radiofree.asia

Category: Venezuela

  • Venezuelan Diplomat Alex Saab Fights Latest US Extradition Maneuvers

    Venezuelan diplomat Alex Saab remains defiant after over 14 months under US-ordered arrest in the African archipelago country of Cabo Verde. A special envoy of the Venezuelan government, he is fighting extradition to the US for the “crime” of trying to procure humanitarian supplies of food, fuel, and medicine from Iran in violation of illegal US sanctions. To date, Saab’s legal appeals for freedom have been either denied, rejected, or ignored as his extradition to the US is becoming increasingly imminent.

    Saab continues to fight this flagrant attempt of extra-territorial judicial overreach by the US. In response to Saab’s recent appeal to the US 11th Circuit Court, the US filed on August 24 an application for an extension to reply on October 7. This legal delaying tactic is likely a US ploy to allow Saab’s pending extradition without recognizing his diplomatic immunity.

    The post Venezuelan Diplomat Alex Saab Fights Latest US Extradition Maneuvers appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Venezuelan Diplomat Alex Saab Fights Latest US Extradition Maneuvers

    Venezuelan diplomat Alex Saab remains defiant after over 14 months under US-ordered arrest in the African archipelago country of Cabo Verde. A special envoy of the Venezuelan government, he is fighting extradition to the US for the “crime” of trying to procure humanitarian supplies of food, fuel, and medicine from Iran in violation of illegal US sanctions. To date, Saab’s legal appeals for freedom have been either denied, rejected, or ignored as his extradition to the US is becoming increasingly imminent.

    The legal case

    Saab continues to fight this flagrant attempt of extra-territorial judicial overreach by the US. In response to Saab’s recent appeal to the US 11th Circuit Court, the US filed on August 24 an application for an extension to reply on October 7. This legal delaying tactic is likely a US ploy to allow Saab’s pending extradition without recognizing his diplomatic immunity.

    Under the Geneva Conventions, a credentialed diplomat such as Saab has absolute immunity from arrest, even in the time of war. The US does not recognize Saab’s diplomatic status as if Washington has the authority to qualify who other countries may choose and receive as their ambassadors.

    To begin with, Saab’s arrest on June 12, 2020, was arbitrary, illegal, and irregular. While on his way from Caracas to Tehran, his plane was diverted to Cabo Verde for a technical fueling stop. Saab was forcibly removed from the plane by Cabo Verdean police who did not have an arrest warrant.

    The day after the arrest and detention, the US had INTERPOL issue a Red Notice, which was subsequently annulled by INTERPOL. And when the arrest warrant arrived after the fact, it was made out in the name of a person who was not Alex Saab. Such is the truly farcical legal basis for the diplomat’s detention.

    Cabo Verde is a member of. and under the jurisdiction of, the Economic Organization of West African State (ECOWAS) Court of Justice, which ordered Saab to be released and even paid damages by the Cabo Verde government. Cabo Verde appealed the ruling, lost, and then claimed – even though it had recognized the authority of the court by participating in the proceedings – that it did not have to obey the court’s orders.

    Subsequently, the United Nations Human Rights Committee called for Saab’s release.

    Saab’s legal team went to the Cabo Verde Supreme Court with a writ of habeas corpus. This was denied on the absurd grounds that Saab was at “liberty” under “house arrest.” In fact, he was not only detained but not allowed to be treated for a cancer condition by his doctors or even meet with family who came to support him when they first came to Cabo Verde. Only after pressure was Saab allowed minimal visitation.

    On August 13, Saab’s case came before the Cabo Verde Constitutional Court contesting his detention on twelve constitutional grounds. Saab was not allowed to appear in person at the court. Although the Constitution Court is bound to respond, it has simply run the clock so far.

    The political case

    This legal theatre around the Saab case serves as an obfuscation for what is fundamentally a political case of the US attempting to impose regime-change on Venezuela through its punishing unilateral coercive measures; measures which amount to an unlawful blockade of the Latin American nation.

    The US wields an inordinate amount of influence on one of the smallest nations in the world with a larger Cabo Verdean population in the US than on the home islands. With few natural resources, Cabo Verde is dependent on remittances from abroad and more unfortunately is “a waypoint for illicit drugs and other transnational organized crime,” according to a US government report. With a GDP of only $1.7bil, the current $400mil US embassy building project is a considerable carrot for Cabo Verde.

    The political nature of the case is in effect recognized by the US. Saab is accused by the US of being the mastermind behind a network of sources that has allowed Venezuela to bypass the US blockade and procure needed supplies, which is the reason for targeting Saab. In pursuit of enforcing its illegal sanctions, the US would likely want to extract from Saab information on how Venezuela has tried to circumvent the blockade, which the US has imposed to asphyxiate Venezuela into submission.

    Saab alleges that he has been tortured while in Cabo Verde. He has reason to expect that he would face more of the same, if he were extradited to the US, to force him to not only disclose his trade contacts and channels but to denounce the government of Venezuela.

    Saab in his own words

    Saab, however, remains defiant. On August 19, Saab legally charged Cape Verdean authorities with gross misconduct in his case including torture. The following are his own words in a statement released through his lawyers August 25:

    “Cape Verde has not decided yet because despite having all legal terms expired and having clear knowledge that innumerable laws have been violated, the fact of now having to totally violate its own constitution in order to extradite me, upsets the conscience of those judges of the Constitutional Court, who have been honest until now, but who are strongly pressured by the US.

    In Cape Verde, its president, the prime minister, the corrupt attorney general, and even the humblest people, know and recognize that I am kept kidnapped.

    For those who dream that my speech or integrity will change if I am extradited, let me spoil that illusion. My integrity does not change with the [political] climate or the type of torture. Venezuela is sovereign. It is the country that adopted me.

    It is the country for which all decent people fight. We do not go around the world lying and asking for sanctions against the people.

    Venezuela will win this battle, whether in Cape Verde or in North America, we will win. I hope to see the sanctions lifted soon, and that priority will continue to be given to the people who need at least 30 more years of electoral victories, led by a people united around the PSUV [socialist party] and our President Nicolas Maduro Moros.

    So, leave the emotions out wondering if the plane arrived, if it didn’t arrive, if I will ‘sing’ as a tenor in case they extradite me, etc. Let go of that ridiculous illusion, first because there is nothing to ‘sing’ about and second because as I have said many times, I will never betray the Homeland I serve.”

    International effort to free Alex Saab

    Internationally, Cabo Verde has received diplomatic letters protesting the Saab case from Iran, China, Russia, the United Nations, the African Union, ECOWAS, and, of course, Venezuela based on the principles of immunity and inviolability of consular rights. Over 15,000 internationals have signed a petition to the US and Cape Verdean political leadership to free Alex Saab at https://afgj.org/free-alex-saab.

    The post Venezuelan Diplomat Alex Saab Fights Latest US Extradition Maneuvers first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Venezuela Is The Fifth Country With Most ‘Sanctions’ In The World

    The report also provides evidence on how the United States government and the European Union have intentionally issued them in order to make the Venezuelan people suffer painful situations, to create conditions for overthrowing the constitutionally elected government of President Maduro. This was announced by the Executive Vice President of the Republic, Delcy Rodríguez, at a press conference at the Miraflores Palace.

    The post Venezuela Is The Fifth Country With Most ‘Sanctions’ In The World appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • The Media Myth of ‘Once Prosperous’ and Democratic Venezuela Before Chávez

     

    Extraordinary Threat, by Joe Emersberger and Justin Podur

    Monthly Review Press, 2021

    The following piece is adapted from the authors’ new book, Extraordinary Threat: The US Empire, the Media and 20 Years of Coup Attempts in Venezuela, published by Monthly Review Press.

    In his State of the Union address on February 6, 2019, Donald Trump said:

    We stand with the Venezuelan people in their noble quest for freedom—and we condemn the brutality of the Maduro regime, whose socialist policies have turned that nation from being the wealthiest in South America into a state of abject poverty and despair.

    Trump’s ridiculous comment was not considered controversial, because the Western media, including the anti-Trump outlets like the New York Times, have spent many years conveying a lie: that Venezuela had been very prosperous and democratic until Hugo Chávez, and then his successor Nicolás Maduro, came along and ruined everything. If readers believe that, then they may indeed wonder, “Why shouldn’t the US government help Venezuelans return to that prosperous state?”

    But this attitude is the result of common deceptions about Venezuela’s economic history, and it ignores how the rise of Chávez actually brought democratic reform, not regression, to Venezuela. The story the Western media tell should instead make people wonder how Chavismo could have become the dominant political force if everything had once been wonderful in Venezuela.

    ‘Once the richest’

    This vague claim about Venezuela’s economic history, in various forms—“once prosperous,” “once the richest”—has become ubiquitous in the Western media. A Nexis search of English-language newspapers for “Venezuela” and “once prosperous” turned up 563 hits between 2015 and 2019.

    The “once prosperous” claim cannot refer to Venezuela’s natural wealth: The huge oil and gold reserves are still there. The clear intent of describing Venezuela as “once prosperous” is to suggest that living conditions were “once” those of a rich country.

    So by what measure was Venezuela “once” wealthy? When exactly was that? What is the ranking criteria being used to say it was one of the wealthiest? Was it once in the top 10% (by whatever measure)? The top 50%?

