Wikileaks And US Foreign Policy Against Venezuela and Hugo Chavez

4 posts / 0 new

Question: when is US foreign policy going to switch to helping the people of South and Central American lift themselves out of poverty, instead of ensuring their continued poverty and exploitation by backing military regimes and the oligarchs they represent?

Because this is the problem - US foreign policy does not represent the people of hte United States, but the handful of richest families and the corporations they own.

Only from that perspective, could Hugo Chavez, Evo Morales, even Fidel Castro be considered 'enemies'. There is no more Soviet threat. There is no attempt to acquire nuclear missiles in South America that I have heard of - and if they did, they could be invaded and overthrown in a heartbeat.

So what threat does Venezuela pose to the United States, other than an intellectual one? What is Zimbabwe's "continuing unusual and extraordinary threat to the foreign policy of the United States" (note, not US national security, but US foreign policy), that justifies continued economic sanctions against Zimbabwe?

If the US stood with the people of these countries, it's enemies/rivals would be reduced to maybe Russia, China and India, if that.

Pay these people the market value of their raw materials, and there would be no need for a Hugo Chavez or an Evo Morales.

Anyway, according to the CIA, Hugo Chavez is 'the enemy'.

Wikileaks: Documents Confirm US Plans to Destabilize Venezuela
by Eva Golinger
Global Research, December 16, 2010
chavezcode.com

State Department documents published by Wikileaks evidence Washington's plans to "contain" Venezuela's influence in the region and increase efforts to provoke regime change

A substantial portion of the more than 1600 State Department documents Wikileaks has published during the past two weeks refer to the ongoing efforts of US diplomacy to isolate and counter the Venezuelan government.

Since Hugo Chavez won the presidency for the first time in 1998, Washington has engaged in numerous efforts to overthrow him, including a failed coup d'etat in April 2002, an oil industry strike that same year, worldwide media campaigns and varios electoral interventions. The State Department has also used its funding agencies, USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), to channel millions of dollars annually to anti-Chavez NGOs, political parties, journalists and media organizations in Venezuela, who have been working to undermine the Chavez administration and force him from power.
When these interventionist policies have been denounced by the Chavez government and others, Washington has repeatedly denied any efforts to isolate or act against the Venezuelan head of state.

Nonetheless, the State Department cables published by Wikileaks clearly evidence that not only has Washington been actively funding anti-Chavez groups in Venezuela, but it also has engaged in serious efforts during the past few years to convince governments worldwide to assume an adversarial position against President Hugo Chavez.

"CONTENTION" PLAN AGAINST A "FORMIDABLE FOE"

In a secret document authored by current Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs, Craig Kelly, and sent by the US Embassy in Santiago in June 2007 to the Secretary of State, CIA and Southern Command of the Pentagon, along with a series of other US embassies in the region, Kelly proposed "six main areas of action for the US government (USG) to limit Chavez's influence" and "reassert US leadership in the region".

Kelly, who played a primary role as "mediator" during last year's coup d'etat in Honduras against President Manuel Zelaya, classifies President Hugo Chavez as an "enemy" in his report. "Know the enemy: We have to better understand how Chavez thinks and what he intends...To effectively counter the threat he represents, we need to know better his objectives and how he intends to pursue them. This requires better intelligence in all of our countries". Further on in the memo, Kelly confesses that President Chavez is a "formidable foe", but, he adds, "he certainly can be taken".

In 2006, Washington activated a Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Mission Manager for Venezuela and Cuba. The mission, headed by clandestine CIA veteran Timothy Langford, is one of only four such intelligence entities of its type. The others were created to handle intelligence matters relating to Iran, North Korea and Afghanistan/Pakistan, evidencing the clear priority that Washington has placed on Venezuela as a target of increased espionage and covert operations.

Another suggestion made by Kelly in the secret cable, is a recommendation to increase US presence in the region and improve relations with Latin American military forces. "We should continue to strengthen ties to those military leaders in the region who share our concern over Chavez".

Kelly also proposed a "psychological operations" program against the Venezuelan government to exploit its vulnerabilities. "We also need to make sure that the truth about Chavez - his hollow vision, his empty promises, his dangerous international relationships, starting with Iran - gets out, always exercising careful judgment about where and how we take on Chavez directly/publicly".

Kelly recommended US officials make more visits to the region to "show the flag and explain directly to populations our view of democracy and progress". Kelly also offered details on how Washington could better exploit the differences amongst South American governments to isolate Venezuela:

"Brazil...can be a powerful counterpoint to Chavez's project...Chile offers another excellent alternative to Chavez...We should look to find other ways to give Chile the lead on important initiatives, but without making them look like they are our puppets or surrogates. Argentina is more complex, but still presents distinct characteristics that should inform our approach to countering Chavez's influence there".

PRESSURING MERCOSUR

Kelly also revealed the pressure Washington has been applying to Mercosur (Market of the South) to not accept Venezuela as a full member in the regional trade bloc. "With regard to Mercosur, we should not be timid in stating that Venezuela's membership will torpedo US interest in even considering direct negotiations with the trading bloc".

