- Since taking office in January 2001, the Bush administration
targeted Hugo Chavez for removal. It tried and failed three previous
times:
-
- -- in April 2002 for two days; aborted by mass street
protests and support from many in Venezuela's military, especially from
its middle-ranking officer corp;
-
- -- the 2002 - 2003 general strike and oil management
lockout causing severe economic disruption; and
-
- -- the August 2004 national recall referendum in which
Chavez resoundingly prevailed with a 59% majority.
-
- Other disruptions have occurred since and now may again
be ongoing. US intervention is innovative and determined to regain control
of Venezuela and its vast hydrocarbon resources, the largest by far in
the hemisphere after Canada. Perhaps the world with the US Department
of Energy's estimate of 1.36 trillion extra-heavy oil barrels included
besides its proved 80 billion barrels of light sweet reserves, ranking
it seventh overall behind the five largest Middle East producers and Canada.
-
- Throughout most of his tenure and since the Bush administration
took over, CIA and various misnamed US quasi-governmental agencies have
been active in Venezuela. Ones like the National Endowment of Democracy
(NED). The International Republican Institute (IRI) with John McCain as
its chairman and its ties to extremist Republican party elements, and
the US Agency for International Development (USAID). All are imperial
instruments. Undemocratic and for rule by the power of money.
-
- They fund opposition groups and coup supporters. Arrange
(staged for media) anti-Chavez marches and street protests. Spend millions
to subvert democracy to return the country to its past. Oligarchs who
once controlled it. Washington and Big Oil that control them.
-
- They plot assassination attempts, according to Chavez
to remove him. To reverse Bolivarianism and its socially beneficial gains
in health care, education, housing, feeding the hungry, lifting millions
out of poverty, and enfranchising all Venezuelans in the country's participatory
democracy. Strengthening it at the grassroots.
-
- Recent Disturbing Events
-
- On September 10, Venezolana de Television's (VTV) La
Hojilla program disclosed a recording (from an undisclosed source) of
a planned military coup against Chavez - by active and retired plotters.
Participants named were Vice Admiral and National Guard Forces Inspector
General Carlos Alberto Millan Millan. National Guard General Wilfredo
Barroso Herrera, and retired Air Force General Eduardo Baez Torrealba
(involved in the April 2002 aborted coup). Unknown is who else is behind
this and how deep the suspected plot runs.
-
- Conversations recorded were about "tak(ing) the
Miraflores (presidential) Palace (government headquarters and) the TV
installations....that is all effort towards where (Chavez) is. If he's
in Miraflores, the effort goes toward there." Talk also was about
seizing the "command headquarters (with) the troops inside"
and about Maracay, Aragua state's Air Base Libertador where Venezuela's
F-16s and other planes are based.
-
- Baez Torrealba was heard saying: "We are divided
into four zones....east, west, and two in the centre" and have an
F-16 pilot. He mentions either attacking Chavez's plane or capturing it.
Possibly the presidential palace the way the CIA engineered it in Chile
for Augusto Pinochet against Salvador Allende on September 11, 1973 -
with bombs, rockets and tank fire. Open warfare on Santiago's streets.
Whether planned for Caracas is anyone's guess but it certainly is possible.
-
- Chavez knows the history as well as past conspiracies
against himself. He said on-air that his government "infiltrated
the most radical and fascist movements (and have) known for a long time
that they are looking for land and air rockets and sophisticated equipment
to blow up the presidential plane" and that past plans were to bomb
the Miraflores. He also knows that CIA is behind them and said if there's
a coup, "the counter-coup would be overwhelming" - meaning a
mass popular uprising to reverse it with military support, similar to
2002.
-
- Chavez then confirmed the detentions of several suspected
coop plotters and said others fled the country. He also expelled US ambassador,
Patrick Duddy. Gave him 72 hours to leave, and recalled his Washington
envoy, Bernardo Alvarez, in sympathy with Bolivia's Evo Morales. On September
10, he declared US ambassador, Philip Goldberg, persona non grata. Accused
him of supporting eastern Bolivian fascist elements and working with them
to plan a coup against his presidency.
