What’s Latin America’s Role In A World On The Brink Of Nuclear War?
The China Academy recently hosted a conversation between University of Chicago professor John Mearsheimer and the philosopher and politologist Alexander Dugin. A World on the Brink of Nuclear War was the topic of the discussion.
Camila Escalante, Editor of Kawsachun News, was an invited member of the press and posed the following question:
Camila: The U.S. and other NATO governments have attempted to rally support for their wars in Latin America and the Caribbean. They’ve made visits and sent the SOUTHCOM commander to hold meetings with Latin American governments to try and convince them to purchase U.S. weapons. They’re also trying to get their support for Israel’s wars. Can either of you comment on the role of Latin America in these conflicts, particularly on the role of the friends of the incoming U.S. president, Donald Trump, such as Argentina’s president Javier Milei and El Salvador’s president Nayib Bukele. Both are friends with the Republicans and Trump. These leaders seem to be antagonistic towards the multipolar project and anyone promoting multipolarity, while demonstrating hostility towards the likes of Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua.
John Mearsheimer: “I don’t think Latin America matters that much in the Ukraine conflict or in the Middle East. There’s no question that when you talk about world opinion, that matters and the U.S. cares greatly about what world opinion says regarding Ukraine. The U.S. wants as many countries as possible to be pro-Ukraine, pro-western, and anti-Russian. In the Middle East, the U.S.wants all sorts of countries around the world to support Israel unconditionally the way the U.S. supports Israel. So in terms of world opinion we care about Latin America but the fact is that the U.S. does not have a lot of influence in terms of how Latin American leaders and their public think about these conflicts. So we have this situation where in the west there is widespread support for America’s position in Ukraine and for America’s position in the Middle East. But outside the west, that’s not true, and when you talk about outside the west you’re talking about Latin America. You’re talking about Central and South America. The United States has not been successful in getting much support from Latin America in Ukraine or in the Middle East. In that sense, Latin America matters and its been a problem of sorts for the US but if you look at sort of power politics, if you look at the nitty-gritty of what’s going on in places like Ukraine and places like the Middle East, Latin America just does not matter very much because Latin American countries, to be perfectly frank, don’t have a lot of power to throw around on the world stage. Therefore, they don’t matter that much in terms of the nitty-gritty of these conflicts. But they do matter in terms of public opinion.
Alexander Dugin: “I think that’s on the balance of power or calculation on measuring of the real potential, Mr. Mearsheimer is totally right, once more. So, I don’t think in reality that Latin America (doesn’t) matter in the Middle East or in the Ukrainian conflicts. But I think that Latin America matters in terms of multipolarity. I think that is the clear conflict between two world visions trying to save the unipolar moment, to prolong it. To keep it alive. And that means that nothing in terms of a pole would ever appear in Central or South America. So that is the preventive strategy. I think Milei and the other pro-US leaders are a preventive weapon against the possibility, the virtuality of creation of something like a consensus among Latin America countries. I think we have two…versions of the possible unification of integration of Latin American countries that (are) leftist, represented by Venezuela of Chávez, by Cuba, by Nicaragua. But, as well, we have the very interesting conservative version of Juan Perón, Getulio Vargas in Brazil. So we could aspire, or we could call that one, that it will be the moment of Latin America, a Latin America becoming the independent pole but in order to get there we need to unite (and) overcome many, many local contradictions of a post-colonial nature. But I think in the present world that is almost not (an) important factor in the context of power politics on the global scale. And I agree that the influence of Latin America in the Middle East conflict or in the Ukraine is very, very small. But, in the future, I think that Latin America could play a very important role in creation or facilitating or helping the multipolar world system to be established or to sabotage it. So I think that Brazil is trying, now, to converge, to invest somehow in this multipolarity being present in BRICs and Milei tries to sabotage this multipolarity. That is clear but I think that is the next round of the global game or the balance between emerging multipolarity and declining unipolarity. It is the next round and it is of less importance, obviously, than what is going on now in the Middle East and Ukraine and what will happen, I think soon, in Asia, with (the) Taiwan problem, and the Pacific Ocean. And Africa and Latin America will go after. You have your role to play in this multipolarity but I don’t think that today, in the balance of power, Latin America really matters. I think that maybe, including, the global opinion of Latin American population as well doesn’t matter too much to the West. We’re very happy and very grateful for Latin America to support our will to establish (a) multipolar world order. In that sense we are grateful. And for us it matters. But in the real balance of power, I would rather agree with Mr. Mearsheimer, that it is (a) secondary element and argument.