Brazil rejects any idea of NATO interfering in the South Atlantic
Brazil rejects any interference of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO, in the South Atlantic or any idea of a similar organization at South Atlantic level, reports “O Estado de Sao Paulo”.
Defence minister Nelson Jobim who has been meeting with US officials made the issue “most clear” to his US counterparts, particularly any interference in the South Atlantic.
“The South Atlantic has security questions which are very different from those in the North Atlantic”, Jobim is alleged to have argued.
The newspaper also reports that Mr Jobim expressed fears that an expanded area of action for NATO, speared by the undisputed power of the United States could lead to “multilateral war actions without the support from the UN Security Council”.
In few words the message from Brazil to US officials was that “NATO can’t substitute the United Nations”.
Jobim had already anticipated those fears last September during a conference at Portugal’s National Defence Institute, with the participation of representatives from Europe, Latin America and the United States.
At the time Jobim argued that a literal interpretation of NATO’s role as an “Atlantic organization” could open the doors for intervention in any part of the world, under different pretexts.
The Brazilian minister visited Washington where he met with the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano “to reaffirm the shared commitment of the United States and Brazil to strengthening the global aviation system”, according to an official US report.
The US and Brazil signed a Joint Statement of Intent on aviation security between DHS, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and the Empresa Brasileira de Infra-Estrutura Aeroportuária (INFRAERO), a state-owned company which operates under the Brazilian Ministry of Defense.
“Together, the international community is forging a 21st century international aviation security framework that will make air travel safer and more secure than ever before,” said Secretary Napolitano. “I look forward to working closely my Brazilian counterparts to continue our unprecedented collaboration to better protect the international aviation system.”
Secretary Napolitano also applauded Brazil’s support for the International Civil Aviation Organization’s (ICAO) recent adoption of a historic Declaration on Aviation Security—forging a new foundation for aviation security that will better protect the entire global aviation system from evolving terrorist threats.
Suggested Stories
-
May 25th 2012
Three former presidents admit Mercosur has failed and has Uruguay ‘trapped’
-
May 22nd 2012
Argentina proposal to increase Mercosur common external tariff from 22% to 35%
-
May 22nd 2012
Argentine frozen chips retained in the border because of trade dispute with Brazil
-
May 22nd 2012
Brazil announces measures to boost sales of vehicles and stimulate growth
43 comments Feed
Note: Comments do not reflect MercoPress’ opinions. They are the personal view of our users. We wish to keep this as open and unregulated as possible. However, rude or foul language, discriminative comments (based on ethnicity, religion, gender, nationality, sexual orientation or the sort), spamming or any other offensive or inappropriate behaviour will not be tolerated. Please report any inadequate posts to the editor. Comments must be in English. Thank you.
“Brazil rejects any interference of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO, in the South Atlantic”
Think says:
Ain't Britain a member?
What's more interesting is the suggestion that the US is starting to glance south ....... and if they want to consider a SATO I'm sure the British would be interested .... and we have a number of potential bases.
Don't forget that the south Atlantic has two sides :-)
That Antartic treaty is starting to look a little shaky maybe ??
These Jobin words are a change; perhaps Brazil is telling the world wich ir their state policy for the next 20 years; this is Itamaraty style.
Thanks Britain.
Your 1493 “Iselandic” settlers are the perfect tool for SA unity :-)
Argued yes ....but persuaded ?
Shaken,... not stirred :-)
Hoyterd, cool down, no warmongering please; what´s only in challenge here is the link beetwen Malvinas and London.
Instead of looking the issue in this dumb manner of yours - no one is disputing whether or not the region has an owner - consider the fact that an advance by a military organization in a region, alters the power balance in the area. That's why Russia makes a fuss when a former Soviet country is invited into NATO.
It is really laughable how NATO tries to revive itself even if it has pretty much no long term usefulness since the socialist bloc downfall. Does the US really think expanding NATO is a good idea? If so, why? Expanding it would just make it more dilute, and thus meaningless. Plus, I am sure neither Brazil nor Argentina have any interest in “play[ing] in the North Atlantic.” You see, not all countries are like the UK, not all of them would like to have their military used in whatever the US demands of them.
Please………….. don’t tell anybody because then, I will have to kill you and then autodestruct….
””Dusty” rumors are leaking out of Desire’s Ocean Guardian platform”
They are certainly not leaking oil :-)))
www.debtbombshell.com/
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/8081090/HMS-Astute-operation-underway-to-refloat-worlds-most-advanced-nuclear-submarine.html
Easy.....:
Lowering Wages….
