Video:
Moscow Challenges The Monroe Doctrine, Russia’s Military Facilities in Latin
America
By South
Front
Global
Research, July 16, 2016
Region: Latin America & Caribbean, Russia and FSU
One
of the dogmas of US foreign policy is the so-called Monroe Doctrine dating back
to, surprisingly enough, President James Monroe who in 1823 said, in an address
before US Congress, that outside powers’ efforts to colonize or exploit Latin
American countries would be viewed as acts of aggression by the United States.
The sentence above pretty much encapsulates the average American’s
understanding of the doctrine.
What
is left unsaid is that the doctrine has no legal standing. It is not an
international treaty or agreement, and the US Congress has not granted the
Presidency a blanket authority to go to war against any external power
encroaching upon the US “exclusive preserve.” What is equally left unsaid is
Monroe’s quid pro quo: the US would likewise refrain from meddling in European
politics, which radically changes the actual meaning of the doctrine. It is not
merely an assertion of US dominance over a region, but rather a not
reciprocated offer of a sphere of influence division between the US and
European powers which actually came close to being codified in the form of the
UN Security Council which, by granting veto power to its five permanent
members, de facto divided the world into five spheres of influence.
Those
days of US restraint and respect for international treaties are long gone. On
the one hand, successive US administrations invoke various “open door” doctrines
in order to intervene in every corner of the planet, usually with dire
consequences, while at the same time seeking to preserve the Americas for
the US to exploit and colonize and deprive the sovereign states of that region
the right to choose its allies and economic partners. Naturally, from the
perspective of international law, such unilateral actions are untenable, and
accepting them would set the precedent of recognizing the US as a privileged
international actor, in effect making “American Exceptionalism” an
internationally acknowledged reality.
This
is the context in which Russian military installations in Latin America ought
to be viewed. From the military point of view, their presence is as, if not
more, important for political reasons than military ones.
These
installations include the Lurdes Radioelectronic Reconnaissance Center which
became operational in 1967, collecting intelligence for the GRU, KGB, and the
Soviet Navy. Decommissioned in 2002, the site could be made operational should
the circumstances require it, with Cuban government’s permission. At the moment
there are no plans to do so, however.
In
March 2016 the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs had stated that there are no
plans to reactivate Lurdes, ostensibly because the Russian Federation can
gather the necessary intelligence by other means. In actuality, the status of
Lurdes likely depends on the degree of US military aggressiveness in Eastern
Europe. Luckily at the moment NATO, for all its belligerent rhetoric, does not want
to go too far in provoking Russia, hence the “rotating” NATO troop presence
which would be politically less difficult to back out of than permanent bases.
While
the status of Lurdes is frozen, another project, this time in Nicaragua, is
moving forward. Russia is establishing a GLONASS navigation system station in
the country, a move that instantly led some in the US claim it is a
reconnaissance installation. The station is part of a larger package of
Russia-Nicaragua cooperation that also entails the provision of 50 T-72 tanks
to the country. In the preceding years, and most recently in 2013, Nicaragua
has been visited by Russian strategic bombers that also took the opportunity to
visit Venezuela.
Collectively,
these measures are relatively modest and are not comparable to US initiatives
in Eastern Europe. There is certainly no discussion of another “Cuban Missile
Crisis” type confrontation. Here one has to keep in mind that Russia is not the
only international actor interested in defying the US-imposed quarantine of
Latin America.
China
has similar interests for identical reasons, namely the need to respond to the
US encroachment of its positions around the South China Sea. China’s interest
in Latin America has also been evidenced by the discussions of a so-called
Nicaragua Canal that would offer an alternative to the US-controlled Panama
Canal, an initiative that Washington also strongly opposes. Therefore if the US
provocations toward both Russia and China continue, Latin America could very
easily become a catalyst for closer security cooperation between the two
countries.
The
original source of this article is South Front
Copyright
© South
Front, South Front,
2016
No comments:
Post a Comment