SPINWATCH-'US-Colombia military base pact is misunderstood' http://colombiareports.com/colombia-news/interviews/8780-global-context-needed-to-understand-us-colombian-military-base-agreement.html

According to Barnett, the U.S. uses similar base agreements across the world to assist, train, and empower local militaries and governments to handle their internal security situations on their own. The reason, Barnett claims, is that establishing security is essential in order for a country to integrate into the global economy and take advantage of the benefits offered through globalization.

comment-ok first of all these bases are illegal,uribe government circumvented congressional approval and debate,wich was deemed unconstitutional,secondly we will look at who mr barnet is who he's representing ...US-Colombia military accord challenged in Bogota court http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100306/pl_afp/colombiausagreementmilitary   Bases are Unconstitutional http://english.pravda.ru/hotspots/conflicts/05-03-2010/112495-gringo_bases_unconstitutional-0 

-------------------------------------------------------

secondly, heres some backround on barnett...Thomas Barnett http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Barnett   From 1998 through 2004, Barnett was a Senior Strategic Researcher and Professor in the Warfare Analysis & Research Department, Center for Naval Warfare Studies, U.S. Naval War College, Newport, Rhode Island.

At the Naval War College, Barnett served as Director of the New Rule Sets Project an effort designed to explore how the spread of globalization alters the basic "rules of the road" in the international security environment, with special reference to how these changes redefine the U.S. Military's historic role as "security enabler" of America's commercial network ties with the world.

[1] The project was hosted by Cantor Fitzgerald and took place near the top of One World Trade Center. After the offices of Cantor Fitzgerald and its carbon credit brokerage subsidiary CantorCO2e were destroyed at One World Trade Center on 9/11/2001, Barnett described the event as the "first live-broadcast, mass snuff film in human history."[2]

Following the September 11, 2001 attacks, from October 2001 to June 2003, Barnett worked as the Assistant for Strategic Futures in the Office of Force Transformation in the Department of Defense under the direction of the late Vice Admiral (ret). Arthur K. Cebrowski, during which time he created a Powerpoint brief that developed into his book The Pentagon's New Map.[

------------------------------------------

this is barnetts book-The Pentagon's New Map: War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=The_Pentagon's_New_Map:_War_and_Peace_in_the_Twenty-First_Century_(2004_book)      "'Look beyond globalization's frontier,' Barnett writes in a new book called The Pentagon's New Map: War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century and there you will find the failed states that command our attention, the rogue states that demand our vigilance, and the endemic conflicts that fuel the terror we now recognize as the dominant threat not just to America's future security but to globalization's continued advance.'" [1]

"The message for the military was one many in the Pentagon brass had struggled against for years," the Associated Press's Matt Kelley writes in the May 19, 2004, "Unlikely Visionary Plots Pentagon Future." "Instead of girding for a high-tech war with a competitor like China, Barnett says, the U.S. military must play the role of global enforcer, taking out terrorists and rogue regimes in the Gap and sticking around to help connect those countries to the global marketplace of goods, services, information and ideas.

"That means a lot of smaller conflicts and long-term nation building of the sort Pentagon generals had worked to avoid and Bush administration officials derided in the years leading up to the 2001 terrorist attacks."