US Escalates War Plans In Latin America
US Military: After Iraq, Latin America
By Rick Rozoff
Global Research, July 23, 2009
Stop NATO
On June 29 US President Barack Obama hosted his Colombian counterpart Alvaro Uribe at the White House and weeks later it was announced that the Pentagon plans to deploy troops to five air and naval bases in Colombia, the largest recipient of American military assistance in Latin America and the third largest in the world, having received over $5 billion from the Pentagon since the launching of Plan Colombia nine years ago.Six months before the Obama-Uribe meeting outgoing US President George W. Bush bestowed the US's highest civilian honor, the Medal of Freedom, on Uribe as well as on former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and former Australian Prime Minister John Howard.A press account of the time expressed both shock and indignation at the White House's honoring of Uribe in writing that "Despite extra-judicial killings, paramilitaries and murdered unionists, Colombia's President Uribe has won the US's highest honor for human rights." [1]The same source substantiated its concern by adding:"Colombia is the most dangerous country on earth for trade unionists. In 2006, half of all union member killings around the world took place there. Since Uribe came into power in 2002, nearly 500 have been murdered. In reply to concern about the assassinations, Uribe dismissed the victims as 'a bunch of criminals dressed up as unionists.'"More than 1,000 cases of illegal killings by the military are being investigated. There are dozens of cases of soldiers taking innocent men, murdering them and dressing them up as enemy combatants. Hundreds ofmembers of the security forces are thought to have taken part in such activities." [2]Colombia: Forty Year WarFor over forty years Colombia, the last of Washington's remaining "death squad democracy" clients in the Western Hemisphere, has waged a relentless counterinsurgency war against the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC} and an equally ruthless campaign with its US-trained and -equipped military and allied paramilitary formations against trade union, peasant, indigenous and other organizations. An estimated 40,000 have been killed and 2 million displaced as a result of the fighting. In 1985 the FARC laid down its arms and entered into a peace process with the government of Belisario Betancur.It helped found the Patriotic Union to participate in electoral and other peaceful activities but within several years as many as 5,000 Patriotic Union elected officials, candidates, trade unionists, community organizers and other activists were murdered by Colombian security forces and government-linked right-wing death squads, especially the notorious United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC) and its late leader Carlos Castano. Eight congressmen, 70 councilmen, dozens of deputies and mayors and hundreds of trade unionists and peasant leaders were slain and in 1989-1990 two of its presidential candidates were murdered within seven months.Faced with complete extermination, the FARC rearmed and sought refuge in the southeast of the country.In 1998 then Colombian President President Andres Pastrana permitted FARC a 16,000 square mile safe haven in the Caqueta Department. The US then set its sights on an intensive counterinsurgency campaign to destroy the FARC infrastructure in the region and to uproot and destroy the organization altogether.In January of 2000 STRATFOR, not a source known for opposing war, warned:"The U.S. State Department recently announced a two-year, $1.3 billion emergency U.S. aid package for counter-narcotics operations in Colombia. The plan also is geared toward helping President Andres Pastrana negotiate peace with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). But the plan will have the opposite effect. It will end the peace negotiations between the rebels and the government and re-ignite the war. Ultimately, the plan does little more than pave the way for greater U.S. involvement. [3]It went on to say that "The bulk of the money pledged for counter-narcotics efforts will go directly to the military to fight the rebels....This will tip the balance of power away from the government in Bogota and toward the military, which has always opposed the peace negotiations. Ultimately, the door will open wider for greater U.S. involvement." [4] Plan Colombia: Clinton's Parthian ShotColombia was already the largest recipient of US military aid in the Western Hemisphere by 2000, but the Clinton administration increased the Pentagon's role in the nation with what became Plan Colombia.After entering office in January of 1993 bombing Iraq and later killing hundreds if not thousands of Somalis the same year, Clinton and his foreign policy team never abandoned the use of military aggression.In 1995 it provided military planners and advisers for Croatia's brutal and ethnocidal Operation Storm and led NATO's bombing of Bosnian Serb targets, including retreating troops and refugee columns following them, leaving what is now the Bosnian Serb Republic strewn with depleted uranium and an epidemic of cancer cases.Three years later it launched cruise missile attacks on Afghanistan and Sudan and on December 16, 1998 began Operation Desert Fox, a deadly four-day assault on Iraq with 250 airstrikes and over 400 Tomahawk cruise missiles - the evening before scheduled impeachment proceedings against Clinton in the US Congress.The following year the administration's use of military aggression reached its apex with the 78-day US-led NATO assault against Yugoslavia, the first military attack against a European nation since Hitler's and Mussolini's from 1939 onward.The administration's Parthian shot was Plan Colombia in 2000.Colombia's President Pastrana conceived of a project the preceding year, 1999, that the White House redesigned for its own purposes.As former US ambassador to El Salvador Robert White, sacked by the Reagan administration in 1981 in preparation for unleashing its death squad and Contra wars in Central America, wrote after the US Congress passed Plan Colombia in June of 2000:"If you read the original Plan Colombia, not the one that was written in Washington but the original Plan Colombia, there's no mention of military drives against the FARC rebels. Quite the contrary. (President Pastrana) says the FARC is part of the history of Colombia and a historical phenomenon, he says, and they must be treated as Colombians." [5]An alternative American presswire reported that, "In early 1999, the Pastrana administration began peace talks with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), the largest rebel group. "The president also made his first trip to Washington in search of aid against the drug trade. But when he got there, 'they changed the script on him,' according to Marco Romero of the Peace Colombia Initiative, a coalition created in September by 60 local non-governmental organizations (NGOs) seeking an alternative to the Plan Colombia. "Pastrana's talks with U.S. congressional leaders and the head of the White House office on National Drug Control Policy, Barry McCaffrey, gave rise to the Plan Colombia, said Romero." [6]McCaffrey is a retired Army General who earned his stripes in the Dominican Republic in 1965, Vietnam from 1966-69 and in Operation Desert Storm in 1991. He was also head of the Pentagon's Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) from 1994-96 and Deputy US Representative to NATO."In support of their request for aid to Colombia, U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and drug czar McCaffrey told the U.S. Congress that the funds were to be used for 'restoring order in southeastern Colombia.'" [7] With the passing of Plan Colombia the US increased military aid to the nation by over twenty times in just two years, 1998-2000, from $50 million in 1998 to over $1 billion in 2000, placing Colombia only behind Israel and Egypt in that category. In the ten years since 1998 US military aid was increased a hundredfold.Earlier in the year a mainstream American news source said that "The Clinton administration's proposed $1.6 billion in emergency aid to Colombia is at least as much a counterinsurgency package as it is an anti-drug measure" and mentioned that "a member of Congress objected to White House efforts to sidestep the normal appropriations process." [8]Weeks before the House vote one of the worse recent massacres of Colombian civilians occurred in El Salado, perpetrated by paramilitaries with army complicity. Plan Colombia was drenched in blood even before it was formalized. In January of 2000 US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright visited Colombia to promote the initiative and in honor of her arrival the Colombian military killed 50 of its citizens in an attack outside of the capital of Bogota.The US Congress and Senate added over a billion dollars, sixty attacks helicopters and more special forces counterinsurgency advisers to the war in June. Approximately 70% of the 2000 Plan Colombia funds were allotted for the financing, training and supplying of army anti-narcotics battalions operating in southeastern Colombia, the former FARC safe haven.Nominal progressives, the late Paul Wellstone in the Senate and Illinois Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky in the House, attached a human rights proviso that no serious person expected to be honored and only two months after the Congress's authorization of Plan Colombia Clinton used his presidential waiver to override the human rights conditions on the grounds of "national security."Nine Years Later: Drug War Charade Gives Way To Naked CounterinsurgencyThe escalation of counterinsurgency operations was packaged under the label of a war against drugs, of course. Nine years later Colombia remains the largest supplier of cocaine and heroin to the United States.How seriously one should have taken this charade was indicated in April of 2000 when the former commander of the U.S. Army's anti-drug operation in Colombia, Col. James C. Hiett, pleaded guilty to not having turned over evidence on his wife, Laurie, for smuggling cocaine and heroin into the United States. His spouse pleaded guilty in January of planning to smuggle $700,000 worth of heroin into the US through the mail. Colonel Hiett doubtlessly performed his duties in propagating the tale that the FARC was responsible for the lion's share of coca and opium cultivation and trafficking in the nation and that the US military was the best response to its alleged activities.If one still had any doubts regarding the sincerity of American claims to be combating narco-trafficking and terrorism, within weeks of the passage of Plan Colombia Secretary of State Albright escorted the head of the so-called Kosovo Liberation Army, Hashim Thaci, whose colleagues and allied drug cartels control most of the marijuana, hashish and narcotics traffic in Europe, to her old haunts in the United Nations Headquarters and her then current ones in the State Department, preparing him to become a future head of state. (Since last year he is in fact the president of what former Serbian president Vojislav Kostunica has aptly called the world's first NATO state. It is also the world's newest narco-state.)After the events of September 11, 2001 in the United States the White House elevated the FARC towards the top of its targets list in the so-called Global War on Terror, though what role the group could have had in the attacks in New York City and Washington, D.C. is beyond any sane person's ability to discern or fathom.By 2002 the Bush administration had discarded most of the drug war rationale and "Congress approved a law to allow American military aid to Colombia to be used in a 'unified campaign' against drugs and terrorism" and by 2008 "six years and $5-billion later, the Colombian military is Latin America's most skilled fighting force." [9]American "Special Operations training provided many of the skills that showed 'the way to open the door to these remote jungle locations that were in the past inaccessible to the Colombian government.'"Military units including Special Forces and an elite Commando Brigade were created. Eight regional intelligence units were set up with reconnaissance airplanes, and state-of-the-art air-to-ground communications. An Intelligence School was created, as well as a Counter Intelligence Center." [10]Days before leaving office George W. Bush awarded Colombian President Alvaro Uribe, who rumors have linked to the former Medellin drug cartel and whose brother Santiago is accused of narco-trafficking and death squad connections, the Medal of Freedom.Perhaps anticipating the honor and paying back the person most responsible for Plan Colombia and the increased military operations both within Colombia's borders and outside the country, Alvaro Uribe announced that he was conferring the "Colombia is Passion" award on Bill Clinton "at a gala event...in New York City" for "for believing in our country and encouraging others to do the same.""Prominent Democrats on the guest list include former Clinton strategists Dick Morris and Vernon Jordan, former Clinton Cabinet members Lawrence Summers and Madeleine Albright, and several Democratic congressmen," most of whom presumably had the political survival skills not to attend. [11]Earlier the same year "On the eve of a visit by U.S. President George W. Bush" and with no further pretense of a drug war "U.S. and Colombian soldiers arrived in the southern town of Cartagena del Chaira, a FARC stronghold, by helicopter...." [12]As the narcotics issue has been downplayed, so the human rights component of Plan Colombia has been relegated to the realm of short-lived public relations manipulation.In February of 2007 Colombian Foreign Minister Maria Consuelo Araujo's brother, Senator Alvaro Araujo, was arrested for connections to the paramilitary United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC).Uribe was untroubled by the above and said, "When they ask, why do I keep the foreign minister, I answer: She is not involved in the criminal activities that are under investigation." [13]Plan Colombia has entered its tenth calendar year. In the intervening years covert and overt government and paramilitary massacres, many too grisly to relate, have continued unabated and drug cultivation and exports have been, if marginally dented, not substantially affected by what is still referred to when convenient as a drug eradication program.Drug war claims notwithstanding, Plan Colombia's activities both within and outside the nation were actuated by other designs.Colombia: Pentagon's Base In Andean RegionFrom its very advent it was intended to be more than an intensification of the decades-old counterinsurgency war in Colombia and to be the opening salvo of a US campaign to escalate the militarization of the Andes region. White House and Pentagon plans to employ Colombia as a regional military force and operating base to police South America have gained new urgency for Washington with political transformations in Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Argentina and Paraguay heralding the end of US political, economic and military domination of the continent.In its first full year of existence, 2001, a Peruvian Air Force jet shot down a civilian plane spotted by a US aircraft flown by CIA contractors with American missionary Veronica Bowers and her infant daughter on board, killing both as well as the pilot.By 2006 the US had doubled the amount of military trainers and advisers stationed in Colombia and in the same year the nation's planes started violating the air space of neighboring Ecuador. The planes, and it would not have been unusual for US personnel to have been aboard them, were ostensibly conducting fumigation missions.The Ecuadoran government denounced the actions as "unfriendly and hostile" and "Defense Minister Marcelo Delgado said...that army airplanes will fly over its border to prevent Colombian airplanes from entering Ecuadorian airspace...." [14]In December of 2006 not only Colombian planes crossed the border into the country. Later in the month "Some 40 Colombians...fled across the border into Ecuador after they were attacked by Colombian soldiers," the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in Ecuador reported. [15] Twelve months before fifteen Colombians were killed and 1,500 displaced in the Narilo province in the country's southeast, bordering Ecuador. "Authorities remained silent as to whether this was a military operation against guerrilla fighters or a dispute between paramilitary groups." [16]In early 2007 Marine Gen. Peter Pace, then chairman of the JointChiefs of Staff, traveled to Colombia and spent two days meeting with the country's military and political leadership. Shortly afterwards Colombian Defense Minister Juan Manuel Santos, about whom more will be said later, returned the favor and visited the Pentagon where he met with US Defense Secretary Robert Gates. A Defense Department report of the visit quoted Pentagon officials as saying that "U.S. military support for Colombia, previously focused on combating drugs, has expanded to helping the Colombian military confront the country’s rebel insurgency" and that "U.S. Special Forces troops in Colombia provide Colombian forces military training...."[17]Five months later Colombia built a third military base on its 2,219 kilometer border with Venezuela, initially stationing 1,000 troops in it.Colombia has become a military outpost for Washington in confronting and threatening both Ecuador on its southwestern and Venezuela on its northeastern frontiers.It is also part of a strategy that is more than regional and even continental in nature and scope.South America: NATO's Sixth ContinentSince the implementation of Plan Colombia in 2000 the US has enlisted several NATO allies for the counterinsurgency war in the nation and for broader purposes in the region. British SAS (Special Air Service) personnel have been assigned to the Colombian military for training purposes and Spain also sent military personnel.The North Atlantic Treaty Organization has members in Europe and North America and partnerships in Asia (Afghanistan, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Pakistan, Singapore, South Korea, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan) and Africa (Algeria, Egypt, Mauritania, Morocco and Tunisia) and with Australia.The only inhabited continent it hasn't penetrated yet is South America,In January of 2007 Colombian defense chief Santos traveled to Washington, London and Brussels, in the last-named city "for talks with the European Union," and then to Munich, Germany "for a meeting of NATO defense ministers." [18] Santos of course made the tour to garner more military aid from the US and its NATO allies. The European Union was reported to have provided $154 million annually as of that year.Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez warned in September of 2005 that "We discovered through intelligence work a military exercise that NATO has of an invasion against Venezuela, and we are preparing ourselves for thatinvasion." He detailed the plan as consisting of a "military exercise...known as Plan Balboa [that] includes rehearsing simultaneous assaults by air, sea and land at a military base in Spain, involving troops from the US and NATO countries." [19] US troops deployed to the Dutch possession of Curacao off Venezuela's northwest coast were also part of the planned operation.In spring of the following year it was reported that "Military maneuvers in the Caribbean are being carried out by the US, members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and countries from the hemisphere - excluding Cuba and Venezuela, which are the potential objectives of this demonstration of force" and that immediately afterwards "Future exercises will involve roughly 4,000 soldiers from the US, Holland, Belgium, Canada and France, who are scheduled to participate in a maneuver being dubbed the Joint Caribbean Lion, to take place between May 23 and June 15 in Curacao and Guadeloupe." [20]Colombian Counterinsurgency War: Model For South Asia And Central AmericaFor the past several years the US has also recruited and deployed Colombian military and security forces for the war in Afghanistan, supposedly to replicate the Plan Colombia drug war component in South Asia.In April of 2007 Washington transferred its ambassador to Colombia, William Wood, to Afghanistan to oversee the application of the Colombian model of counterinsurgency under the guise of combating drug cultivation. Two years later Afghanistan is estimated to account for over 90% of the illegal opium production in the world.A Bangladeshi analyst observed that "Based on 2003 figures, drug trafficking constitutes the third biggest global commodity in cash terms after oil and the arms trade. "Afghanistan and Colombia are the largest drug producing economies in the world, which feed a flourishing criminal economy. These countries areheavily militarized and the drug trade is protected."Amply documented, the CIA has played a central role in the development of both the Latin American and Asian drug triangles."NATO, as an entity, has become an accessory to major narcotics proliferation and criminal activity. Opium is not truly being reduced: in fact all the figures show that it is on the rise. This is happening under the eyes of NATO as confirmed by several media reports." [21]The intermediate way stations between Afghanistan and Colombia are Kosovo, not without reason dubbed the Colombia of the Balkans, and increasingly Iraq.The pattern is impossible to ignore.Ironically given the above contention, BBC News reported two years ago that "The US hopes that some of the lessons learned in Colombia can be applied to Afghanistan...." [22]Last January the current chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Michael Mullin, visited Colombia and was quoted as saying "Our military-to-military relationship is exceptionally strong. We need to stay with them. They have achieved things that are remarkable." [23]This March Mullin traveled to Colombia, Brazil, Chile, Peru and Mexico. Upon returning his comments were summarized as affirming that "The U.S. military is ready to help Mexico in its deadly war against drug cartels with some of the same counter-insurgency tactics used against militant networks in Iraq and Afghanistan" [24] and that "the Plan Colombia aid package could be an 'overarching' model for Pakistan and Afghanistan...." [25]A feature on US Central Command chief David Petraeus' plans for the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan reported that "Military officials are also looking at U.S. relations with Colombia as a possible model for Afghanistan and Pakistan, saying something like Washington's Plan Colombia strategy could help the two countries against militants." [26]The report from which the last quote is excerpted, "US sees lessons for Afghan war in Colombia," also includes this:"Afghan police have already trained with their Colombian counterparts and Bogota is studying sending troops to Afghanistan to help out in eradication and de-mining." [27]What is being exported to Afghanistan was made sickeningly evident last autumn when it was announced that Colombia had dismissed three generals and 22 soldiers of different ranks for the slaughter, at random apparently, of young slum dwellers in Bogota."The youths were lured from a Bogota slum with the promise of work; later their bodies were found in mass graves near the Venezuelan border."Human rights groups say that soldiers sometimes kill homeless people so that they can inflate their claims of success on the battlefield and receive promotion. [28]Among the three generals asked to resign was General Mario Montoya Uribe, "the author of the policy to use body counts to measure success against guerrillas" [29] who "allegedly encouraged promoting officers whose units kill the most leftist rebels." [30]A later report provided gruesome details:"More than 1,000 cases of illegal killings by the military are being investigated. There are dozens of cases of soldiers taking innocent men, murdering them and dressing them up as enemy combatants. Hundreds ofmembers of the security forces are thought to have taken part in such activities." [31]Recall in reference to the above that the report immediately preceding it states that the murdered were buried in mass graves near the Venezuelan border.With this year's onslaught by the Sri Lankan military against LTTE strongholds appearing to have ended the nation's 33-year war, the Colombian government and its American military suppliers are waging the only decades-long counterinsurgency war in the world, one now in its fifth decade.It has been and remains a war against the poor, the landless, the disenfranchised, anyone would opposes the privileges and abuses of the large landholders, the business elite, the US-trained military establishment and the upper echelons of the narco-mafias.Nine years ago Plan Colombia was designed to be the terminal phase of that war.The Colombia model is now the prototype Washington has openly identified for application in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Mexico among other locations.Plan Colombia: Reining In Resurgent South AmericaPlan Colombia, additionally, is now being increasingly revealed as a military strategy for suppressing a rising tide of discontent with the aftereffects of post-Cold War neoliberalism throughout South America, Central America and the Caribbean.The US and the West as a whole have used the Colombian regime and its formidable military machine to intimidate its neighbors Ecuador and Venezuela and the Andean region as a whole. Bordering on Panama, Colombia is also a potential launching pad for attacks on Central American nations like Honduras, Nicaragua and El Salvador.A brief chronology of the past year and a half will demonstrate the heightened role that is intended for Colombia by its sponsors in Washington.In January of 2008 Venezuelan President Chavez said that the US and its Colombian client "don't want peace in Colombia because it's the perfect excuse to have thousands of soldiers there, the CIA, military bases, spy planes and who knows what other...operations against Venezuela."He added, "I accuse the government of Colombia of devising a conspiracy, acting as a pawn of the U.S. empire, of devising a military provocation against Venezuela." [32]On March 1st of 2008 Colombia launched a raid inside Ecuador and killed 24 suspected FARC members, including the group's second in command Raul Reyes.An article titled "Colombian official says US intelligence helped raid onrebels" reported that "the Ecuadoran air force found that Colombia used ten 500-pound bombs, similar to those used by US forces in Iraq, which 'cannot be transported by Colombian airplanes.'"Ecuadoran authorities also noted that a few hours before the Colombian bombing raid, an HC-130 military aircraft had taken off from the US air base at Manta, in southeastern Ecuador." [33]Fearing that the armed incursion inside Ecuador was part of a broader plan of aggression, Venezuela deployed some 9,000 troops to its border with Colombia. On the day of the attack Venezuelan President Chavez warned his Colombian counterpart, "Don't think about doing that over here because it would very serious, it would be cause for war." [34]Ecuadoran President Rafael Correa broke off diplomatic relations with Colombia after the attack and when it was later discovered that the bombing had killed an Ecuadoran national, warned of further consequences.On March 6 Venezuela decreed a state of general alert and sent ten battalions, tanks and planes to the Colombian border.US President Bush told reporters that "America would continue to stand with Colombia." [35]Three weeks later Ecuador announced that it would "install electronic surveillance equipment and boost its military presence along its border with Colombia" and President Correa warned that his country would ""never again" allow a foreign attack on its soil. [36]US Military: After Iraq, Latin AmericaAlso in April of 2008 the US Air Forces Southern director of operations, Col. Jim Russell, advocated that troops being withdrawn from Iraq be redeployed to the Pentagon's Southern Command which takes in South and Central America and the Caribbean. He stated at the time: "We think, as we move ahead, we will see more of a shift of attention towards the region.“We’re seeing problems right at the mouth of Central America. That’s the gateway to our southern border.” [37]On July 12, 2008 the US Navy reestablished its 4th Fleet, encompassing South and Central America and the Caribbean as does the Pentagon's Southern Command, after it was disestablished in 1950 following World War II.Earlier this year the chief of the Southern Command, Admiral James Stavridis, became NATO Supreme Allied Commander and head of the Pentagon's European Command. Three of the last five NATO top military commanders - Stavridis, his predecessor Bantz John Craddock and Wesley Clark - moved to that post from being head of Southern Command. In May of 2008, clearly anticipating what has occurred this week, Venezuela warned Colombia not to allow a new US military base in La Guajira near the border with northwestern Venezuela. The latter's president said, "We will not allow the Colombian government to give La Guajira to the empire. Colombia is launching a threat of war at us." [38]Less than a week later a US warplane penetrated Venezuelan airspace on a flight from the Netherlands Antilles. The Venezuelan government accused the US of spying on a military base on Orchila Island and "said the U.S. was testing Venezuela's ability to detect intruders and that the Venezuelan air force was prepared to intercept the plane had it not turned back toward the Caribbean island of Curacao." [39]Defense Minister Gustavo Rangel said that "This is just the latest step in a series of provocations in which they want to involve our country." [40]In September a bloody separatist ambush killed eight people in the Bolivian province of Pando. The government expelled US ambassador Philip Goldberg, an old hand at supporting violent secessionist uprisings in Bosnia and Kosovo earlier. The head of the nation's armed forces, General Luis Trigo, warned that "The Bolivian Armed Forces warned on Friday that they will not tolerate any more actions of radical groups or foreign interference in the country's internal affairs." [41]Toward the end of 2008 Bolivia expelled US Drug Enforcement Administration officers and later announced plans to purchase Russian helicopters for anti-narcotics operations.Today Bolivian President Evo Morales stated, "I have first-hand information that the empire, through the U.S. Southern Command, made the coup d'etat in Honduras." [42]In October of 2008 Ecuador charged the CIA with infiltrating its military and knowing of the Colombian attack on its territory the preceding March. Defence Minister Javier Ponce told newspapers: "The CIA had full knowledge of what was happening in Angostura." [43]At the same time Colombian Defense Minister Santos broadened his nation's bellicosity by aiming it toward Russia. Completely the creature of Washington and its military that he is, Santos said:"Russia, with its 16,000 nuclear bombs, has a great desire to be a key player in the world. But its presence in the region will promote a return to the Cold War." [44]Santos was alluding in particular to recent Russian-Venezuelan naval exercises in the Caribbean and to the fact that Russia has provided Caracas with advanced arms, warplanes and submarines, reflecting a general trend among Latin American nations - including Bolivia, Ecuador, Argentina and Nicaragua - toward increased military ties with Russia as a counterbalance to traditional American domination of their armed forces and to be able to defend themselves against US and proxy attacks. What Santos and his American sponsors fear is the effective demise of the almost 200-year-old Monroe Doctrine.This March Venezuelan President Chavez labeled Colombian Defense Minister Santos "a threat to regional stability" and a "a threat to the stability and sovereignty of the countries in the region" who "again shows his contempt for international law" in reference to Santos' defense of the attack inside Ecuador last year. [45]Santos reiterated his intention to continue striking alleged rebel sites in neighboring countries, evoking this response from Chavez a few days later: "In case of a provocation on the part of Colombia's armed forces or infringements on Venezuela's sovereignty, I will give an order to strike with Sukhoi aircraft and tanks. I will not let anyone disrespect Venezuela and its sovereignty." [46]During the past few months the Pentagon has been training the armed forces of Guyana, Venezuela's eastern neighbor, both at home and in the United States. The use of French and Dutch island possessions in the Caribbean for military purposes has already been examined. With the election of Ricardo Martinelli as president of Panama this May putting that country back into the US column, the noose is tightening around Venezuela.Ecuador refused to renew an agreement with the US for the use of its Manta military base and so Washington lost its basing rights there this month. With the corresponding announcement last week by Colombian President Uribe that he was turning five more military bases over to the Pentagon - three airfields and two navy bases - President Chavez was correct in seeing the move as "a threat against us," and warning that "They are surrounding Venezuela with military bases." [47]Since the overthrow of Honduran President Manuel Zelaya on June 28, led by military commanders trained at the School of the Americas, alarms have been sounded in Latin America and throughout the world that the coup, far from being an aberration or anachronism, may mark a precedent for more in the near future.And just as in the final months of the Bush presidency and the first seven months of the current one military operations in Afghanistan, for five years given secondary importance in relation to Iraq, have escalated into the world's major war front, so plans for direct US military aggression in Latin America, dormant since the invasion of Panama in 1989, may be slated for revival. Notes1) Russia Today, January 18, 20092) Ibid3) STRATFOR, January 14, 20004) Ibid5) Ottawa Citizen, September 6, 20006) Inter Press Service, December 21, 20007) Ibid8) United Press International, April 11, 20009) Tampa Bay Times, July 12, 200810) Ibid11) Associated Press, May 24, 200712) Associated Press, March 10, 200713) Xinhua News Agency, February 18, 200714) Xinhua News Agency, December 16, 200615) Xinhua News Agency, December 27, 200616) Xinhua News Agency, January 20, 200617) U.S. Department of Defense, February 1, 200718) Reuters, January 29, 200719) Australian Associated Press, September 4, 200520) Prensa Latina, April 10, 200621) The Daily Star, November 24, 200722) BBC News, July 8, 200723) Agence France-Presse, January 17, 200824) Reuters, March 6, 200925) Reuters, March 5, 200926) Reuters, October 16, 200827) Ibid28) Radio Netherlands, October 30, 200829) Russia Today, January 18, 200930) Trend News Agency, November 4, 200831) Russia Today, January 18, 200932) Reuters, January 25, 200833) Focus News Agency, March 24, 200834) Associated Press, March 1, 200835) Reuters, March 4, 200836) Associated Press, April 22, 200837) Stars and Stripes, April 27, 200838) Associated Press, May 15, 200839) Bloomberg News, May 21, 200840) Reuters, May 19, 200841) Xinhua News Agency, September 13, 200842) Agence France-Presse, July 22, 200943) Reuters, October 30, 200844) Russian Information Agency Novosti, October 4, 200845) Trend News Agency, March 4, 200946) Russian Information Agency Novosti, March 9, 200947) Associated Press, July 21, 2009Stop NATOhttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on Globalization. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements contained in this article.To become a Member of Global ResearchThe CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor@yahoo.com www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.For media inquiries: crgeditor@yahoo.com© Copyright Rick Rozoff, Stop NATO, 2009 The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=14503
© Copyright 2005-2007 GlobalResearch.caWeb site engine by Polygraphx Multimedia © Copyright 2005-2007

