In recent weeks, many observers of the Latin American military situation have detected what could be the beginning of a new arms race in the region. Brazilian President Luis Inacio "Lula" da Silva was photographed boarding the Tikuna, his country's first conventional, domestically built submarine. He used the opportunity to highlight his support for the Brazilian military.
Similarly, Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez has broadcast his intention to purchase Russian MiG fighter jets and Brazilian low-flying surveillance aircraft, and to expand military expenditures. He is doing so, perhaps, because of recent problems with Colombia. Even Chile, after a lengthy process of weighing its options, is still pondering whether to acquire a dozen American-built jet fighters or a joint Swedish-Brazilian alternative.
Is there a new arms race underway in Latin America? If so, is there any conceivable way it could help address the hemisphere's economic and social dilemmas?
Regional wars and border conflicts have existed since time immemorial in Latin America. There was the Chaco war and the Chilean-Bolivian conflagration in the nineteenth century, the so called "Soccer War" between Honduras and El Salvador in the 1960s, the clash between Ecuador and Peru in the 1980s, and Antarctic border disputes between Chile and Argentina that were finally settled in the early 1990s. But the main reason for heavy military spending in Latin America has always been chiefly domestic.
Either the military ran various countries, and gorged itself with hardware and troop increases, or weak civilian governments, terrified of military coups or blackmail, placated their armed forces with all sorts of unnecessary martial goodies. By international standards, arms spending in Latin America is low relative to GDP; but it is nonetheless excessive relative to the region's needs.
Today the situation is more complex. In Venezuela, keeping his former comrades in arms happy is obviously a concern for Chavez. But festering conflicts with his Colombian neighbors are also a factor, particularly in view of the constant accusations and suspicions that Chavez comforts and supports the FARC guerrillas in Colombia. High oil prices allow Venezuela to go on this military spending spree, and there seems little that anybody can do about it.
In Brazil, matters are somewhat different. Lula has been able to neatly dovetail his socialist roots with traditional Brazilian nationalism, which has always been strong in the country's armed forces. "O Brasil, pa's grande" is a universal slogan in South America's giant -- a country that has borders with nine neighbors and fears that its distant jungle frontiers cannot easily be patrolled.
Similar sentiments are apparent elsewhere in the region. But the question everywhere in Latin America is whether it would not be a better idea to implement former -- and perhaps future -- Costa Rican President Oscar Arias's idea of Latin American disarmament, to turn "spending on swords" into investments in ploughshares. Arias, the 1987 Nobel peace prize recipient, has a good reason for pushing this idea: his country has no standing army. Still, it is a bold initiative that should be revived in view of Latin America's incipient arms race.
Indeed, it could be the cornerstone of a new program for the next secretary-general of the Organization of American States, who is to be elected in the coming weeks. Obviously, I am rooting for the Mexican candidate, Foreign Minister Luis Ernesto Derbez. But whoever wins will need new ideas and initiatives to reinvigorate a dormant institution. Stopping Latin America's budding arms race is about as good an idea as there can be.
Jorge Castaneda is a former foreign minister of Mexico and currently a candidate for Mexico's presidency.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS