|
By Doreen Miller
YellowTimes.org Columnist (United States)
(YellowTimes.org)
– "You're either with us or against us," as uttered by U.S. President
Bush, when viewed in light of the CIA's extensive "Coups 'R Us" history
of governmental overthrows, belies its singular reference to his war on
terrorism and unwittingly reveals a deeper, prevailing U.S. attitude
towards other nations in general, and towards democratically elected
leaders of foreign countries in particular. It seems the only form of
government the U.S. recognizes and is willing to support is that which
unequivocally bows to the supremacy of U.S. economic and political
interests.
How else does one rationally explain the apparent
hypocrisy between the U.S. "pro-democracy" rhetoric and its covertly
sanctioned, CIA-directed attempt to oust Venezuela's democratically
elected President Hugo Chavez? How does the United States, with a
straight face, justify backing repressive, military dictatorships such
as that of Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf, or, in the
not-so-distant past, rebel leaders such as Osama bin Laden and Saddam
Hussein who then permutate into dangerous renegades and dictators by
their own "USA-made-possible" might?
From
its inception in 1947, the CIA has had to answer to nobody but the
president under the terms of the National Security Act, leaving the
door wide open for many questionable and terribly undemocratic,
clandestine operations. Throughout its 55-year history, the CIA has
been responsible for political meddling, disinformation campaigns, the
assassinations of democratically elected leaders, and military coups in
more than three dozen countries, leaving a trail of dirty, blood-tinged
fingerprints in, but not limited to: Haiti, Dominican Republic,
Ecuador, Brazil, Indonesia, Greece, Congo (Zaire), Bolivia, Uruguay,
Australia, Angola, Nicaragua, Afghanistan, the Honduras, El Salvador,
and Colombia.
The
U.S. Congress passed laws in 1974, 1975, and again in 1986 after the
disclosure of CIA involvement in the Iran/Contra scandal, for the
purpose of assuring greater accountability of this governmental arm.
However, these reforms have proven themselves to be but superficial,
ineffective window dressing against a powerful backdrop of CIA cunning,
control, deception and stealth.
The
initial years of the CIA proved to be busy ones, indeed, as it
participated in corrupting the democratic election process in Italy by
buying up votes, broadcasting propaganda, lies and half-truths, and
beating up opposition leaders in order to successfully keep the
communists from winning. Another of its very first missions involved
securing U.S. interests in Greece against the threat of the "dreaded"
Communist Party. That was accomplished by backing and placing into
power notorious, anti-communist Greek leaders who were known for their
own shocking baggage of deplorable human rights abuses.
Contrary
to what one might expect, the high and mighty United States, model of
democracy, fares no better than its more ignominious counterparts when
it comes to upholding human rights around the world. In fact, it has a
long, and not-so-proud history of using violence, extortion, and murder
to install any kind of regime, including brutal dictatorships, if it
serves to protect its economic and corporate interests, most especially
its inalienable right to pursue the exploration and extraction of oil
and gas worldwide. The United States thinks nothing of being involved
in the overthrow of legitimate, democratically elected leaders that
fail to toe the arbitrarily drawn, U.S.-defined line.
In
1953, the CIA toppled, in its first military coup, the democratically
elected Mohammed Mossadegh of Iran after he had defiantly threatened to
nationalize British oil. He was summarily replaced with a dictator
whose secret police is said to have rivaled the brutality of the Nazi
Gestapo.
If
the democratically elected Guatemalan President Jacob Arbenz had been
paying close attention to the lesson of Iran, he never would have made
the foolhardy attempt in 1954 to nationalize the Rockefeller-owned
United Fruit Company, in which the CIA director, Allen Dulles,
personally owned stock. Arbenz, too, suffered the same fate as
Mossadegh, and was replaced, in a CIA-led military coup, by a series of
blood-thirsty dictators who would kill more than 100,000 Guatemalans
over the course of the next 40 years.
Have
you ever wondered how the United States convinced Cambodia to join its
efforts in the Vietnam War? Quite simply, the CIA dethroned Prince
Sihanouk, who was highly popular for keeping his country out of the
war, and replaced him with their personal marionette, Lon Nol, who
immediately complied with U.S. interests by throwing Cambodian troops
into battle. This created a chain reaction within opposition groups in
Cambodia, resulting in a bloody chaos that opened the path to the rise
in power of the Khmer Rouge, a ruthless faction that would claim the
lives of millions of innocent people.
The
1973 CIA-led military coup and subsequent assassination of the
democratically elected socialist leader Salvador Allende in Chile was
triggered when Allende nationalized American-owned firms in the hopes
of providing better conditions for his own people. He was replaced by
General Augusto Pinochet who tortured and murdered thousands of his
countrymen and women in a crackdown on labor leaders, unions and the
political left. Once again, much blood was shed and countless lives
lost for the ultimate purpose of preserving U.S. corporate interests
and sovereignty.