    It’s always implied that Venezuela’s economic glory days were in the pre-Chávez era, but the financial journalist Jason Mitchell has made this claim explicitly. Writing for the UK Spectator (2/18/17), he said, “Twenty years ago Venezuela was one of the richest countries in the world.” So Venezuela had supposedly enjoyed its wealthy status in 1997, the year before Hugo Chávez was first elected. That’s utter nonsense.

    In reality, when Chávez was first elected in 1998, Venezuela had a 50% poverty rate, despite having been a major oil exporter for several decades. It started exporting oil in the 1920s, and it was only in the early 1970s that the biggest Middle Eastern oil producers, Saudi Arabia and Iran, surpassed Venezuela in production. In 1992, the New York Times (2/5/92) reported that “only 57% of Venezuelans are able to afford more than one meal a day.” Does that sound like “one of the richest countries in the world”? Obviously not, but it is worth saying more about the statistics that can be used to mislead people about Venezuela’s economic history.

    Income and distribution

    Economists typically use GDP per capita to assess how rich a country is. It is basically a measure of the average income per person. If journalists cared to be at all precise when they say that Venezuela had once been “rich,” then that’s a statistic they’d cite.

    The chart below shows World Bank data for Venezuela’s real (inflation-adjusted) GDP per capita since 1960, and it contradicts Western media’s relentlessly insinuated story that a transition from prosperity to poverty took place because of Chavismo. Real GDP per capita peaked in 1977, near the end of an oil boom, then went into a long-term decline. When Chávez took office in 1999, it was at one of its lowest points in decades. Then it was driven even lower by the first two attempts to oust Chávez: the April 2002 coup and, several months later, a shutdown of the state oil company—the “oil strike.” By 2013, real GDP per capita recovered dramatically, nearly reaching its 1977 peak.

    Venezuelan GDP per Capita (constant local currency)t

    Venezuelan GDP per Capita (constant local currency). Chart: Extraordinary Threat,  Emersberger and Podur.

    Under Chávez, the poverty rate was cut in half, so there certainly is a correlation between GDP per capita and living conditions in Venezuela. But a country’s GDP per capita, by itself, says nothing about how income is distributed. And that can also make international comparisons very misleading.

    For example, 1980 was very close to Venezuela’s historic peak in real GDP per capita, which ranked 32nd in the world that year when adjusted for purchasing power parity, as economists recommend for international comparisons. But its infant mortality rate ranked 58th in the world, far below Cuba, whose infant mortality rate was 28th that year. Infant mortality is a basic health indicator that helps reveal the extent to which a country’s wealth is actually being used to benefit its people. In fact, Venezuela’s infant mortality rate in 1980 was more than twice as high as that in Cuba.

    Another revealing year is 1989, when the massacre of poor demonstrators later known as the Caracazo took place. In terms of GDP per capita (adjusted for purchasing power parity), Venezuela ranked highest in Central and South America—while its government perpetrated the most infamous slaughter of poor people in its modern history.

    The massacre exposed the essentially fraudulent nature of Venezuela’s prosperity and democracy. It explains the rise of Chávez, and also reveals how the US government and media reflexively helped the Venezuelan government that perpetrated the massacre.

    From Caracazo to Chavismo

    New York Times photo of the aftermath of the unsuccessful 1992 coup in Venezuela

    New York Times photo (2/5/92) of the aftermath of Hugo Chavez’s unsuccessful 1992 coup.

    It began on February 27, 1989. Venezuelan security forces killed hundreds, and possibly thousands, of poor people over a five-day period. The poor had risen up in revolt against an IMF-imposed “structural adjustment” program that involved stiff hikes to fuel prices and bus fares. The program was imposed by President Carlos Andres Pérez, a man who had campaigned saying that IMF programs were like a “neutron bomb that killed people but left buildings standing.”

    US President George H. W. Bush called Pérez on March 3, 1989, while the Caracazo massacre was still taking place, to commiserate with Pérez and offer Venezuela loans. The US media’s Venezuela narrative suited Bush’s foreign policy. A New York Times article (11/11/90) about Venezuela by Clifford Krauss described Pérez as “a charismatic social democrat.” Not a word was written about the Caracazo massacre. The article focused on Bush’s gratitude toward Pérez for, among other things, boosting Venezuela’s oil output to help protect the United States from negative economic consequences after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.

    On February 5, 1992, Lieutenant Colonel Hugo Chávez first became widely known to Venezuelans by attempting a military coup. The day Chávez’s coup failed, a news article in the New York Times (2/5/92) referred to Venezuela as “one of Latin America’s relatively stable democratic governments,” and to Pérez himself as “a leading democrat,” despite the Caracazo massacre only three years earlier, which is never mentioned. The Times also quoted then–President Bush calling Pérez “one of the great democratic leaders of our hemisphere.”

    Not another Pérez

    When Chávez first took office after elections in 1999, the US government did not go immediately on the attack. When you consider the flashy anti-IMF campaign rhetoric of Carlos Andres Pérez—the president who then massacred people to implement an IMF austerity plan—it’s unsurprising that the US would feel Chávez out for a while. Maybe Chávez would be similarly phony—and therefore worthy of US support.

    By 2001, the US government realized that Chávez was not going to be like Pérez, who made a sick joke of his anti-IMF rhetoric once he was in office. Chávez was actually going to try to follow through on his promises to change the system and assert his country’s sovereignty. Chávez aggressively opposed the US invasion of Afghanistan, and even said that the US ambassador came calling and disrespectfully asked him to reverse his position. That provoked Chávez to order the ambassador out of the room. This was a key event in the souring of Venezuela/US relations (Bart Jones, Hugo!, Steerforth Press, 2007, p. 297).

    Changing Venezuela by Taking Power, by Gregory Wilpert

    Verso, 2006

    Domestically, Chávez also had a short honeymoon period with Venezuela’s old elite and middle class. As Gregory Wilpert put it in Changing Venezuela by Taking Power (Verso, 2006, p. 20):

    When Chávez first took office, he enjoyed approval ratings of 90%, which would suggest that racism and classism for eventual middle-class opposition to Chávez could not be an important factor.

    Venezuela’s middle class had been sliding into poverty for two decades and supported Chávez in 1998 because they were desperate for change.

    But soon enough, the old political elite, like the US ambassador, deeply resented Chávez asserting his authority. They had expected Chávez’s deference. His African and Indigenous roots, and his working-class origin, could be overlooked, until he shunned the usual power brokers when making his cabinet appointments.

    The conflict intensified when a constituent assembly, elected by voters, drafted a new constitution which was then approved in a referendum. Transitional authorities were appointed under the new democratic order. As Wilpert described it (Changing Venezuela, p. 20):

    The old elite then used its control of the country’s mass media to turn the middle class against Chávez, creating a campaign that took advantage of the latent racism and classism in Venezuelan culture.

    By 2004, predictably, Chávez relied much more heavily on the support of poor people to win elections (Changing Venezuela, p. 268–269).

    New constitution, new era

    In the first year he took office, Chávez initiated a three-step process to give Venezuela a new constitution. In April 1999, he went to voters asking if they wanted to initiate the process by electing a constitutional assembly, and if they approved of the rules specifying how the assembly would be elected. His side won that referendum with 92% of the vote on the first question, and with 86% on the second (which specified basic electoral rules) (Changing Venezuela, p. 21).

    Elections were held in July to choose the members of the assembly. Chávez supporters won 125 of the assembly’s 131 seats. The assembly then drafted a constitution and, four months later, it was approved by 72% of voters in another referendum.

    The assembly also appointed a transitional body, known as a Congressillo (small congress), that appointed a new attorney general, human rights defender, comptroller general, national electoral council and supreme court.

    In July 2000, Chávez went to voters again for a fresh presidential mandate under the new constitution and prevailed easily with 59.8% of the vote. But these were “mega-elections,” as Wilpert (Changing Venezuela, p. 22) put it, ones that “eliminated the country’s old political elite almost entirely from the upper reaches of Venezuela’s public institutions”:

    Thirty-three thousand candidates ran for over 6,000 offices that day. In the end, Chávez was reconfirmed in office with 59.8% of the vote. Chávez’s supporters won 104 out of 165 National Assembly seats and 17 out of 23 state governorships. On the local level, Chávez candidates were less successful, winning only about half of the municipal mayors’ posts.

    Ominously, a New York Times editorial in August 1999 already presumed to lecture Venezuelans and distort a very democratic reform process as a power grab:

    They should be very wary of the methods Mr. Chávez is using. He is drawing power into his own hands, and misusing a special constitutional assembly meeting now in Caracas that is composed almost entirely of his supporters.

    Mr. Chávez, a former paratroop commander who staged an unsuccessful military coup in 1992, has so far shown little respect for the compromises necessary in a democracy, which Venezuela has had for 40 years.

    Clearly, any genuine reform process in Latin America was going to be vilified by liberal outlets like the New York Times.

    Key lies

    The lies peddled about Venezuela’s past make US aggression against it possible in the present. It is worth summing up some of these key lies:

    • Venezuela was “once prosperous” and ruined by socialism. In fact, Venezuela was an unequal country in which most people were poor despite the country’s oil wealth, which had generated huge export revenues since the 1920s.
    • Venezuela was a democracy before Chavismo. In fact, Venezuela’s democracy was a gravely flawed system in which politicians alternated holding power according to an undemocratic agreement, and rammed austerity down the throats of Venezuela’s poor by committing massacres, such as the Caracazo.
    • Chavismo ruined Venezuela’s democracy. Chávez indeed attempted to carry out a coup in 1992, but he came to power through an election in 1998, and afterward made changes through extensive democratic processes.

