Showing posts with label Latin America. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Latin America. Show all posts

Saturday, October 18, 2008

Venezuela beefing up against potential US aggression

Analysis: Venezuela buys Russian tanks


Russia to sell Venezuela rocket launchers: report
Moscow (AFP) Oct 15 - Russia plans to sell Venezuela armoured personnel carriers and multiple rocket launchers, the Russian arms export agency said Wednesday. "We are preparing to deliver a large number of BMP-3 armoured personnel carriers" and multiple rocket launchers, Igor Sevastyanov, deputy director of Rosoboronexport, was quoted as saying by Interfax news agency. Venezuela has already bought 24 Sukhoi fighter jets, 50 helicopters and 100,000 Kalashnikov assault rifles from Russia in contracts worth a total of 4.4 billion dollars signed between 2005 and 2007, officials said. During a visit by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez to Moscow last month, Russia announced it was giving Venezuela a one-billion-dollar credit to buy Russian weapons and the two countries discussed nuclear energy cooperation. They are also planning joint naval exercises in the Caribbean in November. US military chiefs have said they are concerned about the military build-up in Venezuela and the US State Department has said it will be watching the Russian-Venezuelan naval exercises "very closely."
by Jack Sweeney

In 2006 and 2007 Venezuela's air force purchased 36 Russian-built Sukhoi Su-30 "Flanker-C" fighters, of which 24 already are in service and the remaining 12 will be delivered before the end of 2009. However, President Hugo Chavez has also placed an order for 24 state-of-the-art Russian Sukhoi Su-35 "Flanker-E" fighters with delivery starting by 2010.

After the U.S. State Department thwarted Venezuela's plans to buy Spanish military air transports in 2006, Chavez purchased from Russia 10 Ilyushin IL-76E -- NATO designation Candid -- troop/cargo transports and two Ilyushin IL-78 -- NATO designation Midas -- in-flight tankers with the capacity to refuel three aircraft simultaneously.

These transport aircraft will be delivered between the fourth quarter of 2008 and the end of 2009, giving Venezuela's armed forces the largest strategic air lift capacity in Latin America, defense procurement officials say.

However, the arms purchases Venezuela made between 2005 and 2008 are only the start of a bilateral military and security alliance between Caracas and Moscow potentially worth billions of dollars in future sales by Russian arms manufacturers.

During Chavez's latest visit to Moscow on Sept. 25 and 26, his third trip this year, Russian Prime Minister and former President Vladimir Putin agreed to expand Venezuelan-Russian military cooperation. Underscoring Venezuela's importance to Moscow as a major client for Russian weapons, Chavez was granted $1 billion in credit to finance more arms purchases.

The first item on Chavez's arms shopping list is between 20 and 30 TOR-M1 9M330 air defense missile systems. Venezuela's president also wants at least three diesel-powered Varshavyanka (Kilo)-class submarines.

Venezuelan defense sources say Chavez also wants to replace his army's obsolescent AMX-30 main battle tanks with between 50 and 100 Russian-built T-90 main battle tanks. The army also wants to buy at least 100 Russian-made light tanks and armored fighting vehicles, and up to 400 BMP-3 armored personnel carriers.

The Chavez government also is expanding defense and security ties with China. During his visit to Beijing on Sept. 24, Chavez signed an agreement to purchase 24 Chinese-made K-8 light attack aircraft, which Venezuelan air force officials say will be used for training purposes. The K-8s, which are scheduled to arrive in Venezuela during 2009, will operate from the Teniente Vicente Landaeta Gil Air Base near the city of Barquisimeto in Lara state.

China also is supplying Venezuela's air force with 10 long-range JYL-1 radars, three of which already are operating at Paraguana and Mene Mauroa in Falcon state near state-owned Petroleos de Venezuela's 940,000 bpd Paraguana refining complex and in Apure state near Venezuela's border with Colombia. The air force expects to achieve almost 100 percent radar coverage of Venezuela's national territory by 2013 when all 10 radars are installed and operational.

Spain's Navantia shipyard at Cadiz is building eight seagoing vessels for Venezuela's navy, including four coastal patrol boats -- 39 dwt -- equipped with a helicopter deck aft and Oerlikon Contraves DMN 0008 Millennium 35mm anti-aircraft guns. But navy officials say the patrol boats probably also could be armed with air and anti-ship missiles or heavier guns forward.

The other four vessels Navantia is building are missile-capable frigates that Venezuelan navy officials describe as "similar in design" to Venezuela's Italian-made Lupo frigates, which have been in use for about 30 years.

Original article posted here.

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

Financial collapse Argentina style



Sunday, September 21, 2008

The US' cloak of secrecy being pulled off in Bolivia

The Destabilization of Bolivia and the "Kosovo Option"


The secession of Bolivia's Eastern provinces is part of a US sponsored covert operation, coordinated out of the US State Department, in liaison with US intelligence.

The death squads armed with automatic weapons responsible for killing supporters of Evo Morales in El Porvenir are supported covertly by the US. According to one report, "USAID has an "Office of Transition Initiatives" operating in Bolivia, funneling millions of dollars of training and support to right-wing opposition regional governments and movements."(The Center for Economic and Policy Research, September 2008). The US also provides support through to various opposition groups through the National Endowment for Democracy.

The expelled US Ambassador Philip S. Goldberg worked under the helm of Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte, who directly oversees the various "activities" of US embassies around the World. In this regard Negroponte plays a far more important role, acting behind the scenes, than Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice. He is also known as one of the main architects of regime change and covert support to paramilitary death squads both in Central America and Iraq.

Philip S. Goldberg's mandate as ambassador to Bolivia was to trigger the fracture of Bolivia as a country. Prior to his appointment as ambassador in early 2007, he served as US Chief of Mission in Pristina, Kosovo (2004-2006) and was in permanent liaison with the leaders of the KLA paramilitary, who had integrated civilian politics, following the NATO occupation of Kosovo in 1999.

Supported by the CIA, the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), whose leaders now head the Kosovar government, was known for its extensive links to organized crime and the trade in narcotics. In Kosovo, Goldberg was involved in setting the stage for the subsequent secession of Kosovo from Serbia, leading to the installation of an "independent" Kosovar government.

In the course of the 1990s, Goldberg had played an active role in the break up of Yugoslavia. From 1994-1996 he was responsible for the Bosnia Desk at the State Department. He worked closely with Washington's Special Envoy Richard Holbrooke and played a central role as Chief of Staff of the US negotiating team at Dayton, leading up to the signing of the Dayton Accords in 1995. These accords were conducive to the carving up of Bosnia-Herzegovina. More generally they triggered the destruction and destabilization of Yugoslavia as country. In 1996, Goldberg worked directly as Special Assistant to the Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott (1994-2000), who together with Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, played a key role in launching the war on Yugoslavia in 1999.

The Central Role of John Negroponte

Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte plays a central role in the conduct of covert operations. He served as US ambassador to Honduras from 1981 to 1985. As Ambassador in Tegucigalpa, he played a key role in supporting and supervising the Nicaraguan Contra mercenaries who were based in Honduras. The cross border Contra attacks into Nicaragua claimed some 50 000 civilian lives. During the same period, Negroponte was instrumental in setting up the Honduran military death squads, "operating with Washington support's, [they] assassinated hundreds of opponents of the US-backed regime." (See Bush Nominee linked to Latin American Terrorism, by Bill Vann, http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/VAN111A.html):

"Under the rule of General Gustavo Alvarez Martnez, Honduras's military government was both a close ally of the Reagan administration and was "disappearing" dozens of political opponents in classic death squad fashion.

(See Face-off: Bush's Foreign Policy Warriors by Peter Roff and James Chapin,http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/ROF111A.html

This did not prevent his nomination to the position of US Permanent Representative to the UN under the Clinton administration.

The Salvador Option

Negroponte became Ambassador to Iraq in 2004, where he set up a "security framework" for the US occupation, largely modeled on the Central American death squads. This project was referred to by several writers as the "Salvador Option".