Cuba demostró su capacidad de resistencia, solidaridad y organización (+ Video)
http://www.cubadebate.cu/especiales/2009/07/26/cuba-demostro-su-capacidad-de-resistencia-solidaridad-y-organizacion/,


Los modestos resultados ratifican el optimismo y la confianza en que ¡si se puede!
Discurso pronunciado por el General de Ejército Raúl Castro Ruz, Presidente de los Consejos de Estado y de Ministros, en el acto central en conmemoración del 56 aniversario del asalto a los cuarteles Moncada y Carlos Manuel de Céspedes, en la plaza Mayor General "Calixto García", Holguín, 26 de julio de 2009, "Año del 50 aniversario del triunfo de la Revolución".
http://www.granma.cubaweb.cu/2009/07/27/nacional/artic09.html,

RAUL:" Yes we can ! "
http://www.cubanews.ain.cu/2009/0726destacaraul.htm,

Castro hints at more belt-tightening for Cuba http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE56P1QG20090726,

Raul Castro to Cubans: Return to the Land http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/07/26/world/worldwatch/entry5189649.shtml,

President Raul Castro Heads Main Activity Commemorating the 56th anniversary of National Rebellion Day
http://www.periodico26.cu/english/news_cuba/july2009/26-raul072609.html,

Young Cubans Say Raul Castro’s Speech on July 26 is a Guide for Action
HAVANA, Cuba, July 26, (acn).- The statements given by President Raul Castro indicate the goals we are to reach and reveal the challenges ahead said young man Yordanis Pupo after the closing of the central rally held in Holguin province to mark July 26.On his way out of the Calixto Garcia square, venue of the celebrations, Pupo, who is a social worker, said “we are able—as Raul said—to make our land productive and apply our knowledge to lower imports and increase local production.” Meanwhile, Darisney Avila, a young woman who also attended the rally, said that Raul gave the guidelines to further boost the country’s development; she said Raul’s statement revealed a general commitment to reach the victory. Young Communist League leader in Holguin, Osmany Viñals, underscored the responsibility of the young generations of Cuba in contributing to a fruitful exploitation of our lands. We will keep firmly committed to the battle that must be waged and for just any mission we are appointed to, said the youth leader.

Los pueblos de América Latina deben mucho al antiimperialismo de Castro y Chávez
En los países progresistas del tipo Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, las oposiciones de derecha son las empresariales y están muy bien financiadas y asociadas a los EEUU.
Pedro Echeverría V
http://www.kaosenlared.net/noticia/pueblos-america-latina-deben-mucho-antiimperialismo-castro-chavez,

El asalto al cuartel Moncada, en Cuba marcó el inicio de la liberación de América Latina
http://www.poresto.net/ciudad/47134-el-asalto-al-cuartel-moncada-en-cuba,

Military in Honduras Backs Plan on Zelaya
WASHINGTON — The Honduran armed forces issued a communiqué on Saturday indicating that they would not stand in the way of an agreement to return Manuel Zelaya, the country’s ousted president, to power.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/26/world/americas/26honduras.html?_r=1,

La Ofensiva Imperial en América Latina
Hay una sóla solución para que el pueblo hondureño derrote éste golpe imperial: la convocatoria inmediata de una Asamblea Constituyente. La soberanía reside siempre en la voluntad del pueblo.
Eva Golinger - 25-7-2009
“Nosotros creemos que si tuviéramos que elegir un gobierno modelo y un líder modelo en la región para que los demás países lo siguieran, el actual liderazgo de Venezuela no sería ese modelo. Si esa es la lección que ha aprendido el Presidente Zelaya de este episodio, bueno, entonces sería una buena lección.” – Declaraciones de Phillip Crowley, vocero del Departamento de Estado, 20/07/2009. Dos grandes acontecimientos que afectan al futuro y al destino del pueblo latinoamericano sucedieron hace un mes. Primero, hubo un golpe de estado, violento, nefasto y brutal, contra el presidente Manuel Zelaya en Honduras. Soldados encapuchados secuestraron al presidente constitucional, un domingo de madrugada, y lo forzaron al exilio en un acto de cobardía. Un empresario fue ilegamente nombrado “presidente” por el congreso hondureño – compuesto por una mayoría golpista – y procedieron a usurpar el poder, reprimir y violar los derechos humanos del pueblo e imponer un estado de terror al estilo de las peores dictaduras del Siglo XX. Pocas horas después del violento secuestro del Presidente Zelaya, la mayoría de los países del mundo condenaron al golpe y llamaron enfáticamente por su retorno inmediato e incondicional. Y aunque rechazaron “la acción contra el Presidente Zelaya” y llamaron por la restitución del “orden constitucional”, Washington quedó cortó en clasificar a los indudables hechos como un “golpe de estado” y se negaron a pedir la restitución del presidente constitucional. Luego de tres semanas de un discurso ambigüo, el Departamento de Estado dijo definitivamente que no consideraba que lo sucedido en Honduras fue un golpe de estado. Con esa decisión, Washington respalda a la tésis de los golpistas de que sus acciones fueron constitucionales. No queda duda que detrás de este golpe – fantasma de las operaciones sucias de la CIA - están los intereses imperiales más poderosos del mundo junto a los medios masivos de comunicación y la oligarquía hondureña. Dos días después del golpe en Honduras, tuvo lugar una insólita reunión en la Casa Blanca entre dos presidentes. Cómo si la agresión contra el país centroamericano aún no resonara suficientemente con las demás naciones de América Latina, el acordado en un apretón de manos entre los jefes de estado de Washington y Colombia, selló la inexistente posibilidad de “cambio” en el seno del imperio y reafirmó que Washington no dejará su sed por la dominación plena del hemisferio. El Presidente Barack Obama – prometido “agente de cambio” – pidió y logró la ocupación del Pentágono de cinco bases militares colombianos, todas estratégicamente ubicadas para cubrir la región andina, la pácifica y el caribe. A la velocidad de la luz, el congreso estadounidense aprobó 46 millones de dólares para “mejorar” las instalaciones en sóla una de las bases, por ahora, la de Palanquera en la región central de Colombia, que se utilizará para operaciones de “seguridad hemisférica”. En el centro del golpe en Honduras está la base militar que ocupa Washington desde el 1954 en Soto Cano (Palmerola). Siempre ha sido su centro de operaciones clandestinas contra los movimientos izquierdistas en la región, desde el golpe contra Jacobo Arbenz hasta las guerras sucias de los ochenta contra los sandinistas y la influencia “socialista” de la Revolución Cubana. Hoy, el golpe en Honduras es contra el ALBA y es un intento de abortar el renacimiento del bolivarianismo en la región. Las bases militares en Colombia sirvirán como punto de ataque contra los países vecinos. Próximo en la mira está Bolivia, con elecciones presidenciales y legislativas en diciembre. La “Operación Tegucigalpa” se está preparando contra el Presidente Evo Morales – muchos de los conspiradores trabajan desde Perú, donde se encuentra una creciente presencia militar estadounidense y también un grupo de golpistas venezolanos, fugitivos de la justicia. Y no olvidemos que el Presidente Obama autorizó un fondo extraordinario de 320 millones de dólares para “promover la democracia” en América Latina el próximo año. La invasión silenciosa se intensificará bajo el “poder inteligente” de la nueva administración en Washington. Hay una sóla solución para que el pueblo hondureño derrote éste golpe imperial: la convocatoria inmediata de una Asamblea Constituyente. La soberanía reside siempre en la voluntad del pueblo. Y los países del ALBA deben crear con urgencia una alianza de investigación estratégica sobre injerencia y amenazas imperiales para compartir información y diseñar escudos eficaces para defender nuestras revoluciones.
¡En la unidad está la fuerza!
¡ Juntos, venceremos siempre!