     

     

    The post The Media Myth of ‘Once Prosperous’ and Democratic Venezuela Before Chávez appeared first on FAIR.

    This post was originally published on FAIR.

  • MintPress News Confronts Senator Cruz On Murderous US Sanctions

    MintPress News’ Ben Rubinstein ran into Senator Ted Cruz at Las Vegas’ McCarran International Airport. Recognizing the senator’s long-standing support for economic warfare on the Global South via unilateral coercive measures, or sanctions, Rubinstein jumped at the chance to confront Cruz.

    The post MintPress News Confronts Senator Cruz On Murderous US Sanctions appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • The UK’s hidden war on Venezuela

    The corporate media in Britain was responsible for a vicious disinformation campaign against Jeremy Corbyn from 2016 to present. If that happened right under our noses here in Britain, think about the levels of disinformation being propagated about Venezuela in the mainstream press, as the British state tries to overthrow their government. The Canary’s John McEvoy reports on the UK’s hidden war on Venezuela.

    By Pablo Navarrete

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Latin American Socialism And The Fight Against COVID-19

    Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua have made significant strides in protecting their people and defending their socialist projects, even as they face a series of interventions orchestrated by Washington, ranging from long-running economic blockades to media campaigns and even military operations. The resilience of Latin American socialist societies and institutions in this context of COVID-19 and U.S. intervention merits significant attention.

    The post Latin American Socialism And The Fight Against COVID-19 appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Revealed: Juan Guaidó used millions of looted dollars to asset strip Venezuela

    On 3 August, The Canary exposed how Venezuelan opposition figure Juan Guaidó’s UK legal costs were paid with money appropriated from the Venezuelan state.

    In an effort to access roughly US$2bn of Venezuelan gold held in the Bank of England, it was reported that Guaidó’s legal team drew on hundreds of thousands of dollars originally seized from the Central Bank of Venezuela in the US.

    We can now reveal that this figure is significantly higher. According to official documents, Guaidó and his appointees have given over US$6.5m to powerhouse legal firms as part of a campaign to bleed the Venezuelan state of its foreign assets.

    Almost all of this money was sent in a series of instalments to Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP – the legal firm representing Guaidó in the UK.

    The firm appears to be tightly knit with the US foreign policy apparatus, and has over recent years represented a series of right-wing Latin American officials.

    Remarkably, the documents also suggest that Guaidó has been paid over half a million dollars from this fund.

    Looted dollars

    In April 2020, the US government transferred US$342m of Central Bank of Venezuela assets to an account at the US Federal Reserve in New York. In a move denounced by the Venezuelan government as “vulgar plundering”, the money was then handed over to Guaidó’s ad-hoc administrative board of the Central Bank of Venezuela.

    Official figures released by Guaidó’s ad-hoc board show that at least US$6,552,512 of these funds have been used “for professional services of lawyers in the care of Assets abroad to be protected and licensing procedures before OFAC”.

    Guaidó and his appointees have, in other words, spent millions of looted dollars in an attempt to asset strip the Venezuelan state.

    Most of this money was paid to Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP – the legal firm representing Guaidó in the UK.

    Guaidó and his appointees have also directed roughly US$100m of looted assets towards a secretive “Liberation Fund”. According to AP, opposition lawmakers used the fund during 2020 to “pay themselves $5,000 a month” while providing only $100 a month to doctors and nurses battling the coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic.

    Remarkably, the documents suggest that Guaidó and his appointees have in fact paid Guaidó over half a million dollars since March 2021. The most recent instalment to the ‘Presidency’ was delivered on 19 July 2021, and totalled US$407,702.

    Lobbying for Guaidó

    A number of questions also arise regarding Guaidó’s legal representation in the UK and its connections to the US foreign policy apparatus.

    Eli Whitney Debevoise II, a senior partner at Arnold & Porter who leads on Guaidó’s UK case, has been listed on the US Foreign Agents Registration Act as a lobbyist for the Venezuelan opposition.

    According to an official document, Debevoise has advised Guaidó “concerning U.S. economic sanctions, corporate banking law, U.S. litigation, and international arbitration”.

    The document continues:

    In support of the primary registrant [Guaidó], the short-form registrant may engage in political activities on behalf of the foreign principal, including making contact with U.S. government officials concerning the preservation of Venezuela’s assets in the United States, the establishment of a diplomatic presence, and economic and humanitarian assistance.

    Guaidó may have paid for Arnold & Porter’s legal services, in other words, with money seized in the US as a result of Arnold & Porter’s lobbying efforts.

    Proximity to the US foreign policy apparatus

    Debevoise II seems well-positioned to provide lobbying services in the US.

    According to his LinkedIn account, he’s a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), which provides “in-person access to world leaders, senior government officials, members of Congress, and prominent thinkers and practitioners”. Elliot Abrams, Donald Trump’s former point-man on Venezuela, is a long-time senior fellow and member of CFR.

    Debevoise II also lists the late US official William D. Rogers, who planned US policy in Latin America throughout the 1960s and 1970s, as a mentor. Rogers was a top adviser to Henry Kissinger throughout the mid-1970s; the latter described Rogers as “my friend and, in many ways, my conscience”.

    Newspaper reports from the 1960s note that Debevoise II’s father Eli Whitney Debevoise was the principal officer at CIA front organisation the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ). As the Washington Post reported in 1967, the ICJ received “$655,000 from known CIA front groups”. Among Arnold & Porter’s alumni is former CIA general counsel Jeffrey H. Smith.

    Arnold & Porter reportedly launched an “influence campaign” in support of disgraced drug trafficker Juan Antonio “Tony” Hernández, the brother of Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández.

    Guaidó’s legal representation in the UK thus appears to enjoy a close proximity to both the US foreign policy apparatus and the Latin American right, and questions regarding conflicts of interest are likely to arise.

    Despite his involvement in a damning series of scandals, the UK government reemphasised its support for Guaidó on 18 August.

    Featured image via Flickr/Trump White House Archive

    By John McEvoy

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Here’s The Agenda For Venezuela’s Peace Talks In Mexico

    The Bolivarian government of Venezuela and representatives of the US-backed opposition have officially begun a new dialogue process in Mexico, with the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding.

    The negotiation and dialogue process was inaugurated on Friday evening at Mexico City’s National Museum of Anthropology, as the two Venezuelan negotiating parties signed the Memorandum.

    The post Here’s The Agenda For Venezuela’s Peace Talks In Mexico appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Venezuela Rejects Accusations Of Former ICC Prosecutor

    This Thursday, August 12, Venezuela’s Public Ministry (MP) rejected as worthless the accusations issued by the former prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), Fatou Bensouda, after she irresponsibly ignored the collaboration of the Venezuelan authorities in the Venezuela I case filed by the near-defunct Lima Group accusing Venezuelan authorities of human rights violations.

    From his Twitter account, the Attorney General of Venezuela Tarek William Saab published a statement in which he repudiated the statement of the former ICC prosecutor regarding the preliminary examination underway on Venezuela.

    In Bensouda’s statement, she had said that there was a “reasonable basis” to believe that since April 2017 various Venezuelan authorities had committed crimes against humanity.

    The post Venezuela Rejects Accusations Of Former ICC Prosecutor appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • The Meaning of the Protests in Cuba

    The July 11 protests fused economic and political grievances. A struggle is taking place in Cuba over what happens next.

    This post was originally published on Dissent MagazineDissent Magazine.

  • Perú On The Lima Group

    A few days after the inauguration of Pedro Castillo, the Peruvian government has changed the official position that its predecessors maintained regarding the internal affairs of Venezuela. Yesterday Perú’s newly appointed Minister of Foreign Affairs Héctor Béjar pointed out that the policy of the new government will be opposition to blockades and “sanctions.”

    The post Perú On The Lima Group appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Judicial Decision On Alex Saab’s Extradition Expected Next Week

    The Constitutional Court (TC) of Cape Verde scheduled a hearing on the constitutional appeal of the special envoy of Venezuela, Alex Saab Morán, for next August 13 at 9:00 a.m. Saab has been held in Cape Verdean prison for 410 days under an arbitrary measure emanating from the United States, victim of a flawed process denounced by the diplomat, his defense, and activists and legal experts worldwide.

    “We inform you that by order of the Venerable Presiding Counselor Judge in the file of the Concrete Inspection of Constitutionality No. 2/2021, in which Alex Nain Saab Moran is appellant and the Supreme Court of Justice is appealed, the first instance hearing referred to in Article 92 of Law No. 56/VI/2005, of February 28…

    The post Judicial Decision On Alex Saab’s Extradition Expected Next Week appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Stories Of Resistance From El Maizal Commune

    El Maizal Commune lies in the fertile lands between the Lara and Portuguesa states in western Venezuela. Founded in 2009, this rural commune has since become an important political and economic force in both the region and the country. It not only produces huge amounts of corn every year, but also raises cattle and pigs, along with a growing number of additional side enterprises. Most importantly, El Maizal Commune forges new social relations and new human beings: people committed to the socialist project that Chávez promoted during his lifetime.

