We strongly condemn the brutal and cowardly aggression against our country, which caused more than 100 deaths, including innocent civilians, as well as the destruction of family homes and even the devastation of a center of higher learning: the University of Sciences.
We also oppose the aberrant and unrealistic deglobalization project, which is entirely counterproductive in the face of the threat of climate change. This project seeks to drag humanity back to the bygone era of the colonial division of the world established at the Berlin Conference of the late 19th century, which resulted in the horrific conflagrations known as the world wars. This idea attempts to impose a new Monroe Doctrine, called the Donroe Doctrine.
It is unrealistic, first and foremost, for a simple matter of numbers. The United States has only about 340 million inhabitants (4% of the world's population), making it utterly fantastical to believe that it could militarily dominate a planet of more than 8.2 billion. And not even Latin America, with its more than 650 million inhabitants spread over 20 million square kilometers. They may initially show some minor victories, but it is not sustainable over time, as former President López Obrador reminded them: "Today's ephemeral victory may be tomorrow's resounding defeat."
Suffice it to say, for example, that if Mexico, Brazil, Colombia, and Venezuela, with their more than 450 million inhabitants, had signed a mutual assistance pact in case of aggression, the situation would be very different, and the Caribbean Sea would be a zone of peace today. But we cannot, so far, blame our political leadership for not doing so, because our countries do not have a culture of war.
Secondly, because the world economy is increasingly undergoing a process of globalization and interdependence, which is radically changing its structure and functioning. An example of this is the United States itself, where, according to Fortune magazine in 1960, the largest companies of that time were: General Motors, Jersey Standard, and U.S. Steel, General Electric, Esmark, Anderson-Prichard Oil Corporation, Armour, Gulf Oil, Chrysler, Mobil, and DuPont, where companies working with fossil fuels and their derivatives were largely dominant, while in 2024, according to the same magazine, the largest were Walmart, Amazon, UnitedHealth Group, Apple, CVS Health, Berkshire Hathaway, Alphabet, Exxon Mobil, McKesson, and Cencora, with social media and e-commerce taking center stage. A completely different reality.
Dividing the world into parcels would result in each bloc of nations developing its own networks, negatively impacting the practically monopolistic business of these companies abroad by trillions of dollars, with a devastating impact on the American economy.
And thirdly, there's the age factor, which works against this project. Trump is turning 80, and if he isn't impeached in the next legislative session, which seems very likely, he'll be 83 by the time his term ends. Adding to the problem is that his legacy has no prestigious successor, but rather an overwhelming majority of detractors.
Certainly, this harebrained project has no future, but if it isn't stopped and while it's being abandoned, it will not only bring suffering to most of humanity, but will also place it on the brink of nuclear confrontation.
For our region, this situation could be disastrous, or it could be a magnificent opportunity to finally recognize the need to embark on a common path of development that provides us with the necessary economic, scientific, and social strength to successfully face the challenges ahead.
It is necessary to begin building the post-Trump world now, keeping in mind what Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdo?an said about the current sad state of relations between nations: "If you're not at the table, you're on the menu."
Any political leader who doesn't understand this reality should, for the sake of our people, step down.
