United States firmly in control in South America 5/19/2016 0 Comments   US Espionage: Alive and Well in Latin America by Eva Golinger Edward Snowden revealed to the world the 21st century spycraft in use against millions of innocent, unknowing people who now think twice about sending a text or an email. Amongst the documents obtained by Snowden were reports and details on surveillance of current and former heads of state, many of them from Latin America. Brazil’s President Dilma Rousseff was outraged over revelations of NSA espionage against her government, including wiretaps of her own phone and email. Former Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez was another major target of NSA operations. Just three years before Edward Snowden became a household name, whistleblower organization Wikileaks had already released a massive trove of classified and secret documents from the Pentagon and State Department that exposed U.S. government involvement in coups, destabilization campaigns, mass espionage and war crimes. The dirty tactics, strong-arming and back-stabbing revealed in internal State Department cables shed glaring light on the lengths Washington will go to impose its agenda. Allies are treated as enemies, and adversaries as partners, so long as it advances the self-serving objectives of U.S. power. None of what Snowden or Wikileaks revealed, as incredulous as it seemed to many, was surprising in Latin America. The region has been subjected to every tactic in the CIA book to ensure U.S. domination and control of its “backyard”. Throughout most of the 20th century, U.S. backed coup d’etats and interventions placed and removed heads of government, imposing School of the Americas-trained dictators that tortured, assassinated, disappeared, persecuted and incarcerated tens of thousands of civilians, disrupting and destabilizing their democratic, progressive movements and spiraling their nations into decades of darkness and brutality. When the dictators no longer served U.S. goals, they were switched out through coups or electoral processes heavily funded by U.S. agencies, ensuring an equally subservient leader would fill their shoes. It wasn’t until the beginning of the 21st century, with the election in Venezuela of President Hugo Chávez, that the region began to liberate itself from Washington’s iron grip. Chavez opened the door to a sweeping tide that brought progressive, leftist leaders to power, elected by widespread majorities in Brazil, Argentina, Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Uruguay, Honduras and El Salvador. Of course the resilience of Cuba for nearly half a century subjected to a crippling U.S. economic blockade and endless CIA attempts to destroy and destabilize their system, was the bedrock of the leftist rise that transformed and liberated the region. After Chavez was elected in 1998 and began to implement changes affecting powerful interests, changes that would redistribute wealth and nationalize control over strategic resources such as oil and gas, the U.S. backed a coup against him in 2002 that briefly removed him from power and installed a U.S. selected dictador, businessman Pedro Carmona. When Venezuelans took to the streets to reclaim their democracy, bringing Chavez back to power, Washington continued funding and overseeing efforts to destabilize his government, undermine his policies and debilitate Venezuela’s economy and international trade. In response, support for Chavez grew and his allies came to power throughout the continent, elected for policies that prioritized social justice and people over profits. One by one, U.S. agencies targeted them, funding coups against Evo Morales in Bolivia in 2008, Manuel Zelaya in Honduras in 2009, Rafael Correa in Ecuador in 2010 and Fernando Lugo in Paraguay in 2012. The success of the coups in Honduras and Paraguay attempted to weaken advancing Latin American integration and sovereignty, but the failure to overthrow Morales and Correa helped strengthen the consolidation of regional organizations like ALBA and UNASUR, and propelled the creation of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), which intentionally excludes the U.S. and Canada. Nevertheless, U.S. efforts to regain control and influence over the region continue. President Barack Obama has reiterated this objective numerous times during the course of his administration, making clear that the United States must “lead” in Latin America and look to the future, not the past. Ignoring Washington’s atrocious, criminal history in the hemisphere does not equate to improved relations, especially since the same behavior continues today, veiled under seemingly noble pretenses. The clandestine operations, espionaje, secret missions, covert funding, psychological warfare and regime change tactics the U.S. has employed in Latin America for decades, continue today overtly and covertly. Snowden has revealed ongoing surveillance and illegal spying of Latin American leaders, governments and public and private institutions, while other investigations, including Wikileaks, have evidenced the vast array of strategies and tactics utilized by U.S. agencies to fund political parties, build opposition movements and undermine democratically elected presidents who refuse to subordinate to U.S. agenda. Venezuela continues to be a key target of these destabilization tactics. U.S. agencies including the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a congressionally funded entity that finances political movements abroad, and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), State Department’s funding arm, invested over $100 million in U.S. taxpayer dollars to build up the anti-Chavez coalition in Venezuela during the period 2002-2011. Despite this enormous aid from the U.S. government, the opposition was unable to garner enough support to oust Chavez through elections, and the various attempts to overthrow him were easily defeated by his supporters. Since his untimely death in early 2013, his successor, Nicolas Maduro has become the target of these efforts. Currently, Venezuela is preparing for an important electoral process set for December 6, when all 165 legislative seats in the National Assembly are up for reelection. The country is experiencing a severe economic crisis and President Maduro’s popularity has fallen. While Maduro and his administration share responsibility for failed