SOUTH AMERICA

Background reading concerning a better knowledge of South American politics -

by Steve Whatham.

A Northern neighbour from Hell.

An understanding of politics throughout South America would be incomplete without some mention of the USA continued political and military involvement throughout the Americas.

Starting point could be said as President James Monroe’s address to the United States Congress in 1823. Called the Monroe Doctrine this articulated US policy on the political order developing in the Americas, in particular the role of European powers in the Western Hemisphere.

What the doctrine said in essence was “This is our Backyard” We will run the show.

For over a century the “Monroe Doctrine” has been used as a tool for expansion into South America by successive U.S. governments.

United States foreign policy history reveals over 50 overt military incursions since 1890 and over 6000 covert interventions to bring about this aim. This has resulted in the killing of millions of innocents.

S. Brian Willson, a Vietnam War Veteran and lawyer writing for Veterans For Peace states in his essay “Who are the REAL Terrorists”:-

In country after country in the expanding U.S. sphere of influence after World War II, "dominoes" fell, and military regimes and other dependent tyrannies came into power with the aid of U.S. covert and/or overt interventions. This occurred in virtually all of Central and South America, and in many parts of Africa and Asia. These regimes invariably exhibited common characteristics:

(a) they represented a small, wealthy elite interest, including multinational corporations, promoting intense capitalist economics; (b) they all used terror, including torture, carried out by security forces often trained in these techniques by the U.S. military, to keep the aggrieved majority unorganized, powerless, and subservient to minority elite and corporate goals;

(d) they assured, with the support of official U.S. policy, that already highly skewed income and wealth distribution disparities became ever more unequal and caused the majority of their populations to be kept in a state of extreme deprivation and misery.

Many of these regimes are now being described as "democratic" by the U.S. government. This despite the fact that structural disparities between the Haves and Have-Nots have widened even further, and that the elected leaders continue to primarily represent the wealthy elite, and tend to be corrupt.

Worse, they continue to use methods of terror, frequently U.S.-facilitated, in response to grassroots popular movements expressing an alternative to state-imposed, top-down "neoliberal capitalist economics." The numbers of voiceless poor are increasing in this so-called "democratic," post-Cold War era, in the U.S. as elsewhere.

The increasingly sophisticated, nearly unchecked propaganda machinery of the "democratic" West has successfully censored this demonic history of the real terror network. Substituted in its place is an often desperate, frequently concocted network of the voiceless that includes, by careful definition and selectivity, only those "terrorists" who challenge important Western "neoliberal" economic interests, or who can be linked in some way, no matter how remotely, to the "enemies" of these interests.

Described as "Communists," "terrorists," "drug traffickers," "demons," "backwards," etc., and whether they reside in the U.S. or abroad. The existence of the poor threatens the disproportionately privileged collective Western and American Way of Life (AWOL). Their misery is, in effect, inevitably and forcefully imposed as a trade-off enabling AWOL affluence.

Genuine democracy (self-determination) and true justice for the majority of the world's people are not tolerated by political/economic systems such as ours, so totally dependent upon exploitation of public resources and human labour to assure maximization of private profits for the few.

Further useful material includes:-

Letters from Lexington. Reflections on Propaganda. Noam Chomsky.

Americas Other War. Doug Stokes. Zed Books.

Harold Pinter on the USA. His speech following receiving the Nobel Prize for literature.

BOLIVIA.

Evo Morales, Bolivia’s Socialist president enacted a new constitution on the 11th February 2009, the first ever approved by popular vote.

This gives greater powers to the indigenous majority and also allows Morales, the first indigenous president, to stand for a second five year term. Changes also voted on include rights to territory, language and justice to 36 previously marginalised peoples. (Limits to the size of landholdings have also been enacted to try to provide more equitable land rights to the poor).

The results of the referendum on the constitution also show that the population is deeply divided along regional lines.

This is because four provinces of Bolivia Santa Cruz, Tarija, Beni and Pando rejected the proposals. These wealthy regions hold much of the countries natural resources and Evo Morales is not popular here. Mr. Morales had earlier stated that not all Bolivians support changes as there are those who are defending their personal and family interests.

At this point a very condensed history follows which should go some way to explain the present day division in Bolivian society.

Landlocked at the heart of South America, Bolivia is named after the independence leader famous throughout the Americas, Simon Bolivar (The Great Liberator). Having a population of around nine million, the great majority are of indigenous descent, first from the Tiwanaku and then the Aymara people. The latter were gradually incorporated into the Inca empire whose capital was Cusco in Peru.

Colonised by the Spanish in 1534 it remained so for nearly four centuries despite continued resistance. Colonisation brought two issues which still exist today one being a new religion, Christianity, the other a non indigenous minority who still have a very big political say in a large area of Bolivia. This area is referred to as the Media Luna and is made up of the four provinces mentioned above.

Since becoming an independent republic in 1825 Bolivia has lost nearly half its territory in wars with its neighbours. This includes its Pacific Ocean coast captured by Chile in 1879.

During the preceding years conditions for the indigenous majority who worked in the mines or in nearly feudal status on large estates were deplorable. Most were denied access to education or political rights.

Up to the 1980s the history is marked by rebellions, frequent wars, military rule, coups. counter coups coalition governments too many to detail and it was not until 1952 that adult suffrage was introduced.

In December 2005 Morales and the Socialists were elected with 54% of the national vote.

On May 1 2006 Morales honoured his promise and nationalised most of Bolivia,s natural gas which had been demanded by the indigenous majority for years. Troops were sent to occupy the gas fields and take back control from foreign companies. Agreements were later signed with eight foreign gas firms with the Bolivian national gas company taking a major stake in October 2006.

THE NEW CONSTITUTION

Claiming a resounding victory for the new constitution with over 61.4% of the votes, the governors of opposition regions, Santa Cruz, Beni, Pando and Tarija claim some success. They point out that this was less than the 67% won by the socialists in a recall referendum in August 2008. In elections scheduled for the end of the year the opposition hope to close the percentage gap.

The global crisis is not going to help the Socialists in the forthcoming election by making it difficult for Evo Morales to please his supporters with promised social improvements.

Since being elected in 2005, Evo Morales and his party have not enjoyed a majority in the upper house of the Congress and the opposition Podemos Party are bound to use all tactics to block some or all of the 100 new laws needed to be accepted to make the constitution effective.

The political conflict, violent at times, could continue and at a press conference in August 2008 Bolivia’s Minister of the Presidency, Juan Ramon Quintana, showed evidence of US interference in the process of changes being boosted by the Socialist government. Names were disclosed of people and institutions that receive large sums of money from USAID to be used to interfere in the process of change demanded by the people. The Minister said that the US embassy must comply with Bolivian laws or leave the country.

In April 2008 Morales had accused the United States of supporting those governing the department of Santa Cruz in their quest for autonomy. He spoke of “brazen participation” and requested President Lula his Brazilian counterpart to intercede with President Bush on his behalf.

Nidia Diaz writing in Granma the Cuban newspaper, December 2008 states:-The Bolivian government’s accusation, supported by clear evidence, that the CIA participated in and supported opposition governors from the Media Luna (Bolivia’s eastern provinces) in the failed coup against President Evo Morales and the results of a UNASUR-commissioned investigation into the massacre that occurred in Pando last September qualifies the political scene of this South American country at the end of 2008.

These actions are closely linked given that efforts to reverse the revolutionary process in Bolivia doubtless came to a climax with the ambush ordered by the governor of Pando, Leopoldo Fernández against a peaceful demonstration of campesinos, which left at least 20 dead, 100 people disappeared, and even torture victims.

Responding to these actions, the Movement to Socialism government likewise charged civil leader and secessionist Branco Marinkovic – ideologist of the racist theory of the Camba Nation – with the crime of terrorism for his involvement in the violent actions that occurred in five regions in September and which took the country to the brink of civil war.

The victory achieved by President Evo Morales in August’s recall referendum, in which he received the conclusive support of more than 62% of the electorate, a percentage that exceeded by several percentage points the votes he won in the presidential elections in December of 2005, when he received 53.7% of the vote, illustrated the growing level of support for his process and model of change under which he aspires to re-found Bolivia.

This constitutes sufficient support to take action against the racist, terrorist, and secessionist plans of the governors from the Media Luna, who are the operational wing of the national oligarchy ousted from power, and the U.S. government, committed to undermining Bolivia’s liberation process.

Through these destructive actions, the opposition is trying to prevent by whatever means necessary the constitutional referendum scheduled for January 25, and the referendum determining the amount of private land that can be owned by one individual.

One shouldn’t forget that much of the land resting in the hands of the oligarchy belongs to indigenous Bolivians, who were stripped of their land and then marginalized for centuries. There are millions of unproductive hectares that form part of the rich caudal of the national bourgeoisie.

Evo Morales’s government is completing the year with a show of strength in support for and defence of national interests. The expulsion of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the U.S. ambassador in La Paz and the indictment of both the masterminds of and those directly responsible for the massacre in Pando are all irrefutable proof that the Bolivian government is not leaving any loose ends in defending the achievements it has won.

Complications where the opposition are likely to oppose change include the ownership of land and natural resources, the rights of the indigenous majority and the way various levels of autonomy will work.

An example of problems faced: One of the opposition-controlled regions, Tarija, holds about 85% of Bolivia's reserves of gas but about 80% of those reserves are estimated to be in traditional lands of the Guarani Indians, one of the 36 indigenous groups in Bolivia whose rights have been extended under the new constitution.

Discord is highly likely to take place as a result of the referendum in respect to competing claims to the revenue from gas sales which is the biggest export.

But are things going to be allowed to change peacefully?

Ends

Continuing our series of articles on South America,

Steve Whatham examines developments in Venezuela.

Venezuela and the continuity
of the Socialist Revolution

• Popular victory in the referendum.

CARACAS, February 15 2009. — With the resounding victory of the "Yes" vote, the majority of Venezuelans made the decision to amend their Constitution and give the opportunity to all elected officials, including the president, to run for re election and guarantee the continuity of the Bolivarian Revolution.

With 94.2% of the ballots counted, 54.36% were in favour of a Constitutional amendment, an 8.6% advantage over the "No" vote which secured 45.63%, according to a report by the National Electoral Council, on the outcome of the constitutional referendum that took place on Sunday, February 15.

“Viva the Venezuelan Revolution! Viva Socialism!” declared President Chávez in his first address to the crowd that was awaiting the official announcement of the results beneath the central balcony of the Miraflores Palace.

Fidel Castro sent the first message to congratulated Chávez and the Venezuelan people on "a victory which, because of its magnitude, is impossible to measure."

With this result, the Venezuelan people voted keeping in mind the 2012 presidential elections, in which the Bolivarian president and other elected officials would have been unable to stand because of limitations under the Constitution, now amended.

The story of Socialist advance in Venezuela starts a little earlier:-

At the Mirafloras Palace, on Febuary 2 1999 Hugo Chavez received the presidential sash to become Socialist leader of Venezuela.

Unemployment was about 20%. 50% of the population was impoverished, crime was rampant and a study carried out by the National Congress showed 15% of children were dying of malnutrition to mention only the tip of problems which few believed were salvageable.

A policy of recovering oil, the most important of Venezuela’s natural resources was to serve to finance social and development programmes that were needed.

Social programmes instigated include Barrio Adrento (Into the Neighbourhood), to provide primary health care with the collaboration of thousands of Cuban doctors.

This has had a big impact on over 17 million Venezuelans using specialist and advanced diagnostics. All completely free of charge.

Results include, infant and maternal mortality which have dropped dramatically and Programme “Operation Miracle” which has restored the vision of thousands of patients.

In respect of education: With the Cuban literacy method “Yo, Si puedo” (Yes I can do it) Venezuela is now one of the few literate South American nations.

Poor Venezuelans numbering millions can now purchase foodstuffs subsidised by the State from thousands of markets built for that purpose.