While in Baghdad, Negroponte hired as his Counselor on security issues, a former head of special operations in El Salvador. The two men were close colleagues going back to the 1980s in Central America. While Negroponte was busy setting up the death squads in Honduras, Colonel Steele had been in charge of the US Military Advisory Group in El Salvador, (1984-86) "where he was responsible for developing special operating forces at brigade level during the height of the conflict.":

"These forces, composed of the most brutal soldiers available, replicated the kind of small-unit operations with which Steele was familiar from his service in Vietnam. Rather than focusing on seizing terrain, their role was to attack ‘insurgent’ leadership, their supporters, sources of supply and base camps." (Max Fuller, For Iraq, "The Salvador Option" Becomes Reality, Global Research, June 2005)

In Iraq, Steele was "assigned to work with a new elite Iraqi counter-insurgency unit known as the Special Police Commandos". In this context, Negroponte's objective was to encourage ethnic divisions and factional strife, by triggering covert terrorist attacks directed against the Iraqi civilian population.

Negroponte was appointed as the Head of the Directorate of National Intelligence in 2005, and subsequently in 2007 came to occupy the Number Two position in the State Department.

The Kosovo Option: Haiti

This is not the first time that the "Kosovo model" of supporting terrorist paramilitaries has been applied in Latin America.

In February 2003, Washington announced the appointment of James Foley as Ambassador to Haiti. Ambassadors Goldberg and Foley are part of the same "diplomatic stable". Foley had been a State Department spokesman under the Clinton administration during the war on Kosovo. He was involved at an earlier period in channeling support to the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA).

Amply documented, the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) was financed by drug money and supported by the CIA. ( See Michel Chossudovsky, Kosovo Freedom Fighters Financed by Organized Crime, Covert Action Quarterly, 1999 )

At the time of the Kosovo war, the then ambassador to Haiti James Foley had been in charge of State Department briefings, working closely with his NATO counterpart in Brussels, Jamie Shea. Barely two months before the onslaught of the NATO led war on 24 March 1999, James Foley, had called for the "transformation" of the KLA into a respectable political organization:

"We want to develop a good relationship with them [the KLA] as they transform themselves into a politically-oriented organization,' ..`[W]e believe that we have a lot of advice and a lot of help that we can provide to them if they become precisely the kind of political actor we would like to see them become... "If we can help them and they want us to help them in that effort of transformation, I think it's nothing that anybody can argue with..' (quoted in the New York Times, 2 February 1999)

In other words, Washington's design was "regime change": topple the Lavalas administration and install a compliant US puppet regime, integrated by the "Democratic Platform" and the self-proclaimed Front pour la libération et la reconstruction nationale (FLRN), whose leaders are former FRAPH and Tonton Macoute terrorists. (For further details see Michel Chossudovsky, The Destabilization of Haiti, Global Research, February 2004)

Following the 2004 coup d'Etat which led to the downfall of the Aristide government, KLA advisers were brought into Haiti by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to assist in the country's reconstruction. (See Anthony Fenton, Kosovo Liberation Army helps establish "Protectorate" in Haiti, Global Research, November 2004)

Specifically, the KLA consultants were to assist in restructuring the Haitian police force, bringing into its ranks, former members of FRAPH and the Tonton Macout.

[In support of] the "Office of Transition Initiatives," (OTI) ... USAID is paying three consultants to help consult for the integration of the former brutal military into the current Haitian police force. And who are those three consultants? Those three consultants are members of the Kosovo Liberation Army." (Flashpoints interview, November 19, 2004, www.flashpoints.net )

The Salvador/ Kosovo option is part of a US strategy to fracture and destabilize countries. The USAID sponsored OTI in Bolivia performs much the same function as a similar OTI in Haiti.

The stated purpose of US covert operations is to provide covert support as well as as training to "Liberation Armies" ultimately with a view to destabilizing sovereign governments. In Kosovo, the training of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) in the 1990s had been entrusted to a private mercenary company, Military Professional Resources Inc (MPRI), on contract to the Pentagon.

It is worth noting that in Pakistan, recent developments point towards direct forms of US military intervention, in violation of Pakistani sovereignty.

Already in 2005, a report by the US National Intelligence Council and the CIA forecast a "Yugoslav-like fate" for Pakistan "in a decade with the country riven by civil war, bloodshed and inter-provincial rivalries, as seen recently in Balochistan." (Energy Compass, 2 March 2005).

According to a 2006 report of Pakistan's Senate Committee on Defence, British intelligence was involved in supporting the Balochistan separatist movement. (Press Trust of India, 9 August 2006). The Bolochistan Liberation Army (BLA) bears a canny resemblance to Kosovo's KLA, financed by the drug trade and supported by the CIA.

Washington favors the creation of a "Greater Balochistan" [similar to a Greater Albania] which would integrate the Baloch areas of Pakistan with those of Iran and possibly the Southern tip of Afghanistan, thereby leading to a process of political fracturing in both Iran and Pakistan. (Michel Chossudovsky, The Destabilization of Pakistan, December 30, 2007)


Global Research Articles by Michel Chossudovsky

Monday, September 15, 2008

Wayne Madsen deconstructs the neo-Cons' failing Latin American interference

Latin America uniting against neocons of Washington

By Wayne Madsen

(WMR) -- Antipathy and disgust for the Bush administration and its neocon ideological ilk, including the key players and advisers in the John McCain campaign, have long taken root in the Middle East and South Asia. Names like Cheney, Wolfowitz, Perle, Feith, and Ledeen are held in utmost contempt throughout the Middle East and Muslim worlds.

The same kind of hatred for the United States and its neocon Latin American policy is now sweeping through South and Central America. In Latin America, it is individuals with names like Goldberg, Levey, Shapiro, Mukasey, Berman, Brownfield, and Shannon who have rankled Latin American nerves by their meddlesome actions in not only grossly interfering in the domestic affairs of Latin American nations, including fomenting insurrection and acts of terrorism, but designating certain Latin American leaders and officials as aiding in drug trafficking and terrorism.

The lack of non-Cuban exile Hispanic surnames involved in crafting the U.S.’s Latin American policy is astounding considering the percentage of Hispanics in the United States.

Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Thomas Shannon told Rep. Howard Berman’s (D-CA) House Foreign Affairs Committee in July that “several” Venezuelans were providing support to Hezbollah, a rather bizarre mixing of Middle East and Latin American neocon policies in an obvious effort to please Berman, one of Israel’s most ardent supporters in the U.S. Congress.

From Bolivia to Venezuela and Honduras to Argentina, Latin American governments are standing firm against the interference by the American administration, which has done everything possible to stoke the flames of insurrection and secession in energy-rich areas of Bolivia, Venezuela, and Ecuador.

Bolivia’s President Evo Morales, who faces CIA and U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA)-sponsored right-wing rebellions in the energy-rich provinces of Santa Cruz, Pando, Tarija, and Beni, expelled U.S. Ambassador Philip Goldberg for interfering in Bolivia’s domestic affairs and supporting the right-wing rebels.

The State Department’s spokesman Sean McCormack, whose snottiness is unprecedented for a spokesperson for America’s seat of foreign diplomacy, responded by expelling Bolivia’s ambassador. McCormack had earlier joked that Russia could send warships to Venezuela if it could find any that could make it that far.

In a side quarrel, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov reportedly upbraided British neocon and pro-Israeli Foreign Secretary David Miliband by stating “who are you to fucking lecture me?”

Venezuela’s President Hugo Chavez, in solidarity with Morales and reacting to yet another CIA-planned coup against him, after an April 2002 coup organized by then-U.S. Ambassador Charles Shapiro failed, ordered U.S. Ambassador Patrick Duddy to leave Venezuela. The State Department responded by expelling Venezuela’s ambassador in Washington.

In an act coordinated between Treasury Undersecretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Stuart Levey and the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), headed by Adam Szubin, the assets of two current and one former Venezuelan officials were frozen after accusations that they aided and abetted drug smuggling and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), which is attempting to oust U.S. narco-fascist from power in Colombia.

Levey and Szubin named Hugo Armando Carvajal Barrios, the director of Venezuela’s Military Intelligence Directorate (DGIM); Henry de Jesus Rangel Silva, director of Venezuela’s Directorate of Intelligence and Prevention Services (DISIP); and Ramon Emilio Rodriguez Chacin, the recently-departed minister of Interior and Justice, in the freeze order. The three were named by the Bush regime after DGIM and DISIP uncovered a plot by CIA-based retired Venezuelan military officers to seize the Miraflores presidential palace in Caracas and blow up Chavez’s presidential aircraft, killing Chavez and his aides. The coup organization was identified as the “2-D Movement” or the “December 2 Movement.”

