Washington Steps Back

Published in El Mundo
(Colombia) on 05 December 2009
by Alfonso Monsalve Solorzano (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Adam Zimmerman. Edited by Amy Wong.
Based on U.S. government sources, as per the article, if what “The Economist”* contends about the military treaty between Colombia and Venezuela** is true – and there is no reason to doubt it – then the hypothesis that I defended in last Sunday’s article*** gains momentum: the United States is a bad ally, as proven by the history of its international relations and conflicts in which it has participated, and it is necessary for Colombia to take this into account in order to redesign its foreign policy.

The Obama administration is beginning to distance itself from the treaty, which, according to the sources mentioned, was made more to please President Uribe than for strategic reasons, because, the sources go on to say, the United States already has bases in Panama, El Salvador and Curacao, from which they could act in Venezuelan territory. In addition, even without the treaty, they say, the United States has had a presence in Colombia for years, including initiating the flyovers that have caused Chavez so much annoyance. In the eyes of Washington politicians, for the two reasons cited, the agreement was doubly unnecessary.

Some say that the United States did a favor for Uribe, who, fearful of the increase in Venezuelan military power, begged for the treaty to be signed in order to deter Venezuela without having to enter into an arms race – unwinnable because of the asymmetry in economic resources which oil produces in the latter country. The worst thing, add The Economist’s sources, is that the North American government did not foresee the consequences that this treaty would have in South America – neither did Uribe, by the way – and ended up creating distance with countries such as Brazil and Chile, which in some form were friends of Colombia.

It is common knowledge that when politicians from any country in the world, especially the United States, leak a story or informally release some information through the news media, it is because it is preparing public opinion for actions or policies that could not be implemented without advance work in manipulating public opinion. For the first cracks to appear in its resolve to maintain the military alliance, it was sufficient for Chavez to make threats and raise the tone of his aggression against Colombia and his rhetoric against the United States In the end, the U.S. can live without a democratic Colombia, but it cannot live, at least not now, without Venezuelan oil.

In the geopolitical chess game, Colombia is a pawn that could eventually be sacrificed in exchange for energy, and Chavez knows this. So he intensifies and accelerates his offensive strategy to destabilize our government and create conditions for the arrival of one of his henchmen to our government. He is supported by armed Colombian groups, whom he protects and strengthens, and by his domestic political allies. Thus, he intimidates the Colombian people, who, weary of a prolonged and systematic propaganda campaign and accompanied by a growing number of provocations that give the very real sense of imminent danger, may end up accepting that it is better to have a dictatorship in peace with the madman and under his direction than a democracy that is permanently besieged by internal and external forces.

I suppose that military experts are doing their job and coming up with strategies for the various scenarios that Colombia will experience in the near future. One of them will almost certainly be that of a democracy not only besieged by its enemies but abandoned to its fate by its allies. Chavez will be calculating what the United States reaction would be towards an attack on Colombia.

Interestingly, this is also the job of the Colombian military. In case the conclusion is that the U.S. considers the loss of the Colombian democracy acceptable, then time begins to be an important factor. Preparing to confront and win this hypothetical, but not improbable, conflict requires, in great measure, trained and experienced personnel, something that this country already possesses as a result of decades of internal conflict and technology. Regarding the latter, we are far from satisfying our own defense needs because of the enormous cost required, but it is precisely the accumulated experience and scientific and technological development achieved so far that permits one to think about accelerating the development of defense technologies, which I understand to exist in embryonic form, and do not require so many economic resources. It also requires finding allies in other parts of the world who can support us with technology at affordable prices.

*Translator's Note: The article entitled "Off Base" appeared in 05 December 2009 issue of "The Economist," describing the unintended negative consequences of a recent defense agreement between the USA and Colombia, which can be summed up in one sentence: "Despite frantic explanations, Colombia is now distanced from Brazil and Chile."

**Translator’s note: The treaty is between Colombia and the USA; this appears to be an error in the original text.

***"Last Sunday’s article” refers to "La semana internacional" by Alfonso Monsalve Solorzano in “El Mundo,” 29 November 2009. The article concludes with "Democracy in Colombia is at risk and the truth is we do not have a trustworthy ally to preserve it. We must restructure our strategy in order to obtain it. I will discuss this further in a future article."


PERIODICO EL MUNDO - Impresión artículo
Fecha de impresión: 2009/12/08
Fecha del artículo: 11:27 pm | 5 de Diciembre de 2009

Washington recula


Autor: Alfonso Monsalve Solórzano


Si lo que plantea The Economist, respaldado, según informa, en fuentes del gobierno norteamericano, sobre el tratado militar entre Colombia y Venezuela es cierto –y no habría razones para dudarlo- la hipótesis que defendí en el artículo del anterior domingo toma fuerza: Estados Unidos es un mal aliado, como lo prueba la historia de las relaciones internacionales y los conflictos en los que ese país ha participado, y es necesario para Colombia tener en cuenta esa constante para rediseñar su política exterior.
El gobierno de Obama comienza a distanciarse del tratado, que según las fuentes citadas se hizo más por complacer al presidente Uribe que por razones estratégicas, porque, continúan, ellos ya tienen bases en Panamá, el Salvador y Curazao, desde las cuales podrían actuar en territorio venezolano. Además, porque sin necesidad del tratado, dicen, desde hace años los Estados Unidos tienen presencia en Colombia y vuelan los aviones que tanto han molestado a Chávez. Desde la óptica de los funcionarios de Washington, y por las dos razones citadas, era un acuerdo doblemente innecesario.

