combat jets, refuelling tankers and cargo aircraft.

Around 1,500 military personnel are stationed on the Falklands, supported by Typhoon fighter jets, ground-based air defences and the Royal Navy’s permanent South Atlantic patrol vessel, HMS Medway.

Earlier this month, a senior defence source told GB News the UK could defend and reinforce the Falklands against Argentine aggression.

“We are in a position where, with the benefit of some of the other overseas territories in the South Atlantic, not least Ascension Island, we would be able to reinforce through there if we had to, in much the same way Ascension was used in 1982,” they said.

However, defence experts have warned these defences are primarily focused on countering air and surface threats.

They argued three high-tech European-made Argentinian submarines could fundamentally alter Britain’s approach to protecting the Falklands.

Mr Bolton hinted Germany’s Type 209NG submarines could effectively hide in an ambush position and strike a critical blow against British ships in a hypothetical conflict with Buenos Aires.

“If the angle was right and it positioned itself correctly, we wouldn’t know about it until it hit something of ours… The first we’d know of it is a torpedo heading for the Queen Elizabeth,” he speculated, referencing one of the Royal Navy’s two flagship aircraft carriers.

Mr Bolton explained the UK could feasibly detect and destroy submarines like the Type 209NG in such a scenario, yet doing so would require “cost and resources that we frankly don’t have”.

“For the UK, this means monitoring these three boats 24/7, 365 days a year. Not only to know where they are, but to track them once they’ve gone under the surface,” Mr Fawcett concurred.

“From a naval operational perspective, ocean and subsea surveillance capabilities would become a strategic necessity in the South Atlantic.”

Mr Bolton argued the “game-changing” threat posed by a new Argentine submarine fleet meant the UK would need measures similar to those used to contain Russian incursions in the High North.

The MoD launched Atlantic Bastion in 2025, a hybrid naval and undersea-warfare programme to protect the UK from Moscow’s increased submarine and spy-vessel activity.

However, the Commons Defence Committee reported this week “glaring gaps” existed in Britain’s ability to protect the High North, with a “shockingly low availability” of countermeasures against Russian aggression.

“Our focus should (be) Nato’s northern flank and ideally not the Falklands,” Mr Bolton said. “So it’s a distraction from all that.”

To that end, he suggested the Argentinians were making a “fairly sensible calculation from their point of view”.

Mr Bolton said spiralling costs to defend the Falklands would “erode the political will to resist Argentina diplomatically”.

Even so, Mr Bolton detailed the Argentinian Navy would need years of training, maintenance and infrastructure construction before it could field a new submarine fleet.

Mr Fawcett provided an alternate view on the potential acquisition, saying: “(It) cannot be viewed purely through the lens of the Falklands conflict. Nobody wants a repeat of 1982.

“We need to assess how the West engages with emerging democratic powers in the Global South. Bringing them into the broader Western democratic alignment helps foster regional stability.

“Argentina, alongside Brazil and Chile, occupies a key role in regional stability, particularly as China seeks to expand its influence over South American maritime trade routes and infrastructure.

“Ultimately, if Argentina moves forward with modernising its naval force, any enabling US support or Western financial underwriting will almost certainly come attached to firm diplomatic assurances, security clauses, and non-aggression commitments regarding the Falkland Islands.”

Addressing Argentina’s potential new European submarine fleet, a Government spokesman said: “The Secretary of State and the wider Ministry of Defence regularly engage with our French and German allies on a range of issues.

“The Ministry of Defence is committed to maintaining a defensive military presence in the South Atlantic to ensure the protection of the Falkland Islands.

“Our defences in the South Atlantic are robust, consisting of air, land, and maritime forces with a strong permanent presence on the Falkland Islands.”

They added the suitability of the military presence on the Falklands is “under constant review”.

GB News has approached Naval Group, the French Government, the Argentine embassy, and its defence attaché in London for comment.

Falklands Threat: France and Germany Offer Submarines to Argentina as Britain Pursues EU Reset

Britain faces renewed questions about its defence strategy in the South Atlantic after reports that French and German defence manufacturers have offered to supply Argentina with a new fleet of submarines. The development has attracted attention in Westminster because it comes as the UK government seeks closer relations with European partners and Argentina continues to assert its claim to the Falkland Islands.