    The post Stories Of Resistance From El Maizal Commune appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Juan Guaidó Paid UK Legal Fees With Looted Venezuelan Money

    Court documents show that Venezuelan opposition figure Juan Guaidó‘s UK legal costs were paid with money appropriated from the Central Bank of Venezuela. As part of a legal effort to access roughly US$2bn of Venezuelan gold held in the Bank of England, Guaidó’s legal team drew on hundreds of thousands of dollars – if not millions – originally seized from the Central Bank of Venezuela in the US. Guaidó’s attempt to seize Central Bank of Venezuela assets in the UK, in other words, has been financed by money previously seized from the Central Bank of Venezuela.

    The post Juan Guaidó Paid UK Legal Fees With Looted Venezuelan Money appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Results of 47th session of the Human Rights Council

    The ISHR and 17 other organisations (see below for their names) share reflections on the key outcomes of the 47th session of the UN Human Rights Council, as well as the missed opportunities to address key issues and situations. See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2021/06/22/key-issues-affecting-hrds-in-47th-session-of-un-human-rights-council-june-2021/

    CIVIL SOCIETY PARTICIPATION

    We deplore the systemic underfunding of the UN human rights system and the drive for so-called efficiency, including the cancellation of general debates in June, which are a vital part of the agenda by which NGOs can address the Council without restrictions. We call for the reinstatement of general debates at all sessions, with the option of civil society participation through video statements.  We welcome the focus of the civil society space resolution on the critical role played by civil society in the COVID-19 response, and the existential threats to civil society engendered or exacerbated by the pandemic. For the resolution to fulfil its goal, States must now take action to address these threats; while we welcome the broad support indicated by a consensus text, this cannot come at the cost of initiatives that will protect and support civil society.

    HUMAN RIGHTS ONLINE

    We welcome a resolution on the promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights on the Internet and its thematic focus on bridging digital divides, an issue which has become ever-important during the COVID-19 pandemic. We urge all States to implement the resolution by taking concrete measures to enhance Internet accessibility and affordability and by ceasing Internet shutdowns and other disruptions, such as website blocking and filtering and network throttling. In future iterations of the text, we encourage the core group to go further in mentioning concrete examples that could be explored by States in adopting alternative models for expanding accessibility, such as the sharing of infrastructure and community networks.  We welcome the resolution on new and emerging digital technologies and human rights, which aims to promote a greater role for human rights in technical standard-setting processes for new and emerging digital technologies, and in the policies of States and businesses. While aspects of the resolution risk perpetuating “technology solutionism”, we welcome that it places a stronger focus on the human rights impacts of new and emerging digital technologies since the previous version of the resolution, such as introducing new language reiterating the importance of respecting and promoting human rights in the conception, design, use, development, further deployment and impact assessments of such technologies.

    GENDER EQUALITY AND NON-DISCRIMINATION

    We are concerned by the increasing number of amendments and attempts to weaken the texts. We are particularly concerned by the continued resistance of many States to previously adopted texts and States’ willful misinterpretation of key concepts related in resolutions on human rights in the context of HIV and AIDS, accelerating efforts to eliminate all forms of violence against women and girls: preventing and responding to all forms of violence against women and girls with disabilities and preventable maternal mortality and morbidity and human rights on maternal morbidities. We deplore the instrumentalising of women’s rights and sexual and reproductive health and rights. We encourage States to center the rights of people most affected and adopt strong texts on these resolutions. We welcome the resolution on menstrual hygiene management, human rights and gender equality as the first step in addressing deep-rooted stigma and discrimination. We urge all States to address the root causes for the discrimination and stigma on menstruation and its impact.

    RACIAL JUSTICE AND EQUALITY

    The High Commissioner’s report highlighted the long-overdue need to confront legacies of slavery, the transatlantic trade in enslaved Africans and colonialism and to seek reparatory justice. We welcome the historic consensus decision, led by the Africa Group, to adopt a resolution mandating an independent international expert mechanism to address systemic racism and promote racial justice and equality for Africans and people of African descent. The adoption of this resolution is testament to the resilience, bravery and commitment of victims, their families, their representatives and anti-racism defenders globally. We deplore efforts by some Western States, particularly former colonial powers, to weaken the text and urge them to now cooperate fully with the mechanism to dismantle systemic racism, ensure accountability and reparations for past and present gross human rights violations against Black people, end impunity for racialized State violence and address the root causes, especially the legacies of enslavement, colonialism, and the transatlantic trade in enslaved Africans.

    MIGRANTS RIGHTS

    Whilst we welcome the return of a resolution on human rights of migrants, we deplore the continued failure of the Council to respond meaningfully to the severity and global scale of human rights violations at international borders including connected to pushbacks. International borders are not and must not be treated as places outside of international human rights law. Migrants are not and must not be treated as people outside of international human rights law. Expressions of deep concern in interactive dialogues must be translated into action on independent monitoring and accountability.

    ARMS TRANSFERS AND HUMAN RIGHTS

    We welcome the resolution on the impact of arms transfers on human rights and its focus on children and youth. However, we note with concern the resistance of the Council to meaningfully focus on legal arms transfers beyond those diverted, unregulated or illicitly transferred. The Council should be concerned with all negative human rights impacts of arms transfers, without focusing only on those stemming from diversion and unregulated or illicit trade.

    CLIMATE CHANGE

    We are disappointed that the resolution on human rights and climate change fails to establish a new Special Rapporteur. However, we welcome the increasing cross regional support for a new mandate. It is a matter of urgent priority for the Council to establish it this year.

    COUNTRY SPECIFIC SITUATIONS

    ALGERIA

    While special procedures, the OHCHR and multiple States have recognized the intensifying Algerian authorities’ crackdown on freedom of association and expression, the Council failed to act to protect Algerians striving to advance human rights and democracy.

    BELARUS

    We welcome the renewal of the mandate of the UN Special Rapporteur on Belarus. Given the ongoing human rights crisis in Belarus, the mandate complements the OHCHR Examination in ensuring continuous monitoring of the situation, and the mandate remains an accessible and safe channel for Belarusian civil society to deliver diverse and up-to-date information from within the country.

    CHINA

    The Council has once again failed to respond meaningfully to grave human rights violations committed by Chinese authorities. We reiterate our call on the High Commissioner and member States to take decisive action toward accountability.

    COLOMBIA

    We are disappointed that few States made mention of the use of excessive force against protestors in a context of serious human rights violations, including systemic racism, and urge greater resolve in support of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly in the country and globally

    ETHIOPIA

    The resolution on Ethiopia’s Tigray region, albeit modest in its scope and language, ensures much-needed international scrutiny and public discussions on one of Africa’s worst human rights crises. We urge the Ethiopian government to engage ahead of HRC48.

    ERITREA

    We welcome the extension of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Eritrea, as scrutiny for violations committed at home and in Tigray is vital.

    NICARAGUA

    We warmly welcome the joint statement delivered by Canada on behalf of 59 States, on harassment and detention of journalists, human rights defenders, and presidential pre-candidates, urging Nicaragua to engage with the international community and take meaningful steps for free and fair elections. States should closely monitor the implementation of resolution 46/2, and send a strong collective message to Nicaragua at the 48th session of the Council, as the Council should ‘urgently consider all measures within its power’ to strengthen human rights protection in the country.

    PALESTINE

    We welcome the Special Rapporteur’s report that “Israeli settlements are the engine of this forever occupation, and amount to a war crime,” emphasizing that settler colonialism infringes on “the right of the indigenous population […] to be free from racial and ethnic discrimination and apartheid.” We also reiterate his recommendation to the High Commissioner “to regularly update the database of businesses involved in settlements, in accordance with Human Rights Council resolution 31/36.”

    THE PHILIPPINES

    While acknowledging the signing of the Joint Human Rights Programme with the UN OHCHR, the Government of the Philippines fails to address the long-standing issues on law enforcement and accountability institutions, including in the context of war on drugs. We continue to urge the Council to launch the long-overdue independent and transparent investigation on the on-going human rights violations.

    SYRIA

    We welcome mounting recognition for the need to establish a mechanism to reveal the fate and whereabouts of the missing in Syria, including by UN member states during the interactive dialogue on Syria, and the adoption of the resolution on Syria addressing the issue of the missing and emphasizing the centrality of victim participation, building on the momentum created by the Syrian Charter for Truth and Justice.

    VENEZUELA

    In the context of the recent arbitrary detention of 3 defenders from NGO Fundaredes, we welcome the denunciation by several States of persistent restrictions on civil society and again for visits of Special Rapporteurs to be accepted and accelerated.

    *American Civil Liberties Union, Association for Progressive Communications, Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies, Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales (CELS), Center for Reproductive Rights, Child Rights Connect, CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, Conectas Direitos Humanos, Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights, FIDH, Franciscans International, Human Rights House Foundation, International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute, International Commission of Jurists, International Lesbian and Gay Association, International Service for Human Rights, US Human Rights Network

    https://ishr.ch/latest-updates/hrc47-civil-society-presents-key-takeaways-from-human-rights-council/

    This post was originally published on Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards.

  • Venezuela’s Resistance Reduces Washington’s Pressure

    The Venezuelan Foreign Minister, Jorge Arreaza, has dedicated the last four years of his life to weather the worst diplomatic crisis his country has suffered in decades. During that time he has faced the trade blockade, the confiscation of strategic companies and deposits abroad, and the recognition of the parallel government of Juan Guaidó by Washington and the European Union.