A NOBEL PRIZE FOR MRS. CLINTON

The never-ending document read yesterday by the Nobel Laureate Oscar Arias is much worse than the 7 points of the surrender paper he had proposed on July 18th.He wasn’t communicating with international opinion in Morse Code. He was speaking in front of the TV cameras that were transmitting his image and all the details of the human face that tends to have as many variables as a person’s fingerprints. Any intent to lie can be easily discovered. I was observing him carefully.Among those watching the television, the great majority knew that Honduras had had a coup d’état. That medium gave information about the speeches made at the OAS, the UN, the SICA (Central American Integration System), the NAM Summit and other forums; they had seen the violations, the assaults and the repression inflicted on the people engaged in activities that brought together hundreds of thousands of people protesting against the coup.The strangest thing was that when Arias was laying out his new peace proposal, he wasn’t delusional; he believed what he was saying.Even though very few in Honduras were able to see the images, in the rest of the world many did see them and they also saw when he proposed the famous 7 points on July 18th. They knew that the first of them said, verbatim: “The legitimate restitution of José Manuel Zelaya Rosales to the presidency of the Republic of Honduras until the end of the constitutional term for which he was elected…”Everyone wanted to know what the mediator would be saying yesterday afternoon. The acknowledgement of the rights of the constitutional president of Honduras, with the powers reduced almost to zero in the first proposal, was relegated to sixth place in the second Arias plan, where the phrase “to legitimate the restitution” is not even being used. Many honest people are amazed and they perhaps attribute what he said yesterday to some dark manoeuvres of his. Perhaps I am one of the few in the world that understands that there was an auto-suggestive element rather than a deliberate intent in the words of the Nobel Peace Laureate. I noticed that especially when Arias, using special emphasis and laboured phrasing on account of the emotion, spoke about the multitude of messages that presidents and world leaders, moved by his initiative, had sent him. It’s what was going through his mind; he doesn’t even realize that other Nobel Peace Laureates, honest and modest individuals such as Rigoberta Menchú and Adolfo Pérez Esquivel, are outraged by what has happened in Honduras. Without any shadow of a doubt, a large part of the civilian governments of Latin America, the ones who knew that Zelaya had approved the first Arias plan and were confident in the good sense of the perpetrators of the coup and their Yankee allies, breathed in relief; that lasted only 72 hours. Seen from a different angle, and returning to the things that prevail in the real world, where the dominant empire exists and almost 200 sovereign states have to wrestle with all kinds of conflicts and political, economic, environmental, religious and other interests, the only thing missing is to award the brilliant Yankee way of thinking of Oscar Arias, trying to gain some time, strengthen the coup, and dishearten the international bodies that supported Zelaya. On the 30th anniversary of the triumph of the Sandinista Revolution, Daniel Ortega, bitterly remembering Arias’ role in the first Esquipulas Treaty, declared before a huge crowd of Nicaraguan patriots: “The Yankees know him well, that’s why they chose him to be the mediator in Honduras”. At that same event, Rigoberta Menchú, of indigenous descent, condemned the coup. If the measures agreed to at the foreign ministers meeting in Washington would be merely fulfilled, the coup d’état would not have been able to survive the non-violent resistance of the Honduran people. Now the perpetrators of the coup are already moving around in the oligarchic spheres of Latin America, some of which, from high state positions, no longer blush when they speak of their sympathies for the coup and imperialism goes fishing in the choppy waters of the river that is Latin America. Exactly what the United States wanted with the peace initiative, while it accelerated negotiations to surround Bolivar’s homeland with military bases. We must be fair, and while we await the last word of the people of Honduras, we should demand a Nobel Prize for Mrs. Clinton.

-Fidel Castro Ruz - July 23, 2009


Coalition Letter Urges President Obama to Restore Academic Travel to Cuba

WASHINGTON, July 22, 2009 – With a new academic year quickly approaching, NAFSA: Association of International Educators and a diverse group of 17 organizations today sent a letter to President Obama urging him to remove current restrictions on academic travel to Cuba.The letter applauds the President’s recent actions with respect to Cuba and asks him to take further steps toward his goal of setting U.S.-Cuban relations on a new path by restoring academic travel between the two countries.Citing the many benefits of academic exchanges and their history of success in advancing democratic change and strengthening relations between the United States and other countries, the letter suggests that a policy of open academic travel between the United States and Cuba would align well with the President’s interest in expanding opportunities for exchanges between young people around the world. As President Obama recently said to a group of students in Turkey, "exchanges can break down the walls between us."Unfortunately, study abroad among Americans to Cuba has declined precipitously since the Bush administration imposed restrictive regulations on academic travel to the island in 2004. According to the latest data available from the Institute of International Education, only 220 American college students studied in Cuba during the 2006-2007 academic year. Three years earlier, ten times that many students had done so. In addition to urging the President to restore academic travel to Cuba via general license, the letter supports the granting of U.S. visas for Cubans coming to the United States for exchange purposes and the announcement of a policy favoring academic, cultural, religious, sports and professional visits, and also urges Cuban authorities to grant exit visas for students and scholars accepted by US academic institutions.

The letter was signed by the following organizations:
American Association of State Colleges and UniversitiesAlliance for International Educational and Cultural ExchangeAmerican Institute for Foreign StudyCIEE – Council on International Educational ExchangeCommunity Colleges for International DevelopmentCuba Academic AllianceEmergency Coalition to Defend Educational TravelFund for Reconciliation and Development Latin American Studies AssociationLatin America Working GroupNAFSA: Association of International EducatorsNational Foreign Trade CouncilOrbitz WorldwidePartners of the AmericasSocial Science Research CouncilThe OpenCuba.org CampaignUSA*EngageWashington Office on Latin America

The full text of the letter is available here: http://www.nafsa.org/_/File/_/POTUS_Cuba_July_09.pdf,

Zelaya, Negroponte and the Controversy at Soto Cano
The Coup and the U.S. Airbase in Honduras
By NIKOLAS KOZLOFF
The mainstream media has once again dropped the ball on a key aspect of the ongoing story in Honduras: the U.S. airbase at Soto Cano, also known as Palmerola. Prior to the recent military coup d’etat President Manuel Zelaya declared that he would turn the base into a civilian airport, a move opposed by the former U.S. ambassador. What’s more Zelaya intended to carry out his project with Venezuelan financing. For years prior to the coup the Honduran authorities had discussed the possibility of converting Palmerola into a civilian facility. Officials fretted that Toncontín, Tegucigalpa’s international airport, was too small and incapable of handling large commercial aircraft. An aging facility dating to 1948, Toncontín has a short runway and primitive navigation equipment. The facility is surrounded by hills which makes it one of the world’s more dangerous international airports.Palmerola by contrast has the best runway in the country at 8,850 feet long and 165 feet wide. The airport was built more recently in the mid-1980s at a reported cost of $30 million and was used by the United States for supplying the Contras during America’s proxy war against the Sandinistas in Nicaragua as well as conducting counter-insurgency operations in El Salvador. At the height of the Contra war the U.S. had more than 5,000 soldiers stationed at Palmerola. Known as the Contras’ “unsinkable aircraft carrier,” the base housed Green Berets as well as CIA operatives advising the Nicaraguan rebels. More recently there have been some 500-to-600 U.S. troops on hand at the facility which serves as a Honduran air force base as well as a flight-training center. With the exit of U.S. bases from Panama in 1999, Palmerola became one of the few usable airfields available to the U.S. on Latin American soil. The base is located approximately 30 miles north of the capital Tegucigalpa.In 2006 it looked as if Zelaya and the Bush administration were nearing a deal on Palmerola’s future status. In June of that year Zelaya flew to Washington to meet President Bush and the Honduran requested that Palmerola be converted into a commercial airport. Reportedly Bush said the idea was “wholly reasonable” and Zelaya declared that a four-lane highway would be constructed from Tegucigalpa to Palmerola with U.S. funding. In exchange for the White House’s help on the Palmerola facility Zelaya offered the U.S. access to a new military installation to be located in the Mosquitia area along the Honduran coast near the Nicaraguan border. Mosquitia reportedly serves as a corridor for drugs moving south to north. The drug cartels pass through Mosquitia with their cargo en route from Colombia, Peru and Bolivia. A remote area only accessible by air, sea, and river Mosquitia is full of swamp and jungle. The region is ideal for the U.S. since large numbers of troops may be housed in Mosquitia in relative obscurity. The coastal location was ideally suited for naval and air coverage consistent with the stated U.S. military strategy of confronting organized crime, drug trafficking, and terrorism. Romeo Vásquez, head of the Honduran Joint Chiefs of Staff, remarked that the armed forces needed to exert a greater presence in Mosquitia because the area was full of “conflict and problems.” But what kind of access would the U.S. have to Mosquitia? Honduran Defense Secretary Aristides Mejía said that Mosquitia wouldn’t necessarily be “a classic base with permanent installations, but just when needed. We intend, if President Zelaya approves, to expand joint operations [with the United States].” That statement however was apparently not to the liking of eventual coup leader and U.S. School of the Americas graduate Vásquez who had already traveled to Washington to discuss future plans for Mosquitia. Contradicting his own colleague, Vásquez said the idea was “to establish a permanent military base of ours in the zone” which would house aircraft and fuel supply systems. The United States, Vásquez added, would help to construct air strips on site. Events on the ground meanwhile would soon force the Hondurans to take a more assertive approach towards air safety. In May, 2008 a terrible crash occurred at Toncontín airport when a TACA Airbus A320 slid off the runway on its second landing attempt. After mowing down trees and smashing through a metal fence, the airplane’s fuselage was broken into three parts near the airstrip. Three people were killed in the crash and 65 were injured. In the wake of the tragedy Honduran officials were forced at long last to block planes from landing at the notoriously dangerous Toncontín. All large jets, officials said, would be temporarily transferred to Palmerola. Touring the U.S. airbase himself Zelaya remarked that the authorities would create a new civilian facility at Palmerola within sixty days. Bush had already agreed to let Honduras construct a civilian airport at Palmerola, Zelaya said. “There are witnesses,” the President added. But constructing a new airport had grown more politically complicated. Honduran-U.S. relations had deteriorated considerably since Zelaya’s 2006 meeting with Bush and Zelaya had started to cultivate ties to Venezuela while simultaneously criticizing the American-led war on drugs. Bush’s own U.S. Ambassador Charles Ford said that while he would welcome the traffic at Palmerola past agreements should be honored. The base was used mostly for drug surveillance planes and Ford remarked that “The president can order the use of Palmerola when he wants, but certain accords and protocols must be followed.” “It is important to point out that Toncontín is certified by the International Civil Aviation Organization,” Ford added, hoping to allay long-time concerns about the airport’s safety. What’s more, the diplomat declared, there were some airlines that would not see Palmerola as an “attractive” landing destination. Ford would not elaborate or explain what his remarks were supposed to mean. Throwing fuel on the fire Assistant Secretary of State John Negroponte, a former U.S. ambassador to Honduras, said that Honduras could not transform Palmerola into a civilian airport “from one day to the next.” In Tegucigalpa, Negroponte met with Zelaya to discuss Palmerola. Speaking later on Honduran radio the U.S. diplomat said that before Zelaya could embark on his plans for Palmerola the airport would have to receive international certification for new incoming flights. According to Spanish news agency EFE Negroponte also took advantage of his Tegucigalpa trip to sit down and meet with the President of the Honduran Parliament and future coup leader Roberto Micheletti [the news account however did not state what the two discussed]. Needless to say Negroponte’s visit to Honduras was widely repudiated by progressive and human rights activists who labeled Negroponte “an assassin” and accused him of being responsible for forced disappearances during the diplomat’s tenure as ambassador (1981-1985). Moreover, Ford and Negroponte’s condescending attitude irked organized labor, indigenous groups and peasants who demanded that Honduras reclaim its national sovereignty over Palmerola. “It’s necessary to recover Palmerola because it’s unacceptable that the best airstrip in Central America continues to be in the hands of the U.S. military,” said Carlos Reyes, leader of the Popular Bloc which included various politically progressive organizations. “The Cold War has ended and there are no pretexts to continue with the military presence in the region,” he added. The activist remarked that the government should not contemplate swapping Mosquitia for Palmerola either as this would be an affront to Honduran pride.Over the next year Zelaya sought to convert Palmerola into a civilian airport but plans languished when the government was unable to attract international investors. Finally in 2009 Zelaya announced that the Honduran armed forces would undertake construction. To pay for the new project the President would rely on funding from ALBA [in English, the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas] and Petrocaribe, two reciprocal trading agreements pushed by Venezuelan leader Hugo Chávez. Predictably the Honduran right leapt on Zelaya for using Venezuelan funds. Amílcar Bulnes, President of the Honduran Business Association [known by its Spanish acronym COHEP] said that Petrocaribe funds should not be used for the airport but rather for other, unspecified needs. A couple weeks after Zelaya announced that the armed forces would proceed with construction at Palmerola the military rebelled. Led by Romeo Vásquez, the army overthrew Zelaya and deported him out of the country. In the wake of the coup U.S. peace activists visited Palmerola and were surprised to find that the base was busy and helicopters were flying all around. When activists asked American officials if anything had changed in terms of the U.S.-Honduran relationship they were told “no, nothing.”The Honduran elite and the hard right U.S. foreign policy establishment had many reasons to despise Manuel Zelaya as I’ve discussed in previous articles. The controversy over the Palmerola airbase however certainly gave them more ammunition.
-Nikolas Kozloff is the author of Revolution! South America and the Rise of the New Left (Palgrave-Macmillan, 2008)