MEXICO, BOGOTA & OTHERS ASK TO "FIGHT" CHAVEZ

The cables published by Wikileaks not only reveal US hostility towards Venezuela, but also the requests made by regional leaders and politicians to work against President Chavez.

One secret document from October 2009 referring to a meeting between Mexican President Felipe Calderon and US Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair tells of how Calderon confessed he was "trying to isolate Venezuela through the Rio Group". The Mexican head of state also appealed to the US intelligence chief, "The region needs a visible US presence...the United States must be ready to engage the next Brazilian president. Brazil, he said, is key to restraining Chavez...The US needs to engage Brazil more and influence its outlook".

URIBE REQUESTS "MILITARY ACTION" AGAINST CHAVEZ

In several secret documents authored by the US Embassy in Colombia, efforts by ex President of Colombia, Alvaro Uribe, to convince Washington to take action against Venezuela are evidenced.

In one cable from December 2007, the US Ambassador in Colombia recounts a meeting between Uribe and a delegation of US congress members, including Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid. According to the text, Uribe "likened the threat Chavez poses to Latin America to that posed by Hitler in Europe".

And in yet another report summarizing a January 2008 meeting between Uribe and the Head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Michael Mullen, Uribe is quoted as recommending military action against Venezuela.

"The best counter to Chavez, in Uribe's view, remains action - including use of the military".

Later in that same secret cable, Uribe urged Washington to "lead a public campaign against Venezuela...to counter Chavez..."

OPPOSITION BISHOP REQUESTS US ACTION

In addition to regional politicians and US diplomats urging plans against President Chavez, one cable reveals how during a meeting between a Venezuelan Archbishop and the US Ambassador, the religious leader asked for Washington to act against his own government. At the meeting, which took place in January 2005 according to the document, Archbishop Baltazar Porras told Ambassador William Brownfield that the "US government should be more clear and public in its criticism of the Chavez administration" and that the "international community also needs to work and speak out more to contain Chavez..."

The plans and strategies revealed through these official documents confirm what other evidence has already corroborated regarding Washington's increase in aggression towards Venezuela. The US continues to fund opposition groups that act to undermine Venezuelan democracy while escalating its hostile discourse and policies against the Chavez government.

This week's Senate affirmation of Larry Palmer as Ambassador to Venezuela will only make matters worse. Palmer was rejected by the Venezuelan government after he made negative statements about the Chavez administration in August. Washington's insistence of sending Palmer appears to be an effort to provoke a rupture in diplomatic relations.

Eva Golinger is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Eva Golinger

MrK's picture
MrK
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Comments

" In one cable from December 2007, the US Ambassador in Colombia recounts a meeting between Uribe and a delegation of US congress members, including Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid. According to the text, Uribe "likened the threat Chavez poses to Latin America to that posed by Hitler in Europe". "

What you see here are the old plantation owning class and the Catholic Church freaking out over losing power to the masses of the people of their own country. What they fear are real economic and political democracy.

What they need to 'contain' is free healthcare and education.

MrK's picture
MrK
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

More of those 'freedoms' that people hate: The US freedom to interfere, harm and overthrow governments all around the globe. I had some hope Obama would not do this. Sadly, I think Obama feels less affinity for the downtrodden who stand up for themselves than the corporate state and the many blessings it has bestowed upon him. President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton fall far to the right once again as they seem to stop just short of assassination in the excerpts above - oh wait they do killings all the time in Pakistan, Yemen and likely elsewhere.

So sad for my country that all the world's leaders must consider the possibility of a drone strike by US. No wonder that some South Americans have refused any foreign military bases anymore - forever - put it in their Constitution - forget about it.

Obama and Clinton are clearly anti-democratic in ther attempts to depose a leader elected more often than they - by wider margins than they. Chavez has repeatedly won with his local MSM nearly 100% screaming opposition and even inciting rebellion. Ha! No American politician comes close to that strength in representing the people in the face of a corporate controlled media.

Chavez has traded oil to Cuba for medical treatments that have restored the sight of thousands. Venezuela is a lot closer to an ideal democracy than the US. It is clear who the bad actors are here: Chavez and the Venezuelans give heating oil to the US poor in emergencies while Democrats and Republicans alike scheme to 'take him out'. So sad for US.

LeMoyne's picture
LeMoyne
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

"Venezuela is a lot closer to an ideal democracy than the US."

Which is why they must fail. Which is why we backed Batista instead of Castro. Why we ignored the entreaties of Minh and bombed South Viet Nam back into the stone age. Why, when given the choice between backing a democratically elected president or a right wing dictator the US will go with he dictator more often than not.

The system is broken. It's about maximum wealth extraction. I would submit that the US has become a clearing house to facilitate the transfer of wealth from the middle/working class and the poor to the economic royalists at the top. War....and the perpetual making of same is merely the most profitable way devised so far to facilitate that exchange. The last thing that the US wants...and actively works against is democracy anywhere....especially at home.

norske's picture
norske
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Currently Chatting

The Death of the Middle Class was by Design...

Even in the face of the so-called Recovery, poverty and inequality are getting worse in our country, and more wealth and power is flowing straight to the top. According to Paul Buchheit over at Alternet, this is the end result of winner-take-all capitalism, and this destruction of the working class has all been by design.

Powered by Drupal, an open source content management system