-
- On September 20, another incident occurred, so far unexplained.
In west Caracas, a grenade was thrown from a residential building, killing
two and injuring 19 others. A 23-year old man was identified as the perpetrator,
who then, it was claimed, jumped to his death from the building's eighth
floor. No further information is available at this time but authorities
are investigating.
-
- Then around the same time in London, Samuel Moncada,
Venezuela's UK ambassador, attended a fringe Labour Party meeting and
expressed "fear(s) that the next few weeks will be very dangerous
for us." He believes that the Bush administration may try to oust
Chavez in its remaining months. Others in Venezuela also think something
is going on to destabilize the country. Possibly a plot to assassinate
their president and bring down his government.
-
- Disturbing Latin American stirrings in the final Bush
administration months along with all else on their plate and planned
in the Middle East, Central Asia and elsewhere. Plus the November presidential
and congressional elections and a hugely calamitous financial crisis commanding
daily headlines and top- level meetings as first order of business because
of its seriousness.
-
- Nonetheless, the Bush administration expelled Venezuela's
Washington ambassador after he'd been recalled following Chavez saying
"When there is a new government in the United States, we'll send
an ambassador." Given the campaign rhetoric by both US presidential
candidates, he may have a change of heart. Both promise permanent wars.
New fronts to wage them on, and an uncompromising pro-corporate agenda.
Not good news for independent democrats like Chavez, especially ones in
oil-rich countries like Venezuela.
-
- Separately on September 12, the Bush administration went
further with US Treasury officials announcing sanctions and the freezing
of assets against Hugo Carvajal Barrios and Henry Rangel Silva, both
Venezuelan intelligence chiefs. Also named was Ramon Rodriguez Chacin,
the country's former Justice and Interior Minister. Serious and unwarranted
accusations against high government officials for supporting drugs trafficking
and supplying arms to Colombia's FARC- EP resistance.
-
- On September 17, Washington also blacklisted Venezuela
(for the fourth time) and Bolivia (for the first time) for not cooperating
in the "war on drugs" and designated both countries and Burma
as "hav(ing) failed demonstrably during the previous 12 months to
adhere to their obligations under international counternarcotics agreements,"
in a statement released by the White House. The State Department listed
20 countries as illicit major drugs producers or transit sites.
-
- It omitted what scholar/researcher Peter Dale Scott calls
"Deep Events (or "deep politics" that governments try to
suppress) and the CIA's Global Drug Connection" in his article by
that title. The "complex geography or network of banks, financial
agents of influence and the 'alternative' or 'shadow' CIA" and its
possible involvement in major "deep events" like the Kennedy
assassination and 9/11. A "global financial complex of hot money
uniting prominent business, financial and government (elements) as well
as underworld figures." An "indirect empire (between) CIA, organized
crime, and their mutual interest in drug-trafficking."
-
- For the enormous profits that CIA uses for its operations
and helps it plot coups against countries like Iran (1953), Guatemala
(1954), Venezuela (2002) and maybe again in 2008 along with Bolivia and
the current Iranian government. For state terrorism like Operation Condor
(in Latin America in the 1970s). Iranian and Pakistani incursions currently.
All its other nefarious activities, including "strengthening drug
networks....in Laos, Pakistan, Lebanon, Turkey, Columbia," Thailand
and Afghanistan - the world's largest by far opium producer after Washington
replaced the Taliban and allowed regional "warlords" to ramp
up replantings.
-
- Also its involvement in a possible plot against Chavez.
At the least, the latest Bush administration efforts to tarnish and disrupt
his democratic government with considerable media support for its accusations
and much more.
-
- The Corporate Media on the Attack
-
- A New York Times September 18 Simon Romero article is
headlined: "Alleging Coup Plot, Chavez Ousts US Envoy." In it
he suggests the accuracy of a Human Rights Watch's (HRW) biased 2008 Venezuela
report discussed below. That "into its 10th year (Chavez's) government
has consolidated power by eliminating the independence of the judiciary,
punish(ed) critical news organizations, and engag (ed) in wide-ranging
acts of political discrimination against opponents." Leaving mentioned
the Chavez government's views to suggest his own and HRW's.