Como quien dice, le hicieron a Uribe un favor, que temeroso del incremento del poderío militar venezolano rogó por la firma del tratado para disuadir a Venezuela sin tener que enfrentar una carrera armamentista que no podría ganar por la asimetría en recursos económicos que el petróleo produce en ese país. Lo peor, añaden las fuentes de The Economist, es que el gobierno del norte no previó las consecuencias que el tratado desataría en Suramérica, como, de paso, tampoco lo hizo Uribe, quien terminó distanciándose de países como Brasil y Chile, que de alguna manera han sido amigos de Colombia.

Se sabe que cuando funcionarios de cualquier país del mundo, pero especialmente de los Estados Unidos, filtran una noticia, o de manera informal, a través de los medios de comunicación, dejan caer una información, es porque están aclimatando la opinión pública para tomar medidas o llevar a cabo políticas que no pueden realizarse sin un previo trabajo de manipulación de dicha opinión. Bastó que Chávez amenazara y subiera el tono de sus agresiones contra Colombia y su retórica contra Estados Unidos, para que se presentaran las primeras grietas en su intención de mantener la alianza militar. Al fin y al cabo, EEUU puede vivir sin que Colombia sea una democracia pero no puede hacerlo, al menos por ahora, sin el petróleo venezolano.

En el ajedrez geopolítico, Colombia es un peón que, eventualmente, podría sacrificarse a cambio de energía, y eso lo sabe Chávez, que arrecia y acelera su estrategia ofensiva para desestabilizar a nuestro gobierno y crear condiciones para la llegada de un subalterno suyo a nuestro gobierno, apoyado en los grupos armados colombianos, a los cuales protege y fortalece, y en sus aliados en el país político, amedrentando a los colombianos, que cansados de un prolongado bombardeo propagandístico orquestado sistemáticamente, acompañado de un creciente número de provocaciones que den la sensación, por lo demás real, de peligro inminente, terminen por aceptar que es mejor una dictadura en paz con el energúmeno vecino y bajo su dirección, que una democracia permanentemente asediada desde los frentes externo e interno.

Me imagino que los expertos en defensa están haciendo su trabajo e ideando estrategias para los distintos escenarios que vivirá Colombia en un futuro cercano. Uno de ellos, será, casi sin duda, la de una democracia no sólo asediada por sus enemigos, sino abandonada a su suerte por sus aliados. Los cálculos de Chávez pasan por prever la reacción efectiva de los Estados Unidos frente a una agresión hacia Colombia.

Curiosamente, esos también deben ser los de los encargados de la defensa colombiana. En caso de que la conclusión sea que EEUU considere admisible la pérdida de la democracia colombiana, el tiempo comienza a ser un factor importante. Prepararse para enfrentar y ganar este hipotético pero no improbable conflicto requiere, en gran medida, de gente entrenada y con experiencia, algo que este país ya posee, por las décadas de confrontación interna, así como de tecnología. En ésta última estamos lejos de satisfacer las necesidades de defensa, por los enormes costos que se requieren; pero precisamente la experiencia acumulada y los desarrollos científicos y tecnológicos que el país ha alcanzado, permiten pensar en acelerar el desarrollo de tecnologías propias de defensa, que entiendo existen embrionariamente y que no requieren de tantos recursos económicos. Y, necesita también, buscar aliados en otras latitudes, que puedan apoyarnos en tecnología a precios accesibles.




This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Ireland: Donald Trump Could Be Swallowed Up by an Epstein Conspiracy He Helped Create

Thailand: Donald Trump Buys Time with Weapons for Kyiv

Turkey: Musk versus the Machine: Disrupting the 2-Party System

Germany: Trump Is Capable of Learning

Germany: Nerve-Wracking Back and Forth

Topics

Australia: Donald Trump Made MAGA a Promise on the Epstein Files. They Are Holding Him to It

Australia: What’s Behind Donald Trump’s Latest Crypto Adventure?

Ireland: Donald Trump Could Be Swallowed Up by an Epstein Conspiracy He Helped Create

China: Blind Faith in US ‘Security Commitments’ Is Short-Sighted

Thailand: Donald Trump Buys Time with Weapons for Kyiv

Sri Lanka: As Albanese Stands Tall, Let’s Stand by Her

Indonesia: Trump’s 19% Tariffs: How Should We Respond?

Turkey: Conflicting Messages to Syria: US Supports Integrity while Israel Attacks

Related Articles

Colombia: The End of the Dollar’s Reign?

Colombia : Trump’s Strategy against Maduro

Colombia: The ‘Toy’ Trump Gave to Musk

India: Will Fallout at Home, Abroad Restrain Trump Disruption?

Australia: Trump’s Tariff Tango Will Only Reinforce His View that Bullying Works