EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- One American Who Isn't For Sale
- Transcript: Today's Live Q&A With NSA Leaker, Edward Snowden
- Remembering Satyajit Ray’s Hirok Rajar Deshe: On Edward Snowden, Resistance and Inverted Totalitarianism
- Obama Cans Regulator Who Crossed Wall Street
- Pentagon Bracing for Public Dissent Over Climate and Energy Shocks
Popular content
Today's Top News
Observations on Latin America
The recent events in Honduras are not isolated, but rather part of a conservative counterattack taking shape in Latin America. For some time, the right has been rebuilding in Latin America; hosting conferences, sharing experiences, refining their message, working with the media, and building ties with allies in the United States. This is not the lunatic rightwing fringe, but rather the mainstream right with powerful allies in the middle class that used to consider themselves center, but have been frightened by recent left electoral victories and the rise of social movements. With Obama in the White House and Clinton in the State Department they have now decided to act. Bush/Cheney and company did not give them any coverage and had become of little use to them. A "liberal" in the White House gives conservative forces the kind of coverage they had hoped for. It is no coincidence that Venezuelan opposition commentators applauded the naming of Clinton to the State Department, claiming that they now had an ally in the administration. The old cold-warrior axiom that the best antidote against the left is a liberal government in Washington gains new meaning under Obama with Clinton at the State Department.
Coup leaders in Honduras and their allies continue to play for time. Washington's continuing vacillation is allowing them to exhaust this option, but so are right-wing governments in Colombia, Mexico, Panama and Peru. After all, this coup is not just about Honduras but also about leftwing success in Latin America, of which Honduras was the weakest link. It is increasingly becoming obvious that there is no scenario under which elites in Honduras will accept Zelaya back. I do not think that they have a plan "B" on this matter and this speaks to the kind of advice they are getting from forces in the U.S. and the region. If Zelaya comes back, the Supreme Court, the Congress, the military and the church all lose credibility and it opens the door for the social and political movements in Honduras to push for radical change that conservative forces would find more difficult to resist.
But Honduras is only part of the equation. Colombia's decision to accept as many as 7 new U.S. military bases (3 airbases, including Palanquero, 2 army bases, and 2 naval bases one on the Pacific and one on the Caribbean), dramatically expands the U.S. military's role in the country and throughout the region. The Pentagon has been eyeing the airbase at Palanquero with its complex infrastructure and extensive runway for some time. This is a very troubling sign that will alter the balance of forces in the region, and speaks volumes about how the Obama administration plans to respond to change in Latin America. A possible base on the Caribbean coast of Colombia would also offer the recently reactivated U.S. Fourth Fleet, a convenient harbor on the South American mainland. In short, Venezuela would be literally encircled. However, Venezuela is not the only objective. It also places the Brazilian Amazon and all its resources within striking distance of the U.S. military, as well as the much sought after Guarani watershed. After public criticism from Bachelet of Chile, Lula of Brazil and Chávez of Venezuela, Uribe refused to attend the August 10 meeting of UNASUR, the South American Union, where he would be expected to explain the presence of the U.S. bases. The meeting of the UNASUR security council was scheduled to take up the issue of the bases and Bolivia's suggestion for a unified South American response to drug trafficking. Instead, Uribe has launched his own personal diplomacy traveling to 7 different countries in the region to explain his actions. In addition, Obama's National Security Advisor James Jones is in Brazil trying to justify the U.S. position on the bases.
The recent media war launched by Uribe against Ecuador and Correa, once again claiming financing of the FARC, and the more recent offensive against Venezuela concerning 30 year old Swedish missiles, that, like the Reyes computers, cannot be independently verified, have filled the airwaves in Venezuela, Colombia and the region. The current Colombian media campaign was preceded by Washington's own efforts to condemn Venezuela for supposed non-compliance in the war against drug trafficking. In addition, Israel's foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, also traveled throughout Latin America in July claiming that Venezuela is a destabilizing force in the region and in the Middle East.