-
- Do it in spite of its tainted state. An example is how
it "condemn (es) human rights abuses in Colombia." Not the repressive
government. The most fascist in the region, but the FARC-EP and ELN resistance
against it. More on HRW below.
-
- A Miami Herald op-ed piece is headlined: "Expulsions
Underscore Chavez's Intolerance for Dissent" and states that expelling
"two respected human rights monitors from Venezuela is the latest
evidence that President Hugo Chavez is determined to muzzle dissenting
views....Mr. Chavez never misses an opportunity to rail against the United
States, but his real enemies are those who dare to take issue with his
politics. His anti-democratic agenda has restricted legitimate political
activity by his opponents for years, and his arbitrary behavior is getting
worse." The most far right US elements couldn't say it better or
be more mirror opposite the facts.
-
- A Los Angeles Times August 9 editorial accused Chavez
of a "power grab (and) attack(ing) democracy." The Washinton
Post calls him a Venezuelan caudillo or strongman. So does the Wall Street
Journal repeatedly. Reckless commentaries accuse him of rigging elections.
Excluding his most formidable opponents. Violating Venezuelan law, and
now engaging in drugs trafficking, terrorism, and delivering a suitcase
with $800,000 in slush money to Argentina's Cristina Kirchner for her
2007 presidential campaign. The Inter-American Dialogue's Peter Hakim
has "no doubt" this latter charge (playing out in a Miami courtroom)
is politically motivated and "is coming from the US government."
So are all the others.
-
- The Journal's Mary O'Grady wages constant war against
Chavez, and her latest September 15 op-ed refers to his "Russian
Dalliance." His holding joint exercises with Moscow's "flotilla."
Russia "evoking memories of the 1962 Cuban missile crisis by playing
war games with another would-be Latin strongman." Chavez "only
too happy to be used." Suggesting he and Evo Morales are communists
and all the negatives that implies. That Chavez is a "dictator."
That his "economy (is) in shambles" when, in fact, it's had
19 consecutive impressive quarters of growth and grew at 7.1% in the
second quarter - compared to America's unprecedented economic crisis and
contraction. That Chavez is so worried about a "serious challenge
to (his) chavismo (that he) trotted out the Uncle Sam boogeyman, called
in the Russians, and (sent) Washington's ambassador packing."
-
- Human Rights Watch on the Attack
-
- Too often, Human Rights Watch (HRW) fails to practice
its stated mandate - that it's "dedicated to protecting the human
rights of people around the world....stand(ing) with victims and activists....upholding
political freedom (and) bring(ing) offenders to justice." Instead
it functions the way James Petras characterizes similar NGOs as the "executing
agents of US imperialism."
-
- Its support for the oppressed is dubious at best. Tainted
at worst, and its latest September 18 Venezuela report is disturbing,
biased, and inaccurate. It's not dissimilar to how it covers the Israeli
- Palestinian conflict. Distorting it to downplay Israeli violence. Playing
up to the Israeli Lobby, and operating more by a political agenda than
as a credible human rights organization. Clearly with its funding sources
in mind that must be placated and never offended. HRW does it skillfully.
-
- From its 1978 beginnings as the US Helsinki Watch Committee
(or Helsinki Watch), HRW advanced America's interests as a propaganda
instrument against Soviet Russia. Despite occasional good work, too often
it's "serv(ed) as a virtual public relations arm of the (US) foreign
policy establishment," according to Edward Herman, David Peterson
and George Szamuely in their 2007 report titled: "Human Rights Watch
in Service to the War Party."
-
- Exhibits A and B: against Serbia's Slobodan Milosevic
and Saddam at a time "the United States and Britain were clearly
planning an assault on Iraq with a 'shock and awe' bombing campaign and
ground invasion in violation of the UN Charter." HRW ignored the
impending onslaught. The "supreme international crime," and
focused on Saddam's much lesser ones. A "valuable public relations
gift to US and British leaders" instead of denouncing them.
