Untitled Document
How can a leader of a country who instituted a program that has taught almost
two million former illiterates to read and write within a year be called a tyrant?
How can a leader of a country who incorporated land reform that has been a huge
success be called evil? How can a leader of a country who has been instrumental
in eradicating diseases that once ravaged the nation be called troublesome?
By having the name of Hugo Chavez; that’s how.
In past few years, Hugo Chavez has worked wonders with the nation of Venezuela.
He has endured assassination attempts; a failed coup; and an illegitimate recall
vote; all sponsored by either the U.S. administration or its stooge allies within
Venezuela. Today, even former opponents of Chavez begrudgingly admit he has
done a wonderful job at the helm of their country. All the horror stories of
the rich being raped of their money have proven untrue. The country is now prospering
and for the first time, a member of the indigenous population that encompasses
80% of the country is in power. And, his efforts have benefited, for the first
time, the majority of the 80%.
This success is becoming too much for the U.S. Chavez has run afoul of all
that the U.S. looks for in an allied leader. He is friends with and has collaborated
with President Fidel Castro of Cuba. In the past couple of years, his influence
has been profound in other Latin American countries. His message is that the
should be independent of the yoke of Washington. And, this thought process is
being welcomed all over the southern portion of the Western Hemisphere.
While most of the eyes of the world are on the Middle East, Washington is already
drawing plans to combat Chavez. Recently, the magazine National Review published
a commentary by Otto Reich, Bush’s top Latin American aide during his
first term. According to Reich:
With the combination of Castro’s evil genius, experience in political
warfare, and economic desperation, and Chavez’ unlimited money and recklessness,
the peace of this region is in peril.
The emerging axis of subversion forming between Cuba and Venezuela must be
confronted before it can undermine democracy in Colombia, Nicaragua, Bolivia,
or other vulnerable neighbors.
The new plan of the administration is similar to the "dual-containment"
program the U.S. used in the 1990s against Iraq and Iran. First, the U.S. will
try to isolate Venezuela’s new allies and have them turn against Chavez.
This will be done economically and with military threats.
Once Chavez is neutralized, the U.S. then will go after its almost five-decade
thorn-in-the-side, Fidel Castro. Divide and conquer has worked in the past and
the U.S. has no plans to change the strategy.
While the former peace protestors have now gone home and put their signs away,
no movement is visible that will mention a future conflict against Venezuela
and/or Cuba. A few days before the bombs fall, they will again take to the streets
and give the U.S. administration a chance to say, "See. We have a democracy
where anyone can be heard." They can be heard, but their message is never
taken into account. And, the warmongers work 24 hours a day to hone their plans;
not just a few days before imminent action. The protesters should be on the
streets now. Once they finally do hit the pavement, the plans will already have
been made and set in concrete.
I find it sad that many people in the Arab world, as well as many non-Arabs
who are aware of the plight of Iraq, know little or nothing about the politics
of Latin America in general, or those of Hugo Chavez in particular. Techniques
the U.S. used in Latin America to prop up violent regimes and deny the people
any form of humanity were the same being used today in Iraq: torture, deceit,
stooge government appointees, etc. Now, the U.S. will thrust on Latin America
the same techniques used against Iraq: techniques taken from the U.S. 1970s
and 1980s Latin America playbook.
Who is this guy Chavez? Maybe a lot of people who follow the Middle East do
not realize that he upset the U.S. administration of Clinton in 2000 by visiting
Saddam Hussein. Wow, the Clintonites bristled.
On August 9, 2000, Chavez and Saddam held talks in Baghdad. The primary subject
was the price of oil. Chvez’ predecessors could always be counted on by
Washington to lower prices below the OPEC rate when ordered to do so. In their
meeting, Chavez told his Iraqi counterpart that those days were gone.
In addition to oil prices, Chavez gave the Iraqi president his support in attempting
to end the embargo against Iraq. The Venezuelan Deputy Foreign Minister, Jorge
Valero, told CBS News, "President Chavez affirmed the Venezuelan position
supporting any accord against any kind of boycott or sanctions that are applied
against Iraq or any other country in the world."
This meeting did not go unnoticed by U.S. pundits. Patrick Clawson, research
director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy stated, "There
is no agenda between Venezuela and Iraq, except their OPEC ties."
There may have been no official agenda, but look at Chavez’ accomplishments
and they mirror those of the Ba’athists of Iraq: land given to people
to produce crops, similar to the program in Iraq from which two million Egyptians
benefited; upgrading the health care system; programs to include women in the
public and private sectors; making literacy programs available to anyone in
the country; etc. The progressions of the Ba’ath revolution and the "Bolivarian"
revolution of Chavez ran on parallel tracks.
After leaving Iraq, Chavez called Saddam Hussein his "brother." Those
in the Arab world who support justice and oppose the imperialistic actions of
the U.S. that have destroyed Iraq must now become aware of the future plight
of President Hugo Chavez. He is on the same track as the one Saddam Hussein
pursued years ago. This time, with enough awareness and vocal opposition, Chavez
may not derail before he reaches his destination.
During his stay in Baghdad, Chavez was impressed with Saddam’s hospitality.
He was openly thankful that the Iraqi president drove him around Baghdad in
his own car. No chauffeur, just the two presidents. Imagine Allawi driving anyone
by himself on the open streets of Baghdad outside the "green zone."
I would not want to be his life insurance agent.