The state of the republic is really the same, and the dispute over the Falklands has been ambiguous for decades. 【Reading.com】

If we go back to the roots, the "Latin American policy" of the United States has to start with the "Monroe Doctrine."

The so-called "Monroe Doctrine" refers narrowly to the early part of the old century. As a result of the Napoleonic Wars, Spain's colonial system in the New World collapsed, and the new republic founded in the wave of Latin American independence led by Jose de San Martín and Simón Bolívar wanted to be recognized by the United States. "The Monroe Doctrine. There are three salient features: first, European countries can no longer colonize the American state for any reason; second, they exercise the American principle in foreign policy, that is, the United States intervenes in European affairs only if its own interests are harmed; and third, the United States regards any attempt to colonize the Americas as a threat to national security. U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt also added a statement: "Big stick policy." Hence this. It can be seen that although the "Monroe Doctrine" was in the name of helping Latin American colonies fight for democracy and freedom. But in the final analysis, it is safeguarding the interests of the United States, and it is naked hegemonism.

"The Monroe Doctrine. How big is the impact on the United States? Perhaps it is not enough to overstate.

It can be said that the "Monroe Doctrine" not only laid the foundation for the United States to become one of the great powers, but also served as the guiding program for US foreign policy for the next 100 years until the United States entered World War I.

, know, positive

In fact, the "Monroe Doctrine" has also greatly complicated the attitude of the United States toward the re-home of Latin America.

The United States did not become the second "empire on which the sun never sets" Since the Spanish-American War at the end of the old century, the land area of the United States has never expanded, with the "Monroe Doctrine." There is an inseparable relationship.

In the "Monroe Doctrine. Under the influence of the United States, many policies of the United States are difficult for the outside world to understand.

For example, after the Mexican-American War, Mexico once asked to be incorporated into the United States; In anyone's opinion, the annexation of Mexico would not only bring millions of square kilometers of land to the undeveloped United States, but also bring in a much-needed population, and would consolidate American hegemony in the Western Hemisphere, without any reason to refuse; In fact, the United States did refuse, and it refused very decisively and crisply, without the slightest hesitation. Another example. After the Spanish-American War, the United States did not annex Cuba, nor did it even turn Cuba into a colony of the United States, as it did with the Philippines, which was also seized from Spain. Rather, it allowed Cuba to gain independence, laying the groundwork for becoming a major problem for the United States a few years later; It's completely incomprehensible, so to speak; If the annexation of Mexico would change the political structure of the United States, allow the pro-slave forces to prevail over the anti-slave forces, cause the United States to miss the Industrial Revolution, and seriously damage the interests of the New England capitalists who dominated the United States, then the annexation of Cuba would not only not have these problems, but would also bring unspeakable benefits to the United States, which was in the midst of a golden exhibition.

Even in the "post-Monroe Doctrine era", that is, after World War I, the United States participated in World War I, and Mao Jing violated the "Monroe Doctrine", so many American historians regard World War I as a turning point in US foreign policy, "Monroe Doctrine." Still has a huge impact on US foreign policy.

Among other things, by the beginning of the century, Venezuela was "a dictator small." Under the leadership of Chavez, he embarked on the road of confrontation with the United States without hesitation. Not only the nationalization of the assets of American companies in Venezuela. It also prohibits the export of oil and other resources to the United States, and Venezuela is a member of OPEC, the world's largest heavy oil reserve and an important oil exporter, but the United States did not send troops to overthrow Chavez as it did with Saddam, but adopted a very rare tolerant attitude. And it hasn't changed for decades!

As can be seen from these examples, the "Latin American policy" of the United States is indeed very complex.

Take, for example, the Argentine affair in the Falklands War. The United States did not formally support the United Kingdom, and even actively mediated between the two countries. It is hoped that the two sides will resolve the issue through peaceful negotiations.

Leaving aside the appearance, it can be seen that there is an invisible red line in the "Latin American policy" of the United States.

To put it simply, it is whether the interests of the United States are harmed. As long as it does not harm the interests of the United States, the United States will not interfere in what Latin American countries do and what they do. On the contrary, the United States will use a thunderous military action to wipe out the regimes of Latin American countries, or more precisely Latin American countries, that dare to challenge. The so-called "American interests." Influenced by the special relationship between the United States and Latin American countries, the term "American interests" here refers to major events that the American people can understand, or that can justify the US government's military action. The President Ma's vain attempt to take back jurisdiction over the canal and the Colombian government's connivance with drug lords have become justifications for US military action.

I love ugliness

Undoubtedly, on the issue of the Falklands. The United States does not have any "justification".

Although American politicians know that if the Falklands really have incredible reserves of rare metal deposits, then the question of the ownership of the Falklands will have a huge impact on the world pattern and thus affect the national interests of the United States. However, in the eyes of ordinary Americans, no matter how the Falklands issue ends, it cannot belong to the United States, so the resources on the Falklands have no direct relationship with the United States. There was no army to send troops.