    The post Venezuela’s Resistance Reduces Washington’s Pressure appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Hundreds of Venezuelan Cancer Patients Lives’ Endangered by US Sanctions

    Six independent UN human rights experts alerted that hundreds of Venezuelan cancer patients’ lives are under threat because of an “excessively strict application” of US sanctions.

    In a press release published on Wednesday, the group of experts warned that Venezuelan cancer patients “have been stranded, destitute, in countries where they went for treatment” because “money cannot be transferred out of Venezuela,” laying blame on US unilateral measures and overcompliance policies.

    The post Hundreds of Venezuelan Cancer Patients Lives’ Endangered by US Sanctions appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Venezuela accuses and warns US for military aircraft violating its Airspace

    Venezuela’s defense ministry has accused Washington of “flagrant provocation” after a US military plane allegedly flew into its territory from Colombia. According to Caracas, the US violated its airspace over 20 times this year. The “flagrant provocation” happened as part of joint military drills in Colombia in which American fighter jets are participating, Venezuela said. “Reconnaissance tasks are being carried out towards the Venezuelan geographical area,”

    The post Venezuela accuses and warns US for military aircraft violating its Airspace appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Saab Case Shows Western Media’s Casual Acceptance of US Atrocities

     

    A Colombian businessperson named Alex Saab was traveling to Iran on behalf of the Venezuelan government in June 2020. His official mission was to negotiate shipments of medicine and other essential products to Venezuela.  He was arrested in Cape Verde at the behest of the US government, where he remains to this day; President Joe Biden has continued Donald Trump’s effort to extradite him to the US.

    Western corporate media have been frank about the fact that Saab was targeted for helping Venezuela get around US sanctions. Though you’d struggle to learn it from those media, these sanctions have been directly linked to tens of thousands of Venezuelan deaths since 2017 (FAIR.org, 6/14/19). Articles about Saab’s case have also ignored all the powerful arguments that the sanctions are illegal under both US and international law.

    Imagine being imprisoned for nonviolently attempting to prevent a heinous crime. That sums up the absurdity of Saab’s predicament–and Western media’s coverage of it.

    WSJ: Deal Maker for Venezuela’s Maduro Can Be Extradited to U.S., Court Rules

    The Wall Street Journal (1/5/21) reported that Alex Saab was accused of “laundering money…for projects ranging from housing construction to food distribution.”

    In January, a Wall Street Journal article (1/5/21) about Saab’s case quoted Martin Rodil, who it described as “a Venezuelan in Washington who works with federal agencies to recruit witnesses to build cases against corrupt Venezuelan officials.” Rodil told the Journal that US prosecutors want  to “go after the banks that have been helping Venezuela to sidestep sanctions.” Rodil explained that “Alex Saab was the guy who would go to China, he’d go to Turkey, he’d go to Dubai, Iran and to Eastern Europe, Serbia, that’s what’s valuable about him.”

    Reuters (3/15/21, 3/18/21) has casually reported that Saab “faces extradition to the United States, which accuses him of violating US sanctions,” and that he has been “repeatedly named by the US State Department as an operator who helps Maduro arrange trade deals that Washington is seeking to block through sanctions.” A Reuters article (8/28/20) about Saab’s case in 2020 mentioned in passing that “the United States this month seized four cargoes of Iranian fuel bound for Venezuela, where fuel shortages are once again worsening.”

    Possible crimes against humanity

    Apparently Reuters could not find an independent source to dispute the legality or condemn the extreme cruelty of seizing desperately needed fuel shipments to Venezuela (FAIR.org, 6/4/21). Was the news agency unaware that Alfred De Zayas (a former UN investigator assigned to Venezuela) has spent years arguing that the US violates the legally binding UN Charter by attempting to overthrow Venezuela’s government (Democracy Now!, 1/24/19)?

    Amy Goodman and Alfred De Zayas on Democracy Now!

    Amy Goodman interviews Alfred De Zayas on Democracy Now! (1/24/19).

    In fact, De Zayas said in 2019 that US sanctions on Venezuela should be investigated by the International Criminal Court as possible crimes against humanity (Independent, 1/26/19).

    Article 2 of the UN Charter says: “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.” Note that even threats are illegal under international law, never mind an actual use of force. Presumably, the Western media would consider it an illegal “use of force” if Venezuela were suicidal enough to seize urgently needed shipments to the US.

    De Zayas, an expert on international law, has explained that

    nothing in the UN Charter can be read as authorizing in any way unilateral coercive measures [sanctions], which are incompatible with general principles of international law, violate the prohibition of interference in the internal affairs of other states and violate their sovereignty.

    He added that the repeated, near-unanimous UN General Assembly resolutions condemning the US embargo on Cuba “can be seen as a restatement of the law on unilateral sanctions.” De Zayas noted that even when sanctions are approved by the UN Security Council–as the Venezuelan sanctions are not–the Security Council itself

    is not above international law, as its mandate is circumscribed by Article 24 of the Charter.  Thus the imposition of sanctions regimes that are tantamount to “collective punishment” and cause widespread death and suffering of innocent people are contrary to Article 24 of the Charter and therefore ultra vires [beyond its authority].

    ‘Coercive measures of an economic character’

    Idriss Jazairy

    Idriss Jazairy (Ethics & International Affairs, 9/6/19): “Unilateral measures not only adversely affect the rights to international trade and to navigation, but also the basic human rights of innocent civilians.”

    In 2019, Idriss Jazairy (Ethics & International Affairs, 9/6/19), another former UN special rapporteur, took the same position as De Zayas: that unilateral sanctions violate international law. So did a resolution passed last year by the UN Human Rights Council (Canadian Dimension, 4/10/21).

    Moreover, the OAS Charter, which the US has signed, also has very strong anti-sanctions language:

    Article 19

    No state or group of states has the right to intervene, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatever, in the internal or external affairs of any other state. The foregoing principle prohibits not only armed force but also any other form of interference or attempted threat against the personality of the state or against its political, economic and cultural elements.

    Article 20

    No state may use or encourage the use of coercive measures of an economic or political character in order to force the sovereign will of another state and obtain from it advantages of any kind.

    Again, if the US were the country being victimized, the media would not need legal experts to say that seizing fuel shipments, threatening military attack, deliberately inflicting economic hardships on the public and encouraging generals to overthrow the government were all gross violations of international law. The same applies to openly targeting a businessperson for trying to carry out business in the face of illegal sanctions.

    ‘Extraordinary’ lie

    NYT: Navy Warship’s Secret Mission Off West Africa Aims to Help Punish Venezuela

    The New York Times (12/22/20) described the US seizing Iranian oil bound for Venezuela as “a high-seas handover that blocked two diplomatic adversaries from evading American economic sanctions.” Bloomberg (8/16/20), meanwhile, called it “state-sponsored piracy.”

    How could Reuters and other big Western outlets also have missed the detailed report written in 2021 by UN special investigator Alena Douhan, which called on the US to end its fraudulent “national emergency” regarding Venezuela? Independent journalist Slava Zieber interviewed Douhan about her report, but prominent Western media ignored it (FAIR.org, 6/4/21).

    In US law, the outrageous lie that Venezuela poses an “extraordinary threat” to the US is the legal basis for a “national emergency” that justifies imposing sanctions. US aggression against Venezuela therefore shows as much contempt for US law as it does towards the UN Charter.

    A New York Times article (12/22/20) last year about Saab’s case was nonchalant in mentioning US crimes :

    The showdown over Mr. Saab is the latest twist in the tense relationship between the United States and Venezuela. In 2017, Mr. Trump said he would not rule out a “military option” to quell the chaos in Venezuela. In 2018, the Trump administration held secret meetings with rebellious military officers from Venezuela to discuss their plans to overthrow Mr. Maduro.

    And in August, the United States seized more than 1.1 million barrels of Iranian fuel that was headed to Venezuela in a high-seas handover that blocked two diplomatic adversaries from evading American economic sanctions.

    Describing a “tense relationship” between the US and Venezuela is like saying an armed robber has a tense relationship with their victim.

    It’s the empire, stupid

    The US has been trying to overthrow Venezuela’s government since 2002 when the New York Times (4/13/02) and other US newspapers applauded a US-backed coup that temporarily ousted President Hugo Chávez, who died in 2013 (Extra! Update, 6/02).

    One tactic the US has deployed against Venezuela, many years before it dramatically intensified its tactics to truly barbaric levels under Trump (and now Biden), is to claim jurisdiction over any use of the US financial system, however incidental.

    The US indictment against Saab alleges that as far back as 2011, he was involved in paying bribes to Venezuelan officials in Venezuela. How on earth can the US claim legal jurisdiction over corruption that foreign officials and businesspeople (as opposed to US-based corporations) allegedly perpetrated in Venezuela?

    When you have the world’s dominant financial system, you can (when it suits you) act as if you had jurisdiction over the whole world. That financial power is key to making US sanctions so devastating. For example, out of fear of violating US sanctions, Swiss Bank USB blocked payments that Venezuela made to the United Nations COVAX program to purchase Covid-19 vaccines.

    Greg Wilpert and Joe Sammut explained in the book  Viviremos: Venezuela vs. Hybrid War (International Publishers, 2021), that “with more than 60% of central bank reserves, and most of commerce, in dollars,” the US government is well positioned to “weaponize” any use of its financial system to behave like a global dictator. US economist Michael Hudson argues that the US could use the SWIFT bank clearing system to make Europe “permanently dependent” and “under US control” (Grayzone,  5/12/21).

