radiofree.asia

Category: Venezuela

  • New Revelations Confirm Illegality Of The Extradition And Arrest Of Saab

    In his new memoir, Sacred Oath, former US Defense Secretary, Mark Esper, who served under President Donald Trump at the time of the arrest of Alex Saab in Cape Verde, effectively admits that the White House was quite aware of the fact that Saab was a diplomat at the time of his capture.

    As Esper writes, “At Maduro’s direction, Saab was reportedly on special assignment to negotiate a deal with Iran for Venezuela to receive more fuel, food, and medical supplies. Saab was Maduro’s long standing point man when it came to crafting the economic deals and other transactions that were keeping the regime afloat*.*” Esper’s recognition that Alex Saab was “on special assignment” and negotiated economic deals for Venezuela is a tacit recognition of Saab’s diplomatic status. 

    The post New Revelations Confirm Illegality Of The Extradition And Arrest Of Saab appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Venezuela and Iran sign 20-year cooperation plan, Maduro pledges joint ‘anti-imperialist struggle’

    Venezuela’s President Nicolás Maduro took a historic trip to Iran and announced a 20-year cooperation agreement, pledging to more closely integrate the countries’ economies and work together in a joint “anti-imperialist struggle for a better world, of international respect and peace, without hegemonies.”

    Maduro signed the pact with Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi in Tehran on June 11. It was described by the Venezuelan and Iranian governments as a “partnership agreement” and “cooperation agreement.”

    The deal involves collaboration in science, technology, agriculture, oil and gas, petrochemicals, tourism, and culture, according to Tehran’s Press TV.

    The post Venezuela and Iran sign 20-year cooperation plan, Maduro pledges joint ‘anti-imperialist struggle’ appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Summit of the Americas: Isn’t it a dud?

    The Empire went to assert its position in the Latin America. But it has flopped. CNN headlined: “Snubs, from key leaders at Summit of the Americas reveal Biden’s struggle to assert US leadership in its neighborhood”. It’s a setback for the Empire!

    Today, it’s not an unimaginable development in the region.

    The IX Summit of the Americas has kicked off in Los Angeles on June 6, 2022; and US President Mr. Biden has formally inaugurated the summit on June 9, 2022.

    “Yet”, CNN said, “the absences of the presidents of Mexico, El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala are still notable since the United States has worked to cultivate those leaders as partners on immigration, an issue that looms as a political liability for Biden.”

    The summit, since its planning, was under the shadow of failure.

    The Empire planned to organize the summit of what it calls the Americas.

    But, it began by excluding many, significant parts of the Americas.

    Who were excluded? The Empire excluded its old foe – Cuba. And, new foes of the Empire emerged in the continent: Venezuela, Nicaragua.

    The Empire didn’t imagine that there would be such a reaction to its exclusion-plan.

    The theme of the summit is “Building a sustainable, resilient and equitable future”.

    But, with exclusion, with imposition of self-formulated will on others, how far a sustainable, equitable and resilient future can be built? Anything sustainable requires participation of all concerned. Anything equitable requires space for participation of all related parties. Without sustainable and equitable approach nothing can be resilient.

    How can a continent or two continents move with an equitable approach if countries are excluded, and dictated? And, in Latin America, having such an approach without participation of Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua is beyond imagination.

    With dictation, with treating countries as subjects in Latin America, should one today imagine that an all inclusive sustainable path or model be accepted? Lackeys can accept it. But, today’s Latin America is different than half-a-century ago, although many dream to have a Latin America cowed down. But, the reality today is not that.

    The summit had to brace its failure: Mexico’s President Andrés Manuel López Obrador denied to be lackey of the Empire. He declined to join the summit. López Obrador said:

    I am not going to the summit because not all the countries of America are invited and I believe in the need to change the policy that has been imposed for centuries, exclusion, wanting to dominate for no reason.

    What is López Obrador’s position? All countries must have opportunity to join the summit on an equal footing. Is it possible to consider the argument useless, irrational? The Empire’s position turned out as irrational, baseless.

