The military in Argentina and Chile

Carlos López says: "President Lagos does not fear the military but like most educated Chileans, he is very much aware of Chile's need to keep up her materiel and maintain an efficient system of national defense. I am always defending the navy which this time came up with the short end of the stick; the four Meko class frigates have been cancelled. Why does Chile need armed forces? I have one simple and easy explanation. Look at history. The last time Chile fought in a war was in 1884. Every time Chile has been threatened, and there have been many times in which our neighbors were ready to roll, it was enough to flex Chilean military muscles and the threat disappeared. The Argentinean military chose the Falklands for example, instead of the Beagle Channel. I challenge anyone in WAIS or anywhere, to find more than five countries in the world that have not had war for over 115 years. Replacing an obsolete fleet of F-5 and aging Mirages, is not a started for an arms race".

My comment: I hope Carlos' last assurance is correct. Historically, countries have always invoked an outside threat to justify an arms buildup. Some Americans argue that the t4rrorism threat is being used now to justify Pentagon spending of about $1 billion a day. It was the argument both France and Germany used in the past. Now a war among NATO members is inconceivable. I hope Latin America progresses to that point.

Ronald Hilton - 2/10/02