Dmitri Medvedev and Barack Obama, presidents of Russia and the United States, will discuss, during the official visit of the American president to Moscow from 6th to 8th July, measurements to achieve a mutual compromise on nuclear arms reduction, of no proliferation, and the possibility of working together in an antimissile defense.
However, analysts from the Latin-American Circle for International Studies (LACIS), a non-profit, non-governmental organization dedicated to analyze, investigate and exchange information with headquarters in Mexico City, have pointed out that nuclear disarmament, besides being a priority concern, it is not the only issue of concern for the world and particularly for Latin America.
Rick Rozoff, analyst from the Globalization Studies Centre, has stated that, after the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) 60th Anniversary Summit in early April, it has become clear that the United States and its European allies are granting themselves the prerogative of intervening in regional and internal affairs of any nation round the world as well as the exclusive right to employ military forces away from their own territory.
LACIS experts believe that NATO’s globalization is a growing reality. This strategic approach, launched from Washington, draws in not only Western Europe, besides some governments’ reluctance and reticence, but also casts an interventionist shadow over Latin America. Therefore Mexico’s border with USA has also become a border with NATO itself.
Regarding Latin America the aim is clear: establishing a military siege against any country that does not comply with the geopolitical and geostrategic guidelines of the United States. LACIS analysts have denounced that this is the underlying reason for the naval maneuvers named UNITAS Gold carried out back in April, with 15 warships, 2 submarines and more than a dozen planes from 11 countries, including Mexico for the first time, due to an initiative taken by Mexican president Felipe Calderón and supported by the Senate of the Republic. However the consequences and implication will be very negative for Mexico.
This trend is progressing in an alarming way: the government of the United States pointed out that the Mexican Army and the Mexican Security Agencies will take part in the first mayor tactical exercise of multinational forces against terrorism in USA from 27th to 31st July.
El Universal, a leading Mexican daily newspaper, published a report from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), whose function is to coordinate the response to natural disasters and terrorist attacks, stating that “this year the United States welcomes the participation of Australia, Canada, Mexico and the United Kingdom in the National Level Exercise 2009”.
NATO, under the aegis of the United States, is gradually approaching a geopolitical and geostrategic confrontation of global scope. If Russia, China, Iran or any other nation attempts to install a system of antimissile defense to counter United State and, even more, if such plan is started, it would be understandable and even justifiable if United States reacts.
Nonetheless, LACIS specialists believe that United State insists in besieging Russia with an antimissile defense system, which is without a doubt, according to military experts, an arm of close impact, because it does not only constitute a shield but a “training session to enter in action”. This siege “will enable a most efficient management of the military potential of the United State abroad”.
Military experts, mentioned by Noam Chomsky in a wide analysis of this issue, have explained that in the likelihood of United State becoming safe from any retaliation, it will achieve the ability and disposition “to shape the geopolitical and geostrategic framework of other world regions”. The antimissile defense “was not conceived just to defend United State but as an instrument of global domination”.
During a declaration to the National Security and Foreign Affairs Subcommittee of the House of Representatives of the USA, Joseph Cirincione, president of the Ploughshares Fund, an international organism of the civil society supporting initiatives to prevent the proliferation and use of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons, pronounced the following:
“In short, the ballistic missile threat today is limited and changing relatively slowly. There is every reason to believe that it can be addresses through diplomacy and measured by military preparedness. The most serious threats are the short-range missiles confronting our armed forces and some allies, not the long-rage missiles that are the focus of the bulk of the anti-ballistic missile budget”.
Moreover the antimissile defense system opens up the possibility for new threats of attacks in the Middle East and for further expansion of the United States military presence – and of NATO – in Latin American, as pressure tools against those governments who do not comply with the hegemonic commands of Washington. Therefore it raises the danger of a nuclear war with no victory for any one.
Chomsky reminds us that “more than half a century ago, Bertrand Russell and Albert Einstein launched an appeal to the people of the world, that they come to terms with the fact that we are facing a distinct, terrible and inevitable choice. Must we put an end to the human race, or is humanity willing to renounce war?”
To accept the supposed “system of antimissile defense” offsets the balance towards ending the human race in the near future.