The kidnapping of president Evo Morales and the crisis of the international order
By Hugo Moldiz Mercado
The virtual kidnapping of Bolivian President Evo Morales on the 2nd of July, for about 15 hours, is too serious not to examine. What was the real nature of the operation?
The message it sends is one of imperialism, to a world that, for different conditions, seems to be returning to the times of primitive accumulation of capital (invasions, murders, looting and other extra-economic measures) and leaving behind the international order built in the aftermath of World War II.
These are episodes that become milestones in world history. The arrest and subsequent kidnapping of the president of Bolivia will be one of them. Never before has something like this happened.
It all started on Tuesday, 2nd July, when President Evo Morales was on his flight back to Bolivia after taking part in a Second Congress of Gas producing countries that took place in the Russian city of Moscow. This was at the same time that Edward Snowden was known to be hiding in Moscow airport. The technician from the CIA had carried out espionage programs, had revealed that the United States used to police the world.
The young contractor, who left Hong Kong on a commercial flight, has angered the US government and its secret services, as it has revealed information that accounts for unauthorised surveillance the US. Secrets were also revealed by Julian Assange, founder of WikiLeaks.
Edward Snowden announced that he would seek asylum in 21 countries, among which was that of Evo Morales, who said he would consider the case.
Then, following ‘information’ that the former American contractor was in the Air Force of Bolivia, the US played a military operation in direct complicity with four European countries. Portugal argued ‘technical reasons’ to deny the use of airspace, France and Italy were notified in mid-flight and Spain held the same position.
Morales and his small entourage were forced to land in the Austrian capital of Vienna, where he spent more than 15 hours before continuing their flight to Bolivia, via Brazil. The Austrian capital became a virtual prison for the indigenous leader and president of the Bolivia.
Despite the indignation which this has provoked in most of Latin America, we have to draw some preliminary conclusions.
First, what the United States and four European countries have shown is the decline of the international order since the end of World War II.
The highest expression of that international order is the United Nations, on the basis of the United Nations Declaration of January 1942, the Moscow Conference of 1943 and the San Francisco Conference of 1945, inaugurated a later stage to the Second World War with the aim of ensuring universal peace and coexistence.
Evo Morales’s arrest violated the United Nations Charter, international treaties and conventions as they ignored their basic human rights, the immunity he enjoys in his capacity as head of state and the right to go from one place to another passing by an intermediate (fifth freedom aviation). It has ignored the fundamental principles of public international law.
The world has experienced an intense “Cold War” between the United States and the Socialist bloc led by the USSR. Contrary to the thinking of many, the passage from one world to another opened a long period of US military invasions and its allies in various parts of the planet.
In all these imperial invasions, the central feature was the ignorance of the United Nations Charter, the Universal Declaration of human rights, international treaties and conventions. The cases of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya are examples.
Second, it has been confirmed that the United States and its NATO allies are developing a Broad Spectrum Domain Strategy.
The development of this type of design began after the attack on the twin towers in 2001 and strengthened during the NATO Summit in November 2010, when it formulated a new Strategic Concept for the Imperial forces can intervene anywhere in the world and for any reason. Expanding the influence of NATO, which has already landed in Latin America through Colombia.
It is therefore evident that on the 2nd of July, France, Italy, Spain and Portugal banned the use of their airspace in coordination, although the governments of these countries insist that decisions were made individually and have ruled out any possibility of having to explain and apologise.
Third, it is a sign of threat to the left and progressive governments of Latin America. For nearly 15 years US influence in the region has diminished.
The US pinpointed Evo Morales. Imperialism has used this criminal attack to send a message to the people and governments who raise the banners of independence, sovereignty and dignity. That is, the kidnapping of an indigenous president has not been a mistake, but an operation.
Fourth, it shows the use of covert methods by Washington to put pressure on governments sympathetic to their policies in Latin America, with the aim of reducing the level of growing influence of new bodies such as UNASUR, ALBA and CELAC.
Coincidence or not, all the presidents who missed the UNASUR meeting, except Rousseff who was dealing with the protests, they have free trade agreements with the United States and are part of the Pacific Alliance, to be precise, it is the return of the FTAA but with another name.
Fifth, it shows quite clearly that Europe has become the extension of the territory of the United States. Gone is the dream of presidents such as Charles De Gaulle and Olof Palme, who aimed for the European dream.
By signing this peaceful occupation of the USA, European countries have become, with the complicity of their states and governments, the colonies of imperialism.
Sixth, what the United States and its European allies have found is that Latin America is opposed to these actions, that the peoples and governments are far from intimidated by criminal actions as developed against President Evo Morales, what they do is pick up the flags of emancipation.
Republished from The Brazilian Post