Un Premio Nobel para Mrs. Clinton
Reflexiones de Fidel
El interminable documento leído ayer por el Nobel Oscar Arias es mucho peor que los 7 puntos del acta de rendición que había propuesto el 18 de julio.No se comunicaba con la opinión internacional a través de una clave Morse. Hablaba delante de las cámaras de televisión que transmitían su imagen y todos los detalles del rostro humano, que suele tener tantas variables como las huellas digitales de una persona. Cualquier intención mentirosa se puede descubrir con facilidad. Yo lo observaba cuidadosamente.Entre los televidentes, la inmensa mayoría conocía que en Honduras tuvo lugar un golpe de Estado. A través de ese medio se informaron de los discursos pronunciados en la OEA, la ONU, el SICA, la Cumbre de los No Alineados y otros foros; habían visto los atropellos, los abusos y la represión al pueblo en actividades que llegaron a reunir cientos de miles de personas protestando contra el golpe de Estado.Lo más extraño es que, cuando Arias exponía su nueva propuesta de paz, no deliraba; creía lo que estaba diciendo.Aunque muy pocos en Honduras podían ver las imágenes, en el resto del mundo muchas personas lo vieron y también lo habían visto cuando él propuso los famosos 7 puntos el 18 de julio. Sabían que el primero de ellos decía textualmente: “La legítima restitución de José Manuel Zelaya Rosales en la Presidencia de la República hasta el fin del período constitucional por el cual fue electo…”Todos deseaban saber qué diría ayer por la tarde el mediador. El reconocimiento de los derechos del Presidente Constitucional de Honduras, con las facultades reducidas casi a cero en la primera propuesta, fue relegado a un sexto lugar en el segundo proyecto de Arias, donde ni siquiera se emplea la frase “legitimar la restitución.”Muchas personas honestas están asombradas y tal vez atribuyen a oscuras maniobras suyas lo que dijo ayer. Quizás yo sea uno de los pocos en el mundo que comprenda que había una autosugestión, más que una intención deliberada en las palabras del Nobel de la Paz. Me percaté de eso especialmente cuando Arias, con especial énfasis y palabras entrecortadas por la emoción, habló de la multitud de mensajes que Presidentes y líderes mundiales, conmovidos por su iniciativa, le habían enviado. Es lo que le pasa por la cabeza; ni siquiera se da cuenta de que otros Premios Nobel de la Paz, honestos y modestos, como Rigoberta Menchú y Adolfo Pérez Esquivel, están indignados por lo ocurrido en Honduras.Sin duda alguna que gran parte de los gobiernos civiles de América Latina, los cuales conocían que Zelaya había aprobado el primer proyecto de Arias y confiaban en la cordura de los golpistas y sus aliados yanquis, respiraron con alivio, el cual duró solo 72 horas.Visto desde otro ángulo, y volviendo a las cosas que prevalecen en el mundo real, donde el imperio dominante existe y casi 200 estados soberanos tienen que lidiar con todo tipo de conflictos e intereses políticos, económicos, medioambientales, religiosos y otros, solo falta algo para premiar la genial idea yanqui de pensar en Oscar Arias, para tratar de ganar tiempo, consolidar el golpe, y desmoralizar a los organismos internacionales que apoyaron a Zelaya.En el 30 Aniversario del Triunfo de la Revolución Sandinista, Daniel Ortega recordando con amargura el papel de Arias en el primer Acuerdo de Esquipulas, declaró ante una enorme multitud de patriotas nicaragüenses: “Los yanquis lo conocen bien, por eso lo escogieron como mediador en Honduras”. En ese mismo acto, Rigoberta Menchú, de ascendencia indígena, condenó el golpe.Si se cumplían simplemente las medidas acordadas en la reunión de Cancilleres en Washington el golpe de Estado no habría podido sobrevivir a la resistencia pacífica del pueblo hondureño.Ahora los golpistas se están moviendo ya en las esferas oligárquicas de América Latina, algunas de las cuales, desde altas posiciones estatales, ya no se ruborizan al hablar de sus simpatías por el golpe y el imperialismo pesca en el río revuelto de América Latina. Exactamente lo que Estados Unidos deseaba con la iniciativa de paz, mientras aceleraba las negociaciones para rodear de bases militares la patria de Bolívar.Hay que ser justos, y mientras esperamos la última palabra del pueblo de Honduras, debemos demandar un Premio Nobel para Mrs. Clinton.
-Fidel Castro Ruz - Julio 23 de 2009

Reflections by Comrade Fidel

THE 30TH SANDINISTA ANNIVERSARY AND THE SAN JOSÉ PROPOSAL

The coup d’état in Honduras, promoted by the far right-wing of the United States –which in Central America was maintaining the structure set up by Bush – and backed by the Department of State, was evolving poorly on account of the energetic resistance by the people.
The criminal venture, condemned unanimously by world opinion and international bodies, could not be sustained.
The memory of atrocities committed during recent decades by the tyrannies that United States organized, instructed and armed in our hemisphere was still fresh.
The efforts of the empire were set in motion during the Clinton administration and in the following years in the plan to impose the FTA on all the countries of Latin America via the so-called Summits of the Americas.
The intention of committing the hemisphere to a free trade agreement fell through. The economies in other parts of the world grew at a good clip and the dollar lost its exclusive hegemony as the privileged currency. The brutal world financial crisis complicated the situation. Under those circumstances, the military coup was produced in Honduras, one of the poorest countries in the hemisphere.
In the wake of two weeks of growing popular struggle, the United States manoeuvred to gain time. The Department of State appointed Oscar Arias, president of Costa Rica, to the task of helping along the military coup in Honduras, besieged by the vigorous but peaceful pressure exerted by the people. Never had such a similar event in Latin America received such a response.
In US calculations, the fact that Arias held the title of Nobel laureate for peace held some weight.
The real Oscar Arias story indicates that the man we are dealing with is a neo-liberal politician, talented and with a gift for words, extremely calculating and a faithful ally of the United States.
From the first years of the triumph of the Cuban Revolution, the government of the United States used Costa Rica and apportioned it resources to present it as a showcase of the social advances that could be achieved under capitalism.
That Central American country was used as an imperialist base for the piratical attacks against Cuba. Thousands of Cuban technicians and university graduates were stolen away from our people who were already being submitted to a cruel blockade, in order to provide their services in Costa Rica. Relations between Costa Rica and Cuba have been restored in recent times; it was one of the two last countries in the hemisphere to do so, something that is of satisfaction for us, but in spite of that I must express what I am thinking at this historic moment for our America.
Arias, originally from the wealthy and leading class in Costa Rica, studied law and economics at a university in his country and later studied and graduated as master in political sciences from the English University of Essex where he finally graduated as Doctor of Political Sciences. Having such academic laurels, President José Figueres Ferrer of the National Liberation Party appointed him as advisor in 1970, at the age of 30, and shortly after he was appointed Minister of Planning, a position ratified by the next president Daniel Oduber. In 1978, he enters Congress as Deputy for that party. He ascends to secretary general in 1979 and is president for the first time in 1986.
Years before the triumph of the Cuban Revolution, an armed movement of the national bourgeoisie of Costa Rica, under the leadership of José Figueres Ferrer, father of President Figueres Olsen, had eliminated the small coup-perpetrating army of that country and his struggle gained the sympathies of the Cubans. When we were fighting in the Sierra Maestra against the Batista tyranny, we received some weapons and ammunition from the Liberation Party created by Figueres Ferrer, but he was too much of a friend to the Yankees and he soon broke with us. It cannot be forgotten that the OAS meeting in San José Costa Rica gave rise to the First Declaration of Havana in 1960.
All of Central America suffered for more than 150 years and, since the days of the filibusterer William Walker who made himself president of Nicaragua in 1856, is still suffering the problem of United States interventionism which has been a constant, even though the heroic people of Nicaragua have now attained an independence that they are ready to defend right up to their last breath. Any support from Costa Rica is unheard of since it was achieved, even though there was a government in that country which, on the eve of the victory in 1979, saw fit to show solidarity with the Sandinista National Liberation Front.
When Nicaragua was being drained of its life blood in Reagan’s dirty war, Guatemala and El Salvador had also paid a high price in human lives due to the US interventionist policy that provided money, weapons, schools and indoctrination to the repressive troops. Daniel told us about how the Yankees finally promoted formulae that put an end to the revolutionary resistance of Guatemala and El Salvador.
On many occasions, Daniel had bitterly commented to me that Arias, following US instructions, had excluded Nicaragua from the peace negotiations. He only met with the governments of El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala to impose treaties on Nicaragua. Therefore he was expressing great gratitude to Vinicio Cerezo. He also told me that the first treaty signed in the convent of Esquipulas, Guatemala on August 7, 1987, after two days of intense conversations among the five Central American presidents. I have never publicly spoken about that.
But this time, while commemorating the 30th anniversary of the Sandinista victory on July 19, 1979, Daniel explained it all with impressive clarity, as he did with all subjects throughout his speech that was heard by hundreds of thousands of people and broadcast on radio and television. I use his exact words: “The Yankees appointed him as mediator. We have deep sympathies with the people of Costa Rica, but I cannot forget, in those tough years the president of Costa Rica called together the Central American presidents and he didn’t invite us…”
“But the other Central American presidents were more sensible and they told him: There can be no peace plan here if Nicaragua isn’t present. In the name of historical truth, the president had the fortitude to break the isolation the Yankees had imposed on Central America – where they had forbidden the presidents to talk with the president of Nicaragua and they wanted a military solution, they wanted to finish Nicaragua off, finish off its revolution, with a war - , the man who took that courageous step was President Vinicius Cerezo of Guatemala. That is the true story.”
Right away he added: “The Yankees came running to find President Oscar Arias, because they already know him! They want to find a way to gain some time, so that the perpetrators of the coup begin to make demands that are unacceptable. Who has ever heard of a coup negotiating with the people from whom it is ripping away their constitutional rights? Those rights cannot be negotiated; one simply has to reinstate President Manuel Zelaya, just as the ALBA, Rio Group, SICA, OAS and United Nations treaties stated.
“We want peaceful solutions in our countries. The battle being fought by the people of Honduras at this time is a non-violent battle, in order to avoid more pain than that which has already been inflicted on Honduras”, concluded Daniel, verbatim.
Because of the dirty war ordered by Reagan and which in part – he told me – was funded by drugs sent to the United States, more than 60,000 persons lost their lives and 5,800 more were made invalid. Reagan’s dirty war gave rise to the destruction and abandonment of 300 schools and 25 health centres; 150 teachers were murdered. The toll rose to tens of billions of dollars. Nicaragua only had 3.5 million inhabitants, it stopped receiving the fuel that the USSR was sending them and the economy became unsustainable. It called elections and even had them earlier, and it respected what the people decided, those people who had lost all hope for holding on to the gains of the Revolution. Nearly 17 years later, the Sandinistas returned to the government in victory; just two days ago they were celebrating the 30th anniversary of the first victory.
On Saturday, July 18th, the Nobel Laureate proposed 7 points of the personal peace initiative that was detracting from the authority of the UN and OAS decisions and was tantamount to an act of renunciation by Manuel Zelaya that took away sympathies and weakened poplar support. The constitutional president sent what he described as an ultimatum for the coup, which his representatives were to present, announcing at the same time his return to Honduras on Sunday, July 19th via any department of that country.
Around noon on that Sunday, a giant Sandinista demonstration takes place, with historical denunciations of US policy. They were truths that could be nothing other than tremendously significant.
The worst of the matter is that the United States was running into resistance for its sweetening manoeuvre from the coup government. It would still need to be pinpointed at what moment the Department of State sends their strong message to Micheletti, and whether the military chiefs were warned about the positions of the US government.
What is real is that for whoever would be closely following the events, Micheletti was against peace on Monday. His representative in San José, Carlos López Contreras, had declared that the Arias proposal could not be discussed because the first point, the one dealing with Zelaya’s reinstatement, was not negotiable. The civilian government of the coup had taken its role seriously and did not even realize that Zelaya, divested of his authority, would not represent any risk to the oligarchy and would suffer a politically hard blow if he accepted the proposal made by the president of Costa Rica.
That very same Sunday the 19th, when Arias is asking for another 72 hours to explain his position, Mrs. Clinton is speaking on the phone with Micheletti and sustains what the spokesperson Philip Crowley describes as a “tough phone call”. Some day we shall know what she said to him, but it would be enough just to see Micheletti’s face when he spoke at a meeting of his government on Monday July 20th: he really looked like a kid in kindergarten who had been scolded by his teacher. I was able to see the images and hear the speeches at the meeting on Telesur. Other images broadcast were those of the OAS representatives making their speeches in the heart of that institution, committing themselves to await the last word of the Nobel Laureate on Wednesday. Did they or didn’t they know what Mrs.Clinton had said to Micheletti? Maybe they did, maybe they didn’t. Perhaps some of them, not all of them, knew. Men, institutions and concepts had turned into instruments of the high-handed and arrogant policy of Washington. Never had a speech in the heart of the OAS shone with such dignity as the brief but brave words at that meeting spoken by Roy Chaderton, the Venezuelan ambassador.
Tomorrow the stony image of Oscar Arias will appear, explaining that they have drawn up such and such a solution to avoid violence. I think that even Arias himself has fallen into the great trap set up by the Department of State. Let’s see what he does tomorrow.
Nevertheless, the people of Honduras are the ones who will have the last word. Representatives of the social organizations and the new forces are not the instruments of anyone, inside or outside the country. They know the needs and suffering of the people, their awareness and their mettle have multiplied; many citizens who were indolent have joined the cause; the very members of the traditional parties who are honest and who believe in freedom, justice and human dignity will judge their leaders on the position they will adopt at this historical moment.
We still do not know what the attitude of the military will be when faced with the Yankee ultimata, and what messages will get to the officers; there is only one patriotic and honourable point of reference: loyalty to the people who have heroically stood up to the tear gas bombs, the blows and the shooting.
Without anybody being able to be sure about what the final whim of the empire will be, whether Zelaya returns legally or illegally as a result of the final decisions adopted, without a doubt Hondurans will give him a grand welcome because it will be a measure of the victory that they have already won with their struggles. Let nobody doubt that only the Honduran people will be able to build their own history!