Within
the past few weeks, sophomoric attempts by the Bush Administration to
ward off accusations of its involvement in Venezuela's failed military
coup d'tat pale in comparison to the plethora of implicative
fingerprints left at and all along the trails leading up to and away
from the scene of the crime. Those who lived through the Chilean coup
of 1973 can corroborate key elements and tactics used by the CIA that
were replayed in Venezuela: the use of civilians to create an
atmosphere of chaos, a false picture of an elected leader turned
"dictator," the complicity of media controlled by the wealthy,
self-serving elite, and the use of the military to incite a coup.
Prior
to this bungled coup, the situation in Venezuela was akin to leaving an
open bottle of wine in the same room with a known alcoholic (the CIA)
and expecting him to resist the irresistible. Chavez, elected by an
overwhelming majority in the last election, had been openly critical of
the U.S. war in Afghanistan. He not only set about trying to correct
the incredible maldistribution of wealth in his country where 80
percent live in poverty, but aggressively criticized the "poisonous"
IMF policies of "plunder and exploitation" in Third World countries. To
bolster the sagging Venezuelan economy, Chavez levied taxes on the
rich, redistributed idle land of the wealthy to the landless, and cut
the production of and imposed tariffs on oil to raise its price, much
to the dismay of the insatiable, "we have a right to cheap oil" United
States.
What
actually sealed his temporary fate was his attempt to break free of
U.S. domination by resisting privatization of publicly owned
enterprises, or as Colin Powell put it, "distorting the democratic
free-market advocated by the U.S." Hitting the nail directly on the
head, Larry Birns, Director of the Council on Hemispheric Affairs,
might as well be talking about the U.S. relationship to the rest of the
world when he explains the role of Latin America as being a subservient
one whose function it is to "provide raw materials, cheap labor and
markets to the 'colossus of the North.' " In other words, autonomous,
independent development within foreign countries is simply not
tolerated by the U.S.
As
the weeks progress, more information will undoubtedly continue to be
brought to light revealing the extent of U.S. involvement in this
abominable assault on freedom and democracy. To date, ties have been
made between coup leaders and Otto Reich, who was directly involved in
the Iran/Contra scandal; Elliot Abrams, known for his role in the 1973
coup in Chile as well as his sponsorship of death squads in Argentina,
El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala; and John Negroponte, who was duly
informed at the beginning of this year of the impending action against
Chavez.
British
news reporters are currently investigating leads of alleged
coup-operative and logistical support from U.S. Naval ships in the area
at that time. Financial backing is being traced to the National
Endowment for Democracy, an arm of the CIA used for covert operations
abroad, which within this past year suspiciously quadrupled its
assistance for various Venezuelan groups, including $154,377 given
directly to Venezuelan labor union leader Carlos Ortega who worked
closely with "King-for-a-Day," Pedro Carmona.
The
fact that several coup leaders and their families have found safe
asylum in the welcoming arms of the United States flies in the face of
U.S.-agreed-to commitments set forth by the Inter-American Democratic
Charter whose provisions mandate its members defend democracy against
this very type of military overthrow. The United States also
dishonored this agreement not only by its immediate endorsement (within
hours!) of the illegitimate and highly undemocratic military regime of
Carmona, but also by its attempts to stifle criticisms of this new
order by other members of the Organization of the American States. So
as not to waste a moment in conveying legitimacy on the new government,
U.S. Ambassador Charles Shapiro was seen welcoming and congratulating
Carmona the very next day, all "smiles and embraces in an obvious state
of satisfaction," as reported by Venezuelan newspapers.
What
the coup leaders hadn't counted on was the sheer determination of the
Venezuelan people to rise up and defend their democracy against a
dangerous, fascist attitude - covertly and unscrupulously played out by
the United States over the years in numerous countries around the world
- that ignores and would contemptuously trample on the will of the
majority for the benefit of big business and the wealthy few.
Chavez's
ultimate crime was that of being an independent thinker whose, some
might argue "misguided," measures undertaken in trying to revise
flawed, inequitable domestic policies had somehow become "unacceptable"
to Washington. Translated that means, he dared to place the interests
of his own impoverished people over and above the corporate,
money-making interests of the United States.
There
is much to be said of the truth in the words of Christian Perenti, a
professor at the New College of California, when he describes Venezuela
as "the truest democracy in the world today" as it struggles "to reform
capitalism into a more egalitarian, healthier system." It seems to me
that the United States has a lesson to learn from its failed coup in
Venezuela about the true meaning and practice of democracy in
respecting and upholding the rights and will of the people.
Doreen Miller encourages your comments: dmiller@YellowTimes.org
YellowTimes.org encourages its material to be reproduced, reprinted, or
broadcast provided that any such reproduction must identify the original
source, http://www.YellowTimes.org. Internet web links to http://www.YellowTimes.org are appreciated.
|
