NationStates Jolt Archive


Arms race in Latin America?

Zilam
27-02-2008, 02:01
I saw this article (http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0116/p07s01-woam.html?page=1), and although it is a month old, I think it explores an interesting topic. Here is the article in full, followed by my own commentary:

Is Latin America heading for an arms race?
Recent increases in defense spending by Brazil and Venezuela are attracting observers' attention.


São Paulo, Brazil - Increased defense spending by Venezuela, Brazil, and Ecuador, coupled with significant arms purchases by Chile and Colombia, may mark the start of an arms race in South America – a region that hasn't seen a major war between nations in decades.

"There is a real risk of it escalating and it could become very dangerous," says Michael Shifter, the vice president of policy at the Inter-American Dialogue in Washington.

Concern has grown in the wake of recent purchases by Venezuela and Brazil. Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez, flush with oil money, has spent freely on attack and transport helicopters, Russian fighter planes, and 100,000 Kalashnikov rifles.

In neighboring Brazil, which, with half of Latin America's landmass and population, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva recently asked Congress to allocate 10.13 billion reais ($5.6 billion) – a 53 percent increase – for its 2008 military budget.

Those increases came after Chile invested significant sums earlier in the decade. Colombia has received hundreds of millions of dollars in US drug-war aid for military purchases. And now Ecuador is also spending more on weapons.

"I think that it is done in different places for different motivations," says Mr. Shifter, who testified before the US Congress last year on the implications of Venezuela's increased military spending. "[Mr.] Chávez is using this as part of mobilizing the country and thinking of a possible attack from the US. In Chile, it is much more about giving the armed forces what they want. Colombia spends because a lot of the [US] aid comes in the form of military equipment."

The problem, continues Shifter, is that "there is tremendous mistrust between countries ... if you don't know what your neighbors' intentions are, then it is natural is to build up as much as you can to prepare for any contingency."

Some South American nations worry about Chávez's ambitions and do not want him to gain a significant military edge.

"Brazil won't say it, but Chávez's build up is what has made it invest in its military," says Reserve Col. Geraldo Lesbat Cavagnari, coordinator of the Strategic Studies Group at Unicamp university in São Paulo.


Brazil and Venezuela already vie for political supremacy in South America with Chávez bringing together the radical leftists under his socialist banner and President Lula leading a more measured coalition of social democrats. At this point, the two leaders are friends and the two nations have no border quarrels or historical feuds that could flare up. But there are tensions between Venezuela and Colombia over gas-rich territorial waters and border areas where Colombia's FARC guerrillas are active. And Veneuzela has made claims on the western part of Guyana.

But few people believe Chávez is buying weapons in order to attack a neighbor. He has warned opponents of his Bolivian ally Evo Morales that "rifle and machine guns will thunder" if they try to topple President Morales but Venezuela still does not have a military machine capable of shock and awe, analysts said.

In addition, its army is one-third the size of Brazil's, and distinctly less experienced and battle hardened than neighboring Colombia's.

Any attempts to settle territorial claims on western Guyana would give both the US and Britain, a former colonial power, reasons to enter the fray.

Yet the thought of an unpredictable leader with modern weaponry concerns some of the continent's moderates. Moreover, many analysts say the region cannot afford to devote large amounts of money to weaponry. Poverty is still a major problem in most South American countries and that – along with infrastructure, justice, and education – is seen as a more worthy priority than submarines or fighter planes.

"An arms race on our continent will oblige us to depart from the path of giving priority to investments in social programs," says Jose Sarney, a Brazilian senator and a fierce critic of Chávez. "Having a military power on the continent is dangerous for both Brazil and... Latin America."

Nevertheless, no one wants to get left behind, especially Brazil. Investment in modern weaponry, analysts agree, is long overdue for South America's biggest nation.