A spokesperson for the Venezuelan National Assembly described the plotters as some of the same military officers who participated in the CIA-backed 2002 coup against Chavez. The charges by Chavez came as Morales said the United States was behind the explosion of a natural gas pipeline from Bolivia to Brazil. The charges of American involvement in terrorist plans and attacks in Latin America came while Americans were being subjected to a gross use of another anniversary, the 9/11 terrorist attacks, to whip up nationalistic fervor.

Chavez also agreed with Argentina’s President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner that the trial in Miami of Guido Antonini, who is accused of attempting to deliver a suitcase of cash from Venezuela to help the presidential campaign of Kirchner in Argentina, was an attempt to “trash” both he and Kirchner. The Venezuelan and Argentine leaders are both ardent critics of neocons, their international free trade and financial contrivances, and the Bush regime.

The Justice Department of Attorney General Michael Mukasey is using the Miami cash-for-Argentina trial to damage Chavez and his Interior minister, Tarek el-Aissami. El-Aissami’s only crime appears to be that his father was born in Syria, which, of course, for neocons in their myopic and archaic of the world, is tantamount to having a direct link to terrorism.

Argentina has shown solidarity with both Venezuela and Bolivia in their showdowns with the United States. However, disgust with neocon-occupied Washington does not end with Venezuela, Bolivia, and Argentina. Paraguayan President Fernando Lugo extended his full support to Morales in his confrontation with the right-wing provincial secessionists. Honduran President Manuel Zelaya refused to accept the credentials of the new U.S. ambassador to Tegucigalpa, in solidarity with Morales and Chavez. Zelaya announced solidarity with Nicaragua, Cuba, Bolivia, and Venezuela in their showdowns with the United States.

Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega also supported Bolivia and Venezuela in expelling the American ambassadors and announced that Nicaragua, like Venezuela, was prepared to establish closer military links with Russia. Ortega particularly supported Bolivia sending Goldberg packing, saying the U.S. envoy had interfered in Bolivia’s internal affairs.

Nicaraguan Foreign Minister Samuel Santos also charged that Washington was trying to undermine Nicaragua’s government by pressuring international organizations to cancel aid packages to the country. Nicaragua also recognized the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia from the U.S.- and Israeli-backed Republic of Georgia.

After El Salvador presidential candidate for the progressive Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front (FMLN), Mauricio Funes, visited Argentina to meet with Kirchner, the neocon media began to claim that Funes was being funded by Chavez of Venezuela. The neocons, bereft of any hard evidence of “plots,” are always apt to concoct elaborate conspiracy theories that take in everyone whom they have targeted in their political sights.

The signs that the Bush regime and the neocons are on a major political offensive in Latin America are also demonstrated by the discovery in Guatemalan Vice President Rafael Espada’s office in Guatemala City of three hidden microphones -- one installed in a telephone, one in a calculator, and the third in a reception room. Guatemala’s progressive president, Alvaro Colom, has expressed solidarity with Bolivia and Venezuela. Ecuadoran President Rafael Correa, who has faced CIA-backed secessionists in the Guayaquil area, also stood in solidarity with Morales and Chavez. Correa has ordered the United States Air Force to vacate a military air base at Manta next year and he accused the United States military of assisting Colombia in cross-border raids into Ecuador. Correa said if any evidence emerged of U.S. diplomats violating Ecuador’s sovereignty, they would also be expelled.

Peruvian President Alan Garcia also backed Morales against the secessionists as did Uruguayan President Tabare Vazquez.

Latin America’s political, military, and economic powerhouse, Brazil, also warned against any attempt by secessionists in Bolivia to overthrow Morales. Earlier, Brazil and Argentina announced they were eliminating the U.S. dollar as an international monetary exchange medium. Brazilian president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva’s foreign policy adviser, Marco Aurelio Garcia, told UPI that Brazil would oppose any rival or unconstitutional government in Bolivia. There are reports that U.S. “paramilitaries” are active in fomenting unrest in both Bolivia and Venezuela.

Washington has also revived the U.S. Navy’s Fourth Fleet, to be based in Jacksonville, Florida, a move that Cuba, Venezuela, and Bolivia claim is a return to U.S. “gunboat diplomacy.”

Original article posted here.

The refrain is growing: Yankee, go home.

Expulsion of US Ambassadors: Ecuador, Honduras support Bolivia & Venezuela

Ecuador, Honduras support Bolivia, Venezuela in expulsion of U.S. envoys

Ecuador and Honduras on Friday voiced support for Bolivia and Venezuela's decision to expel U.S. ambassadors in their countries in protest of Washington's intervention in their domestic affairs.

"The president of Bolivia, Evo Morales and the president of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, have enough reasons to label (as "persona non gratas") the U.S. ambassador in La Paz, Philip Goldberg, and that in Caracas, Patrick Duddy. I respect those countries' decisions and I am sure that they had their concrete and verified reasons," Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa said during his visit to Peru.

"Ecuador will make its resolutions in a sovereign way," Correa noted.

"I have to acknowledge that former U.S. ambassador to Ecuador always respected my country," the president said, adding that "if any U.S. ambassador or of any place attempts to interfere in our internal affairs or affect the country's security, he will be immediately expelled."

Correa made the remarks at a press conference at the Andean Community of Nations (CAN) that groups Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru.

The Ecuadorian president had previously met with his Peruvian counterpart Alan Garcia.

Meanwhile, reports monitored here said that Hondurian President Manuel Zelaya also voiced support for Bolivia's decision to expel the U.S. ambassador, saying he will not receive the new U.S. ambassador to Honduras for the moment, though he does not want to have problems with Washington.

In another development of the day, the Venezuelan government said it formalized the expulsion of U.S. ambassador to Venezuela, Patrick Duddy, after President Hugo Chavez announced the decision on Thursday to show solidarity with Bolivia.

The U.S. ambassador was asked to leave the country within 72 hours starting from 19:15 local time (2345 GMT) on Thursday.

In a communique, the government declared Duddy as "persona non grata" , saying it subjects the ties with the United States to an intense evaluation "to guarantee the respect to our homeland."

Bolivian Ambassador to Venezuela Jorge Alvarado said on Friday that he appreciates Venezuela's sympathy with La Paz, describing the words of President Chavez as a honor and an incentive for the Bolivian people.

"The Bolivians, Venezuelans and the Latin Americans should feel proud because our governments are dignifying us," Alvarado said.

Alvarado said Latin American nations could not react to the U.S. intervention before, because they lived with alleged help from it. "But we are now showing that we can expel a U.S. ambassador," Alvarado told local VTV channel.

Bolivian President Evo Morales on Wednesday requested U.S. Ambassador to Bolivia Philip Goldberg to leave the country immediately, accusing him of "heading the division" inside Bolivia by encouraging, together with the opposition, the protests agains this government.

Original article posted here
.

Rare article from Newsweek that actually says something helpful about international news: focus on Bolivian crisis

Revolt of the Rich

Despite winning last month's recall election, President Evo Morales faces escalating violence from protesters who don't want to share the nation's natural-gas wealth.

Michael Miller
Newsweek Web Exclusive

Relations between Bolivia's President, Evo Morales, and the country's wealthy easterners were tense from the start. Since Morales's election in 2005, the eastern provinces, known as the "Media Luna," or half moon, which have grown rich on natural gas, have fought bitterly over a new constitution that would redistribute some of that wealth to the western provinces. The opposition has requently waged disruptive strikes. Protests began to take a more violent turn after Morales trounced the opposition in last month's recall election. This week at least eight Bolivians were killed in clashes. Opposition groups blew up part of a natural gas pipeline and vandalized government offices, causing millions of dollars worth of damage. They have also succeeded in disrupting trade with Brazil and Argentina, which rely on Bolivia's natural gas.