Fidel Castro Ruz
July 21, 2009
8:55 p.m.

Cinco Héroes cubanos rehenes del imperio
(Mientras prosigue la impunidad a los terroristas…)
-Nancy Valiño
Cuando el pasado 15 de junio la Corte Suprema de Justicia de los EEUU rechazó considerar el caso de nuestros Cinco Héroes, no hacía más que actuar en concordancia con lo que ha sido la actitud hacia Cuba de los diferentes gobiernos del imperio yanqui y sus múltiples instancias de poder durante ya más de cincuenta años.Unos días antes, otra dependencia del poder judicial estadounidense, había otorgado generosamente al terrorista Luis Posada Carriles un nuevo plazo para que este prepare su “defensa” con todas las garantías del caso.Ambos hechos, indisolublemente relacionados, grafican claramente los dos polos del tratamiento que se ha mantenido hacia Cuba y constituyen asimismo una especie de barómetro que permite constatar el actual nivel en la persistente obsesión por doblegar y rendir a la isla.Mientras el sistema de Justicia y el gobierno de los EEUU prosiguen en su empeño de proteger entre algodones de impudicia a uno de los terroristas más prolíficos en muerte y dolor existentes sobre la faz del planeta, desprecian revisar el caso de nuestros Cinco Héroes, avalando con el silencio de la Corte Suprema todas las irregularidades de orden judicial, político y ético cometidas, advertidas incluso por la o­nU. Sin duda pretenden castigar en ellos la resistencia y dignidad de todo un pueblo; de esta forma, nuestros Cinco Héroes son verdaderos rehenes.

El imperio le teme a la Verdad y la Justicia
Unas semanas antes de la inmoral determinación de la Corte Suprema de Justicia de los EEUU, había sido el propio Departamento de Estado quien incluyera nuevamente a Cuba en la lista de países que “patrocinan el terrorismo”, reafirmando con ello una vez más, el peligroso antecedente de mantener a Cuba en la mira de sus postulados de Seguridad Nacional. Ese mismo Departamento de Estado que acaba de negar una vez más la visa a Adriana Pérez , esposa de nuestro Héroe Gerardo Hernández Nordelo…Pero, efectivamente existen países que fomentan al terrorismo como política de estado y amparan terroristas a contrapelo de todas las convenciones internacionales que advierten y sancionan al respecto.Así, mientras desde las redes del poder imperial sus voceros llegan a quedar afónicos de tanto pregonar sobre la “democracia y los derechos humanos” -en tanto califican a otros como “ejes del mal”-, se implementan tras bambalinas multifacéticos planes para apoderarse de todo cuanto constituya un interés “estratégico” para el sistema, o para destruir aquello que vean como un estorbo a lo mismo. Golpes de estado, guerras de rapiña, asesinato de opositores, tortura, desaparición, acompañan la implementación de la ideología de la Doctrina de Seguridad Nacional como política terrorista del imperio desde su génesis. Hoy mismo testimonian dolorosamente sobre esta realidad, la ignominia de Guantánamo, los bombardeos a poblaciones civiles indefensas, el apoyo a regímenes que masacran a sus pueblos y el patrocinio a cualquier gérmen de contrarrevolución en Nuestramérica o cualquier otro “oscuro rincón” planetario.En este mismo contexto, nunca será demasiado referirse al ejemplo histórico de la guerra terrorista desarrollada sistemáticamente contra Cuba como política de estado, desde los albores de la revolución.Porque no se ha tratado solo del Bloqueo, con todas sus inhumanas consecuencias, lo que se ha implementado contra Cuba. Todas las diferentes administraciones de la Casa Blanca, junto a sus agencias e instituciones como la CIA, la USAID y el Pentágono entre otros, han tenido en mira la destrucción de la revolución y no han vacilado en utilizar para ello todos los medios de una guerra sucia terrorista.Esta verdadera obsesión, amplificada dialécticamente ante el fracaso del empeño, ha llevado hasta límites rayanos en el ridículo a más de algún inquilino de la Casa Blanca, o director de la CIA, o general del Pentágono. Por supuesto, ha ocasionado también inconmensurable dolor y daños materiales al pueblo cubano.Nunca se han resignado a considerar a Cuba como un pueblo Libre y Soberano al que no pueden dictarle condiciones; continúan delirando con estrujarle y fundirle dócilmente a su ideología fascistoide del “Destino Manifiesto”, a constreñirle con una neoversión de la Enmienda Platt o la Doctrina Monroe. Sin ir más lejos, y por lo mismo, todavía continúa vigente el llamado “Plan Bush” incluyendo su famoso “capítulo secreto”.

Están atragantados con Cuba.
“En silencio ha tenido que ser” (José Martí)
Frente a la constante agresión imperial Cuba ha ejercido el derecho a defender su Soberanía y Libertad.Desde los inicios de la revolución, los servicios de Seguridad junto al pueblo cubano han dedicado esfuerzos para prevenir y neutralizar el terrorismo promovido desde los EEUU. Su accionar constituye sobretodo un ejemplo de proceder ético ante este tipo de situaciones extremas, cuyo enfrentamiento se realiza sin el recurso a los métodos tradicionalmente empleados por otros servicios similares del autodenominado mundo “libre y democrático”: el amedrentamiento, la tortura, la desaparición, el asesinato. Nuestros Cinco Héroes, desde su injusta prisión, testimonian dignamente acerca de esta lucha antiterrorista. Mediante el monitoreo de los grupos terroristas se ha logrado impedir numerosos intentos de sabotajes, planes de asesinato de dirigentes, así como desmantelar diversas provocaciones, etc. Pero no siempre ha sido posible detener a tiempo la artera maquinaria del terror: miles de víctimas, junto a sus familiares y todo un pueblo testimonian la dolorosa realidad de esta guerra sucia desatada contra Cuba.En reiteradas ocasiones, la información obtenida mediante el monitoreo antiterrorista ha sido compartida con diferentes gobiernos de EEUU (entre ellos el de Clinton, en 1997 y 1998), el Comité Especial de la Cámara de Representantes (acerca del asesinato de John F. Kennedy, 1978), el FBI (1998), etc. en un esfuerzo de desenmascaramiento preventivo; a modo de abortar empeños obsesivos; por ética.Y toda esta información coloca en evidencia un patrón común que dista mucho de ser casual. Los mismos terroristas que han sido utilizados profusamente en la guerra sucia contra Cuba, aparecen también operando relacionados con otros escenarios de la política interna y externa del propio EEUU, comprometiendo en ello hasta el tuétano a más de alguna agencia imperial, empresarios del enorme complejo militar-industrial, la mafia, generales del Pentágono…Esto es lo que sucede por ejemplo en el caso de Luis Posada Carriles, el “terrorista predilecto” de los EEUU, quien aparece involucrado reiteradamente en brutales acciones desde la temprana era de asesinatos de los hermanos Kennedy (1963 y 1968); caso Watergate (1972); el crimen del canciller chileno Orlando Letelier y su asistente en Washington (1976); la voladura del avión de Cubana con sus 73 ocupantes sobre Barbados (1976); la Operación Cóndor en Nuestramérica (décadas de los 70-80 del siglo pasado); caso Irán-Contras (década de los 80, siglo pasado); bombas y asesinato de Fabio di Celmo en La Habana (1997); intento de magnicidio de Fidel en Panamá (2000)…Todo indica que la impunidad y protección que terroristas como Luis Posada Carriles y otros gozan en los EEUU responde simplemente a que este y sus compinches “saben demasiado”. Por esto, cualquier investigación y juicio serio que se decidiera efectuar contra ellos plantearía el peligro de sacar a luz muchos trapos sucios de la compleja red del poder imperial, siniestramente ocultos hasta hoy al pueblo estadounidense y que exceden en mucho al tema “Cuba”.También la impermeabilidad de Posada Carriles frente a la Verdad y la Justicia trasciende ampliamente su desempeño terrorista comprometiendo otros aspectos de la política imperial. El caso de este “paradigma” de terrorista -pero sin embargo impune y protegido en medio del imperio-, representa una firme prueba del cinismo e hipocresía de la cacareada “guerra al terrorismo” y desnuda a esta tal como lo que es: solo la fase actual de la Doctrina de Seguridad Nacional de los EEUU para extender su garra hacia los “rincones oscuros” de su interés.Valdría la pena recordarle a Obama que: “O se está contra el terrorismo, o se protege a Posada Carriles…”

