Its publication is timed to mark the anniversary of when on January 3 1833, Britain took control of the islands from the Argentinians.

It reads: The Argentines on the Islands were expelled by the Royal Navy and the United Kingdom subsequently began a population implantation process similar to that applied to other territories under colonial rule."

But Prof Dodds said the history of the Islands was a lot more complicated than Kirchner would admit.

In the 1760s and 1770s you find a fundamentally messy history of the Falklands, involving the British, the French, the Spanish, and the nascent Argentine republic as well as a little Irish presence as well, he said.

When the president claims the British threw out the Argentines, I think thats a little bit of a rhetorical over-flourish. It wasnt as if there was an indigenous Argentine population there for centuries; far from it.

"The thing about the letter which I think is very telling is the notion that somehow Britain is the only colonial power. It is laughable, he told BBC Radio 4.

For much of the nineteenth century Argentina did one thing terribly well and that was to colonise other territories. It also, like Britain, makes a claim to the Antarctic and behaves in a colonial-like manner.

He said Mr Cameron should acknowledge the letter, but added: I frankly would not take it very seriously. If anything it is a sign of profound weakness and frustration.

Mrs Kirchner insisted her claim on the Islands was backed by her South American neighbours, but Prof Dodds said it had left Argentina isolated in the region. Chile runs a successful airway to the Falkland Islands, supporting trade and tourism.

This is inconvenient truth for the Argentine president. Argentina is not always the most-liked country in Latin America. It is perceived as a rather arrogant country and a country that is very capable of promoting its own interests when it suits. The frustration for her is she hasnt got more support from its neighbours.

Read this article:

Falkland Islands row: Argentina's understanding of history is 'laughable'