The U.S. war machine systematically began to introduce new forms of confrontation, beyond rifles, bombs and machine guns, and a concept of global conflict on multiple fronts was born. Image / markaabyayala.wordpress.com
By Guillermo Alvarado
Despite the weakening of its industrial apparatus and the heavy burden of foreign debt, the United States maintains and perfects its role of international gendarme as we have seen in recent times, especially following the NATO summit held a few days ago in Madrid.
This position was consolidated after the two world wars of the twentieth century, as well as in the endless conflicts in which the Pentagon participated, directly or indirectly, after the 1950s.
From the year 2000 onwards, however, the war machine of the world's leading power began systematically to introduce new forms of confrontation, beyond rifles, bombs and machine guns, and a concept of global conflict on multiple fronts was born.
Thus, strategies with novel names emerged, such as "smart power", "soft strikes" and, finally, "hybrid warfare".
New elements were added to the battlefield, such as people's minds, the popular imagination, traditions and customs, social stability, everyday fears and frustrations and, of course, ideas.
The development of new communication technologies was the key to perfecting hybrid wars, where the ordinary citizen, even without knowing it, becomes a combatant in the service of interests alien to or contrary to his country or community.
You will undoubtedly remember the so-called "color revolutions", apparently spontaneous movements that sprouted like mushrooms after the May rain. And I stress the term "apparently spontaneous", because in truth they were prepared long before their explosion.
In reality they are strategies of silent intervention by Washington, which for years was training leaders, sowing discontent, creating objective difficulties for the welfare of the population, until a shadow director, like Victoria Nuland in Ukraine, gave the go-ahead.
See in depth the strategy followed in Hong Kong to wrest that strategic region from China. The young university students who led the "protest" marches received generous courses in U.S. organizations.
A large part of the media campaign against China is carried out by the "journalist" Jimmy Lai Chee-ying, a tycoon at the service of the White House, through whose hands billions of dollars pass to finance the "opposition" and pay not a few U.S. politicians in exchange for their support or silence.
This does not mean that the first imperial power has abandoned its military doctrine. It manages 40% of global war spending, through some 800 bases distributed in 130 countries and many of them obey its mandates.
When cyberwarfare fulfills its purposes, or takes too long to produce them, armed brutality by its own hand or that of others is put into practice, as is happening in Syria. We'll stay on topic, folks.
