Intervening in Venezuelan affairs

During the 1980s, the U.S. Government was heavily involved in Nicaragua. More than $100 million was invested into removing the Sandinistas from power, first through armed struggle and later through electoral intervention. The National Endowment for Democracy, the U.S. Agency for International Development and the Central Intelligence Agency shared terrain in that small Central American nation and these entities applied a series of methodologies that had been successful in prior interventions in Chile, the Philippines and Panama, to name a few.

A glance at some of the tactics applied in Nicaragua, Chile, the Philippines and Panama caught my attention. Reading through the history of these struggles and forced regime changes all too often seemed like reading contemporary Venezuelan affairs. For example, in Nicaragua in the late 1980s, the U.S. applied a strategy known as “Chileanization”, which was successfully utilized in Chile against Allende and involved organizing internal right-wing forces to destabilize an elected government. This concept ensured that as opposition forces incited violent confrontations with the government, international scandals and reactions would form over “Sandinista Crackdowns”, the nation would spiral into civil disorder and instability and the government would be labeled a “human rights violator” or international pariah.

Sound familiar?

  Venezuelanalysis article

A major organization in Venezuela to which the U.S. has been funneling monies through NED with the purpose of overthrowing the government of Hugo Chávez is Súmate. I'm wondering how this is going to eventually play out. I don't know what international laws govern these kinds of things - as though BushCo hasn't publicly laughed at the idea of being beholden to international laws - but for the moment, the Venezuelan government has issued arrest warrants for leaders of Súmate, on the charge of treason. The director, Maria Corina Machado, who had been in Miami, has recently returned to Venezuela, after apparently considering whether she might stay in the U.S., claiming she has done nothing wrong and that her civil rights are being violated.

And, just a reminder...

Despite the media screaming "Casto-Communist", Chávez' economic programme is far from radical. No nationalisation of the banks or private industry, just investment of Venezuela's oil wealth in the Venezuelan people, and giving them a say in how they want their country run. As Chávez himself describes it, truly a "third way".

...Jeremy Corbyn MP explained why he had proposed inviting President Chávez, instead of Iraq's Allawi, to speak at this year's Labour Party conference: "Because he's democratically-elected, he represents social movements, he represents something positive around the world, and he's not a stooge of the United States. I haven't heard back yet from Tony Blair on this one."

With Chávez now looking more solid than either Blair or Bush, and Big Oil making much more money in Venezuela than Iraq, the Labour Party must be wondering whether they backed the right horse. At least Venezuelans have a leader who keeps his promises, is supported by the people, and can stand up to Bush's blackmail.

  Venezuelanalysis article