Relations between Bolivia and the United States have quickly deteriorated as well. Bolivia expelled U.S. ambassador Philip Goldberg for "conspiring against democracy" and in response the Bush administration sent the Bolivian ambassador in Washington packing. In a show of support, Hugo Chavez, Venezuela's president and staunch Evo ally, ejected the American envoy from Caracas. On Friday, Morales sent troops into the eastern provinces to restore order. To find out where it's all headed, Newsweek's Michael Miller talked with economist and Bolivia expert Mark Weisbrot, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, D.C. Excerpts:

Newsweek: How serious is the fallout between the United States and Bolivia?
Weisbrot:
I think it's serious. I think that this thing was coming for a long time. There had been a number of incidents. There was the incident with the Peace Corps and the Fulbright scholar [asked to spy by the U.S. Embassy]. And then there are the meetings between the ambassador and the opposition. Obviously he's the ambassador: he should meet with everybody. But the way he did and the timing of it was considered unfriendly. I think you have a bigger structural problem, which is that you have USAID funding groups in Bolivia but they won't disclose who they are. They are doing this now in Venezuela too. These are polarized countries. So on that basis both of these governments [Bolivia and Venezuela] just assume that Washington is doing what it has always done, which is to fund the people that they are sympathetic to.

How much influence do eastern Bolivia's large estate owners have? What kind of pressure do opposition groups exert in Bolivia?
Quite a bit. That's what this conflict is really about. You have the most concentrated land ownership in almost the entire world in Bolivia, with around two thirds of the land owned by six tenths of one percent―not even one percent―of the landowners. Obviously Evo Morales ran on a platform of land reform. He is not talking about confiscating huge amounts of land, but there is going to be some redistribution. There is the hydrocarbon revenue, which goes disproportionately to the Media Luna states with the opposition governors. So those are the two big economic reasons for this conflict.

Which one, land or hydrocarbons, is really the central issue?
That is a tough question. The hydrocarbons are more immediate because [the government has] already begun some redistribution there. Morales has not touched the landowners. So I guess you could say that [hydrocarbons] are the bigger issue.

I was in Bolivia a couple months ago and I met with the Central Bank and the ministries. The government has $ 7 billion in reserves right now in the Central Bank, which is an awful lot [considering] their whole GDP is only $13.2 billion. Most of it is owned by the prefectures, the provinces, so they have a lot of money. So it is hard to explain why they would raise such a fuss over the government wanting to take a small part of that and use it for some pensions
for people over 60, which also goes to their own residents.

How does this tie into the recent recall election in Bolivia? Wasn't that election meant to resolve this impasse between the Morales government and the opposition provinces?
It did show some things. First of all, Morales got 67 percent of the vote, which is as big as you get in politics in the world without fixing the election. And the other thing it showed is if you look at the Media Luna provinces, while it's true that the opposition won, the vote for Morales also went up enormously as compared to what he got in 2005. So his support, his mandate, really increased quite a bit since the 2005 election. What you are seeing right now is that the people who could not win anything at the ballot box are trying to use other means. They are cutting off the gas, which is very serious.

What are the financial consequences of opposition groups disrupting Bolivia's natural gas pipeline?
It's huge. It's more of a problem for Brazil than it is for Bolivia: they get half their gas from Bolivia and more than half in the industrial region of Sao Paolo. For Bolivia it is quite a lot of money. It is a $100 million estimated just to fix [the gas pipeline] and $8 million per day of revenue lost as well. But it is even worse than that because the opposition can really sabotage the whole economy. Everything that the government is doing in terms of the next five years as far as extending gas supply to Brazil and Argentina, if Bolivia can't be a reliable gas supplier then those countries are going to have to look elsewhere. So it is a form of serious sabotage. The [Morales government] is calling it "terrorism."

Will Morales's mandate enable him to act more forcefully toward the breakaway provinces or is he going to have to wait for the constitutional referendum in December?
I think he is going to have to do something. The government has been very pacifist and I think they don't get enough credit for that. Most governments in the world would have sent in the military in force and a lot of people would have been killed. He has been extremely restrained. He has tried to avoid violence at all costs and the opposition has been emboldened by that. They just keep escalating. Now they are taking it to a different stage and I don't know how much more the government can just try to ignore it. They really depend on these gas exports, as do Brazil and Argentina. Brazil issued a statement the other day that said they will not tolerate an interruption in the constitutional order in Bolivia. Whether that means they will send troops, I don't know.

Does this have a financial impact on the United States? Or is the decision to expel the Bolivian ambassador simply a quid pro quo response? Is there real money at stake for the United States?
I don't think there is really anything at stake for the United States. If [by antagonizing Morales] they push Chavez too far, there is always the chance that he could cut off oil. But it is unlikely.

What type of fallout will there from Morales' use of troops in the eastern provinces?
It depends on what the [government forces do] and on their capacity for crowd control and using non-lethal weapons. Look at what happened prior to Morales: they are still trying to extradite the former president [Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada] for all the people who were killed in the demonstrations back then. Morales has been on the other side of this and he knows that things can get out of control. So he is trying to do everything to avoid that but it's not easy when you have an opposition that is not operating by the same rules.

Original article posted here.

Honduras joins anti-empire struggle against US and in support of Bolivia

Honduras in diplomatic snub to U.S. over Bolivia

TEGUCIGALPA (Reuters) - Honduras, a former U.S. ally in Central America now run by a leftist government, told a U.S. envoy not to present his credentials as ambassador on Friday in a diplomatic snub in support of Bolivia.

Bolivia and anti-U.S. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez are in a fight with Washington over what they see as U.S. support for violent protests against Bolivian President Evo Morales.

Honduran President Manuel Zelaya, who has moved the country closer to Chavez, was due to receive a new U.S. ambassador on Friday in a ceremony at which the envoy would present a letter with his diplomatic credentials.

But Zelaya temporarily put off the event in support of Bolivia, a government source said.

"The government decided to temporarily suspend the reception of the new ambassador's letter of credentials in solidarity with Bolivian President Evo Morales," the source said. The snub means that envoy Hugo Llorens is not officially U.S. ambassador.

The United States imposed sanctions on aides to Venezuela's Chavez on Friday in retaliation for his expulsion of the U.S. ambassador, escalating a crisis that raises the spectre of a possible oil supply cutoff.

Bolivia and the United States expelled their respective ambassadors earlier this week after Morales accused Washington of supporting the opposition in the Andean country.

Violent anti-government protests have killed eight people in Bolivia, where rightist governors have rebelled against the popular president, demanding autonomy and rejecting his plans to overhaul the constitution and break up ranches to give land to poor Indians.

Original article posted here.

South America with a possibility of shaking of US repression and intervention by unifying over Bolivia

Leaders to meet on Bolivia crisis

The toll from clashes between opponents and supporters of the government has risen to 30 [AFP]

South American leaders are set to gather in Chile on Monday to come up with a plan to prevent Bolivia from breaking apart.

The emergency meeting comes as Evo Morales, Bolivia's president, struggled on Sunday to re-impose order in the country as the toll from violence between opponents and supporters of the government continued to rise.

Al Jazeera's Mariana Sanchez, reporting from Caracas, said the situation was tense and the economic stakes high in Bolivia.

The South American leaders were keen on a way out of the crisis - in part so that Bolivian gas supplies to the region would not be disrupted - but Morales and his opponents had to compromise and offer up some concessions, our correspondent said.

Talks within the country were already under way in La Paz late on Sunday between the country's vice-president and Mario Cossio, the governor of Tarija province representing governors of resource-rich provinces who are against Morales' plans to redistribute wealth to the country's poor indigenous people.

Rising toll

The toll from clashes in Pando province – where Morales declared martial law on Friday – had risen to at least 30, Alfredo Rada, the interior minister said on Sunday, as the authorities accused protesters of setting fire to a town hall and blocking highways in opposition-controlled provinces, impeding fuel and food distribution.

Food and fuel deliveries have been disrupted by protesters blocking roads [AFP]
Morales dispatched troops on Friday and accused anti-government forces of killing his supporters.

Officials said the toll was expected to rise as more bodies continued to be found in the hills and the river.

Ivan Canelas, a presidential spokesman, said without providing details that opposition-led highway blockades continued on Sunday and that "an armed group" had set fire to the town hall in Filadelfia, a municipality near Cobija.

"There are people who want to continue sowing pain across the region," he said.