The reported proposals involve three new submarines intended to modernise Argentina’s ageing naval capabilities. France’s Naval Group has reportedly offered its Scorpène design, while Germany’s ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems has put forward its Type 209NG submarine. Argentina’s senior military leadership has described the competing options as advanced vessels, with financing arrangements potentially playing a decisive role in the final decision. <Cite refs={[“turn654423search0″,”turn654423search2”]} />

For Britain, the situation creates a diplomatic and strategic dilemma. France and Germany are close European partners, but their defence industries are also pursuing commercial opportunities with Argentina, a country whose sovereignty claim over the Falklands remains firmly opposed by the UK.

Why the submarine proposals matter

Submarines can significantly strengthen a country’s maritime capabilities. They can operate discreetly over long distances, gather intelligence and present a challenge to surface vessels. For a navy seeking to rebuild its capabilities, acquiring modern submarines can represent a major strategic investment.

Argentina’s submarine fleet has suffered from years of limited operational capability, making modernisation an important objective for its armed forces. A programme involving three new vessels would represent a substantial change, although ordering submarines does not immediately create a fully operational fleet.

Crews require extensive training, while submarines depend on specialised maintenance facilities, spare parts, weapons systems and long-term technical support. Building or acquiring these capabilities can take years. Reports surrounding the proposals have suggested that delivery could take approximately six years after a contract is signed. <Cite refs={[“turn654423search0″,”turn654423search1”]} />

Consequently, the offers do not mean Argentina is about to launch a military operation against the Falklands. They do, however, raise questions about the future balance of maritime capabilities in the South Atlantic and the long-term requirements of British defence planning.

The strategic significance would depend on the submarines eventually selected, their equipment, the number delivered and Argentina’s ability to operate them effectively.

The Falklands dispute remains unresolved

The Falkland Islands have been administered by Britain for generations, but Argentina continues to claim sovereignty over the territory. The dispute led to war in 1982, when Argentine forces occupied the islands and Britain sent a military task force to retake them.

The conflict resulted in the deaths of hundreds of British and Argentine service personnel, as well as three Falkland Islands civilians. Its legacy continues to influence public opinion and defence planning in both countries.

Today, the UK maintains a military presence on the islands, including air, land and maritime capabilities. The British government has repeatedly stated that the islanders’ right to determine their own future must be respected.

In Parliament, ministers have reaffirmed that the Falkland Islands will remain British for as long as the islanders wish. The Ministry of Defence has also said that the military presence in the South Atlantic is kept under constant review and that existing defences are considered appropriate. <Cite refs={[“turn654423search3″,”turn654423search12”]} />

That position reflects the principle of self-determination: the wishes of the people who live on the islands are central to Britain’s approach. Argentina, by contrast, maintains its own sovereignty claim and continues to seek international support for it.

The submarine proposals therefore enter an already sensitive diplomatic environment.

Javier Milei’s position and Argentina’s military ambitions

Argentina’s President Javier Milei has continued to advocate his country’s claim to the Falklands. His government has pursued a stronger military posture in some areas, including efforts to modernise equipment and rebuild capabilities that have deteriorated over time.

Milei has previously used forceful language about Argentina’s ambition to recover the islands. However, he has also indicated that he does not favour a military solution and has spoken about pursuing the national claim through diplomatic means. <Cite refs={[“turn654423search0″,”turn654423search2”]} />

These positions are important to distinguish. Assertive sovereignty rhetoric can increase tensions, but it does not in itself demonstrate that a military operation is planned.

A submarine procurement programme could serve several purposes, including restoring Argentina’s ability to patrol its maritime territory and protecting its wider interests in the South Atlantic. Such capabilities are not exclusively relevant to the Falklands dispute.

Nevertheless, the history of the region means that any substantial expansion of Argentina’s naval power will attract attention in Britain. The government will need to assess the practical implications without assuming that every defence purchase signals an imminent threat.