-
- When the Pentagon-led NATO countries bombed Yugoslavia
in 1999, HRW attacked the victim and absolved the aggressor. It supported
regime change "either through (Milosevic's) indictment or a US war
(for) the same outcome." It blamed him for the conflict America began
and waged throughout the 1990s with its NATO allies. It ignored Washington's
imperial aim to dismantle Yugoslavia. Its outrageous war crimes in doing
it, and instead cited Serbia's "vicious wars in Bosnia, Croatia and
Kosovo." It demanded responsible Serbs be held to account before
the kangaroo International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia
(ICTW). Run by made-in-Washington rules to avoid any prosecution of its
own role.
-
- It showed HRW's commitment to human rights is hollow
and hypercritical. Its analysis opposite of the truth. Its disdain for
the rule of law, and its judgment fully supportive of its funding sources.
Organizations like:
-
- -- the Ford Foundation;
-
- -- the Rockefeller Foundation;
-
- -- the Carnegie Corporation of New York; and
- -- Time Warner.
-
- Individuals like:
-
- -- Edgar Bronfman, Jr., corporate CEO and member of one
of Canada's most wealthy and influential Jewish families;
-
- -- Katherine Graham (now deceased) of the Washington
Post Corporation with her son and current chairman, Donald Graham, likely
continuing her support;
-
- -- and George Soros who was active in founding HRW jointly
with the US State Department.
-
- Some of its Americas Advisory Board members are also
closely linked to the National Endowment of Democracy (NED) and its anti-
democratic agenda. Figures like George Soros and Robert Pastor, Jimmy
Carter's Latin American National Security Advisor and Senior Fellow at
the Carter Center on Latin America and the Caribbean.
-
- HRW failed to denounce CIA's 2002 coup attempt against
Chavez or the 2004 one against Haiti's Jean-Bertrand Aristide. The thousands
of Lavalas supporters murdered in its aftermath. The continuing daily
human rights abuses committed by so-called UN Peacekeepers, police and
other security forces. The unconscionable human misery in the coup's aftermath.
-
- It said nothing about Venezuelan dominant media's advance
knowledge about and support for the 2002 coup. The air time they gave
plotters. Their virulent propaganda and calls for people to take to the
streets "for freedom and democracy" by ousting Chavez. Their
suppressing all pro-government reports and opinions. Their falsely reporting
that Chavez resigned when, in fact, he was forcibly removed and was being
held against his will. They knew because they were briefed in advance
and were part of the scheme.
-
- When hundreds of thousands of Chavez supporters were
on the streets demanding his reinstatement, they ignored them and aired
old movies and cartoons. Even when the coup was aborted, they maintained
strict censorship in a further act of defiance. Yet, when Chavez refused
to renew RCTV's VHF license (a mere slap on the wrist for an act of sedition),
HRW vehemently complained and denounced the act as censorship. It continues
to criticize Chavez, most noticeably in its 230 page 2008 report titled,
"A Decade Under Chavez: Political Intolerance and Lost Opportunities
for Advancing Human Rights in Venezuela."
-
- The report is unfairly one-sided and biased by criticizing
the "government's willful disregard for the institutional guarantees
and fundamental rights that make democratic participation possible."
In response, the government expelled two HRW employees - America's Director,
Jose Miguel Vivanco, and his Deputy, Daniel Wilkinson. A Foreign Relations
Ministry press release stated: Vivanco and Wilkerson "have done violence
to the constitution (and) assaulted (Venezuela's) institutions (by) meddling
illegally in (its) internal affairs."
-
- The statement added that HRW is linked to America's "unacceptable
strategy of aggression" and expelling them was done to defend "the
people against aggressions by international factors." Not accidently
was the report released two months before Venezuela's November 23 regional
and local elections for governors and mayors. HRW did the same thing previously
to sway voters away from Chavez candidates and issues and toward ones
embracing a pro-Washington agenda. In October 2007, ahead of the December
constitutional reform referendum, it criticized the measures and warned
about the loss of freedoms if the vote was positive. Its latest report
also comes at a time of increased tension between Washington and Caracas
ahead of elections in both countries.
-
- The Washington-based Venezuela Information Office (VIO)
released an analysis of HRW's report titled: "The Truth Suffers in
Human Rights Watch on Venezuela." It's summarized below and can be
read in full along with other current Venezuela information on: rethinkvenezuela.org.
