« Vanity, Thy Name is Krauthammer
Quote Of The Day: On Obama, Al-Maliki And McCain »



From Argentina’s Clarin newspaper: Resurrected U.S. Fourth Fleet Creates Suspicion Across South America

July 19th, 2008
By WILLIAM KERN


Why has the United States decided to resurrect the U.S. Navy’s Fourth Fleet, which has been in mothballs since the 1950s? And why has it chosen to do so now?

People in South America have been debating these questions for months now. Here WORLDMEETS.US presents an analysis that has been quoted widely by Latin American newspapers and politicians like Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro since it was published June 30th by Argentine newspaper Clarin.

For Clarin, Telma Luzzani poses the question this way to an Argentine analyst, who gives his response:

“What reason could the United States have to send such a powerful naval force to a region at peace, without nuclear weapons, without conflict or any real military threats? “They’re never going to admit that it’s because of our natural resources, but it’s no coincidence that this decision comes just as a structural change is underway in the global economy, in which reserves of fresh water, food and energy resources (which our region has in abundance) have assumed such vital strategic value,” said Clarín Khatchik Der Ghougassian, specialist on security issues at the University of San Andrés [Argentina].”

Luzzani continues:

“The commander of the Navy of Brazil, Julio Moura Neto, made it clear that his country will not under any circumstances accept any American naval intervention in Brazilian waters. There is a leader, Hugo Chávez, who is making life complicated for them. And there is a country - Brazil - with plans for leadership that isn’t necessarily opposed to the U.S., but rather takes power away from it.”

And how does this fit into Washington’s overall plans? Luzzani quotes Mexican researcher Ana Esther Cecena:

“The first was economic: with neo-liberalism, the U.S. rearranged the use of natural resources to benefit large multinationals and other political and economic groups. Due to the failure of the Free Trade Area of the Americas, it was not entirely successful. The second was legislative. It had Latin American constitutions - which were very nationalist - changed to allow the entry of foreign private capital and the shrinking of state interference. The third was military: the U.S. pushed for the approval of security laws that in some cases allow the free movement of the FBI or the CIA on our territory.”

By Telma Luzzani

Translated By Douglas Myles Rasmussen

June 30, 2008

Argentina - Clarin - Original Article (Spanish)

No world power takes important decisions without there being great motives behind it. In April, the United States announced that tomorrow, July 1st, after 58 years of inactivity, the Fourth Fleet of it powerful Southern Command will again begin to patrol Latin American waters, this time under the command of Rear Admiral Joseph Kernan. The resume of Kernan, who until now has been the supreme commander of the Naval Special Warfare Command, is no less worrisome. The Marine belongs to the SEAL group, an elite commando unit with men selected for the most grueling special operations. They are prepared to act under the most exacting and adverse conditions, almost always intervening in isolation from their command or other units.

They operated in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos. The choice of Kernan for the Fourth Fleet, even the Pentagon admits, is highly unusual. It’s the first time that a SEAL has held such a post. What’s more, with this decision, the Southern Command has achieved the same level of importance as the Central Command, which operates the Fifth Fleet in the Persian Gulf.

What reason could the United States have, to send such a powerful naval force to a region at peace, without nuclear weapons, without conflict or any real military threats? “They’re never going to admit that it’s because of our natural resources, but it’s no coincidence that this decision comes just as a structural change is underway in the global economy, in which reserves of fresh water, food and energy resources (which our region has in abundance) have assumed such vital strategic value,” said Clarín Khatchik Der Ghougassian, specialist on security issues at the University of San Andrés [Argentina].


READ ON AT WORLDMEETS.US, along with continuing translated foreign press coverage of how the world perceives our nation.