France and Germany face difficult questions

The involvement of French and German manufacturers has created an uncomfortable issue for British policymakers. Both countries are important partners in European security, and Britain has been seeking closer cooperation with European states on defence, trade and other strategic matters.

At the same time, defence exports are commercial and political decisions. Manufacturers may compete internationally for contracts, but the export of military equipment is subject to relevant government approvals and national rules.

The reports of submarine offers do not establish that either country has completed a sale or that Argentina has committed to purchasing a particular design. The final decision remains dependent on Argentina’s assessment of the competing proposals, financing and wider political considerations.

The reported financing offers are particularly significant because submarines are expensive to purchase and operate. If favourable financing is available, it could make a programme more achievable for Argentina. However, financing terms, delivery schedules and any conditions attached to the proposals would need to be confirmed before their full implications could be assessed.

For London, the issue highlights the complexity of European defence cooperation. The UK can pursue stronger relations with France and Germany while also raising concerns about arms exports that could affect its security interests.

Closer diplomatic relations do not remove the need to discuss disagreements openly.

Britain’s European reset comes under scrutiny

The timing has added a political dimension to the story. The British government has been seeking closer ties with European partners following years of strained relations after Brexit.

Supporters of a more cooperative relationship with the EU argue that Britain and its European neighbours share interests in security, economic resilience and defence technology. Greater cooperation could provide opportunities for joint projects, industrial investment and coordination in response to international challenges.

Critics, however, may question whether a closer relationship with European governments can always protect British interests when commercial or strategic priorities differ.

The submarine proposals provide an example of the tensions that can arise. France and Germany may view a potential Argentine contract through the lens of industrial policy and defence exports, while Britain considers the implications for the Falklands and its permanent military presence in the South Atlantic.

That does not necessarily mean the broader European relationship is failing. It demonstrates that partnerships between countries involve negotiation and occasional disagreements, even when they share many common objectives.

The practical test for the UK government will be whether it can communicate its concerns effectively while maintaining cooperation in areas where interests align.

Could new submarines change Britain’s defence calculations?

The possibility of a modern Argentine submarine fleet has prompted questions about whether Britain’s existing military arrangements would remain sufficient over the long term.

Submarines are difficult to detect and can complicate naval planning. A capable fleet could require Britain to consider additional surveillance, anti-submarine measures, intelligence gathering and coordination between air and maritime forces.

However, the impact should not be exaggerated. An acquisition programme would require years of implementation, and the eventual operational effectiveness of the submarines would depend on training, maintenance, readiness and the wider condition of Argentina’s armed forces.

Britain also maintains a permanent defence presence in the Falklands and has the ability to review and reinforce its posture as circumstances change. The government has stated that the protection of the islands remains a priority.

Defence planning must therefore balance preparation against the risk of overreacting to developments that have not yet produced an immediate military change.

A proportionate response would involve monitoring the procurement process, understanding the capabilities being offered and maintaining credible deterrence while continuing diplomatic engagement.

A diplomatic challenge rather than an immediate crisis

The submarine offers highlight the continuing importance of the Falklands dispute and the difficulty of separating defence policy from international diplomacy. They also show that Britain’s efforts to strengthen European relations will sometimes coincide with decisions by partners that raise concerns in London.

For Argentina, the proposals could provide an opportunity to rebuild its submarine capabilities after a long period of decline. For France and Germany, they represent potential defence-industrial contracts subject to the relevant approval processes. For Britain, they are a reason to assess future risks while reaffirming its position on the islands.

The central questions remain unresolved: which design Argentina will choose, whether a contract will be signed, what financing arrangements will apply and how the programme will affect the country’s operational capabilities.

Until those questions are answered, it would be premature to treat the offers as proof of an imminent military confrontation.

Nevertheless, the development is a reminder that Britain’s security responsibilities extend well beyond Europe. The government must maintain a credible defence of the Falklands while navigating relationships with allies whose commercial interests do not always align perfectly with British priorities.

Ultimately, the challenge is to combine clear deterrence with measured diplomacy. The future of the Falkland Islands remains tied to the wishes of their population, while the submarine proposals underline the need for Britain to remain attentive to developments in the South Atlantic—even as it seeks a closer partnership with Europe.