-
- VIO is blunt and accurate in calling HRW down on its
blatantly biased account. Not surprising given its history as explained
above. It exaggerates and lies about human rights deficiencies, and at
the same time, ignores Venezuela's impressive social and other advances
under Chavez. Unparalled in the country's history. Nothing comparable
in America where human rights and social gains are vanishing under both
parties. Along with democracy that's pure fantasy. Facts that HRW is loath
to point out nor would it dare at the risk of offending its funding sources.
-
- VIO deconstructs the HRW report by stating "myths,"
and "facts".
-
- HRW myth: political discrimination defines the Chavez
presidency.
-
- VIO fact: HRW mischaracterizes Chavez's condemnation
of the aborted 2002 coup as "political discrimination" against
the plotters. An absurdity on its face, but not to HRW.
-
- HRW: Chavez disdains the separation of powers and an
independent judiciary.
-
- VIO: Chavez inherited a government for the rich. Mass
poverty, and (according to an earlier HRW report) a judiciary plagued
by "influence-peddling, political interference, and, above all,
corruption....In terms of public credibility, the system was bankrupt."
Since 1999, Chavez made great strides in cleaning it up. He still has
a long way to go, but he's heading in the right direction.
-
- HRW: Chavez "shifted....the mass media in the government's
favor."
-
- VIO: In print and electronically, Venezuela's corporate
media are dominant. The five leading private TV channels control 90% of
the market and most viewers. They operate freely with no government censorship.
Are unrestrained in their one-sided anti-goverment reporting, including
"calling for the overthrow of elected leaders" as they did in
2002. All major newspapers are corporate-owned. TVes (Venezuela's first
public broadcaster) and TeleSur (the regional, multi-nation supported
operation) reach much smaller audiences.
-
- HRW: Chavez "has sought to remake the country's
labor movement in ways that violate basic principles of freedom of movement."
-
- VIO: In fact, Chavez is actively pro-labor. Supports
unions and collective bargaining on equal terms with management. In 2003,
pro- government workers founded the National Workers Union (UNT). Chavez
is responsive to its rights and equitable demands.
-
- HRW: Chavez has been "aggressively adversarial....to
local rights advocates and civil society organizations."
-
- VIO: Chavez is responsive to local leaders. Promotes
the creation of community councils to address their own needs and find
solutions free from federal government control and influence. The idea
is democracy at the grassroots, and it works.
-
- VIO concludes that HRW systematically mischaracterizes
the Chavez government. Wrongly accuses it of political discrimination
and targeting opponents. The truth is mirror opposite even to the extent
of pardoning coup plotters and promoting open dialogue.
-
- In addition, Venezuela has a vibrant and improving participatory
democracy, anchored at the grassroots. Each government branch provides
"strong checks and balances" against the others. The nation
is a free and open society. The Bolivarian Constitution respects and guarantees
human and labor rights for all Venezuelans equally. Social ones also,
including healthcare, education, food, housing, jobs, security and more.
-
- In its biased and inaccurate account, HRW reports none
of this and all other impressive achievements under Chavez. Doing so would
offend its corporate and other backers. They want Chavez ousted. Bolivarianism
ended, and Venezuela returned to its past. HRW is an imperial agent. On
board to make it happen.
-
- Targeting Latin American Democracy
-
- Subversion in Venezuela and possible civil war in Bolivia
threaten Latin America's democracy. Fascists never rest and now control
five of Bolivia's richest states, according to long-time regional expert,
James Petras. They "forcefully oust(ed) all national officials, murder(ed),
injur(ed) and assaulted leaders, activists and voters who have backed
the (Morales) national government - with total impunity."
-
- Why so? Because, in nearly three years in office, Evo
Morales tried to bargain with the far right. Be conciliatory and compromising.
Back down from even "the mildest social reforms." Favor business
over progressive social change in spite of winning a nearly 70% majority
in an August 10 recall election. Allowed the opposition to be "aggressive(ly)
violent." Seize power in Santa Cruz, Pando, Beni, Tarija and Chuquisaca.