    Grayzone: World police: Washington seeks to imprison foreign businesspeople for violating illegal US sanctions

    Stansfield Smith (Grayzone, 4/27/21) “The US government has taken its unilateral coercive measures to an even more ominous level by charging and attempting to extradite foreign businesspeople who have been abiding by international law, rather than the economic dictates of Washington.”

    Writing for Grayzone (4/27/21), US activist Stanfield Smith reviewed Saab’s case, along with the similar prosecutions of North Korea’s Mun Chol Myong and Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou of China. Smith noted that the US has even used its financial might to threaten the International Criminal Court for moving to investigate US war crimes in Afghanistan:

    National Security Advisor John Bolton bullied them, stating: “We will ban its judges and prosecutors from entering the United States. We will sanction their funds in the US financial system, and we will prosecute them in the US criminal system…. We will do the same for any company or state that assists an ICC investigation of Americans.”

    This turned out to be no idle threat: The Trump administration ultimately slapped sanctions on the ICC and its staff.

    Focus on fake critics

    Informed critics of US aggression can easily be found to comment on Saab’s case, if you read alternative media, but major corporate outlets in the West aren’t interested; they prefer to cite anonymous US officials claiming that fake critics exist online. A Financial Times article (3/17/21) about Saab’s case stated:

    According to one intelligence analysis recently seen by the Financial Times, Caracas has used scores of false Twitter accounts in a bid to sway public opinion and pressure the Cape Verdean authorities into sending Saab to Venezuela.

    A few years ago, the US media, aping Washington, expressed alarm that China might use its growing economic strength to assert “veto authority” over governments in Latin America (FAIR.org, 6/6/18). But Wilpert and Sammut (actual experts, not the “false Twitter accounts” that anonymous US official described to the Financial Times) expressed a much more urgent and reality-based concern–one that’s highlighted by Saab’s case:

    Venezuela and other countries suffering from US aggression cannot wait for these world-historical shifts toward a more multi-polar world. The United States will also have to change from within.

    US financial hegemony cannot end too soon, nor can the Western media’s casual acceptance of US brutality and criminality.

    Featured image: Alex Saab

     

    The post Saab Case Shows Western Media’s Casual Acceptance of US Atrocities appeared first on FAIR.

    This post was originally published on FAIR.

  • Afghanistan War Outcome: Hope for Sovereign Nations Fighting the Scourge of Neocolonial Imperialism

    Photo credit from the archives of Newsonline

    Exits of Netanyahu and Trump: chance to dial down Mideast tensions

    The Iraqi geopolitical analyst, Ali Fahim, recently said in an interview with The Tehran Times: “The arrival of [newly elected Iranian President] Ebrahim Raisi at the helm of power gives a great moral impetus to the resistance axis.” Further, with new administrations in the United States, Israel, and Iran, another opportunity presents itself to reinstate fully the 2015 multilateral nuclear agreement, as well as completely lift the US economic sanctions from Iran.

    Let us wait and see after Raisi is in power in August 2021. It is a fact that, since the Trump administration pulled out of the 2015 multilateral nuclear deal, tensions have been on the rise. One can legitimately suspect that the Trump pull-out had as its real intentions: first, to provoke Tehran; second to undo one of the only foreign policy achievements of the Obama administration, which was negotiated by John Kerry for the US. The Trump administration also used unfair economic sanctions on Iran as a squeeze for regime-change purposes. This was a complete fiasco: the Islamic Republic of Iran suffered but held together.

    As far as military tensions in the region, there are many countries besides Syria where conflicts between Iran-supported groups and US-supported proxies are simmering, or full blown. The US does its work, not only via Israel in the entire region, but also Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates in Yemen, and presently Turkey in Syria. Right now conflicts are active in Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Palestine, but something could ignite in Lebanon at any time.

    Photo credit from the archives of Newsonline

    Iran views itself as the lead supporter of the resistance movement, not only through its support for regional allies like Hezbollah and Bashar al-Assad, but also beyond the Middle-East, for Maduro in Venezuela. The upcoming Iranian administration does not hide its international ambition. For better or worse, Iran sees itself as a global leader of smaller nonaligned countries that are resisting US imperialism, be it Syria, Yemen, Palestine, Lebanon, or Venezuela. Even though Iran is completely different ideologically, it has replaced the leadership of Yugoslavia’s Tito or Cuba’s Castro. Both were not only Marxists but also leaders of the nonaligned movement during the Cold War, when the US and the USSR were competing to split the world in two. Now the dynamics have shifted because of China’s rising global influence, and the Iran Islamic Republic thinks it has a card to play in this complex geopolitical imbroglio.

    Photo credit from the archives of Newsonline

    In the US, Europe and Gulf States, Raisi has been categorized as a hardliner cleric and judge, but this gives Raisi more power than he will have as president. In Iran, major foreign policy issues are not merely up to the president to decide but a consensus process involving many. In the end such critical decisions are always signed off by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Khamenei has already indicated that he supports going back to the 2015 nuclear deal. During his electoral campaign, Raisi, who is close to Khamenei despite previous opposition, said that if elected he would uphold the 2015 landmark nuclear agreement.

    Photo Credit:  Gilbert Mercier

    Ottoman empire revival under Erdogan

    Turkey’s President, Recep Erdogan, often behaves as a modern day Sultan. He is shrewd and extremely ambitious. He fancies himself to be the global leader, politically and militarily, of Sunny Islam. Under Erdogan, Turkey has flexed its military muscles, either directly or through Syrian proxies, not only in Syria, but also in Libya, as well as in Turkey’s support for Qatar in the small Gulf State’s recent skirmish with Saudi Arabia. Erdogan thinks he now has a card to play in Afghanistan. More immediately and strategically, the serious issue on Erdogan’s plate is called Idlib.

    Photo credit from the archives of Newsonline

    The problem of the pocket of Idlib has to be resolved, and unfortunately, for all the civilian population that has been and will be in the crossfire, it can only be solved by a full-on military operation, with troops from Bashar al-Assad and Russia. Turkey is, of course, adamant about keeping a military presence and influence within Syria to prevent a complete Assad victory. Time will tell, but the war of attrition has to end. For this to happen, Russia has to commit to face Turkey from a military standpoint. If Russia is ready for a direct confrontation with Turkey, then Bashar al-Assad’s troops, and Russian forces bringing mainly logistic and air support, should prevail.

    What should make this easier is the fact Erdogan has overplayed his hand for quite some time. This includes his tense relationships with his supposed NATO allies, many of whom, including France, Greece and even Germany, would not mind having him out of NATO altogether.

    There are important factors that explain, not only why Erdogan is quite popular with Turks, but also why his position could become precarious. Erdogan is playing on the Turkish nostalgia for the Ottoman Empire.

    From one Empire to two others: the Sykes-Picot agreement

    To understand better this imperial dynamic, we must go back to the middle of World War I, when the Ottoman Empire was allied with Germany. In 1916, the Sykes-Picot secret agreement effectively sealed the fate of post World War I Middle-East. This British-French agreement, in expectation of a final victory, was a de-facto split of the Ottoman Empire. In the resulting colonial or imperial zones of influence, a euphemism for an Anglo-French control of the region, the British would get Palestine, Jordan, Iraq and the Gulf area, while France would take control of Syria and Lebanon. More than 100 years later, the misery created by this imperialist deal lingers in the entire region, from Palestine, with the 1948 English-blessed creation of the Zionist state of Israel, to Iraq. France put in place two protectorates in Syria and Lebanon, in which the respective populations did not fare much better. Even today, French governments still act as if they have a say in Lebanese affairs.

    Photo Credit from the archive Magharebia

    The weight of history and the nostalgia of 600 years of rule in the Middle-East are why some Turks — especially Erdogan — feel entitled to an intrusive role in the region. The unfortunate story of the Middle-East has been to go from one imperialism to another. With the American empire taking over in the mid-1950s, the only competition during the Cold War became the USSR. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US had carte blanche. It became more blunt about the exploitation of resources, regime-change policies and its role as the eternal champion of the sacred state of Israel. Quickly, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar became the US’ best friends in the Arab world. I have called this alliance between the West, Israel and the oil-rich Gulf states an unholy alliance. It is still at play, mainly against Iran.

    Photo Credit: David Stanley

    Since the collapse of the USSR, the US empire has tried to assert a worldwide hegemony by mainly two different approaches: support of autocratic regimes like those in the Gulf States, or pursuit of regime change policies to get rid of sovereign nations. This is what I have identified as engineering failed states: a doctrine at play in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Yemen. Often, Islam soldiers of fortune — called at first freedom fighters as in Afghanistan, or the so-called Free Syrian Army — have mutated down the line into ISIS terrorists. Once the mercenaries developed independent ambitions, they served a dual purpose: firstly, as tools of proxy wars; secondly as a justification for direct military interventions by the empire and its vassals. Since the US-led invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq the bottom line results have been the same: death and destruction. Tabula rasa of Iraq, Libya and Syria, with countries left in ruins, millions killed, and millions of others turned into refugees and scattered to the winds. The numbers are mind boggling in the sheer horrors they reflect. According to the remarkable non-partisan Brown University Costs of War project, since the start of the US-led so-called war on terror, post September 11, 2001, in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Pakistan and elsewhere the direct cost in people killed has been over 801,000. So far, the financial burden for US taxpayers has been $6.4 trillion.