Lost in all this is the fact that Uribe is still considering a third term in office and his party has indicated it will push for a constitutional reform. So conflicts with Ecuador and Venezuela serve to silence critics in Colombia and keep Uribe's electoral competitors at bay. All we need now is for Uribe to ask the Interpol to verify the missiles' origins and Interpol director Ron Noble to give another press conference in Bogota. Déjà vu all over again!
The right and its allies in the U.S. are also emboldened by the electoral victory in Panama and the very real prospects of leftist defeats this year in Chile and even Uruguay. Obviously they are also encouraged by the humiliating defeat of the Fernández / Kirchners in Argentina. These developments could begin to redraw the political map of the region. Correa of Ecuador has already expressed concern about being the target of a coup and Bolivia will undoubtedly come under intense pressure as they are also preparing for an election later this year.
All this is occurring with an increased U.S. military commitment in Mexico with Plan Mérida which seeks to build on the lessons of Colombia: maintain in power a president whose economic and social policies are highly unpopular, but who relies on conflict, in this case the so-called war on the drug cartels, to maintain popularity. Parts of Mexico are literally under siege, including Michoacán, Ciudad Juarez, and Tijuana. The backdrop for this is a divided left; the PRD was the biggest loser in recent midterm elections, and social movements remains localized and unable to mount a national challenge.
None of these developments are forgone conclusions, but they nonetheless speak to the fact that conservative forces in Latin America and their allies in the U.S. are mounting a concerted counter offensive that could increase the potential for conflict in the region.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
35 Comments so far
Show AllGood point in the article about Columbia versus Honduras:
Excerpt for Mercopress.com: "Uribe, the most popular Colombian leader in several decades, was elected in 2002 for a four-year term, but ran again in 2006 after the constitution was reformed to allow his re-election.
Now his supporters are backing a referendum to amend the charter again and allow him to compete in the May 2010 balloting, although separate bills passed by the Senate and the lower house enabling the plebiscite, must first be reconciled and the Constitutional Court also would have to give the green light"
Point: When Zelaya tries to initiate the process of reform to the Honduran constitution, the US supports a coup. When Uribe does the same, it embraces the consitutional change. The difference: Whether the US supports the leader in power.
ahem.... as a native born Coloradan and WORLD citizen, I beg to differ.....
The difference: Whether the CORPORATOCRACY of the US supports the leader in power.
I don't believe anybody in Washington has endorsed a move by Uribe to eliminate term limits. Furthermore, thus far the term limits issue in Colombia is just talk.
Also, the US didn't support the coup. President Obama was clear when he said the coup was illegal. Now he's backing efforts by the OAS to reach a peaceful resolution to the conflict.
What we need in the USA is term limits for Senators and Congressmen, plus of course the term limits for President should be retained.
The US would seek a binding contract for a set number of years so that a change in office has no effect like they have in every other nation.
You really need to do a little research before you start ranting.
My you are a broken record.
How many Native American Nations did the US truly recognize as sovereign?
Zero.
You should be intelligent enough to realize the difference.
Native, the following is a quote from President Obama's press conference about two weeks ago:
PRESIDENT OBAMA:
"We know that our experience in the United States is that two terms works for us and that after eight years, usually the American people want a change. I related to President Uribe the fact that our most revered President, or at least one of our two most revered Presidents, George Washington, part of what made him so great was not just being a founder of our country, but also the fact that at a time when he could have stayed President for life, he made a decision that after service, he was able to step aside and return to civilian life. And that set a precedent then for the future. But as I said, each country, I think, has to make these decisions on their own..."
I believe President Obama was very delicate handling the issue, but expressed in no uncertain terms he's opposed to Constitutional changes to remove term limits.
Bring America Back !!!!
