Bananas: arms smuggling in Ecuador and Ukraine Opinion

The changes currently taking place in the global arms market may involve Latin America in the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, but also in future war scenarios.

In January, the Ecuadorian government emerged interested in transferring weapons of Soviet origin to the United States. In exchange for “junk” weapons, according to Ecuadorian President Daniel Noboa’s definition. (picture)Washington has committed to providing new military equipment for $200 million.

The agreement was considered fundamental to the modernization of Ecuador’s armed forces and to improving its ability to maintain internal security amid the advance of criminal organizations and “narcoterrorist gangs”.

It was Kevin Sullivan, Deputy Assistant Secretary for the State Department’s Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, who clarified what was already known. On a recent visit to Quito, he assured that it was “an arrangement to transfer equipment to the Ukrainian government.” In his defense, Noboa said that he was unaware that the final destination of the weapons would be in a country at war and, therefore, he refused to exchange his “scrap” for new military equipment.

Noboa’s renewed anti-interventionist rhetoric failed to disguise the total disapproval expressed by Russia, which not only rejected Soviet arms shipments to the United States (prohibited according to the terms of the contract between the two governments) but also Ecuador’s role as a supplier was also rejected. Supply of military resources to Ukraine.

The threat of a Russian trade embargo on bananas, bearing in mind that Russia is the small Andean country’s third trading partner, served as the best deterrent to re-establish the Andean country’s historical neutrality and move away from attractive but problematic offers. Worked as.

For the time being, the White House strategy was put on hold, in which the exchange of old weapons for new would strengthen Ecuador as one of the main recipients of military resources in the region. There are probably other ways to reach the same goal.

Furthermore, the same operation sought a direct political alliance with Washington, which could only mean a break with Moscow and the direct involvement of Ecuador in the war, which would have enormous consequences, which would certainly entail military Will be more than the area.

The case of Ecuador also seems to leave some lessons for those governments who, for purely hypothetical reasons, intend to abandon neutrality in the face of a conflict that has affected most of the world, but not least Latin America. It has not taken shape in the U.S., mainly thanks to prudence and efforts to consolidate the region as a peaceful landscape, where national security interests and historical diplomatic neutrality are valued.

However, these conditions may change in the context of the transition to the global arms trade in the heat of conflict between Russia, Ukraine and NATO countries, but also due to other wars of increasing severity, such as the ongoing war in Ukraine. Middle East. , This trend is nascent but not insignificant for Latin American foreign policy.

The main precedent for the Ecuadorian case was in May 2022, when then-Colombian President Iván Duque took advantage of his country’s status as an additional NATO ally and announced the sending of a military mission to Ukraine for training in demolition techniques. This operation was canceled with the coming to power of Gustavo Petro, turning Colombia towards neutrality.

Almost parallel to the failed operation in Ecuador, the gift of two helicopters of Soviet origin by Javier Miley to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky when he attended the presidential inauguration ceremony on December 10, 2023 should also be noted. A gesture that did not go unnoticed and which revealed Argentina’s interest in engaging with the White House.

A fundamental factor today will serve as the main pressure mechanism to encourage arms shipments to Ukraine.

New “Excess Defense Material” (EDA) Policyadditional defense article) allows Joe Biden’s government to get rid of up to $500 million worth of weapons and military vehicles, set a price on it, and sell it at a lower price (or even give it away), as long as The receiving country does not bear the transportation costs. A relatively inexpensive way to secure a supplier network and, above all, an international chain of loyalty based on a system of rewards and recognition.

Although only a year ago many countries, such as Brazil, Mexico and Argentina, rejected the provision of weapons to Ukraine, today the United States is creating conditions for the increased participation of Latin America in the international arms market.

To do this, Washington specifically uses the new right-wing governments’ need for military and economic resources to try to hide their desire for an unrestricted alliance with the White House and, at the same time, their shortcomings in protecting sovereign interests. Hides. The timing, the conspicuous absence of calls for peace and dialogue between nations.