Abandoning Welfare….
Cancelling Development Aid….
Lifting British Pension Age to 70….
Getting out of the European Union….
Implementing Total Fiscal Austerity….
Slackening labor and environmental legislation…
Lowering taxes for their elite segment to avoid ”Brain Drain”…
Strengthening their Speculative Short Term Financial Market…
Launching a “Preemptive” attack against some dangerous “Rouge State” (Argentina for instance)
The possibilities are endless…, Mate :-)
Last 3, infinite and plus ultra...imaginable
And it's even funnier, the fact that many people in my country think that we'll get those islands back lol President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner is well aware of the fact that those islands will never be under Argentina's control. There's still a similar dispute going stronger between Russia and Japan over the Kuril Islands.
Did you accidentaly get my check? Please mail it back to me :-)
so quiet frankly [YOUR FXCKED] you just don’t know it yet lol
blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100043042/hillary-clinton-slaps-britain-in-the-face-again-over-the-falklands/
I hope you're not a Mexican... Are you?
as for your remark abt spelling and grammar, was you not told that to criticise someone else make you look even more stupid, that why people cant understand your crap, but then being a south American one can expect nothing less. Over educated and probably over privileged Spanish speaking twerp what do we expect, besides even your exquisite unnatural spelling capabilities still wont get you the Falklands,
is that ok for you,
This is weird and funny at the same time, because the U.S. already is in South South America,[this should be, the U.S. is already in south America] []and not south south repeated twice,[silly boy??]Argentina, Brasil,[should be Brazil] Chile, Perú, Paraguay. It won't take long until this idea of “NATO interfering in the South Atlantic” becomes a reality. It will help a lot [full stop,] silly boy]]/.And this stupid delinquent over rated impostor of the English language thus picks me up for my spelling. The boy must be illiterate
He probably descends from the Spanish inquisition. In that the question was, who is this silly half breed send him to Argentina with rest of the criminal illiterate riffraff, and this boy is the result of this, stupid stupid stupid, and insulting me will STILL not get you the Falklands,
annd im still ok
Sometimes in my country we say Sur Sur, especially when we talk about the Province of Santa Cruz, Tierra del Fuego or Islas Malvinas, that's why I wrote South South.
Brasil is in Spanish, like Perú.
Full stop? Please, learn to read and stay away from the computer.
Insulting you? Wich of these is more insulting and offensive: Dumb or Mexican?
Period.
In all fairness Briton, I'm from Birmingham and even I speak better english than you do ......the education system today eh!
You don't seem to realize what the point is. That NATO has “the right” to exercise in international waters is of no importance. That it has such right, doesn't mean other countries feel good about it. Nato invited Ukraine to join its ranks. Ukraine had a right to join Nato, and Nato had the right to extend its invitation to whatever country it feels like. But Russia was uncomfortable over that move, and rightly so. Russia does not own Ukraine, but it was defending its interests in protesting the Nato invitation to that country - for such invitation, if accepted, would alter the geopolitical landscape of Eastern Europe. The same is true about the South Atlantic. Having countries from that region - specifically from South America - joining that organization, would leave some other nations (not only Brazil) uneasy for it would alter the power balance in the area. Again, Nato might have the right you cite. But deep down international relations are not about exercising rights. They're about doing what is convenient. And NATO presence in the area is not perceived by Brazil to be convenient to its interests. As for the FI and the UK-Argentina quarrel over that area - well, who cares? I don't think Jobim had that in mind when he protested Nato's actual or planned activities in the S. Atlantic. And last time I checked the current US leadership is not keen on supporting the UK over its brawl with Argentina. So I doubt NATO is really getting itself involved in there - even by merely practicing exercises - anytime soon.
Really???? Oh my God, Hoytred, the world is crazy, I didn't know that. I'm shocked!
PERIOD sounds better than Full Stop.
For all the British people that are not British. Isn't it gross?
Period.
Forgetit87 - I'd check again .. more recently they've followed the British line on missile testing. Clinton got her hands smacked over her earlier remarks!
xbarilox - I seem to recall that the Americans and the British were famously described as, “ one people divided by a common language” !
Oh I’m sorry, I didn’t realise NATO was inviting South American nations to join. Are you sure about this? I missed that bit. I’d agree, if that were the case, certain South American countries might have reason to ask questions.