****Professor Salas is indeed a Latin American Expert !
****See www.commondreams.org/newswire/2008/10/28-10
In this post, before but presuming his election, over
360 Latin America scholars and experts were signatories to a letter to then Senator Obama, offering their support and asking for Change in US Diplomatic policies.
Prof Miguel Salas was one of those signers.
Here was a directly expressed offer of opportunity for Latin Americans to become Partners with the US in its Global interests, rather than the third class citizens of low regard which King George Bush and his team of war criminals has created.
Several of those key Nations have caught the CIA red handed meddling in the politics of their regions, attempting to bring down Govt heads and influence leadership==especially in Venezuela.
Here was a ready made task force to help with some of the staggering problems and relationships of them and the USA!
How about our border problems and the Mexico massive drug cartel problems ?? Has Team Obama made any attempt to use this great Asset within the framework of our Latin American diplomacy efforts , or has it continued King Bush' underhanded dirty infiltration techniques which ultimately makes our Latin neighbors enemies rather than friends ?
Those leaders presumed Obama could and would actually adopt the massive Changes He promised for America, to include , they hoped, change to partnership with them !
Alas, we have seen Obama's abject failures on all those shallow promises, so there is very little hope his team has the smarts to bring in this coalition of 360 Latin Experts and influential citizens.
Is it any wonder that Chavez came to the UN and called George W. Bush==="el diablo"...the devil, and an insane
lunatic. Lets add sheer stupidity to that list.
President Bush was an evil dude. Some may say he is the Anti Christ. However, why do you bring up his name now? Also, Chavez is known for calling names all the time, something he ought to curb, as it makes him look a little childish.
I think we can agree that bringing up Bush's name is appropriate to point out how unchanged US foreign policy has been since he left office in January. US foreign policy towards LAm, and elsewhere, can increasingly be called with every passing day the Bush-Obama foreign policy. Has a certain ring to it, yeah? (not exactly a pleasant one....)
Damn good article. There's a hell of a lot more going on down there than I'd thought.
Interesting article. I have been following the South American drift toward the left for some time, and feel it has been long overdue. Now, it appears, the right is gaining. Hopefully Chavez will not give way to anger and start any military action, but instead, keep improving the lot of the poor in Venezuela.
Dunno why he would start military action, after all, it's not like he has maneuvering room to do so. I've read articles discussing his military threats, but I think he just likes to rattle his saber.
Reference the USA, as I said, our main enemies are the Israel Lobby and the Military Industrial Complex. That dustup in Pakistan is using up a lot of very expensive missiles, and keeps us tangling with the Muslims, just as the Israelis and the MIC want us to do.
Chavez led a military coup!
I think that qualifies as a history of military actions...
"You can only support your claim if you tell us which country Chavez has invaded."
Military actions include domestic actions as well as foreign. Chavez went on television to order down his troops after his coup failed. Regrettably dozens of people had already died.
Like i said, he does have a violent past.
I'd like to say i'm shocked at your apparent lack of knowledge but you rarely post anything of substance anyway.
Prof. Salas' report pretty much clinches it for me.
As a leftist and an internationalist, it now seems pretty clear that we would have been better off with the bumbling Mccain and Palin in the WH than the current highly skilled imperialist Obama. I harbored many fears about an Obama administration, and he is beating all of them.
One cannot eat as much as one wants to vomit.
Remembering where all those Nazi bastards migrated to it comes as no surprise that the diseased mindset of fascism won't let go of their heaven. South America was/is the breeding/nursing home for Nazis from all directions.
It will be interesting to see which countries in Latin America follow Hitler's program 'Heim ins Reich' (Coming home into the Kingdom), whereas the Kingdom is the USA. One centralized fascist nation, armed beyond the teeth, taking over dissenting and unfaithful Nations for the better.
Another perfect example is the displayed maximal hypocrisy in the Fatherland.
It is of course not okay for Chavez to run for more presidential terms, but for Uribe it is perfectly OK.