The list goes on and on. It is suffice to point out that the 2007 budget shows a spend of 65% dedicated to social programmes.

The Economy in Venezuela

Since re-election at the end of 2006, Chavez has set a hectic pace in delivering his vision of a socialist economy. Nationalising key sectors including electricity, cement, oil, telecommunications and steel. He has brought about and put into practice the principles of the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA), a vision of regional integration based on social development rather than trade volumes (in contrast to the US-inspired Free Trade Area of the Americas). Chávez has not only pulled Venezuela out of the IMF and World Bank, but also offers comparable development loan facilities to neighbouring countries.

All of these steps have the aim of achieving a more equal society in Venezuela and reducing poverty. There is also the “Petrocaribe” initiative which allows 17 Central American and Caribbean countries to purchase oil from Venezuela on favourable terms.

The government also encourages the establishment of cooperative businesses owned by the workers – the relevant Missión programme offers incentives of loans and tax breaks. (180,000 co-ops were active at the end of 2006).

Politics in Venezuela

The road towards Socialism has not been an easy one. The opposition which represents the interests of the oligarchy and the U.S. transnational corporations has tried everything to block change.

There was a fascist coup, and then an oil strike (lock out).

Concern throughout Venezuela has been ongoing about the possible use of force to bring down the government with outside help.

Writing in Cuba,s Newspaper on 17th October 2008, Nidia Diaz stated:-

The latest revelations concerning the involvement of a small group of retired and active military officers (but with no command over troops) in assassination plots with Washington’s support, have exposed the Venezuelan opposition’s "consular condition, dependent on and digitalized from the outside," as described by journalist José Vicente Rangel, who has received heavy threats given that he is a former vice president of the Republic and a firm ally of the revolutionary process.

It was Alberto Federico Ravell, president of the pro-coup Globovisión television channel, who asked Rangel to remember every night at bedtime to remember Danilo Anderson (the murdered attorney), which cannot be interpreted in any other way than as a death threat to the former vice president.

The trigger for the investigation commission, headed by Deputy Mario Isea, were the revelations in "La Hojilla" program broadcast by Venezolana de Televisión (VTV), which presented recordings of retired officers talking about plans for both a coup d’état and an assassination attempt.

The officers recorded are Vice Admiral Carlos Alberto Millán Millán (former inspector general of the National Armed Forces); General Wilfredo Barroso Herrera, ex chief of staff of the National Guard; and Aviation Brigade General Eduardo Báez Torrealba, who was involved in the April 2002 coup.

According to the source, one of the officers is heard saying: "Here there is just one objective: we’re going to take Miraflores Palace, the television stations… all efforts toward where the mister is (referring to Chávez). If he’s in Miraflores, all efforts go there."

In recent days, international links have been revealed concerning the coup and assassination plots, involving Colombian paramilitaries with the enthusiastic support (according to those revelations) of Juan Manuel Santos, that country’s defence minister, who has become a vehement critic of President Hugo Chávez and the process that he is leading.

Arrested as members or accomplices of Plan B were Hernán Rincón and Otto Conde, from whom a Carl Gustav portable cannon, rockets and pistols were seized in the state of Zulia – under the opposition governor Manuel Rosales – presumably for use in an assassination attempt. According to sources from the investigation commission, a cell phone with the numbers of opposition members, including that of Rosales, was taken from Rincón.

At the same time, National Guard troops in the state of Falcón took a HK Caliber 9 submachine gun and two M16 Caliber 5.56 automatic rifles, as well as an automatic shotgun, two satellite phones, an UHF radio and 250 cartridges.

In Agraragua, whose governor is Didalco Bolívar from the opposition, 1,002 Caliber 38 revolvers, 30 HK submachine guns, 389 Glock pistols were confiscated as part that should have been destroyed on having been decommissioned by the regional police, and was not.

Mario Isea himself told the press, "We are studying the connection between the decommissioning of weapons at the Aragua police station and assassination plots involving international factors, active and retired military personnel, civilians including politicians with a double agenda, media owners and political entrepreneurs.

Ends