The La Paz newspaper La Razon quoted the country's highways chief as saying blockades had halted transit on major roads in the opposition-governed eastern provinces of Tarija, Beni and Santa Cruz.

US rejects accusations

Meanwhile, the US ambassador to Bolivia is on his way out of the country.

Morales and Hugo Chavez, Venezuela's president and staunch Morales ally, ordered the US ambassadors expelled from their countries last week.

Some provinces oppose Morales' push to empower the indigenous majority [AFP]
Morales has offered no detailed evidence of Philip Goldberg's alleged conspiracy with the opposition, but has accused Goldberg of egging on anti-Morales forces through meetings with governors who have publicly called for the president to be removed.

But Goldberg denied the charge and called the decision to expel him a big mistake on Sunday in his first public comments on the matter.

"I would like to say that all the accusations made against me, against the embassy and against my nation are completely false and unjustified," he told reporters in La Paz as he prepared to leave.

The gravest challenge to Morales' nearly three years as Bolivia's first indigenous president stems from his struggle with the four eastern lowland provinces where the country's natural gas riches are concentrated and where his government has in effect lost control.

The provinces are seeking greater autonomy from Morales' leftist government and are insisting he cancel a December 7 referendum on a new constitution that would help him centralise power, run for a second consecutive term and transfer fallow terrain to landless peasants.

Morales says the new charter is needed to empower Bolivia's indigenous majority.

Original article posted here.

Attempted coup in Paraguay to end rule of two week presidency reminiscent of plans of a certain superpower

Paraguay: New government faces elite resistance

Kiraz Janicke

Barely two weeks after being sworn in on August 15, a coup plot to oust newly elected Paraguayan president Fernando Lugo was exposed on September 2.

Reflecting a growing shift to the left across Latin America, the April 20 election of Lugo put an end to the right-wing Colorado Party’s six-decade-long grip on power — including a 35-year period of military dictatorship.

In an August 15 interview with Argentine daily Clarin, Lugo — a former Catholic priest known as “the Bishop of the poor” — said one of his first measures would be to “recuperate institutionality”.

“We are going to take over state institutions identified with the hegemonic party. We want these institutions to be at the service of all citizens, without ideological distinction”, he explained.

A supporter of the landless peasants’ movement, Lugo has also pledged to carry out a program of agrarian reform, although since being elected has criticised land occupations carried out by poor peasants arguing they should be a “last resort”.

He has also promised to implement a series of measures to combat poverty.

However, this reform program has put him on a collision course with the right-wing oligarchy.

The coup plot allegedly involved Lugo’s predecessor Nicanor Duarte, Attorney-General Ruben Candia Amarilla, electoral court president Manuel Morales and retired general Lino Oviedo. It was exposed after the group invited General Maximo Diaz Caceres, the officer who is the official intermediary between the armed forces and parliament, to a meeting on August 31 to discuss the best way of ousting Lugo.

Oviedo, who attempted a coup in 1996 after being sacked as army chief, is also implicated — though never tried — in the murder of former vice-president Luis Maria Argana in 1999 and the ensuing “Bloody March” massacre of six pro-democracy protesters on March 26, 1999.

Oviedo was pardoned by the Supreme Court for his role in the 1996 coup attempt just in time for him to run in the 2008 elections as a candidate for the National Union of Ethical Citizens (UNCE). He came third.

Parallel senates

Clifton Ross reported in a September 2 Upsidedownworld.com article that Oviedo specifically asked Diaz Caceres about the “appearance” of the military as a means of resolving a crisis over the existence of two competing senates formed, respectively, by Duarte and by Lugo.

Diaz Caceres immediately reported the meeting to the commander of the Paraguayan armed forces, General Bernadino Soto Estigarribia, who in turn reported it to Lugo — assuring him that the military would take no position on the question of the two separate senates.

The crisis of the two separate senates arose after Duarte illegally registered to run for the Senate while still serving as president, and attempted to get himself sworn in as a senator.

In a manoeuvre when only a minority of senators were present, Duarte and Oviedo managed to pass a resolution electing UNCE member Enrique Gonzalez Quintana as “president” of the senate, and swore in Duarte as a senator.

The majority of the Senate — involving some of the Authentic Radical Liberal Party (PLRA), other factions of the Colorado Party and Lugo’s Alianza coalition — rejected these actions and formed a parallel senate.

In a press conference on September 1, with heads of the armed forces behind him, Lugo warned Paraguayans to be “alert against anti-democratic and retrograde sectors out to overthrow” the government and called on the people to mobilise in support of the process of change, according to a Reuters report that day.

On September 4, the Popular Social Front — formed after Lugo’s election in order to unite left groups, social movements, unions and peasant organisations — held a rally of more than 10,000 people outside the Senate in support of the new president, shouting “Nicanor, go home!”

The same day, an ordinary session of the Senate passed a resolution excluding Duarte as an active member, but ratifying him as a non-voting “senator for life”, as is traditional for ex-presidents.

Governments across Latin America, including Brazil, Venezuela, Argentina, Bolivia, Uraguay and Ecuador, as well as Organization of American States President Miguel Insulza, issued statements in support of Lugo.

Resistance

Despite winning this first battle, Lugo faces enormous resistance to his program of change from the old elites, including from within his own governing coalition.

As a September 4 statement by the Brazilian Communist Party pointed out, the conservative PLRA occupies the vice-presidency and many ministries, constituting the government’s largest parliamentary support base.

While the PLRA, Lugo’s main institutional support, is opposed to any change in the agrarian structure, the main social movement is the landless peasants’ movement, which is demanding land redistribution.

Paraguay is one of the biggest beef and soy producers in Latin America, however almost 80% of land is owned by only 1% of the population — many with ties to both the Colorado Party and PLRA.

According to Bloomberg, agriculture minister Candido Vera Bejarano indicated on September 8 that the Lugo government will press ahead with proposals for a new tax on soybean production and banning the growing of oilseed in some areas, as part of a broader agrarian reform package.

Currently soy producers pay no tax on exports.

Unlike neighbouring Argentina, which imposed a variable tax rate on soy in March that led to a four-month conflict with agricultural producers, Paraguay will attempt to negotiate a new tax with producers, Bejarano said.

The government will also create zones dedicated to small-scale farming, where the cultivation of soybeans will be prohibited, the minister said.

However, Luis Enrique Cubillas, advisor to Paraguay’s Oilseed and Cereals Chamber (CAPECO) said soybean growers will protest if the government attempts to introduce a direct tax on exports.

“We have indicated before that we are willing to discuss a tax on profits with the government”, Cubillas said. “But we will not accept any taxes on exports, in fact we will go out onto the streets to defend our rights”.

As with other progressive governments in Latin America, Lugo will have to rely on the mobilisation of the popular masses to break this impasse with the oligarchy, if he is to genuinely implement a program of progressive change.

Original article posted here.

Empire still fighting back: Threats still being made to Chavez's back, likely with US support

Chavez slams critics for downplaying alleged plot

CARACAS, Venezuela: President Hugo Chavez reprimanded skeptics on Sunday for questioning his warnings that Washington is out to kill him — an accusation that Venezuela's opposition dismisses as a ploy to distract from domestic problems such as rampant violent crime and corruption.

Venezuelans are sharply divided between those who believe that radicals backed by the United States are plotting to assassinate their socialist leader, as the government claims, and critics who seriously doubt the accusations.

"Those who talk about it try to ridicule the allegation. For Venezuela's opposition, it's a lie," Chavez said on his Sunday broadcast show. "Some say it's a farce."

"They don't care about my death," Chavez added, suggesting some government adversaries would like to see him assassinated.

Chavez ordered the U.S. ambassador to leave Venezuela last week — both to underscore his accusation that the envoy was aiding a purported coup plot by dissident military officers, and to show support for embattled Bolivian President Evo Morales, who expelled the U.S. envoy in that country after accusing him of egging on opposition protesters. The U.S. ambassadors in both countries have denied the allegations.
Today on IHT.com
Frantic day on Wall Street as banks teeter
Malaysia may be on brink of new era
After Hurricane Ike, rescuers scour ravaged areas

Chavez also recalled Venezuela's ambassador in Washington, saying diplomatic relations will not return to normal until President George W. Bush leaves the White House.