God, where are Your Aliens when we really need them? Or give us a Yellowstone firework, something, anything to stop this sick, sick fascist Nation. Because it becomes more and more apparent, that the German Nazis were American pets, installed to maximize profits and to divide and conquer Europe.
Maybe America will find his charcoaled greatest leader of all times in front of his bunker, too.
Peron was the biggest supporter of fleeing Nazi war criminals.
Uribe should be denied the 3rd term but its worth noting that Common Dreams and numerous readers here made countless arguments defending Chavez's right to run again so i expect you all to grant the same support to Uribe's upcoming reelection run.
Unless you wish to be hypocrites...
What's hypocritical is that US endorses that scurrilous Uribe to run for another term while screaming bloody murder if the Venezuelans allow Chavez to do the same. Now that's hypocritical.
The US has quietly voiced its disapproval of Uribe's plans to run again.
The US voiced it's disapproval of Chavez running again once he disregarded the will of the people. He admitted he was going to push for an endless series of referendums until he got the result he wanted.
Seeing how you are for Chavez removing term limits i expect to see you voicing support for Uribe removing term limits...or you're the hypocrite.
I personally would prefer it Uribe would follow the current constitution. Of course the matter is for the people of Colombia to decide which is the exact same thing i stated with regards to Chavez.
I thought you didn't believe anything that the NSA said...
If you claim the US government is full of nothing but lies then you really can't go around quoting a 20 year old, unsubstantiated report that even the NSA admitted came from a single source who hadn't been highly trusted.
1. Uribe did not, nor plans to have a national referendum for the change in the nation's constitution that extending term limits for the president would require: the horrible Colombian National Assembly makes our own sold-out pay-for-play Congress look honest and left radical. It was only in this same solidly corrupt national assembly that narco-President Uribe planned and still plans to easily slide in a rewrite of the constitution.
2. The left in Venezuela tried to get their base to vote in a bloated omnibus series of amendments and various changes at the constitutional level that would benefit the majority. The incorrect thinking was to go for a vote soon after the crushing defeat of the right-wing corrupt presidential candidate by Chavez to allow to quickly reap benefits that the people could experience. But change should always be as much from the bottom up as possible, like the original rewrite of the national constitution was in 1999 and 2000, with widespread discussion and an end result of so many Venezuelans feeling able to really be part of national politics for the first time. The overweight package was an easy target for the big 4 television stations, all with FoxNews politics, plus the 4 of 5 major nationally distributed daily newspapers, all worthy of being owned by Rupert Murdoch.
2b. So after acknowledging the slim electoral defeat without any protest, Chávez and the Bolivarian Rev. national leadership correctly critiqued their hasty methods, and are approaching the Venez. electorate w/ separate bills that are fully discussed. They started with extending reelection limits, not just for President but at the state and local level as well. This passed with a big margin. For the presidency at least this entailed a constitutional change, and so the current govt correctly put it forward as a constitutional amendment subjected to a nationwide electoral referendum.
All that has to happen for this to not help Chavez, or anyone else working to empower the majority of the darker-skinned economically screwed-over population, is to lose their support: they will then lose the next election. this is exactly what happened to the some of the least efficient and corrupt "Chavista" politicians, always careful to be seen in bright red shirts and being "more Chavista than thou": from Juan Barreto, ex-mayor of Caracas, now under investigation (by the Chavez govt mind you) for embezellment, to the idiot mayor of Merida in the Andes: the worst got voted out. And the same fate awaits all non-progressive politicians in Venezuela, term limits notwithstanding.
THE PEACE MOVEMENT IN THE UNITED STATES
needs to talk about money for healthcare and jobs being shipped into new military bases in Latin America. People will only care about foreign military policy when a connection is made to their own daily lives. A sad comment on our population, but it is what we have to work with.
To be fair, I doubt that most people anywhere, including Latin Americans, are fundamentally different from U.S. Americans in terms of their own daily lives taking priority.
