C
omo in a trip on LSD, the United States embarked on a euphoric daydream: from the 1990s, with the fall of the USSR, the kingdom of the earth would be entirely theirs; his power would be incontestable and I would travel immersed in eternity. There would have been, since the turn of the century, annoying mishaps like Iraq, Kuwait, Somalia, Bosnia, Sudan, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, Yemen, Iran, Libya and more, but that’s why it has its well-fed soldiers who bring order by killing troublemakers on-site.
The United States applied itself thoroughly to the firm creation of its kingdom, at the end of the Second War, beginning with Europe. The ingredients are known: the american way of life It penetrated sharply into all areas of the cultures of the old continent: nearly 9,000 McDonald’s establishments; the volume of US cinema doubles that of the European Union (EU) in the European market; the gringo music industry predominates at ease. In addition, it holds it in deeper ways: the US has created 452 military installations in today’s EU; 219 from the Army, 55 from the Navy, and 180 from the Air Force. However, some libertarian allegations persisted from France and, deeper, although less mediatic, from Germany, which approached Russia through its foreign ministers, who built Germany’s dependence on Russian coal, gas and oil, especially Gerhard Schröder and Angela Merkel. Now Sweden and Finland happily enter the fold.
The war in Ukraine confirmed who is in control in the EU: NATO-EU. The anti-Russian German Ursula von der Leyen got her accounts wrong. She said that the sanctions on Russia would be the toughest in history and that little by little, they would destroy the industrial base of Russia
. It did not work out: the European Commission, which he chairs, was unable to give orders to its member states about what not to buy or sell; he ignored Germany and Italy who insisted that national jobs and prosperity be taken into account. Miscalculations abounded: against US wishes, the ruble rose 30 percent between April 6 and 30.
EU officials seem to know little about the war goals the US would be seeking: not just the defense of Ukraine, but the ultimate weakening of the Russian military. The US has directly taken control. It is laid bare by the trip of the US Secretaries of State and Defense to kyiv and the fact that, on the way back, they stopped at the US air base in Ramstein, Germany, where they brought together the defense ministers of 40 countries, who had been ordered to come forward to pledge support for Ukraine and unequivocal loyalty to the US. Remarkably, the meeting was not convened at NATO headquarters in Brussels, but at a US military facility. The EU is diligently heeding the US military or civil order, bearing much of the cost of the war, serving to contain Russia (and China for later), and thus fortify the capitalist kingdom of the West for the US and secondarily. blueprint for the EU.
It seems clear that the US also wants to contain Russia (and China) in Latin America (LA). These two countries have gone too far in building their relations with the subcontinent, according to the US. Creating that containment may be Biden’s as yet unstated purpose for the ninth Summit of the Americas. But, while the EU is diligent, there are voices in LA that express their own projects and paths, born of their historical circumstance, that show unexpected positions for the boss. They are not voices against the US, but in favor of projects close to the peoples of the subcontinent. LA requires more space to act internationally and more strength to do so. It must, therefore, act together and without exclusions.
There are hints of a new Latin Americanism that seeks to learn from the pink tide of the recent past. AMLO has pledged his prestige to this purpose, and Lucho Arce has done so by pawning the prestige of the Bolivian government. Lula da Silva is already on that route. And there may be a new partner with Petro Urrego in Colombia. From his small and worthy position, Gaston Browne, from Antigua and Barbuda, and Xiomara Castro, from Honduras, have joined. Chile and Argentina seem not to be in the internal condition to make that decision. The positions of their rulers are not clear. Peru does not get out of its internal mess.
The Summit of the Americas is what it is: a meeting of all the countries of the Americas. Not one with a host who decides who he invites. The first condition of sovereignty is that it be believed by the country that claims it. Does the US see a relationship between the excluded –Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua–, and its greatest cause today, which is the contention of Russia and China? Perhaps yes, but his argument about democracy is futility and nothing more. Your decision to exclude is an act of power. It is, therefore, an impulse to the formation of an increasingly sovereign Latin Americanism.