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack called the allegations against the ambassador false, saying Duddy's expulsion reflects Chavez's "weakness and desperation."

Chavez made the accusations after a recording surfaced of a purported conversation between conspirators on plans to assassinate him and topple his government. He claims plotters sought to blow up the presidential plane or bomb the presidential palace.

Five suspects including active and retired military officers have been detained. Military prosecutors are questioning others.

In the recording, a voice identified as an ex-officer says "we're going to take" the presidential palace. Others discuss using troops to block highways and establishing communications with military outposts surrounding Caracas.

"It's proof they'll do anything to get rid of Chavez," said Omar Blanco, a 56-year-old mechanic interviewed in downtown Caracas. He vowed to defend the president "if they try to remove him from power."

It was not clear when the conversation broadcast on state television was recorded. The military officers identified as suspects have not responded to the accusations publicly, and some suspect the recording is bogus.

"Who would be so stupid as to plan a coup or assassination during a telephone conversation, giving names of the conspirators and details?" radio talk show host Marta Colomina, a fierce Chavez critic, wrote in an editorial published Sunday in the local El Universal newspaper.

Chavez has accused Washington of conspiring with his opponents to assassinate him or spur his ouster dozens of times since he took office in 1999.

In 2006, Chavez said a sniper with a long-range rifle had planned to shoot him as he exited a helicopter on a trip to western Venezuela. The alleged suspect was never arrested.

Several days later, the former paratroop commander said he had received warnings from within the White House that Washington was plotting to assassinate him. He did not provide details or reveal of the name of his alleged source.

And last year, Chavez said Venezuela had gathered intelligence that associates of Cuban militant Luis Posada Carriles — a former CIA operative — were plotting his assassination. He did not elaborate, saying only that U.S. Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte — a former director of national intelligence — was involved.

U.S. officials have repeatedly denied that Washington has any designs on Venezuela.

The United States is believed to have been involved in the 1963 assassination of South Vietnam President Ngo Binh Diem and repeated attempts to kill Cuba's Fidel Castro — one of Chavez's closest allies — but political assassination was officially outlawed by former President Gerald R. Ford in an executive order in the mid-1970s.

Original article posted here.

Wednesday, August 27, 2008

While Washington bitches about secessionist elements in Georgia, they seem to be promoting the same in Bolivia

Bolivia: Is Evo in Danger after the August 10 referendum ? The US prepares a civil war


Global Research, August 10, 2008
Bolivia has certainly changed. In La Paz, I attended a large reception given by the Cuban ambassador. Mojitos, buffet, dances... Where was it held? In the ceremonial hall of... the Bolivian army. Yes, the one that killed Ché.


Bolivia has certainly changed, but not everyone wishes it well. We had come to get an idea first hand with some progressive intellectuals from about 15 countries. Frei Betto, Ernesto Cardenal, Ramsey Clark, François Houtart, Luis Britto Garcia, Pascual Serrano... A few days of meetings and exchanges with Bolivian intellectuals, representatives of the Indian communities, artists...

It's a sensitive moment. The rightwing is trying to split away the wealthy regions of the country's East. To frustrate this operation, President Evo Morales, in the middle of his mandate, has called for a revocatory referendum, this Aug. 10. It's a sort of vote of confidence. It puts his legitimacy in play, but also that of the prefects of departments, including those who belong to his opposition. The rightwing is trying to sabotage the referendum and people fear incidents...

We will see who is behind these incidents, which role the United States plays, and the CIA, and a really strange ambassador, and also Europe...

Strong impressions

Strong impressions. Physically, first of all. La Paz is at an altitude of 11,800 feet. Its airport at 13,100. We arrived in the night, short of oxygen, at the brink of passing out. Very attentive, the young people who welcome us have us sit down calmly, while they deal with our luggage and let us catch our breath.

The first day will be devoted to rest and acclimatization. With Luis, a Venezuelan friend, we take a small tour, taking small steps from one bench to the next, in one of the most beautiful capitals of the world. Imagine an immense basin, bordered by the imposing mountains Huayna Potosí (20,000 ft.) and Nevado Illimani (21,200 ft.), not far from the lake Titicaca, the highest navigable lake of the world. Here, water boils at 176° F instead of 212° F at sea level. And no street is flat.

What is striking about La Paz, in winter in any case, is the gentle climate, sunny and fresh. And the gentle people. Everywhere, you are welcomed with kindness, with a kind of quiet serenity. Indians wear heavy clothing with superb multi-coloured shawls. And of curious small "bolo" hats, black, brown or gray. Sometimes, they also carry impressive loads. Two-thirds of the population are Indians.

The importance of the Indian communities

"An Indian president? The white racist oligarchy still won't accept it," Evo confides to us. I began to understand all the wealth of this Indian heritage while visiting with Bolivian friends in Tiwanaku, the capital of an old Incan empire...

We are on the very high plateau of the Altiplano, bordered by mountains. Here, Indians live under difficult conditions, from farming and raising animals. Not a cloud in the sky, an incredibly pure air, you can still feel the nighttime chill.

Tiwanaku was an immense city, whose excavations have hardly begun. A hundred local Indians are busy restoring the temple, an enormous pyramid in terraces. It was a very advanced civilization, which constructed its buildings based on a thorough knowledge of astronomy. It had created a metallurgical and textile industry. It cultivated more than 200 different kinds of corn and 400 kinds of potatoes, of which one species could be frozen and remain edible for ten years. The system of irrigation was very sophisticated with a very precise slope so that the stones would heat the water enough to prevent it from freezing. This system was so sophisticated that today the Agriculture Ministry will revive it to develop agriculture on the terraces. Water is rare here, a treasure.

An Indian elder carries out a ritual ceremony with our group, a sort of sacrifice of small symbolic objects, to celebrate the unity with the cosmos and to gather the wishes that we form. Emotion.

It is no about glorifying the past for its own sake, but to preserve the common memories and values and integrate them into the new society. A Bolivian journalist explains the importance of community here: "It is a strong element of Bolivia. Look here, according to international statistics, a Bolivian peasant has an average income of 50 dollars per year. You may as well say that he is dead! Except if one understands that the communal economy is the basis of our life here. "

In short, it's an invaluable heritage that must not be lost.

One Bolivian in four must emigrate

Strong impressions also regarding social realities in this country. In La Paz, the upper classes live at the lower end of the city, below 10,000 feet, where one breathes more easily. Lower classes, on the other hand, in El Alto: at over 13,000 feet. Small trade, small craft industries, a little animal husbandry in the high plateaus... Life is hard.

The second poorest country of Latin America, Bolivia has seen one of four of its children emigrate. Why? For centuries, this land was colonized by Spain. And all the benefit of its mining wealth, extracted at the cost of a murderous labor in semi-slavery, were carried to Europe. For decades, its gas and its oil benefited only a handful of rich people, but most of all some transnational corporations, especially European-based. The North bled the South thoroughly, leaving behind only misery.

And conflicts. Evo Morales, president for two-and-a-half years, did not fall from the sky. His presidency is the fruit of long years of worker and peasant resistance. The Indian communities have always been exploited, excluded and scorned by a white racist elite, dependent on the United States and Europe.

That's where poverty and underdevelopment arise. But when the Bolivians, to survive, take care of housework in Europe, they are treated like criminals and thrown into prison. Even children! Evo Morales courageously denounced the recent "Directive of Shame" which will make it possible all European countries to imprison the criminals, sorry, the immigrants, for up to 18 months.

Precisely, before leaving, I met with immigrant workers in Brussels, in particular the Latinos and Latinas. In struggle for months to obtain papers, i.e., their rights, their dignity. Confronting ministers who completely ignored them, they had to risk their lives: hunger strike, climbing cranes... Since they greatly appreciated Evo's letter to the E.U., they asked me to give a small message of gratitude to the Bolivian president. I did. It brought a smile to his face.

In fact, when you see the poverty here, the very low wages, the lack of industry, one understands why so many Bolivians must emigrate. But, when investigating further, one also understands that Europe is a dirty hypocrite who bears a heavy responsibility for this emigration. We will return to this later...

What has Evo accomplished?