Agreed.
But that lack of solidarity hurts US lives, too. Those 7 bases in Columbia will be
-------- financed by American workers
-------- used to lower wages in Ecuador, Venezuela, and elsewhere,
So that companies can go abroad,
and lower wages in the US.
An old, old strategy, but still largely unrecognized: hence priorities.
America's latins, thinking drug lords and godless socialists are the cause of Latin America's problems instead of the WOD and US imperialist corporations, could vote Republican.
Chiquita and Dole are using the CIA and the Honduras' SOA trained military to inforce slave wages on the native populations.
I think that we on the Left should start using similar political labels for those who dominate our society and most of Latin America.
We should label the tight cabal the runs Honduras an oligarchy: rule by the few. An oligarchy possesses the government and it views its country as a money-making machine.
When an oligarchy emerges, most government spending goes toward making it more money or to make up for its sudden loss of money. The military is organized, trained and used in order to protect or expand their overseas network of bases, client states and dependencies. It also employes the millions that can't find work, get decent wages or get healthcare benefits.
(Ironically, after the Soviet Union dissolved, the largest command economy in the world became the Pentagon.)
Many of these client states and dependencies are also ruled by tight knit oligarchies.
For example, in our country, we could easily have a national healthcare policy by expanding Medicare coverage to the uninsured and badly insured. The Fed could be dissolved and its functions could be transfered to the Treasury.
But why aren't these simple solutions promoted and discussed? They ignore the power and profit needs of the insurance and financial oligarchies.
Unfortunately, when an oligarchy is established, the average citizen's standard of living plummets, civil rights erode,violent propaganda and social butalization become the norm and the popular culture becomes sewer waste.
This why the present recession is bad news for the average American. When the end of the present recession is declared by the oligarchy's mouthpieces, it won't mean our recession -the recession for the average citizen- will be over.
Our high levels of job insecurity, stagnant wages, lack of credit, lack of housing equity, the return to renting apartments, increasingly limited social mobility, vast numbers of people under- or part-time employed, the cutting of both private and public benefits, etc. will become the norm.
The days of easy money for the lower orders is gone.
Hey. The above is a neat description of Honduras (except the poverty in that country is much more severe).
The oligarchies in Latin America and the US oligarchy are attempting to crush the democratic movements of the lower orders. They want to "kill hope" and have the lower classes bend to oligarchical rule with a democratic facade...an elite democracy with the people excluded.
That strategy usually means bringing in the military, private mercenarie and the intelligence communities into play: violence, torture, disapperances, assinations, exile, cordon sanitaire, massacres, mass imprisonments, concentration camps, drones, bombings, black propaganda, black operations, ... in other words, they will be ramping up state terrorism.
Unfortunately, the US oligarchy has, at least at this time, killed hope for most US citizens. The only visible grassroots movements seen on the oligarch's media are the faux mobs disrupting public meetings discussing healthcare reform. Of course, this is part of the social brutalization process produced by oligarchical rule.
Good summation.
As the oligarchs tighten their noose, it will be harder to escape. Unless we soon begin carrying out peaceful, fraud-proof nationwide voter initiatives and referendums, there will be blood. The oligarchy realizes that referendums are the greatest challenge to their power. That's why they deposed the elected President of Honduras.
"frightened by recent left electoral victories and the rise of social movements"
Afraid of losing rights or losing privileges? The left is concerned with losing rights. The right is concerned with losing privileges.
Obviously, the one agenda is most noble while the other agenda is deeply flawed. But when the mass media reports on events, the framing implies that left has a right to rights while the right has a right to privilege. The mass media repeatedly presents events in this flawed frame until it becomes the people's "reality", that privilege ought to exist. Privilege should be banned.
"Obama's National Security Advisor James Jones is in Brazil trying to justify the U.S. position on the bases."
You mean dispensing gargantuan bribes.