    Photo credit from the archives of Newsonline

    Does Erdogan think he can do better than Alexander the Great with Afghans?

    Apparently Erdogan’s imperial ambitions reach as far as the land of the Pashtuns. The Taliban already control about 85 percent of Afghanistan. While most NATO troops have either left or are in the process of doing so, Erdogan has volunteered Turkish troops to secure Kabul’s airport. Some in the Middle-East speculate, rightly or wrongly, that Erdogan plans to send to Afghanistan some of his available Syrian mercenaries, like those he has used in Libya. Even if this is rubber stamped by regional powers like Pakistan or Iran, which it won’t be, such a direct or proxy occupation will fail. If Turkish or Syrian mercenaries, or any other foreign proxies for that matter, try to get in the way of the Taliban, they will be shredded to bits.

    Does Erdogan think he is a modern day version of Alexander the Great? This is plainly laughable! The Taliban are resuming control of Afghanistan, and that is the reality. Something Afghans agree upon is that they want all occupying foreigners out. This will include Turkish and Syrian mercenaries.

    Photo Credit:  Gilbert Mercier

    Post Netanyahu Israel: more of the same for Palestinians?

    For the Palestinians living either in Gaza or in the occupied territories, one element that has changed in Israel is that Netanyahu is no longer in power. It would be naive to think that the new Israeli administration will be less Zionist in its support for Jewish settlers expanding their occupation of Palestinian land, but we might see a small shift, more like a pause in Israel’s bellicose behavior.

    Lebanon on the brink: opportunity for Israel to attack Hezbollah?

    Despite Lebanon’s dreadful political and economic situation, Israel would be ill advised to consider any military action. Hezbollah is a formidable fighting force of 70,000 men, who have been battle hardened for almost a decade in Syria. Vis a vis Iran, a direct aggression of Israel is even less likely. With Trump gone, it seems that Israel’s hawks have missed out on that opportunity. Furthermore, it would be borderline suicidal for the Jewish state to open up many potential fronts at once against Hezbollah, Hamas, and Bashar al-Assad’s army. All of them would have the backing and logistic support of Iran.

    Once the 2015 nuclear agreement is in force again, with the Biden administration, the tensions in the region should significantly decrease. It is probable that in the new negotiations, Iran will request that all the US economic sanctions, which were put in place by the Trump administration, be lifted.

    Photo credit from Resolute Support Media archive

    Neocolonial imperialism: a scourge that can be defeated

    One thing about US administrations that has remained constant pretty much since the end of World War II is an almost absolute continuity in foreign policy. From Bush to Obama, Obama to Trump, and now Trump to Biden, it hardly matters if the US president is a Democrat or Republican. The cornerstone of foreign policy is to maintain, and preferably increase, US hegemony by any means necessary. This assertion of US imperial domination, with help from its NATO vassals, can be blunt like it was with Trump, or more hypocritical with a pseudo humanitarian narrative as during the Obama era.

    The imperatives of military and economic dominance have been at the core of US policies, and it is doubtful that this could easily change. Mohammed bin-Salman‘s war in Yemen is part of this scenario. Some naively thought MBS would be pushed aside by the Biden administration. The clout of the Saudis remained intact, however, despite the CIA report on the gruesome assassination of a Washington Post journalist in Turkey. All evidence pointed to bin-Salman, but he was not pushed aside by his father. Under Biden, MBS is still Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince, and de-facto autocratic ruler. The Saudis’ oil and money still have considerable influence in Washington.

    The Saudis understand very well that, since the 1970s, their real geopolitical power has resided in the way they can impact global oil prices. They can still make the barrel price go up or down to serve specific geopolitical interests. For example, recently the Saudis tried to help the US regime change policy in Venezuela by flooding the global market to make oil prices crash. Saudi Arabia and its United Arab Emirates ally have used the black gold as an economic weapon countless times, and very effectively.

    The great appetite of the Saudis for expensive weapons systems is another reason why they have a lot of weight in Washington and elsewhere. How can one oppose the will of a major client of the corporate merchants of death of the military-industrial complex?

    Photo Credit from archive of DVIDSHUB

    History will eventually record the 20-year Afghanistan war as a defeat and perhaps the beginning of the end for the US empire that established its global dominance aspiration in 1945. People from countries like Yemen, Palestine, as well as Mali, Kashmir, and even Haiti, who are fighting against an occupation of their lands, respectively, by the imperial little helpers Saudi Arabia, Israel, France, India and the United Nations, should find hope in what is going on in Afghanistan. My News Junkie Post partner Dady Chery has explained the mechanics of it brilliantly in her book, We Have Dared to Be Free. Yes, occupiers of all stripes can be defeated! No, small sovereign nations or tribes should not despair! The 20-year US-NATO folly in Afghanistan is about to end. The real outcome is a victory of the Pashtuns-Taliban that is entirely against all odds. It is a victory against the most powerful military alliance ever assembled in history. Yemenites, Palestinians, Tuaregs, Kashmiris, Haitians and other proud people, fighting from different form of neocolonial occupations, should find inspiration from it. It can be done!

    Photo Credit from the archive of Antonio Marin Segovia

    The post Afghanistan War Outcome: Hope for Sovereign Nations Fighting the Scourge of Neocolonial Imperialism first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • As case of stolen Venezuelan gold reaches court, the UK still backs coup leader Juan Guaidó

    As The Canary has extensively reported, since January 2019 Venezuela has been subjected to a US-backed coup attempt. The putsch began when a previously unknown member of Venezuela’s legislature declared himself ‘interim president’. He was quickly recognized as the oil rich South American country’s legitimate leader by the US and most of its Latin American and Western European allies, including the UK government of then-prime minister Theresa May.

    As part of the coup attempt, the Bank of England unilaterally froze assets belonging to Venezuela. But the beleaguered nation will soon have the opportunity to recoup its stolen property in court. And as the case’s hearing approaches, the UK government has made one last desperate move. Evidently, it hopes to salvage whatever’s left of its international credibility by avoiding the likely embarrassment of having to hand it back to its rightful owner.

    A sycophantic gesture that backfired bigtime

    On 19 July, the UK government issued a statement reconfirming its support for Venezuelan coup attempt leader Juan Guaidó. It appears that the move could be intended to bolster the UK’s position ahead of a legal bid by the Venezuelan Central Bank (BCV in its Spanish initials). Acting on behalf of the democratically-elected government of Nicolás Maduro, the BCV seeks the repatriation of gold held by the Bank of England. Reports differ on the exact value, though estimates usually fall within the range of just below $1bn to $1.8bn. Legal representatives from both sides appeared in court shortly before this report went to press.

    About a month after the coup attempt was launched, in the face of growing sanctions and US hostility, the Venezuelan government requested a return of the gold to Venezuela. However, the Bank of England froze the assets on the spurious basis that the Maduro government was no longer the rightful government of Venezuela. The UK government then pressured the Bank of England into instead granting access to the funds to Guaidó. This move was based on its recognition of him as Venezuela’s rightful leader. Experts in international affairs quickly pointed out that the UK’s action flies in the face international norms of behavior.

    Moreover, just a few months after the beginning of the coup attempt, it became increasingly clear that Guaidó had failed to overthrow the government. As the months turned into years, Guaidó began to cut an increasingly pathetic figure. And since he never seized the reins of the Venezuelan state, his political faction slowly degenerated into a shadow government with no real power. The BCV, meanwhile, filed a lawsuit against the Bank of England in May 2020. As part of the suit, it requests the return of the roughly 14 tonnes of gold to Venezuela. But so far, the Bank of England has refused to comply, precipitating a protracted court case.

    Major victory for the BCV in court of appeal

    In October 2020, the BCV won a major victory. A UK court of appeal overturned a decision that had earlier ruled that UK recognition of Guaidó constituted legitimate grounds for not handing the government over to the Maduro government. Now, it looks like the BCV is on the verge of outright victory. And the significance of this cannot be overstated; the gold represents roughly 15% of Venezuela’s entire foreign currency reserves.

    As part of its case, BCV’s lawyers argue that the Venezuelan government needs these funds in order to strengthen the country’s response to the  coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic and increase investment in its health service. This seems perfectly reasonable, not least because Venezuela has struggled with both these goals in the face of crushing US sanctions and an economic crisis that has lasted roughly seven years. In February, as a result of these factors, United Nations rapporteur Alena Douhan, an expert on unilateral coercive measures, called on the UK and other European states to “unfreeze assets of the Venezuela Central Bank”.

    UK’s isolation amidst growing international admission that coup attempt has failed

    The UK’s position with respect to the coup attempt, meanwhile, has become increasingly desperate and isolated. As The Canary reported in January, the European Union (EU) withdrew its recognition of Guaidó as Venezuela’s legitimate head of state. This was because his party had boycotted elections to the National Assembly, Venezuela’s legislature, and therefore he no longer even held a seat in the body.

    Guaidó’s claim to the presidency was based on a provision of the Venezuelan constitution that says that the head of the National Assembly assumes the presidency in the case of a breakdown in democracy. Though this claim was itself highly dubious in the first place, the EU at least had the decency to follow the logic to its natural conclusion. And so, because Guaidó was no longer even a member of the National Assembly, let alone its leader, it concluded that it could no longer support his claim to the presidency.