Years of neglect have left much of Brazil's war machine obsolete or in disrepair. Meanwhile, its priorities have changed from worrying about Argentina in the south to protecting its jungle frontiers on the north and west and its territorial waters that are home to sizeable new finds of oil and gas.

"There are very real security concerns that are being neglected," says Martin Joyce, the South America defense analyst for Jane's. "One is the Amazon region where drug traffickers are operating with impunity. Secondly, we are also seeing an increased presence of Colombian guerrillas, and that requires mobility and that is why we see helicopters and military airlift high on the priority list. Then there is the new oil reserves. Part of the reason for the procurement of a nuclear submarine is because they said they need to protect those resources. Venezuela comes fairly low down the list.".

I find it interesting, mainly because I am so tired of hearing about what is or isn't going on in the Middle East. I think that an arms race in Latin America can be both dangerous and beneficial. The dangerous part is obvious, but it can be beneficial in the same way that the Cold War was beneficial to the US. There would be increased spending on technologies to out do neighbors, which can benefit the economies of those nations. It also would refocus American attention on the region, since its the back yard more or less of America. This would also be beneficial because A) It keeps American interest in the West and not bothering other people, and B) It would mean that more money would be coming from America into the Latin American nations. We could return to a policy of "good neighbors".

So, what do you think the outcomes of a Latin American arms race be? What would be good? Bad? Do you even care? :p
Non Aligned States
27-02-2008, 02:20
So, what do you think the outcomes of a Latin American arms race be? What would be good? Bad? Do you even care? :p

Until they get nuclear arms, probably a lot of posturing, a border skirmish or two to test out their new toys, compounded human misery for everyone living on the borders, culminating in a nuclear scrabble standoff. :p
Marrakech II
27-02-2008, 02:29
Until they get nuclear arms, probably a lot of posturing, a border skirmish or two to test out their new toys, compounded human misery for everyone living on the borders, culminating in a nuclear scrabble standoff. :p

Who could really develop a nuclear weapon in S America outside of maybe Brazil?
Zilam
27-02-2008, 02:33
Who could really develop a nuclear weapon in S America outside of maybe Brazil?

Wait, I thought Brazil did have a nuclear weapon? Or maybe it was just actively seeking one out?
Marrakech II
27-02-2008, 02:36
Wait, I thought Brazil did have a nuclear weapon? Or maybe it was just actively seeking one out?

I think they started a program but don't think anything came of it. Unless they went by way of South Africa and tested one in secret?

Here is the info:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/brazil/nuke.htm
Zilam
27-02-2008, 02:40
I think they started a program but don't think anything came of it. Unless they went by way of South Africa and tested one in secret?

Here is the info:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/brazil/nuke.htm

Yeah, I just googled it, and was about to post that same site. :)
The Atreidond Islands
27-02-2008, 03:18
I don't think that they will use nukes (Whether or not they have or get them.) I think that if Brazil bombs/attacks/sabotages/ Venezuala's oil, then we'll have another oil crisis. But these kind of things can go any way, look at history.
Andaluciae
27-02-2008, 03:40
Likely, the impact of a Latin arms race will not be felt for quite some time, but in the medium-term it could have dramatic consequences, especially if Chavez succeeds in polarizing the region along ideological lines.
Delator
27-02-2008, 09:09
So, what do you think the outcomes of a Latin American arms race be? What would be good? Bad? Do you even care? :p

Well, first of all...

http://www.exile.ru/articles/detail.php?ARTICLE_ID=8319&IBLOCK_ID=35

...Chavez is not a real threat to any of his neighbors.

Brazil has the money and the need for improvements in it's military, especially it's navy and air-force. They especially need naval improvements, since they recently found new off-shore fossil fuel deposits, and they're going to need to be more assertive in defending their own oceanic trade routes.