¿De cuáles cambios hablaba usted, Mr. Obama?
Muchos continúan haciéndose la pregunta de si Obama se atreverá a marcar la diferencia frente a Cuba respecto a lo que han sido las anteriores administraciones de gobierno estadounidenses.Generalmente, estos tratan de no perder ocasión de golpear a la revolución cubana. Cada cosa que se dice o hace en relación al tema “Cuba” está enmarcada en la obsesiva determinación de rendir y destruir la revolución.Evidentemente en este contexto, el caso de nuestros Cinco Héroes, así como lo de Luis Posada Carriles, colocan a prueba el gigantesco edificio de retórica de “cambios” levantado por Obama. Hasta ahora -maquillajes más, maquillajes menos-, este ha optado por plegarse como uno más a la inmoral política de sus antecesores, lo que ha resultado chocante para muchos que creían honestamente en la posibilidad de un cambio.Siendo partes estructurales de la compleja trama del poder imperial, ni una Corte Suprema de Justicia va a ir en contra de los “intereses estratégicos” de la Seguridad Nacional del sistema puestos en “peligro supremo” por el accionar consecuentemente antiterrorista y ético de nuestros Cinco Héroes. Tampoco algún Tribunal de Justicia cualquiera va osar ir en contra del “guerrero por la libertad” Luis Posada Carriles, quien, guerreando por los caminos del mundo no ha hecho otra cosa sino servir a esos “intereses estratégicos” del sistema.Y por lo que se ve hasta ahora, mucho menos un presidente del imperio se atreve a marcar la diferencia, cuánto más los casos de nuestros Cinco Héroes y el de Luis Posada Carriles colocan en jaque toda su retórica de “cambios”, amenazándolo con confrontar ineludiblemente la Verdad y la Justicia frente a su pueblo, el mundo y el pueblo cubano.Es cierto que en lo que respecta a Cuba, Obama recibe la herencia de lo que han sido más de cincuenta años de política imperial y contubernios de la conexión CIA-mafia cubano-estadounidense; esos son lazos firmes y poderosos construídos en base al terror y la guerra sucia. Pero Obama posee los medios para hacer efectiva en este terreno su propuesta de cambios. Pudiera, por una parte, entender que nuestros Cinco Héroes demuestran en todo su accionar que sí se puede ser verdaderamente antiterrorista, y gestionar su Libertad. Por otra parte, el actual presidente pudiera consultar la información existente o la todavía clasificada acerca de Posada Carriles y facilitar su enjuiciamiento como lo que ha sido hasta hoy: un verdadero terrorista.¿Tendrá Obama, en algún espacio y tiempo de su abultada agenda imperial, el valor ético y político de aplicar frente a estos temas tan sensibles a los pueblos de Cuba y los EEUU, simplemente esta Verdad y Justicia?

You have the Choice, Mr. President!
Mientras nuestros Cinco Héroes continúen encarcelados en las mazmorras del imperio, seguirán siendo ejemplo y banderas para el pueblo cubano y los honestos del mundo; cuando sean liberados, retornarán junto a su pueblo a continuar construyendo y defendiendo esta obra “de todos y por el bien de todos”, como Martí quería.“Nosotros cinco nos debemos a nuestros pueblos y a pesar de todos los reveses, continuaremos luchando contra el terrorismo, contra la guerra, en defensa de Cuba y de todos los pueblos del mundo, incluso del propio pueblo de Estados Unidos, aún en contra de la voluntad de su gobierno, para el cual, su primera misión debería ser precisamente esta que nosotros defendemos”. (Ramón Labañino Salazar)

Referencias:- “La guerra secreta”, Fabián Escalante Font. Editorial Ciencias Sociales, Cuba.- “Imperio del terror”, Alejandro Castro Espín. Editorial Capitán San Luis, 2009, Cuba.- “Paraninfo, un magnicidio frustrado”, Ivón Deulofeu. Editorial Capitán San Luis, 2007, Cuba.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB153/http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20071115/index.htm http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB202/index.htm http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB218/index.htmhttp://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB153/index.htmhttp://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB157/index.htmhttp://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB199/index.htmhttp://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB125/http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB2/nsaebb2.htmhttp://www.terrorfileonline.org/es/index.php/Operaci%C3%B3n_40http://www.antiterroristas.cuhttp://www.freethefive.org http://www.granma.cubaweb.cu/miami5/index.htmlhttp://5heroes.cujae.edu.cu http://www.thecuban5.orghttp://www.cubainformacion.tvhttp://www.aporrea.org/ddhh/a58375.html(“Posada Carriles, un asesino en serie”)


MEDIATOR ARIAS CALLS FOR "AMNESTY" FOR COUP REGIME; EARLY ELECTIONS AND GOVERNMENT OF "RECONCILIATION"
UPDATE AGAIN, 10:15PM: The talks are done for today with no agreement. Zelaya's delegation confirmed they are accepting considering the proposal set out by Oscar Arias (see below), beginning with President Zelaya's return to power by July 24th (by continuing to push back the date, the coup regime consolidates and represses the people even more). The coup regime led by Roberto Micheletti has stated it will "study" the proposal overnight, though it has already had 15 hours to do so today, without arriving at a final decision. Several of the spokespeople for the coup regime have said they will not agree to President Zelaya's return to power, which makes things difficult because that is the principle issue at stake here. The talks will be resumed tomorrow morning at 11am, Costa Rica time. See below for my analysis...

UPDATE: President Zelaya has accepted Arias' offer - with all its massive, dangerous flaws - but, so far, it will not proceed because the coup dictator, Roberto Micheletti, has refused the terms set forth today in the negotiation meeting in Costa Rica. The coup regime stands firm on its refusal to allow President Zelaya to return to power. Supporters of Zelaya and popular resistance forces are still in the streets in Honduras. Zelaya says his return to Honduras - by any means and way - is imminent.

Eva Golinger

The "dialogue" meetings on the Honduras crisis are taking place today in Costa Rica, mediated by the president of that nation, Oscar Arias, who was designed by the Department of State to assume this role. Arias has presented a "document" to both parties, which include representatives from the coup regime and the constitutional government that was ousted in the coup 21 days ago on June 28th. The document, is calling on all parties to accept the following seven terms in order to resolve the political crisis:
1. Allow President Manuel Zelaya to return to his post as president until the end of his term on January 29, 2010.
2. Conform a new government (with Zelaya as president) based on "unity" and "reconciliation", composed on representatives from all political parties in the country to govern through the end of Zelaya's term.
3. Declare a general amnesty to those actors involved in the coup d'etat.
4. President Zelaya will have to renounce any effort to convene a referendum or consultation with the people of Honduras regarding future constitutional reform.
5. Hold early elections during the last weekend of October instead of November 29th, 2009.
6. The military will be commanded by the Supreme Court of Honduras as of September 2009 in order to "ensure" a smooth electoral process.
7. Creation of a truth commission composed of renowned Hondurans and members from the international community, particularly the Organization of American States (OEA) to supervise the correct return of constitutional order and the implementation of the above terms.

President Zelaya has apparently accepted these terms, despite the fact that he would be completely castrated politically, and would be allowing for the same criminals that executed the coup against him to remain in power and in fact, have even more power since they would be part of a "government of unity and reconciliation". If this is true, Zelaya will be strongly disappointing a large majority of those Honduran people who have resisted and struggled against the coup government now for over 21 days. Also, many of us in the international community will also be severely bothered by Zelaya's giving in to such absolutely ridiculous and unacceptable terms!!Personally, I believe the only issue to be considered is the first one, and it should involve the unconditional, immediate return of President Zelaya to power - that is the only matter at hand here. Also, the OAS resolution on the Honduran coup specifically called for the immediate, UNCONDITIONAL, restitution of President Zelaya to power. What Arias (via Washington) is proposing involves a series of conditions that would render Zelaya absolutely powerless.Obviously, this is what many of us have been expected from Arias (via Washington) since he assumed this role as "mediator". This is precisely the outcome the Obama administration has been pushing for since day one of the coup. And it is absolutely unacceptable! First of all, the issue of a government of "unity" and "reconciliation" is ridiculous. That means Zelaya does not name his cabinet members, and all those who previously held positions in his government would be forced to step down. This measure ties Zelaya's hands completely and is just outrageous.The renouncing of considering a possible future constitutional reform is also unacceptable, since that is not an issue to be decided by a small elite in Honduras, but rather the people of Honduras. And then the amnesty for the coup leaders sets a dangerous precedent for other actors seeking to overthrow their governments via illegal means, because they will see that it can be done, and you get off the hook for all the crimes and human rights violations committed!!This is all just really awful. The worst part will be if Zelaya actually does accept this proposal as is being reported right now.I believe the only viable solution is for the people of Honduras to immediately convene a constitutional assembly and to not only rewrite their constitution as they see fit, but also to depose the congress, supreme court and high military command, since they have all been principal participants in a violent, criminal coup d'etat. Once the new constitution is ratified, elections will be held to fill all offices as specified by law. The power resides in the sovereign people to determine the type and model of government they wish to have. If Honduras allows this coup to be legitimated by Arias' (via Washington's) proposal, it will be a dark day for the peoples of Latin America.

Fernand Braudel Center, Binghamton University - Commentary No. 261, July 15, 2009
"The Right Strikes Back!"
The presidency of George W. Bush was the moment of the greatest electoral sweep of left-of-center political parties in Latin America in the last two centuries. The presidency of Barack Obama risks being the moment of the revenge of the right in Latin America.The reason may well be the same - the combination of the decline of American power with the continuing centrality of the United States in world politics. At one and the same time, the United States is unable to impose itself and is nonetheless expected by everyone to enter the playing field on their side.What happened in Honduras? Honduras has long been one of the surest pillars of Latin American oligarchies - an arrogant and unrepentant ruling class, with close ties to the United States and site of a major American military base. Its own military was carefully recruited to avoid any taint of officers with populist sympathies.In the last elections, Manuel ("Mel") Zelaya was elected president. A product of the ruling classes, he was expected to continue to play the game the way Honduran presidents always play it. Instead, he edged leftward in his policies. He undertook internal programs that actually did something for the vast majority of the population - building schools in remote rural areas, increasing the minimum wage, opening health clinics. He started his term supporting the free trade agreement with the United States. But then, after two years, he joined ALBA, the interstate organization started by President Hugo Chavez, and Honduras received as a result low-cost oil coming from Venezuela.Then he proposed to hold an advisory referendum as to whether the population thought it a good idea to convene a body to revise the constitution. The oligarchy shouted that this was an attempt by Zelaya to change the constitution to make it possible for him to have a second term. But since the referendum was to occur on the day his successor would have been elected, this was clearly a phony reason.Why then did the army stage a coup d'état, with the support of the Supreme Court, the Honduran legislature, and the Roman Catholic hierarchy? Two factors entered here: their view of Zelaya and their view of the United States. In the 1930s, the U.S. right attacked Franklin Roosevelt as "a traitor to his class." For the Honduran oligarchy, that's Zelaya - "a traitor to his class" - someone who had to be punished as an example to others.What about the United States? When the coup occurred, some of the raucous left commentators in the blogosphere called it "Obama's coup." That misses the point of what happened. Neither Zelaya nor his supporters on the street, nor indeed Chavez or Fidel Castro, have such a simplistic view. They all note the difference between Obama and the U.S. right (political leaders or military figures) and have expressed repeatedly a far more nuanced analysis.It seems quite clear that the last thing the Obama administration wanted was this coup. The coup has been an attempt to force Obama's hand. This was undoubtedly encouraged by key figures in the U.S. right like Otto Reich, the Cuban-American ex-counselor of Bush, and the International Republican Institute. This was akin to Saakashvili's attempt to force the U.S. hand in Georgia when he invaded South Ossetia. That too was done in connivance with the U.S. right. That one didn't work because Russian troops stopped it.Obama has been wiggling ever since the Honduran coup. And as of now the Honduran and U.S. right are far from satisfied that they have succeeded in turning U.S. policy around. Witness some of their outrageous statements. The Foreign Minister of the coup government, Enrique Ortez, said that Obama was "un negrito que sabe nada de nada." There is some controversy about how pejorative "negrito" is in Spanish. I would translate this myself as saying that Obama was "a nigger who knows absolutely nothing." In any case, the U.S. Ambassador sharply protested the insult. Ortez apologized for his "unfortunate expression" and he was shifted to another job in the government. Ortez also gave an interview to a Honduran TV station saying that "I don't have racial prejudices; I like the sugar-mill nigger who is president of the United States."The U.S. right is no doubt more polite but no less denunciatory of Obama. Republican Sen. Jim DeMint, Cuban-American Republican Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, and conservative lawyer Manuel A. Estrada have all been insisting that the coup was justified because it wasn't a coup, just a defense of the Honduran constitution. And rightwing blogger Jennifer Rubin published a piece on July 13 entitled "Obama is Wrong, Wrong, Wrong About Honduras." Her Honduran equivalent, Ramón Villeda, published an open letter to Obama on July 11, in which he said that "This is not the first time that the United States has made a mistake and abandoned, at a critical moment, an ally and a friend." Meanwhile, Chavez is calling on the State Department to "do something."The Honduran right is playing for time, until Zelaya's term ends. If they reach that goal, they will have won. And the Guatemalan, Salvadorian, and Nicaraguan right are watching in the wings, itching to start their own coups against their no longer rightwing governments.The Honduran coup has to be placed in the larger context of what is happening throughout Latin America. It is quite possible that the right will win the elections this year and next year in Argentina and Brazil, maybe in Uruguay as well, and most likely in Chile. Three leading analysts from the Southern Cone have published their explanations. The least pessimistic, Argentine political scientist Atilio Boron, speaks of "the futility of the coup." Brazilian sociologist Emir Sader says that Latin America faces a choice: "the deepening of antineoliberalism or conservative restoration." Uruguayan journalist Raúl Zibechi entitles his analysis "the irresistible decadence of progressivism." Zibechi in effect thinks it may be too late for Sader's alternative. The weak economic policies of Presidents Lula, Vazquez, Kirchner, and Bachelet (of Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina, and Chile) have strengthened the right (which he sees adopting a Berlusconi style) and split the left.Myself, I think there's a more straightforward explanation. The left came to power in Latin America because of U.S. distraction and good economic times. Now it faces continued distraction but bad economic times. And it's getting blamed because it's in power, even though in fact there's little the left-of-center governments can do about the world-economy.Can the United States do something more about the coup? Well, of course it can. First of all, Obama can officially label the coup a coup. This would trigger a U.S. law, cutting off all U.S. assistance to Honduras. He can sever the Pentagon's continuing relations with the Honduran military. He can withdraw the U.S. ambassador. He can say that there's nothing to negotiate instead of insisting on "mediation" between the legitimate government and the coup leaders.Why doesn't he do all that? It's really simple, too. He's got at least four other super-urgent items on his agenda: confirmation of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court; a continuing mess in the Middle East; his need to pass health legislation this year (if not by August, then by December); and suddenly enormous pressure to open investigations of the illegal acts of the Bush administration. I'm sorry, but Honduras is fifth in line,So Obama wiggles. And nobody will be happy. Zelaya may yet be restored to legal office, but maybe only three months from now. Too late. Keep your eye on Guatemala.
--by Immanuel Wallerstein[Copyright by Immanuel Wallerstein, distributed by Agence Global. For rights and permissions, including translations and posting to non-commercial sites, and contact: rights@agenceglobal.com, 1.336.686.9002 or 1.336.286.6606. Permission is granted to download, forward electronically, or e-mail to others, provided the essay remains intact and the copyright note is displayed. To contact author, write: immanuel.wallerstein@yale.edu.These commentaries, published twice monthly, are intended to be reflections on the contemporary world scene, as seen from the perspective not of the immediate headlines but of the long term.]