The key lies here, otherwise the United States would not have been "ashamed to answer" and never expressed its attitude.

It can be said that the United States is in a very awkward position.

If the situation is the same as it was many years ago, the United States would not have to worry about anything, and even if Argentina brazenly started a war, it would have lost completely. At most, let the British work and teach the disobedient Argentina in the South Atlantic, which will not involve the United States and will not have much impact on the interests of the United States.

The problem is that the Argentina of today is not the Argentina of many years ago.

According to Tian's assessment, even if the Republic did not intervene in the Falklands dispute and only provided intelligence assistance to Argentina, Britain's chances of victory in the Second Falklands War would not be more than 50 percent. Because Argentina massively adopted the weapons and equipment of the republic, especially its two-stage submarines, which came from the republic. So the possibility of the republic sending submarines into the war during the war cannot be ruled out. Although the United States could also concoct the same method and send submarines to assist the British expeditionary fleet in combat, it was limited by the actual situation of the warring parties. The significance of this move by the United States is far less than that of the Republic. The reason is simple, the main combat unit of Argentina is not the Navy. Not to mention the surface fleet. It's the Air Force. The situation in Britain was the opposite, with the expeditionary fleet being the only military force at its disposal. In this way, the greatest value of American submarines is to escort the British expeditionary fleet and perform defensive missions, while Republic submarines carry out attack missions. It is well known that submarines are an attacking force that is good at ambushes, and not a defensive force that is good at guarding. What's more, the climatic conditions in the South Atlantic are very harsh, which is not only very suitable for submarine operations. It is also difficult to salvage the sunken ships. In other words, even if the submarines of the US Navy were able to take out several Republic submarines in battle, it would be difficult to obtain conclusive evidence, at best, it would be impossible to get it. In short, the United States is in an extremely awkward position, and it is difficult to prevent the Republic from helping Argentina in a way that does not see the light of day. It also doesn't make much sense to send troops into battle.

There are not many people who understand this truth, including Pei Chengyi's old opponent, former US Secretary of Defense Duchway.

Du Qiwei, who is a couple, is already a national security adviser in the White House. In terms of official position, Duchway's land has been reduced a lot. In fact, the appointment as national security adviser is of extraordinary significance to Dudgway. First, it officially got rid of military status. He became a politician in the truest sense because, according to American tradition, a security adviser who specializes in providing defense advice and advice to the president cannot be a military man, but only a civilian official. Although the Minister of Defense is highly respected, he is often a victim of the struggle of major interest groups due to the influence of the US political system. Or rather, it is a bargaining chip for the exchange of interests; To a large extent, Dudgway's appointment as defense secretary is the result of the struggle between US interest groups. Under these circumstances, the Secretary of Defense's influence is very limited, and it is difficult for him to become an important figure in the decision-making level of US interest groups. National security advisers, on the other hand, have influence over the president and are involved in decision-making on major issues. There is a high level of power in the decision-making circle.

What hasn't changed is the president of the United States, who won a second term.

If Dudgway's role as national security adviser is well deserved, Blandino's narrow victory over the Republican candidate in the final election was largely out of luck.

Before the election, almost everyone thought that the DPJ, which had been in power for three consecutive terms, would lose the election. In fact. Even within the Democratic Party, there is no optimism. The reason is simple. In the war in India, which ended with the Internet, the federal government led by Blanche did not realize "American interests" and instead deprived the United States of an extremely important ally. Before the election began, the Republican Party took advantage of this to build momentum, claiming that the cowardly Democratic Party had betrayed the national interests of the United States in international affairs, and if it made mistakes again and again, it would inevitably reduce the United States to a third-rate country. In response to this situation, even if Blandino is politically talented, he can only use the economic exhibition to attract votes. According to past practice, when the economy is improving, American voters will pay more attention to the international status and interests of the United States, rather than putting the economic exhibition in place. Because the Great Depression has long since receded, and the U.S. economy has been steadily developing under the Democratic Party for many years, many people think that unless Brande can pull out a more enticing slogan, the Democrats will definitely lose the election.

I love ugly habits

The election results came as a surprise to everyone, and the choices American voters made with their actions are a true reflection of the problems facing the United States.

In the words of Brandino in his personal biography: American voters once again chose the Democratic Party instead of the Republican Party holding high the banner of "defending national interests" in the year of injury, indicating that more than half of Americans are very aware of the situation of the United States and know that if they want to restore the international territory of the United States, the most important thing to do is not to expand externally, but to consolidate the foundation; This choice illustrates. The United States at this time is no longer the United States of four years ago, and with the change of the international situation, the international status of the United States has also changed, and the United States must adjust its national strategy to meet the new challenges.

%, ten thousand

In any case, the biggest problem facing the United States is that the United States is no longer the most powerful country in the world.