policies and decisions, the familiar destabilizing hand of the U.S. government is also at play. During the past year, the U.S. has spent more than $18 million through USAID and the NED to fund anti-government groups in Venezuela, feeding the conflict in that country and keeping alive an opposition that lacks cohesion and popular support. From 2014-2015, the NED channeled nearly $3 million to anti-government groups in Venezuela, a large amount focused on the upcoming legislative elections. $125,000 was given to the opposition group Súmate, created by NED in 2003 to lead a recall referendum campaign against President Chavez. Súmate’s founder, Maria Corina Machado, is a leading opposition figure, whose extremist views and divisive discourse have placed her on the fringe of a rivalrous right-wing movement. Despite her participation in coups and destabilization plots, Machado’s group continues to receive U.S. government funding to intervene in Venezuela’s election. An additional $400,000 has been allocated for a program that “supports members of the National Assembly and the development of policies”, and more than $40,000 went to “Monitor the National Assembly of Venezuela”. This amounts to U.S. government funding to promote pro-U.S. candidates, policies, and to fund internal espionage within the Venezuelan legislative branch. More than half a million dollars of NED funding to anti-government groups this year in Venezuela is dedicated to financing their communications on Twitter and other social media to combat government propaganda. But U.S. funded propaganda is not independent or objective. And another $474,000 went towards efforts to document and disseminate information about the human rights situation in Venezuela, including the preparation of complaints against the Venezuelan government in international bodies, such as the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, the UN Human Rights Council and the International Criminal Court. Coincidentally, complaints against Venezuela have skyrocketed during the last two years. In addition to the overt funding and support for Venezuela’s opposition, the U.S. government continues to engage in clandestine operations to undermine the Venezuelan government. In 2005, after the restructuring of the U.S. intelligence community was completed, newly-named Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte created highly specialized priority intelligence divisions to tackle “intelligence challenges” faced by Washington. The divisions, called “Mission Managers”, represented the most important security and defense targets for the U.S. Three Mission Managers were created for Counterterrorism, Weapons of Mass Destruction and Nuclear Proliferation, and three were country-specific: Mission Manger for Iran, Mission Manager for North Korea and Mission Manager for Cuba-Venezuela. Venezuela as an intelligence priority meant massive resources would be spent on espionage, surveillance and special operations both inside and outside Venezuelan territory. The first Mission Manager for Cuba-Venezuela was CIA veteran Norman A. Bailey, a Cold War expert in espionage and intelligence collection in enemy territory. His tenure only lasted one year and next in line was Timothy Langford, a career clandestine service officer with more than 25 years experience in the CIA.  Venezuela Accuses U.S. of Plotting Coup, Declares State of Emergency  by Nika Knight / Common Dreams Venezuela’s leftist president Nicolas Maduro announced a 60-day state of emergency on Friday evening and accused the U.S. of plotting with right-wing groups within the country to overthrow his government. On the same day, unnamed D.C. officials warned of a coming “meltdown” in Venezuela. The country is struggling with widespread blackouts, shortages, and looting as the collapse in oil prices has plunged it into economic turmoil. The Independent reports: On Friday night, Mr. Maduro delivered a televised national address in which he directly accused the U.S. of seeing to foment his ouster. “Washington is activating measures at the request of Venezuela’s fascist right, who are emboldened by the coup in Brazil,” he said. “We have already seen the image of the oligarchy signing and removing power to the people.” Reuters described the context surrounding the two countries’ long-estranged relationship: Washington has had an acrimonious relationship with Caracas for years, especially following U.S. support for a short-lived 2002 coup against late leader Hugo Chavez. Venezuela’s ruling Socialist Party has long been a strong ally of Rousseff’s Workers Party, however, and her departure adds to Maduro’s isolation in Latin America. Unnamed high-ranking U.S. officials spoke to Reuters early Friday, warning of a looming “meltdown” in the country: The United States is increasingly concerned about the potential for an economic and political meltdown in Venezuela, spurred by fears of a debt default, growing street protests and deterioration of its oil sector, U.S. intelligence officials said on Friday. In a bleak assessment of Venezuela’s worsening crisis, the senior officials expressed doubt that unpopular leftist President Nicolas Maduro would allow a recall referendum this year, despite opposition-led protests demanding a vote to decide whether he stays in office. But the two officials, briefing a small group of reporters in Washington, predicted that Maduro, who heads Latin America’s most ardently anti-U.S. government and a major U.S. oil supplier, was not likely to be able to complete his term, which is due to end after elections in late 2018. “You can hear the ice cracking. You know there’s a crisis coming. Our pressure on this isn’t going to resolve this issue,” one official told the news service. “This is really not the case that the U.S. is rooting for any outcome other than there not be an economic meltdown or social violence,” another said. “There are reasons for concern that over the summer as Venezuela gives importance to payments on debt over imports that these events could spiral.” “Maduro’s government has consistently paid its debt on time,” noted Reuters, “and has slammed market fears of a default as an international smear campaign.” ​ Venezuela's Vice President Nicolas Maduro (R) and Bolivia's President Evo Morales (L) walk ahead of the vehicle carrying the coffin of deceased Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez, Brazil in the crosshairs by ​Jim Naureckas ​ The effort to oust twice-elected Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff has been big news in the United States. Since December 2015, when Brazil’s Chamber of Deputies began an impeachment process over Rousseff’s budget maneuvers, the New York Times has had 74 pieces that mention “Rousseff” and “impeachment,”according to the Nexis news database; the Washington Post has had 138 such stories. But something that hasn’t been big news in US corporate media has been the reaction from Brazil’s neighbors to Rousseff’s suspension pending a Senate trial. While some Latin American governments were supportive—notably, newly right-governed Argentina said it “respects the institutional process” in Brazil, while close US ally Colombia “trusts in the preservation of democratic institutionality and stability”—several others were harshly critical. Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega called Rousseff’s removal an “anti-democratic process that has cast a shadow on the reliability and strength of institutions.” Bolivia’s Foreign ministry said Rousseff’s opponents were trying to “destabilize democratic processes and ignore the will of the people expressed in the popular vote.” Three Latin American countries--Venezuela and El Salvador on May 14, and Ecuador today, May 18—announced they were recalling their ambassadors from Brazil, one of the strongest expressions of disapproval a nation can take. Salvadoran President Sanchez Ceren said he would not recognize the government formed by Vice President Michel Temer after Rousseff’s removal. “We respect democracy and the people’s will,” Ceren said. “In Brazil an act was done that was once done through military coups.” Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro labeled Rousseff’s ouster a “coup,” calling it “a grave and dangerous sign for the future stability and peace of all the continent.” The region’s major multilateral organizations have also been critical of Brazil’s process. Secretary General Ernesto Samper of the Union of South American Nations, representing the continent’s 12 nations, called Rousseff the “legitimate leader” of Brazil. Samper, the former president of Colombia, said the attempt to remove her was  “compromising the democratic governability of the region in a dangerous way.” Prior to Rousseff’s ouster, Secretary General Luis Almagro of the Organization of American States released a strong statement: Our Organization has made a detailed analysis of the impeachment process against Dilma, and has concluded that it does not fit within the rules that govern this process. There is no criminal accusation against the president; rather she has been accused of the poor administration of public resources in 2014. This is an accusation that is political in character, and that does not merit an impeachment process. A Nexis search turns up no US newspaper that reported on the recall of the Venezuelan or Salvadoran ambassadors–and Google News shows no US coverage today of Ecuador’s move. Samper’s comments do not seem to have been covered by any US paper. Almagro’s statement wasn’t quoted by any US papers, though his criticism was briefly alluded to in a handful of stories (New York Times, 4/14/16; LA Times, 4/16/16;  Washington Post, 5/12/16). These omissions are perhaps not surprising, given that most US news coverage of Latin America is strongly guided by the attitudes of the US government. And Washington seems amenable to regime change via legislative action for leftist governments in Latin America: After Honduran lawmakers ousted President Manuel Zelaya, then–Secretary of State Hillary Clinton worked for international recognition of the coup regime, as her published emails revealed. Questions have also been raised about a US role in the legislative overthrow of Paraguay’s President Fernando Lugo. ​ If the US government is happy with legislatures overthrowing presidents in Latin America, most US journalists will not go out of their way to indicate that not everyone in the region is celebrating. One of the few articles in a major US paper to cover the reaction of Latin America to Roussef’s ouster as a story in itself appeared in USA Today (5/12/16). Coming out before any ambassadors had been withdrawn, it had a classic here’s-what-you-should-think headline: Leftist Leaders Leap to Defense of Ousted Brazilian President ​People who work for an industry that so predictably suppresses news that’s unfavorable to the official narrative maybe shouldn’t be so quick to mock others for “leaping.” ​ In Top Secret 2008 and 2009 Congressional Budget Justifications for the National Intelligence Program, the Director of National Intelligence highlighted as a key goal the “identification and administration of ‘Centers of Excellence’ to provide relevant, timely and actionable intelligence about Iran, North Korea and Cuba-Venezuela.”  Another objective was to “create an Investment Strategy for Iran, North Korea and Cuba-Venezuela aimed at strengthening analysis, collection and exploitation.” The 2009 Top Secret document also reveals one of the objectives of the Cuba-Venezuela Mission Manager is “developing analysis about leadership transitions”, referring to the Washington’s “Plan for a Democratic Transition in Cuba”, an effort to overthrow the Cuban revolution and other initiatives to remove Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez from power. In testimony before the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee, Timothy Langford referred to operations taking place in the “Intelligence Fusion Center” in Colombia, an espionage focal point fusing the capabilities of the NSA, CIA, DEA and DIA (military intelligence) to execute special operations in the region targeting U.S. objectives, including the Venezuelan government. As of 2011, the Cuba-Venezuela Mission Manager remained in existence, but since then the available public information on its operations have gone dark. The 2015 Directorate of National Intelligence budget exceeded $53 billion, a significant portion of which went to key strategic intelligence priorities, such as Venezuela. Venezuela has the largest certified oil reserves on the planet and will always be a target of the most powerful interests. A not so distant history of U.S. policy in Latin America recalls how Washington will do what it takes to ensure control over the region and its resources. <<Previous Forward>>