But first of all let us take a look at what Evo accomplished in two-and-a-half years ... He nationalized oil and gas. Would you like to know why the corporate media calls the Colombian President Uribe "good" and Evo Morales "bad"? Very simple. The former cut the taxes of the transnational corporations from 14 percent to... 0.4 percent. To help these transnationals get installed locally under optimum conditions, the Colombian paramilitaries drove four million peasants off their land. The latter, Morales, in order to combat poverty, dared to return to the Bolivian nation the wealth it owned.

By nationalizing its hydrocarbon resources, Evo multiplied the public revenues by five and gave himself the means for relieving the most urgent evils: illiteracy has dropped by 80 percent, a part of the children working in the streets have returned to school, schools teaching in the Indian languages Aymara and Quechua have been established (20,000 graduates), free health care is already available for half of the Bolivians, a "Dignity" pension for those over 60, credit with zero-percent interest for products like corn, wheat, soy and rice. Thanks to Venezuelan aid, 6,000 computers were made available, especially at schools. Thanks to Cuban aid, 260,000 people had eye operations. Elsewhere in Latin America, they would be condemned to be blind, because they are poor.

Moreover, the public investments to develop the economy increased greatly. Bolivia eliminated its fiscal deficit, repaid half of its foreign debt (now down from $5.0 to 2.2 billion), reconstituted a small financial reserve, multiplied employment in the mines and the metal industries by four, and doubled the production and the incomes of these industries. The industrial GDP passed from $4.1 to $7.1 billion in three years. A thousand tractors were distributed to peasants. New roads were built.

In short, Bolivia advances. Not quick enough, some say. For these people, Evo is not moving hard enough against the rightwing and the big landowners. It is a debate that must be carried out among those who live on the spot and can appreciate the situation, with all its possibilities and dangers. And by understanding that it is not enough to say "Do it" to bring a country out of poverty and dependence. By knowing that it is necessary to take account of the relationship of forces with the rightwing, which is agitating and sabotaging. By taking account of the army (Will all its generals be loyal to the government under all conditions?).

Another negative factor: "The legal system remains completely corrupted," was confided to me by... the highest ranking magistrate in La Paz. "It is an old caste that protects itself and the interests of the rich. It's a business, truly. However, we have threatened the immediate recall of any judge caught in an obvious crime. But it is a difficult battle."

And precisely, when I was there, the courts came rushing to help the rightwing by trying to prevent by a legal battle the holding of the referendum.

But there is danger much greater than the legal system...

Behind the rightwing, the United States prepares a civil war

It is the new tactic of the United States. Finding themselves unable to win a war of occupation, Washington is resorting to indirect war, war by proxies. Currently, strategy of Washington is to try to foment a civil war in Bolivia. For that, the provinces controlled by the rightwing and which contain the greater part of the oil and gas reserves along with the large agricultural properties tied to the transnationals, these provincial regimes are multiplying their provocations to prepare to secede.

Having personally studied the secret actions of the great powers to break up Yugoslavia (1), I made a point of drawing the attention of the Bolivians, during some interviews: today, Washington will try to transform their country into a new Yugoslavia.

Here are the ingredients needed for this deed: 1. Massive CIA investments. 2. An ambassador specialized in destabilization. 3. Experienced fascists. With these ingredients, you can prepare a coup d'etat or a civil war. Or both.

First ingredient. As in Venezuela, the CIA is investing a lot in Bolivia. Through its usual covers: USAID, National Endowment for Democracy, Republican International Institute, etc. The right-wing separatist organizations are abundantly subsidized. USAID, for example, financed Juan Carlos Orenda, adviser of the extreme right Civic Committee of Santa Cruz and author of a plan envisaging the secession of this province.

But they also support the more discreet organizations charged to sow confusion and to prepare an anti-Evo propaganda. At the University of San Simon of Cochabamba, the Thousand-year Foundation received $155,000 to criticize the nationalization of gas and defend neoliberalism. Thirteen young Bolivian right-wing leaders were invited for training in Washington: $110,000. In the popular districts of El Alto, USAID launched programs "to reduce the tensions in the zones prone to social conflicts." Read: to discredit the left.

In all, millions of dollars have been handed out to all kinds of organizations, student groups, journalists, politicians, judges, intellectuals, businesspeople. The Spanish Popular Party, around Jose Maria Aznar, takes part in these operations.

Second ingredient. Where does Philip Goldberg, the current ambassador of the United States to Bolivia, come from? From Yugoslavia. Where he accumulated a rich personal experience in how to split a country apart. From 1994 to 1996, he worked in Bosnia for Ambassador Richard Holbrooke, one of the strategists of disintegration. Then, he stirred up conflict in Kosovo and fomented the split between Serbia and Montenegro. An expert, you could say.

And not inactive. As the Argentinian journalist Roberto Bardini tells it: "On June 28, 2007, a 20-year-old U.S. citizen, Donna Thi of Miami, was held at the airport of La Paz for trying to bring into the country 500 45-caliber bullets that she had declared to customs were 'cheese.' Waiting for her at the terminal was the wife of Colonel James Campbell, the chief of the military mission of the U.S. Embassy in Bolivia. U.S. Ambassador Philip Goldberg immediately intervened to obtain her release, saying that it was only an 'innocent error.' The ammunition, he declared, was to be used only for sport and show. In March 2006, another U.S. citizen, Triston Jay Amero, alias Lestat Claudius, a 25-year-old Californian, carrying 15 different identity documents, set off 660 pounds of dynamite in two La Paz hotels." (2)

Why did the U.S. export Goldberg from the Balkans to Bolivia? To transform, I am sure, this country into a new Yugoslavia. Washington favors the method of promoting separatism to retake control of natural resources or strategic areas when governments act too independent, too resistant to the transnationals.

Third ingredient. Experienced fascists. In Bolivia, Goldberg openly supported and collaborated with Croatian-origin businesspeople in the leadership of the secessionist movement. Particularly with Branko Marinkovic, member of Federation of Free Entrepreneurs of Santa Cruz (the secessionist province). A very big landowner, Marinkovic also pulls the strings of the Transporte de Hidrocarbures Transredes (which works for Shell). He manages the 3,750 miles of oil and gas pipelines that feed out to Chile, Brazil and Argentina.

And when did these people come from Croatia? It should be recalled that, during World War II, the German leader, Nazi Adolf Hitler established fascist Greater Croatia where his collaborators, the Ustashis, set up death camps (including one especially for children!) that carried out a terrible genocide aimed at Serbs, Jews and Roma ("gypsy") people. (3) After the Nazi defeat, the Croatian Catholic Church and the Vatican organized "ratlines," paths for the Croatian fascist criminals (and for German Nazi Klaus Barbie) to escape. From Croatia in Austria, then onto Rome. And from there towards Argentina, Bolivia or the United States. (4)

When it became known that Franjo Tudjman and the leaders of the "new" Croatia born in 1991 had rehabilitated the former Croatian World War II criminals, one would like to know if Mr. Marinkovic disavows all this past or if, quite simply, he employs the same methods where he is now. As for the United States, one knows that it rehabilitated and recycled a large quantity of Nazi criminals and spies of World War II. The networks are always useful.

What hides behind separatism

There. All the ingredients are ready to blow Bolivia apart... The dollars of the CIA, plus the experts in provoking civil wars, plus the fascists recycled as businesspeople. A civil war that would serve the interests of the multinationals, but that international public opinion must absolutely prevent. The Bolivians have the right to decide their fate themselves. Without the CIA.

Because a secession would benefit only the elite. The Brazilian writer Emir Sader has just written very precisely: "Today, one of the methods that includes racism is separatism, the attempt to delimit the lands controlled by the white race, by adapting and privatizing the wealth that belongs to the nation and its people. We already knew these intentions in the form of the rich districts that sought to be defined as municipalities, with the goal that a share of the taxes taken by law from their immense richnesses remains under their control to increase the revenue to their split-off districts, behind which they sought to insulate and to use a privately controlled security apparatus to guard their privileged life styles.(...) The separatist referendum is an oligarchic, racist and economic device used because they want to keep the greatest part of the wealth of Santa Cruz for their own benefit and because the oligarchs want, moreover, to prevent the government of Evo Morales from continuing the process of land reform and extending all over the country." (5)

This autonomy, indeed, that means that the rich white people who have always controlled Bolivia refuse to listen to the non-white majority in its West. When one speaks about autonomy, Evo Morales answers: "Let us speak about autonomy, not for the oligarchy, but for the people with whom we struggle. These separatist groups which have just lost their privileges were for a long time in the palace, they controlled the country and allowed the plundering of our country, our natural resources, including its natural resources, and the same with the privatization of our companies, and now they once again want to reestablish this system which exposes their true interest: economic control."