From Arbenz to Zelaya Chiquita in Latin America
By NIKOLAS KOZLOFF
When the Honduran military overthrew the democratically elected government of Manuel Zelaya two weeks ago there might have been a sigh of relief in the corporate board rooms of Chiquita banana. Earlier this year the Cincinnati-based fruit company joined Dole in criticizing the government in Tegucigalpa which had raised the minimum wage by 60%. Chiquita complained that the new regulations would cut into company profits, requiring the firm to spend more on costs than in Costa Rica: 20 cents more to produce a crate of pineapple and ten cents more to produce a crate of bananas to be exact. In all, Chiquita fretted that it would lose millions under Zelaya’s labor reforms since the company produced around 8 million crates of pineapple and 22 million crates of bananas per year.When the minimum wage decree came down Chiquita sought help and appealed to the Honduran National Business Council, known by its Spanish acronym COHEP. Like Chiquita, COHEP was unhappy about Zelaya’s minimum wage measure. Amílcar Bulnes, the group’s president, argued that if the government went forward with the minimum wage increase employers would be forced to let workers go, thus increasing unemployment in the country. The most important business organization in Honduras, COHEP groups 60 trade associations and chambers of commerce representing every sector of the Honduran economy. According to its own Web site, COHEP is the political and technical arm of the Honduran private sector, supports trade agreements and provides “critical support for the democratic system.” The international community should not impose economic sanctions against the coup regime in Tegucigalpa, COHEP argues, because this would worsen Honduras’ social problems. In its new role as the mouthpiece for Honduras’ poor, COHEP declares that Honduras has already suffered from earthquakes, torrential rains and the global financial crisis. Before punishing the coup regime with punitive measures, COHEP argues, the United Nations and the Organization of American States should send observer teams to Honduras to investigate how sanctions might affect 70% of Hondurans who live in poverty. Bulnes meanwhile has voiced his support for the coup regime of Roberto Micheletti and argues that the political conditions in Honduras are not propitious for Zelaya’s return from exile.

Chiquita: From Arbenz to Bananagate
It’s not surprising that Chiquita would seek out and ally itself to socially and politically backward forces in Honduras. Colsiba, the coordinating body of banana plantation workers in Latin America, says the fruit company has failed to supply its workers with necessary protective gear and has dragged its feet when it comes to signing collective labor agreements in Nicaragua, Guatemala and Honduras.Colsiba compares the infernal labor conditions on Chiquita plantations to concentration camps. It’s an inflammatory comparison yet may contain a degree of truth. Women working on Chiquita’s plantations in Central America work from 6:30 a.m. until 7 at night, their hands burning up inside rubber gloves. Some workers are as young as 14. Central American banana workers have sought damages against Chiquita for exposing them in the field to DBCP, a dangerous pesticide which causes sterility, cancer and birth defects in children.Chiquita, formerly known as United Fruit Company and United Brands, has had a long and sordid political history in Central America. Led by Sam “The Banana Man” Zemurray, United Fruit got into the banana business at the turn of the twentieth century. Zemurray once remarked famously, “In Honduras, a mule costs more than a member of parliament.” By the 1920s United Fruit controlled 650,000 acres of the best land in Honduras, almost one quarter of all the arable land in the country. What’s more, the company controlled important roads and railways.In Honduras the fruit companies spread their influence into every area of life including politics and the military. For such tactics they acquired the name los pulpos (the octopuses, from the way they spread their tentacles). Those who did not play ball with the corporations were frequently found face down on the plantations. In 1904 humorist O. Henry coined the term “Banana Republic” to refer to the notorious United Fruit Company and its actions in Honduras.In Guatemala, United Fruit supported the CIA-backed 1954 military coup against President Jacobo Arbenz, a reformer who had carried out a land reform package. Arbenz’ overthrow led to more than thirty years of unrest and civil war in Guatemala. Later in 1961, United Fruit lent its ships to CIA-backed Cuban exiles who sought to overthrow Fidel Castro at the Bay of Pigs. In 1972, United Fruit (now renamed United Brands) propelled Honduran General Oswaldo López Arellano to power. The dictator was forced to step down later however after the infamous “Bananagate” scandal which involved United Brands bribes to Arellano. A federal grand jury accused United Brands of bribing Arellano with $1.25 million, with the carrot of another $1.25 million later if the military man agreed to reduce fruit export taxes. During Bananagate, United Brands’ President fell from a New York City skyscraper in an apparent suicide.

Go-Go Clinton Years and Colombia
In Colombia United Fruit also set up shop and during its operations in the South American country developed a no less checkered profile. In 1928, 3,000 workers went on strike against the company to demand better pay and working conditions. At first the company refused to negotiate but later gave in on some minor points, declaring the other demands “illegal” or “impossible.” When the strikers refused to disperse the military fired on the banana workers, killing scores.You might think that Chiquita would have reconsidered its labor policies after that but in the late 1990s the company began to ally itself with insidious forces, specifically right wing paramilitaries. Chiquita paid off the men to the tune of more than a million dollars. In its own defense, the company declared that it was merely paying protection money to the paramilitaries. In 2007, Chiquita paid $25 million to settle a Justice Department investigation into the payments. Chiquita was the first company in U.S. history to be convicted of financial dealings with a designated terrorist organization. In a lawsuit launched against Chiquita victims of the paramilitary violence claimed the firm abetted atrocities including terrorism, war crimes and crimes against humanity. A lawyer for the plaintiffs said that Chiquita’s relationship with the paramilitaries “was about acquiring every aspect of banana distribution and sale through a reign of terror.” Back in Washington, D.C. Charles Lindner, Chiquita’s CEO, was busy courting the White House. Lindner had been a big donor to the GOP but switched sides and began to lavish cash on the Democrats and Bill Clinton. Clinton repaid Linder by becoming a key military backer of the government of Andrés Pastrana which presided over the proliferation of right wing death squads. At the time the U.S. was pursuing its corporately-friendly free trade agenda in Latin America, a strategy carried out by Clinton’s old boyhood friend Thomas “Mack” McLarty. At the White House, McLarty served as Chief of Staff and Special Envoy to Latin America. He’s an intriguing figure who I’ll come back to in a moment.

The Holder-Chiquita Connection
Given Chiquita’s underhanded record in Central America and Colombia it’s not a surprise that the company later sought to ally itself with COHEP in Honduras. In addition to lobbying business associations in Honduras however Chiquita also cultivated relationships with high powered law firms in Washington. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Chiquita has paid out $70,000 in lobbying fees to Covington and Burling over the past three years.Covington is a powerful law firm which advises multinational corporations. Eric Holder, the current Attorney General, a co-chair of the Obama campaign and former Deputy Attorney General under Bill Clinton was up until recently a partner at the firm. At Covington, Holder defended Chiquita as lead counsel in its case with the Justice Department. From his perch at the elegant new Covington headquarters located near the New York Times building in Manhattan, Holder prepped Fernando Aguirre, Chiquita’s CEO, for an interview with 60 Minutes dealing with Colombian death squads.Holder had the fruit company plead guilty to one count of “engaging in transactions with a specially designated global terrorist organization.” But the lawyer, who was taking in a hefty salary at Covington to the tune of more than $2 million, brokered a sweetheart deal in which Chiquita only paid a $25 million fine over five years. Outrageously however, not one of the six company officials who approved the payments received any jail time.

The Curious Case of Covington
Look a little deeper and you’ll find that not only does Covington represent Chiquita but also serves as a kind of nexus for the political right intent on pushing a hawkish foreign policy in Latin America. Covington has pursued an important strategic alliance with Kissinger (of Chile, 1973 fame) and McLarty Associates (yes, the same Mack McLarty from Clinton-time), a well known international consulting and strategic advisory firm. From 1974 to 1981 John Bolton served as an associate at Covington. As U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations under George Bush, Bolton was a fierce critic of leftists in Latin America such as Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez. Furthermore, just recently John Negroponte became Covington’s Vice Chairman. Negroponte is a former Deputy Secretary of State, Director of National Intelligence and U.S. Representative to the United Nations. As U.S. Ambassador to Honduras from 1981-1985, Negroponte played a significant role in assisting the U.S.-backed Contra rebels intent on overthrowing the Sandinista regime in Nicaragua. Human rights groups have criticized Negroponte for ignoring human rights abuses committed by Honduran death squads which were funded and partially trained by the Central Intelligence Agency. Indeed, when Negroponte served as ambassador his building in Tegucigalpa became one of the largest nerve centers of the CIA in Latin America with a tenfold increase in personnel. While there’s no evidence linking Chiquita to the recent coup in Honduras, there’s enough of a confluence of suspicious characters and political heavyweights here to warrant further investigation. From COHEP to Covington to Holder to Negroponte to McLarty, Chiquita has sought out friends in high places, friends who had no love for the progressive labor policies of the Zelaya regime in Tegucigalpa.

--Nikolas Kozloff is the author of Revolution! South America and the Rise of the New Left (Palgrave-Macmillan, 2008) Follow his blog at senorchichero.blogspot.com,

De Arbenz a Zelaya: Chiquita (United Fruit) en Latinoamérica
http://www.rebelion.org/noticia.php?id=88860,