The Empire will stop at
nothing to find mechanisms and techniques to achieve its final objective,
and we cannot disregard the possibility of a military conflict in the near
future. If the US places Venezuela on the “terrorist list” this year, we
could be on the verge of a regional war.
Latin America has suffered
constant aggressions executed by Washington during the past two hundred
years. Strategies and tactics of covert and overt warfare have been
applied against different nations in the region, ranging from coup
d’etats, assassinations, disappearances, torture, brutal dictatorships,
atrocities, political persecution, economic sabotage, psychological
operations, media warfare, biological warfare, subversion,
counterinsurgency, paramiliary infiltration, diplomatic terrorism,
blockades, electoral intervention to military invasions. Regardless of
who’s in the White House – democrat or republican – when it comes to Latin
America, the Empire’s policies remain the same.
In the
twenty-first century, Venezuela has been one of the principle targets of
these constant aggressions. Since the April 2002 coup, there has been a
dangerous escalation in attacks and destabilization attempts against the
Bolivarian Revolution. Although many fell beneath the seductive smile and
poetic words of Barack Obama, it’s not necessary to look beyond the past
year to see the intensification of Washington’s aggressions against
Venezuela. The largest military expansion in history in the region –
through the US occupation of Colombia – the reactivation of the Fourth
Fleet of the US Navy, as well as an increased US military presence in the
Caribbean, Panama and Central America throughout the past year, can be
interpreted as preparation for a conflict scenario in the region.
Escalation in Aggressions
The hostile
declarations from various Washington representatives during the past few
weeks, accusing Venezuela of failure to combat narcotics operations,
violating human rights, “not contributing to democracy and regional
stability”, and of being the “regional anti-US leader”, form part of a
coordinated campaign that seeks to justify a direct aggression against
Venezuela. Soon, Washington will publish its annual list of “state
sponsors of terrorism”, and if Venezuela is placed on the list this year,
the region could be on the brink of an unprecedented military conflict.
Evidence seems to indicate a move in that direction. A US Air
Force document justifying the need to increase military presence in
Colombia affirmed that Washington is preparing for “expeditionary warfare”
in South America.
The 2009 Air Force document, sent to Congress
last May (but later modified in November after it was used to demonstrate
the true intentions behind the military agreement between the US and
Colombia), explained, ““Development of this CSL (Cooperative Security
Location) will further the strategic partnership forged between the US and
Colombia and is in the interest of both nations... A presence will also
increase our capability to conduct Intelligence, Surveillance and
Reconnaissance (ISR), improve global reach, support logistics
requirements, improve partnerships, improve theater security cooperation
and expand expeditionary warfare capability”.
On the Verge
of War
The first official report outlining the defense and
intelligence priorities of the Obama administration dedicated substantial
attention to Venezuela. The Annual Threat Assessment of the US
Intelligence Community – which has mentioned Venezuela in years past, but
not nearly with the same emphasis and extension – particularly signaled
out President Chavez as a major “threat” to US interests. “Venezuelan
President Hugo Chavez has established himself as one of the US’s foremost
international detractors, denouncing liberal democracy and market
capitalism and opposing US policies and interests in the region”, said the
intelligence document, placing Venezuela in the same category as Iran,
North Korea and Al Qa’ida.
Days after the report was published, the
State Department presented its 2011 budget to Congress. In addition to an
increase in financing through USAID and the National Endowment for
Democracy (NED) to fund opposition groups in Venezuela – more than $15
million USD – there was also a $48 million USD request for the
Organization of American States (OAS) to “deploy special ‘democracy
promoter’ teams to countries where democracy is under threat from the
growing presence of alternative concepts such as the ‘participatory
democracy’ promoted by Venezuela and Bolivia”.
One week later, the
Inter-American Human Rights Commission of the OAS – funded by Washington –
emitted a whopping 322-page report slamming Venezuela for human rights
violations, repression of the press and undermining democracy. Despite the
fact that it was a report – and a Commission – dedicated to the topic of
human rights, the detailed study barely mentioned the immense achievements
of the Chavez government in advancing human rights; advances which have
been recognized and applauded over the past five years by the Unted
Nations. The evidence used by the OAS to elaborate the report came from
opposition testimonies and biased media outlets, a clear demonstration of
dangerous subjectivity.
Simultaneous to these accusations, a
Spanish court accused the Venezuelan government last week of supporting
and collaborating with the FARC and ETA – organizations considered
terrorist by both the US and Spain – provoking an international scandal.
President Chavez reiterated that his government has absolutely no ties
with any terrorist group in the world. “This is a government of peace”,
declared Chavez, after explaining that the presence of ETA members in
Venezuela is due to an agreement made over 20 years ago by the government
of Carlos Andres Perez in order to aid Spain in a peace treaty with the
Basque separatist group.
The Empire Has No
Color
Last week, on tour in Latin America, US Secretary of
State Hillary Clinton couldn’t stop attacking Venezuela during her
different declarations made before international media. She expressed her
“great concern” for democracy and human rights in Venezuela, accusing
President Chavez of not “contributing in a constructive manner” to
regional progress. In a cynical tone, Clinton advised President Chavez to
“look further south” for inspiration, instead of towards Cuba.
Clinton’s regional trip was part of a strategy announced by the
Obama administration last year, to create a divide between the so-called
“progressive left” and the “radical left” in Latin America. It’s no
coincidence that her first tour of the region coincided with the
announcement of a new Latin American and Caribbean Community of States,
which excludes the presence of the US and Canada.
The
Coming Conflict
A military conflict is not initiated from
one day to the next. It’s a process that involves first influencing public
perception and opinion – demonizing the target leader or government in
order to justify aggression. Subsequently, armed forces are strategically
deployed in the region in order to guarantee an effective military action.
Tactics, such as subversion and counterinsurgency, are utilized in order
to debilitate and destabilize the target nation from within, increasing
its vulnerability and weakening its defenses.
This plan has been
active against Venezuela for several years. The consolidation of regional
unity and Latin American integration threatens US possibilities of
regaining domination and control in the hemisphere. And the advances of
the Bolivarian Revolution have impeded its “self-destruction”, provoked by
internal subversion funded and directed by US agencies. However, the
Empire will not cease its attempts to achieve its final objective, and a
potential military conflict in the region remains on the horizon.