I think the U.S ought to consider selling Brazil the U.S.S. Kitty Hawk, the last conventionally powered carrier in the Navy, which is due to be decomissioned next year. It would let Brazil continue to use their current naval-air arm of A-4 Skyhawks. It would also let us sell of some old F-14s. F-18's, and EA-6's, all of which have been retired or are slated to be replaced. It would be of immense help to Brazil, since they won't have to make significant investments of their own, and it would allow them to focus on other areas of need. It might even earn the U.S. a little preferential treatment when those fossil fuel deposits are finally made available.

A little back-scratching between neighbors rarely hurts.
Andaras
27-02-2008, 09:42
Dangerous to whom? To US imperialism and it's bourgeois cronies on the continent? If that's the only argument then I fully support such armaments.
Kilobugya
27-02-2008, 09:43
I don't know about Brasil or Ecuador, but for Venezuela, media pointing an "increase of military spendings" usually forget three facts :

- Chávez lowered military spending when he arrived in power, in 1998, because the finance of the government were very bad, he later on re-increased them when the oil price went up, but most of this increase was only to compensate for the previous shrinking ;

- Venezuela army was mostly equipped with US material (especially in aircrafts), and the USA put a ban on sale of military pieces to Venezuela, so they cannot fix the aircrafts, ... anymore, so instead of fixing the ones they have, they are forced to buy plain new ones (to Russia mostly), just to maintain their capacity, which is of course more expensive ;

- Venezuela has a 2000 km long border with Columbia, which has a much stronger military than they have, and more important, which is the siege of a civil war, with "extreme-right" militias and "extreme-left" guerilla both committing crimes, and both not really kin at respecting borders.
Risottia
27-02-2008, 09:53
Until they get nuclear arms, probably a lot of posturing, a border skirmish or two to test out their new toys, compounded human misery for everyone living on the borders, culminating in a nuclear scrabble standoff. :p

Falkland war 2. Some people never learn.
Dododecapod
27-02-2008, 11:14
Falkland war 2. Some people never learn.

But in this case the "some people" doesn't include the Argentinians. Any military action against the Falklands would be exceedingly unpopular.

Brazil needed to modernize it's military; Venezuela doing the same has given the government there a good excuse to do so. Unless Hugo Chavez starts talking lebensraum, which I seriously doubt, I think this is just going to be business as usual.
Andaras
27-02-2008, 11:36
I don't know about Brasil or Ecuador, but for Venezuela, media pointing an "increase of military spendings" usually forget three facts :

- Chávez lowered military spending when he arrived in power, in 1998, because the finance of the government were very bad, he later on re-increased them when the oil price went up, but most of this increase was only to compensate for the previous shrinking ;

- Venezuela army was mostly equipped with US material (especially in aircrafts), and the USA put a ban on sale of military pieces to Venezuela, so they cannot fix the aircrafts, ... anymore, so instead of fixing the ones they have, they are forced to buy plain new ones (to Russia mostly), just to maintain their capacity, which is of course more expensive ;

- Venezuela has a 2000 km long border with Columbia, which has a much stronger military than they have, and more important, which is the siege of a civil war, with "extreme-right" militias and "extreme-left" guerilla both committing crimes, and both not really kin at respecting borders.

Venezuela doesn't have to directly engage Colombia to cause problems, it could easily cause hell for the government by channeling Russian arms, especially anti-tank and aircraft weapons, to FARC.
St Edmund
27-02-2008, 12:35
Weren't there some armed clashes during a (revival of a long-running) border dispute between Ecuador and Peru as recently as the 1990s?
Andaluciae
27-02-2008, 15:00
Dangerous to whom? To US imperialism and it's bourgeois cronies on the continent? If that's the only argument then I fully support such armaments.

Dangerous to the people of South America, you nitwit.
Andaluciae
03-03-2008, 00:30
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7274038.stm
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/americas/03/02/chavez.colombia/index.html

Speaking of regional hostility...:rolleyes:

Oh, I love it how Chavez wears a military uniform so much...that doesn't give the aura of a dictatorial strongman at all.