Rule by thuggery and intimidation. Head the country toward fascism. Erase
the few social reforms achieved in the past three years. Hand the country
back to oligarchs and their Washington bosses.
-
- Threaten to take the model to Venezuela. End the region's
most impressive participatory democracy. Its social gains, and a leader
who's committed to improving them. Stand up against the same dark forces
targeting Bolivia. Refuses to surrender the way Morales has done. Share
power with the fascist right. Give in to their demands. Back their neoliberal
agenda. Betray the people who elected him overwhelmingly. And face the
possibility of what Michel Chossudovsky calls the "Kosovo Option."
-
- Break up Bolivia by the Yugoslav model. Use extreme violence
to do it. It made Kosovo an independent state. Planning the same scheme
for Bolivia's resource-rich states. Perhaps the same fate for Venezuela
and extinguishing all Latin American democracy.
-
- A very disquieting option. Unthinkable but possible under
the current US administration and which ever new one succeeds it. More
conceivable given a shaky world economy and how that distracts away from
politics. Even the most destructive kind. Allowing democracy to be lost
without even noticing.
-
- Unlikely? Who back in summer 2007 imagined the kind of
financial crisis that emerged. A potential economic armageddon. An unprecedented
situation with no rules around to address. The possibility that nothing
can stop a meltdown. And if it happens that democracy may go with it.
-
- Preventing a similar Latin America outcome is crucial.
Confronting the region's dark forces to stop them. Understanding, as Petras
states, that "you cannot 'make deals' with fascists." You don't
defeat them "through elections and concessions to their big property-owning
paymasters." You confront them head on. Forcefully. Expose and denounce
them. Ally with a democratic constituency and beat down their threat that's
real, menacing and must be stopped or its heading everywhere. Maybe sooner
than anyone imagines.
-
- Some hopeful signs, however, are present, and maybe more
will follow. In mid-September, nine South American presidents held a
crisis summit in Santiago, Chile and expressed "their full and firm
support for the constitutional government of President Evo Morales (and)
reject(ed) and will not recognize any situation that attempts a civil
coup (or) rupture of (Bolivia's) territorial integrity." Let's hope
they mean what they say and will back their words with resoluteness. Except
for Chavez away on foreign tour, they met again on September 24 at the
UN in New York to continue discussions.
-
- In addition, on September 17, the National Coalition
for Change (CONALCAM indigenous, campesino and urban movements) signed
a pact with the Bolivian Workers Central (COB) to "defend the unity
of the homeland that is being threatened by a civil coup lead by terrorists
and fascists" directed out of Washington.
-
- Events are fast-moving. They affect Venezuela and the
region, and Roger Burbach, Director of the Center for the Study of the
Americas (CENSA), reports that 20,000 miners, peasants and coca growers
marched on Santa Cruz. The "bastion of the right wing rebellion"
against Morales. He calls it a "popular upheaval" sweeping the
country. But it's too soon to predict an outcome, and much to worry about
given Morales' weak-kneed approach and reluctance to be as resolute as
his supporters. Burbach calls it "restraint." For Petras, it's
capitulation, surrender, and a doomed strategy.
-
- But not if mass protests can help it with Joel Guarachi,
head of the National Confederation of Peasant Workers, saying 600,000
protesters are located throughout the 16 Santa Cruz provinces alone.
Venezuelans share a common interest and may react the same way if Bolivarianism
and their president are threatened.
-
- Let's hope so. With a few months left in office, the
Bush administration may be unleashing its last hurrah in Latin America.
A "hail Mary" effort to reclaim the region. Remove its weak
democracies in countries like Bolivia and strong ones in Venezuela. And
do it in the face of overwhelming domestic problems at home and lost wars
abroad. Will it work? Not if Bolivians and Venezuelans have anything to
say about it, and they're saying plenty. Stay tuned.
-
- Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre
for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached
lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
-
- Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and
listen to The Global Research News Hour on Republic Broadcasting.org Mondays
from 11AM - 1PM US Central time for cutting-edge discussions with distinguished
guests. All programs are archived for easy listening.
-
- http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10270
|