But it's not only the United States that intervenes in Bolivia...

The hypocrisy of Europe : who thereby caused, "all the misery of the world"?

While hunting down undocumented workers, Europe slips into a sigh from the genteel nobility: "We cannot after all give succor to all the suffering of the world." Ah, well? But, actually, this misery, it is you who created it! Your Charles the Fifth, your Louis XIV, your Elisabeth I and your Léopold II happily massacred the "savages" to steal their wealth! This plundering was the basis of European capitalism's rapid economic growth. And today still your mining, agricultural and other corporations have not ceased to plunder the raw materials without paying for them, have not ceased dominating and deforming the local economies and blocking their development! Isn't it you who have the debt--to repay the South?

Would this be dredging up the past? In the media, the Europeans in charge like to say that today, they want only the best for Latin America and the Third World...

"Completely false," confided to me with indignation Pablo Solon, who represents Bolivia in the trade negociations between Latin America and the E.U: "Bolivia exp-lained it to the E.U. Before the negotiations, we had said that we would not negotiate a Free-Trade-style treaty. And we had communicated our points of divergence regarding services, investments, intellectual property and public property. The commission promised us that these points would be on the table during the negotiations. That in contrast with the "others," they would not try to impose a unique format on us. But, when we met with Peter Mandelson, European commerce official, he told us in a categorical and imperative way: 'This is a Free Trade Agreement. Accept it or you're out of the talks.' I answered personally that we were not going to exclude ourselves and that we were going to defend our points of view until the end. Because Bolivia has many industries which it must defend: steel, plastic, paper, which need mechanisms to protect themselves, as was done for the emergent European industries in the past."

Indeed, Europe showed that it is hyper-dominating and arrogant. It claims it will impose on all of Latin America and the Caribbean the end of subsidies that help to develop the local products, the suppression of the import duties (but it refuses to do the same at home!), suppression of every limit for European exports (refusing the reverse), the transfer without limits of the qualified European labor, and the modification of all laws protecting the local economies.

And moreover, the E.U. wants to impose the privatization of all state services, goods and enterprises. Although already in 2000, out of the 500 largest companies of Latin America and of the Caribbean, 46 percent already belonged to foreign corporations.

And moreover, the E.U. wants to impose patents on living things (Bolivia has a very rich biodiversity coveted by the chemical and pharmaceutical transnationals). But aren't living things, and water also, goods essential for survival, an innate property that should remain with those who always protected them and used them with care?

Ultimately, the E.U. wants to impose completely unbalanced treaties which will wipe out the Bolivian companies. All that it seeks is that the European companies can invade the markets freely. Thus they will ruin these countries. Thus they will provoke emigration. An absurd system, no?

Who chooses immigration and why?

I wrote that Europe drove out the Latino immigrants. That is less than accurate. Europe does not treat them all the same way.

On the one hand, European bosses import the best brains of the Third World, and also the very qualified technicians. They are under-paid to increase company profits. It is what Sarkozy and others call "selected immigration". The boss selects those who will be likely to work for him. But this brain-drain deprives the Third World of people whom it taught (at great cost) and who would be necessary to its development. A new form of plundering.

On the other hand, Europe also welcomes a part of the non-qualified workers. By leaving them without papers, therefore without rights, it forces them to live in fear, to accept wages and working conditions that constitute social reverses. It's an effective way to divide the working class and pressure the other workers. That's how the "competitiveness" of this virtuous Europe is manufactured. How Europe treats undocumented workers is no aberration, but an essential moving part of an economic system.

To sum up: Europe stole from Latin America. Europe continues to steal from Latin America. It stops the continent from nourishing its children. But when those children are forced to emigrate, it imprisons them. Then, it offers lessons of democracy and morality to the whole world.

The time has come

I could not remain in Bolivia a long time, but these people deeply impressed me. I remember the thousands of demonstrators who went down, this Sunday, towards the center of La Paz, crammed into their minibuses, cars or taxis, Indians and whites, from the fairest to the darkest.

With astonishing calm and much less noise than in any demonstration in any other part of the world. With a simple and noble determination. And in their eyes you could read a determination: the time has come to put an end to centuries of humiliations, the time has come for dignity for all, the time has come to make misery disappear.

And I thought once again of those undocumented friends in Brussels, who also demonstrated for their future and their dignity. The problem is obviously the same one, in Brussels and La Paz: for whom must the wealth of a country be used? And if this problem is not resolved in La Paz, the millions of undocumented workers will continue to knock on Europe's doors.

And tomorrow?

How will this evolve? For August 10, an pro-U.S. polling institute, like the majority of my contacts in La Paz, predicted a victory of Evo with 60 percent. On the other hand, some feared the influence of the problem of the inflation and the increase in the cost of living. Still others fear that the rightwing will launch violent provocations.

Whatever happens, the referendum itself will resolve nothing, neither in one direction, nor the other. Evo Morales will still face the same problem: the government is on the left, but it does not control the country's economy, nor its media (which is in the hands of the big landowners and the Spanish multinational Prisa), nor its universities, nor the Church, which is on the side of the rich as usual on this continent. One cannot do everything in two-and-a-half years. But, to advance, Evo will have to succeed more than even in mobilizing the popular masses. His only strength.

In any event, after the referendum, the question will remain the same: will the wealth of the country be used to enrich the wealthy and the transnational corporations or to develop the country and overcome poverty?

To resolve this question in its favor, Washington is ready to do anything. And the international progressive movement? How will it react against disinformation and the preparation of a civil war?

The answer depends on all of us.

Translation from French: John Catalinotto

If you want to send to your friends, French and Spanish versions available at :

[1] Test-media Yugoslavia y Kosovo, http://www.michelcollon.info/archives_testm.php
[2] Roberto Bardini, el embajador de la secesión, traducción francesa vuelta a ver B.I., nº 133, junio de 2008.
[3] Michel Collon, Liars' Poker, IAC, New York, 2002, p. 78
[4] Operación Ratlines, documental de David Young amargo Chanel 4 TVES, 1991. Citado en El Juego de la mentira, p. 83.
[5] CEPRID, la CIA allí la oligarquía en contubernio contradijo a Bolivia, ww.nodo50.org/ceprid/spip.php?article169


Michel Collon is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Michel Collon

Sunday, June 08, 2008

Chavez misstepping badly

Chavez revokes controversial law



Chavez says the law will be amended after
listening to public criticism [AFP]

Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan president, has revoked a law he decreed last month creating four spy agencies and a Cuban-style national informants' network.
"I started listening to criticism and in the end, I think there are some mistakes there," Chavez said on Saturday during a function of the ruling United Socialist Party (PSUV) of Venezuela.


The law, which the government said was needed to block US interference in Venezuelan affairs, made it a crime to refuse to co-operate with intelligence agencies and to publish information deemed "secret or confidential".





The intelligence and counter-intelligence law was approved in the end of May but is now temporarily declared null and will be modified to correct "some mistakes".
"I have no problem acknowledging it, so I decided this morning to correct that law," Chavez said.
Criticism

The law had sparked outrage among opposition members and human rights groups.

Marino Alvarado of the Venezuelan Programme for Education and Action on Human Rights (Provea) said the law "amounts to what is known as a police state".
Chavez specially cited problems with the regulation requiring co-operation from any person or business, whether domestic or foreign, with intelligence services.
"This is a mistake and not a small one," Chavez said.
"I cannot force someone when an intelligence unit asks for co-operation, to become an informant, and then if they refuse we put them in jail."
While not immediately signalling when an amendment would take place, Chavez promised to "rewrite the law listening to the criticism".
Ramon Rodriguez, Venezuela's interior minister, said the law would help Venezuela stand up to "things like the US interference in [Venezuela] internal affairs".
For Chavez, "the law was not bad but it has some elements that the adversary uses to generate fear".
"The battle is political, not legal.

Original article posted here.