As I understand Brazil already has military cooperation agreements with the UK and France. A bit of hypocrisy perhaps? My personal opinion is that the UK and France are naïve to enter into defence technology sharing agreements with Brazil for short-term financial gain. Brazil is the clear winner, obtaining advanced technology that it would otherwise have been unable to develop indigenously for decades, if ever. The assumption on the part of European nations is that Brazil is a friend and ally, some of the anti European rhetoric of the current Brazilian government raises serious questions about Brazil’s reliability. I’d be more concerned about the intentions of China in that region, especially with China’s ever-growing desire for all those lovely hydrocarbons. You might be aware that China has recently overtaken the United States as the worlds greatest energy consumer. For that reason alone (as well as others previously mentioned) NATO should be monitoring the region. The Brazilian governments objections should be noted and questioned.
As for the parallel between Nato and Brazil's agreement with France, I fail to realize what they have in common. That agreement is one of trade: it doesn't concede to France any military presence in Brazil. But a S. American country joining Nato, that'd indeed be an open door for Nato's dominating countries, specially the US, to establish a presence in the area. The military treaties Brazil's signed with European countries (and the US) have nothing to do with the issue. As for them, the fact that you complain about - that European countries (and the US, I should add) are now signing agreements that guarantee technology transfer - means three things: that those countries are in real NEED to find new markets for their military products; that competition in this sector is higher than in some years ago; and that, to export their products, they need to offer advantages that most other exporters are unwilling to guarantee. It doesn't have anything to do with countries believing that Brazil is “a friend and ally”. If you think international relations are established on the basis of friendship, then you don't understand the subject.
As for the Brazilian government being anti-European, why is that? Americans tend to moan about anti-Americanism whenever someone applies political realism - the theory that countries act on the basis of self-interest alone - to interpret US's moves in the international arena. As such, under political realism a country should always be suspicious of another. Do you think a government is anti-European just because it is suspicious towards whatever intention European countries have in the area? Well, suspiciousness is standard when it comes to international relations. If you think differently, then you don't understand the subject.
“Tell me, why China is so worrisome”
“Unlike the US, China recognizes the sea boundaries established by the Convention on the Law of the Sea. So it is not likely to violate other countries' sea area. And unlike the US - and its faithful if a bit goofy sidekick, the UK - China doesn't have a recent history of revolting interventionism such as illegally invading other countries”.
“Nato deserves other countries' suspiciousness more than China does”.
Now I see where you’re coming from, NATO is bad, China is good. And you tell me I don’t understand the situation?Need I remind you of China’s invasion and occupation of Tibet, and its persistent threats towards Taiwan?
They’re now taking a keen interest in Africa...
www.cfr.org/publication/9557/china_africa_and_oil.html
... and Brazil
www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/15/brazil-port-china-drive
Not to mention Japan...
www.japantoday.com/category/politics/view/maehara-worried-about-chinas-military-buildup-values-us-alliance
“New Foreign Minister Seiji Maehara expressed concern Friday about China’s military expansion, citing the continued increase in its defense spending... China’s military spending has logged a double-digit annual increase over 20 years”
As they probably say in China, “There’s more than one way to skin a cat”. But it seems you’re more concerned about NATO exercises in International waters in the South Atlantic. Odd.
Funny that you cite China's businesses activities with Africa and Brazil. But I ask you again: has anyone asked Nato to help us deal with China? No, we haven't. Brazil is even asking Nato to keep a distance. Nobody asked Nato to watch over other countries' bilateral trade relations. Doing so, therefore, would amount to both interventionism and paternalism. You should mind your own business for it seems to me Nato already has too many problems of its own.
The thing with Brazil is different. The article you cite seems to imply that China plans to do with Brazil the same that it is doing with Africa: that it's trying to buy up Brazil. The fact, however, is that foreign acquisition of Brazilian lands is ALREADY regulated. Before a piece of land is handed over to a foreigner, the central government is to be notified and it is up to it whether to authorize the process or not. Plus, federal law forbids the sum of land space owned by all foreigners in a given location to surpass 25% of the total space available. That piece of legislation was in discussion in 2008. It passed Congress earlier this year, some months before The Guardian published that paper. The Guardian should have mentioned it for it is clear that legislation was relevant to the subject at hand. Perhaps TG didn't because it WANTS - even if it has to resort to half-truths - to portray a menacing China swallowing defenseless countries.
Again, I don't believe Nato is really looking to supervise China's imports of energy fuels. How'd that be done in the 1st place? Be that as it may, the fact is that we - Brazilians and Africans - didn't ask you to be concerned about us. Go mind your own business.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!