Thatcher Fouls the Nest

Scan page 5

"The Argentine people :.. will never forget that in one of the most critical hours of their history . . . the US sided with a power that is alien to our continent and cooperated with its aggression.

With these words the Argentine foreign ministry gave vent to the growing bitterness between one of the most savage and reactionary dictatorships in Latin America and its imperialist sponsors in Washington.

The Reagan administration had all along feared that this would be the immediate consequence as soon as the US declared itself unambiguousiy in support of the British military aggression in the South Atlantic.

This was a key reason why Reagan hedged while Haig shuttled for weeks on end to and from London and Buenos Aires posing as a well-intentioned mediator.

If Haig's pose of neutralwas artificial, his desire to avoid an escalation into war was genuine. As one White House aide told Newsweek magazine in April:

"If an Argentine ship goes down forget it; then all Latin America will coalesce around Argentina."

By the first week in May, even betore the sinking of the : General Belgrano this coalescence had largely been completed.

A meeting of the Organisation of American States gave vigorous applause to Argentine Foreign Minister Costa Mendez and voted 170 to recognise Argentine sovereignty over the Falklands. The other four member states - the USA, Colombia, Chile and Trinidad and Tobago abstained.

At present, of course, this "unity" against British imperialism is a largely cosmetic exercise by Latin American governments with an anxious eye both to their own working classes and to their economic dependence upon the imperialist banks.

Peru, for example, continues both to denounce Britain - and to work with US imperialism for a compromise formula. The new right wing nationalist government in El Salvador is vehemently pro-Argentina -but still leans heavily upon US military and economic aid.

The OAS resolution itself was combined with support for a UN resolution calling for the withdrawal of both British and Argentine troops.

But as the situation lingers and deteriorates, the US imperialist leaders • can see a growing threat to decades of careful cultivation of alliances with many dictatorial regimes in Latin The USA had not only armed and aided the dictators: they posed as guarantors of the inviolability of the American continent from outside aggressors enshrined in the 1947 Rio Treaty.

This treaty was of course designed by US imperialism as part of its Cold War offensive against revolutionary movements and external "Communist aggression"

Yet the whole experience since 1947 has confirmed that for the people of Latin America the prime danger of external military intervention comes not from the Soviet Union - but from the USA itself as the self-appointed guardian of capitalist rule.

It is an ironic twist of the tables that the same treaty should now be invoked by Argentina to demand backing against an attack by British imperialism.

It is even more embarrassing that the US leaders, under pressure, should be forced to admit that its alliance with the imperialist nations of Europe through NATO is more important than its relationships with second-string dictatorships in the semi-colonial countries.

And the longer and more intense the war becomes the more the token gestures made by governments will be pressed forward by anti-imperialist sentiment among the working masses of Latin Haig I Galtieri: friends fall out?

Harry America - endangering not only relationshps with dictatorial regimes but even also those regimes themselves.

The US and EEC imperialists can look gloomily forward to many years clearing up the mess made by Thatcher in a few weeks of action.

Scan page 6

Socialist Organiser no.84 May 13, 1982 Page 6