    This latest saga exposes how the UK’s position on Venezuela has become an increasing embarrassment. Clearly, a return of the gold to its rightful owner would be a major victory for national sovereignty and international norms of behavior, as well as another nail in the coffin of the Tory government’s credibility when it comes to international affairs.

    Featured image via Wikimedia Commons – Hossein Zohrevand and Flickr – Dark Dwarf

    By Peter Bolton

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • EU Mission Evaluates Venezuela Electoral Team

    The European Union (EU) has sent an “exploratory mission” to Venezuela to assess social and political conditions in the country.

    The 15-day mission is similarly charged with judging electoral guarantees and the “utility, convenience and viability” of adding an EU delegation to the typically ample electoral observer teams for the November 21 “mega-elections,” in which more than 100 political parties are vying to elect over 3000 public regional and local officials.

    The delegation is considered a further step in smoothing relations between the Caribbean country and the European bloc, with EU Foreign Policy Chief Josep Borrell highlighting a “possible political opening in Venezuela.”

    The post EU Mission Evaluates Venezuela Electoral Team appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Media Completely Ignore American Secret Agent’s Trial For Terrorism In Venezuela

    Matthew John Heath was arrested in September outside Amuay and Cardon oil refineries in possession of a submachine gun, a grenade launcher, C4 explosives, a satellite phone and bricks of $20 bills. The Venezuelan government also alleges that he was found carrying a small coin or badge that CIA employees use to prove their identity to one another without raising suspicions. On Wednesday, Heath pled not guilty to all charges.

    The post Media Completely Ignore American Secret Agent’s Trial For Terrorism In Venezuela appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • ALBA: Towards A People’s Climate Conference

    Today, the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA-TCP) held a meeting of Environment Ministers of its member states to plan for a people’s climate summit that will draw up proposals for the UN Climate Change Conference (COP26) in November. Meeting participants agreed to convene in Venezuela, which will be followed by a people’s conference in Cochabamba, Bolivia.

    The post ALBA: Towards A People’s Climate Conference appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Alex Saab Case Exposes Lawlessness Of The United States

    Dan Kovalik, lawyer, human rights activist and pacifist, asserted that “the story of Alex Saab is very important because it really exposes the lawlessness of the United States. The US put pressure on Cabo Verde to arrest, detain and extradite Alex Saab for the crime of helping Venezuela overcome sanctions that are in themselves illegal.”

    The post Alex Saab Case Exposes Lawlessness Of The United States appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Prosecution Of Alex Saab Unjust, Illegal And Indefensible

    José António Dos Reis, former minister in Cape Verde, founder of the country’s Movement for Democracy (MPD) ruling political party, and close to the current government, harshly criticized Prime Minister Ulisses Correia e Silva (of the same political party) and the judicial authorities of Cape Verde for the illegal detention and abduction of the Venezuelan diplomat Alex Saab.

    In his article entitled “The Case of Alex Saab: Cape Verde Between Ambiguity and Schizophrenia” published by the online media outlet Santiago Magazine, the politician described the judicial process as “unjust, illegal, and indefensible,” highlighting the illegalities committed by the Cape Verdean judicial police in the arrest of the Special Diplomatic Envoy of Venezuela.

    The post Prosecution Of Alex Saab Unjust, Illegal And Indefensible appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Lifting sanctions on Venezuela could signal regime change by different means

    Western governments have recently expressed a willingness to “review” sanctions against Venezuela’s democratically elected government. Of course, this should be welcomed given the huge harm that sanctions have caused to Venezuela’s civilian population. But, as always, we must be skeptical of these governments’ motives. This latest move could simply be the next chapter in the ongoing regime change saga.

    Lifting sanctions as prelude to negotiations

    On 25 June, the US, Canada, and the European Union (EU) indicated they’d potentially be willing to lift sanctions against Venezuela as part of negotiations with president Nicolás Maduro’s government. US secretary of state Antony Blinken, Canadian minister of foreign affairs Marc Garneau and EU high representative for foreign affairs Josep Borrell said in a joint statement that sanctions could be lifted in exchange for restoring “the country’s institutions” and “credible, inclusive and transparent local, parliamentary, and presidential elections”.

    The statement follows meetings between Juan Guaidó’s representatives and Washington officials on 23 June. Guaidó is the leader of the attempted coup against Maduro. Meetings were held with Biden administration personnel from the White House, the State Department, the Treasury, and several congress members. Amongst the latter were senators Marco Rubio and Robert Menendez, both of whom are known for their hardline stance against the US’s adversaries in Latin America.

    Guaidó finally relenting on negotiations, which government supported all along

    As The Canary reported in May 2021, Guaidó indicated willingness to enter into negotiations last month. Much of the corporate-owned media characterized this as some kind of generosity on his part. But Maduro’s government has, in fact, been willing to negotiate ever since the coup attempt began in January 2018. Guaidó’s about-face on the issue appears to be a result of his weakened position.

    As The Canary also reported, in January 2021 the EU announced that it could no longer recognize Guaidó as Venezuela’s ‘interim president’. This was because his party boycotted the National Assembly elections. Therefore he couldn’t remain head of parliament, since he didn’t even hold a seat.

    A welcome prospect

    To be sure, an end to sanctions should be welcomed. Various rounds of US sanctions have been put in place over the years. But in 2019, Washington implemented what have proven to be the most punishing sanctions of all. These were placed on Venezuela’s state oil company Petroleum of Venezuela (better known by its Spanish initials PDVSA).

    As The Canary has already pointed out, as of March 2020 US sanctions had directly led to the deaths of around 100,000 people. That’s according to United Nations special rapporteur for Venezuela Alfred de Zayas. This figure would almost certainly need to be revised significantly as of June 2021, not least because the US weaponized the coronavirus pandemic to ramp up regime change efforts against Venezuela.

    But is it merely a new tactic from regime change?

    This development does not in any way mean that Guaidó’s faction, and its backers in Washington, plan on abandoning regime change. Rather, it represents a change of tack to adapt their coup strategy to new realities on the ground. For instance, the reference to demanding “transparent” elections is revealing. Because what Washington means by “transparent” is an election presided over by the US and its internal allies.

    The basis for this demand is the claim that the Maduro government can’t be trusted to oversee fair elections. The US denounced the 2018 presidential election, for example, as “an insult to democracy”. Washington also claims that the Maduro government controls the country’s electoral oversight body, the National Electoral Council (CNE). The reality, however, is that it’s historically been a multi-party body. And it’s been filled with figures from both the governing United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) and opposition parties since its formation.

    The US’s sordid record of electoral interference

    Moreover, an election presided over by the US and its favored political factions can hardly be considered more trustworthy than one overseen by the CNE. As The Canary has previously reported, Washington has interfered in over 80 elections in more than 40 countries since the end of World War II. Needless to say, given its supposed status as the US’s ‘backyard’, Latin America has been particularly at the receiving end of this electoral meddling. In 1943, for example, the US interfered in elections in Argentina. It even falsely accused left populist candidate Juan Peron of complicity with Nazi Germany.

    The figure of over 80 cases of electoral meddling doesn’t even include cases of direct US-backed regime change, of which there are many examples in Latin America. These include:

    Clearly if there’s anyone that can’t be trusted to oversee a fair election in Latin America, it’s the US itself. Since Guaidó is openly allying himself with a country with such a track record, and until recently one of the most reactionary administrations in US history, his own faction lacks credibility by association.

    Using Venezuela’s civilian population as disposable pawns in a sick game of Russian roulette

    Again, any prospect of lifting the sanctions is welcome. But the reality is that Venezuela’s government isn’t obligated to offer concessions to Guaidó and his puppet masters in Washington. On the contrary, it’s perfectly entitled to demand that sanctions be lifted unilaterally as a condition to entering into dialogue. Because sanctions are, and always have been, a cynical tool to blackmail a democratic government. Mass murder of a civilian population has been used as a bargaining chip. And that truly reveals who the hostile parties are in this increasingly desperate coup attempt, and the depths of depravity to which they’re willing to stoop.

    Featured image via Flickr – Fibonacci Blue

    By Peter Bolton

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • How A US Congressman Took On The US Blockade Against Venezuela

    On a cold winter day in February 2019, activists gathered in downtown Northampton, Massachusetts, to denounce the attempted US-backed coup in Venezuela. More than two years later, in the wake of ongoing rallies and discussions with Democratic Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts, activists gained some ground as the congressman tweeted an open letter to President Joe Biden on June 14 in which he called on the president to end “all secondary and sectoral sanctions” against Venezuela. The letter stated:

    “While US officials debate the sanctions policy in Washington, for people in Venezuela the ongoing crisis is a life-and-death matter. … I have never believed that sanctions should be used to punish whole populations for the actions of their leaders or to bludgeon an adversary into submission.

    The post How A US Congressman Took On The US Blockade Against Venezuela appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Anti-Imperialists Convene in Venezuela for Carabobo Bicentennial Congress

    Venezuela has launched a bold call for unity among the left at the International Bicentennial Congress of the Peoples of the World, taking place this week in Caracas, June 21st to 24th. Conceived by worker-president Nicolás Maduro Moros, the Congress is a socialist and a worldwide initiative. It proposes the Anti-Imperialist Platform of the Working Class. The Bicentennial celebrates the victory of Simon Bolivar’s armies over the royal troops of Madrid in the territory that became Venezuela.

    The post Anti-Imperialists Convene in Venezuela for Carabobo Bicentennial Congress appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.