| Submit your comments on this article |
| International-UN-NGOs |
| The neighborhood bully |
| 2006-11-06 |
| The long fight for the rotating Latin American seat on the Security Council finally ended, as it was bound to, with Venezuela and Guatemala backing down in favor of a compromise candidate, Panama. Though Guatemala led by around 25 votes through most of the 47 ballots, it never approached the two-thirds General Assembly majority needed for a non- permanent Council seat. Panama is a respectable choice. What made this election noteworthy was that the main issue - in fact the sole issue - was the United States. Venezuela's claim to a seat was based on President Hugo Chávez's posturing as a resolute enemy of President George W. Bush; Guatemala was forced to fight a defensive battle against the fact that it was Washington's preferred candidate. Curiously, the longest-ever election process for a seat on the Security Council was also for the Latin American slot - a 155-round marathon in 1979 between Cuba and Colombia in which the United States was also the featured bad guy, and from which Mexico emerged the winner. The difference is that back then the Cold War was in full swing, and ideology determined what side you were on. Today, America's poor standing is based in considerable part on the Bush administration's proudly flaunted disdain for the opinion of the world, an attitude aptly represented in the person of John Bolton, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. That said, the fact that Guatemala handily out-polled Venezuela in all but one round (a tie) showed that a solid majority of the world's nations recognize Chávez for the grandstander he is and are not fooled by his anti-American bluster. All he succeeded in doing in the end was to deny Guatemala, a small country, its turn in the international limelight. Panama and Venezuela have been on the Security Council four times each, Guatemala never. That's pretty dismal for a self-styled champion of the little guy. |
| Posted by:ryuge |
| #6 And further pressure to prevent acquisition of force multipliers like Tankers and AWACs. |
| Posted by: john 2006-11-06 15:53 |
| #5 What is essential is preventing "MKI"izing of those Flankers (what India did). India's flankers are modified with French, Israeli and Indian made avionics. Pressure by the US can ensure that Hugo's pilots have to rely on the default Russian export grade equipment |
| Posted by: john 2006-11-06 15:51 |
| #4 Mojo- ..IF the Venezulelan Flanker drivers get the same amount and quality of training over the next few years as our guys do... ...and IF they dedicate the same amount of maintenance to their birds as we do... ...and IF they design, develop, and train to use a command and control system like ours... Then they will have a chance of dealing with our F-15s and -16s. Otherwise they will not survive their first encounter - assuming we allow their aircraft to even leave the ground. Capability and Ability are two very different things, just ask the commander of the Iraqi AF in 1991. Mike |
| Posted by: Mike Kozlowski 2006-11-06 13:45 |
| #3 I thought Israel was the neighborhood bully. Listen to the Bob Dylan song, and you'll hear what I mean. |
| Posted by: Eric Jablow 2006-11-06 13:17 |
| #2 The Sukhoi's a nice aircraft. F-15+ grade. But do they have anybody to fly them? |
| Posted by: mojo 2006-11-06 11:47 |
| #1 According to Mil forum > Venezuela has reactivated its FIGHTER SQUADRON 13 and intends to re-equip it wid Russian FLANKER aircraft. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2006-11-06 03:46 |