This entry was posted on Saturday, July 19th, 2008 at 1:29 pm and is filed under Foreign Policy, You Tube, Military Affairs, Newspapers, Natural Disasters, Argentina, Water, Pentagon, Venezuela, Columnists, Energy, Military, Foreign Affairs, Latin America (Central/South), Americas - N & S, USA, Hugo Chavez, Foreign Politics, Environment. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Viewing 4 Comments

Trackbacks

close Reblog this comment
Powered by Disqus · Learn more
blog comments powered by Disqus

« Vanity, Thy Name is Krauthammer
Quote Of The Day: On Obama, Al-Maliki And McCain »

By posting comments on The Moderate Voice you are acknowledging and agreeing to the following general comments policy:

(1) The Moderate Voice's comments are hosted by Disqus (http://disqus.com). If your comment doesn't appear immediately, please be patient since it is an off-site system.

(2) All e-mail received from readers by The Moderate Voice is considered intended for publication unless otherwise indicated in the initial message from the writer. Please do not send us attachments unless you contact us and we agree to it.

(3)The Moderate Voice reserves the right to edit all e-mail and posted comments for content, clarity, and length.

(4) Our comment space is reserved for comments that relate to a post's topic. You should not reprint lengthy text from your own works or those of others, including news articles. You MAY link to them.

(5) Comments that are abusive, offensive, contain profane or racist material or violate the terms of service for this blog's host provider will be removed and the author(s) banned from future comments. Such comments also violate the very SPIRIT of this site -- which was created to encourage thoughtful and vigorous discussion among readers who may share differing viewpoints.

(6) All points of view are welcome on The Moderate Voice, with the following exceptions:

(a) Comments posted several times a day with the intent of dominating, re-directing or hijacking the thread by turning a discussion into the equivalent of a bitter shouting match.

(b) Comments posted several times a day that insult or call other commenters or blog writers names or repeatedly make the same point with the effect of or clear intent to annoy other commenters or blog writers.

(7) Name-calling, personal attacks, racist comments or use of profanity by any commenter, whether they are by persons who agree or disagree with the views expressed by The Moderate Voice will NOT be tolerated and will result in the deletion of the comment and the banning of the commenter's ISP address, without notice. In some cases a comment may be deleted and the writer will be given another chance. Commenters who virtually ASK The Moderate Voice to ban them by ignoring any warnings or daring TMV to ban them will quickly get their wish.

(8) Anonymous commenters should identify themselves with the same moniker, so readers know their comments are coming from a single individual. If they don't, they are subject to a banning.

(9)If we have problems with inappropriate or inflammatory comments from a commenter who it turns out gave a fake email address that person is subject to immediate banning.

(10) Quotes from material appearing on The Moderate Voice with attribution are allowed. Reprints are allowed only by permission from The Moderate Voice. You may request permission by e-mail.

(11) The Moderate Voice is a personal site. It is not the Government. It is NOT aligned with any political party. It is NOT promoting any specific candidate for office. It is not a public institution or a media organization. It is not a neutral site. It is intended to express and disseminate the authors' varying points of views. Writers on this weblog WILL take positions. It reserves the right to limit comments to those that, in its view, comport with its stated comment policy. Comments that do not comply are subject to deletion and banning of the author's ISP.

Disclaimer:

--Reading and posting comments at The Moderate Voice constitutes acknowledgment of and agreement to the terms outlined in this comment policy. This comment policy may be revised in part or in full at any time.

--All comments must comport with applicable state and federal laws. The Moderate Voice has no obigation to monitor, edit, censor, or take responsibility for comments. It may or may not act upon a violation of its comment policy once a suspected violation has been brought to its attention. Therefore, commenters are solely responsible for the content of their comments and should ensure that that their comments are lawful and fall within the stated guidelines of both The Moderate Voice and its hosting company.

--The Moderate Voice is not be responsible for injury or liability to any reader or commenter resulting from its own communications or those of commenters, that may be offensive, misleading, inaccurate, illegal, or otherwise unsuitable in the view of the reader. Readers and commenters further agree to indemnify and hold harmless The Moderate Voice from claims resulting from the use of any material appearing on The Moderate Voice which damages the reader, commenter or any other party.

--The Moderate Voice is not responsible for and might disagree with material posted in the comments section. While we strive for accuracy in our posts and DO correct errors, material posted by The Moderate Voice in its posts -- or those left by others in the comments section -- may or may not be accurate.

Read and Post at your own risk.