Although no one denies that economic strength is only a part of a country's comprehensive strength, and in the competition between major powers, economic strength is not the most important decisive factor, but no one denies that economic strength is the number one yardstick to measure the country's territory, and it is the most direct reflection of national strength. In fact. Since the beginning of the industrial age in human history, economic strength has been a competition between countries and the rest of the world when countries lead the world, and the total economic output has been surpassed by the rest of the world, or even threatened.

Now the United States has fallen off the altar and is no longer the country with the largest economic aggregate.

From the standpoint of the Americans, you can feel the impact of this change.

Among other things, in at least dozens of countries, "American" is no longer an honorable title.

If we take into account the decline of the United States in terms of military power, scientific and technological strength, cultural influence, financial geography and so on. The choice of American voters to abandon the Republican Party, which holds high the banner of expansion, and the Democratic Party, which actively promotes economic development, is precisely a response to the changes in the basic national conditions of the United States, and it is also a choice made for the future development of the United States.

In the face of such a national situation, Brandino has to be more cautious in handling the Falklands dispute.

After receiving a hotline call from George Britain, Brandino convened a high-level cabinet meeting to solicit opinions from several cabinet members, including Duchway.

The results were not encouraging.

After hours of arguing, an agreement was reached on the issue of the thugs.

No doubt. The attitude of the leading members of the US federal government to the Falklands dispute is not consistent.

In fact, it is impossible to be consistent.

Don't say anything else. How many rare metal deposits there are in the Falklands. The top levels of the United States have a different opinion.

According to the non-public exploration results submitted by the standard company to the State Council, although there are not many proven reserves, and even because of factors such as scattered reserves and difficult mining, they do not have economic exploitation value for the time being, but they are prospective reserves. That is, there may exist, and there are very many reserves that have not yet been proven, and it is very likely that they will have exploited value in the future to the old years.

If that were the case, there would be no reason for the United States to abandon Britain.

, toe 23

It's just that, according to the secret investigation report submitted by Tian. Standard exploration reports are unreliable because it is likely that Standard has been influenced by arms interests. What's more. The standard company itself has a background in arms enterprises, and among its major shareholders, there are old ones who also hold shares in arms enterprises, and six of them are major shareholders of arms enterprises. In other words, if the Standard Company's report is not true, it is a shocking conspiracy to help arms companies open up sales and deliberately create a regional war.

There is no doubt that politicians in the United States have backgrounds in interest groups.

Under these circumstances, it is not surprising that senior officials in the US federal government have serious differences in basic concepts.

Relatively. Both Blanche and Duchway believed in Hui's investigation report even more. The two are well aware of the methods of interest groups, many years ago. In order to control the oil, American interest groups can direct a war. Saddam Hussein was sent to the gallows. Right now. For the sale of arms. U.S. interests can still direct a war to drive Theron out of Argentina. The difference is that many years ago, no single force could work against American interest groups; Now, interest groups in the United States can no longer do whatever they want. This difference determines the ultimate fate of the United States. If the Iraq War many years ago cost the United States tens of thousands of soldiers and hundreds of thousands of dollars, the current Falklands War will make the United States lose hope of revival.

Seeing the essence clearly, Brandino will not act rashly.

After the Cabinet meeting failed to reach a consensus. Brandino talked to Duchway several times individually, hoping that Duchway would play a more important role in the matter.

In his own office, Duchway did not refuse the president's request.

As national security adviser, although Dudgway only has the power to advise and advise the president, and cannot mobilize federal resources like a cabinet official, as the person closest to the president, the national security adviser can often use the president's authority to obtain far more power than a cabinet minister. Under normal circumstances, no official wants to offend the big celebrities around the president, and they will take the adviser's orders as the president's orders.

Other words. Duchway has a lot of influence.

Within a few days, Duchway did several very important things. The first is to have the fourth re-investigation of the exploration results of Standard Company, and resubmit a more detailed investigation report, which must include the network of interests of Standard Company and the government officials involved in the exploration incident. The second is to have the Pentagon assess Britain's military strength and submit an assessment report on the existing shortcomings. This must include what the United States can do in response. The third is to let the fourth, concave and other intelligence agencies take joint action. An assessment of the possibility of the Republic's involvement in the Falklands conflict was made and the impact of possible scenarios was clearly mentioned in the assessment.

Of course. The most important thing is not yet these.

I love to call Huan'er,

When accepting the president's arrangement, Duchway mentioned that the most important thing to pay attention to is not Argentina's challenge or whether the Republic will intervene in the Falklands dispute, but how much role Pei Chengyi, who has been hired as Argentina's top military adviser, can play. Or can you command the Argentine army to fight like you command the republican ** team!

Blanche also knew that Pei Chengyi was powerful, so he attached great importance to Du Qiwei's suggestion.

What's more. The only one who can answer this question and make an accurate judgment on Pei Chengyi's actions in Argentina is Du Qiwei!