    The Mexican President pointed out:

    [T]here cannot be a Summit of the Americas if all the countries of the American continent do not participate.

    He said there can be a summit excluding many, but that would be “to continue with the old policy of interventionism, of lack of respect for nations and their peoples”.

    The Empire’s choice was the second one.

    Thus it was none but the Empire that has undercut the initiative.

    The summit plans to have an approach on health care. But, the document is full with neo-liberalism. Neo-liberalism doesn’t serve people.

    In the area of health care, Cuba is exemplary. Does it sound rational that someone plans to have an approach for people’s health, and peoples’ health across Latin America, but excludes Cuba?

    Cuba’s public health care system stands as an example. It’s far, far advanced, well-organized, well-managed and people-oriented than many, many countries, many advanced, resourceful countries. Denying this fact today is nothing but making oneself a fool.

    The Empire can compare the ways it, the Empire, and Cuba, handled the pandemic. If someone keeps in mind the resource-gap between these two countries, Cuba and the Empire, the failure of the Empire and the success of Cuba will stand as unbelievable fact.

    If someone keeps in mind the fact that Cuba was obstructed in procuring syringes and raw materials for Covid-fighting-vaccine, and Cuba has succeeded in facing the pandemic, then, the Cuba-fact may sound mythical. But, the undeniable reality is: Fidel’s Cuba has done it.

    Cuba’s President Miguel Diaz-Canal said:

    [I]n no case will I attend. [F]rom the beginning, the United States government conceived that the Summit of the Americas will not be inclusive.

    Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro said:

    [W]e have a clear path: unity, inclusion, diversity, democracy, and the right to build our own destiny. We reject the claims of excluding and discriminating against peoples at the Summit of the Americas.

    Daniel Ortega, President of Nicaragua, said:

    We are not interested in being at that summit.

    Luis Arce, President of Bolivia, said:

    [A] Summit of the Americas that excludes American countries will not be a full Summit of the Americas.” He reaffirmed: “[I]f the exclusion of sister nations persists, I will not participate in it.

    Xiomara Castro, President of Honduras, said:

    I will attend the Summit only if all the countries of the Americas are invited without exception.

    The ruptured effort also faced opposition from The Caribbean Community (Caricom), the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of our America-Peoples Trade Treaty (ALBA-TCP), the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (Celac).

    The summit is, thus, standing as a sign of the Empire’s ruptured leadership in the region. It shows that those days are gone, when the Empire was the sole authority. Now, questions are being raised, defiance is being voiced. Countries, not only a single country, Cuba, in Latin America now dare to distance themselves from the Empire. It’s a challenge to the Empire.

    It’s not utterances by a number of state-persons. It’s a different dynamics that has grown in the region. Years of peoples’ political struggles in countries in the region are a basic factor behind this dynamic; and peoples in those countries have learned from their experiences: exploitation by the Empire, brutality, assassinations and mass murders, backing rightist groups and coup-masters, interventions, imposition of undemocratic/authoritarian regimes. These experiences were long, and for many decades. Eduardo Galeano’s The Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage of a Continent is enough to narrate the Empire’s story in Latin America. The rupture thus went on. It went on in the societies and politics in Latin America. Peoples’ politics are getting manifested in a number of state machines there in the continent.

    This rupture, a rupture in the Empire’s leadership in the region, is a show of the Empire’s declining influence. This trend, decline in influence, will gather strength, which means people’s struggles will gain strength, and that will hopefully get reflected in states.

    The Los Angeles summit will have fora, and documents/declarations, such as Civil Society Forum and Young Americas Forum, and Americas Partnership for Economic Prosperity, Action Plan on Health and Resilience in the Americas, and Los Angeles Declaration on Migration.

    But with neo-liberalism, which is unbridled capitalism, with imperialist interest dominating entire activities and programs, the “civil” society, the “young” group, the “partnership” can bring nothing but expansion of imperialist interest and control. Not dignity, but dictation will prevail; not prosperity but exploitation will expand.

    Cuba, the country standing with dignity, has already said: It’s part of effort to apply the Monroe Doctrine.

    “What our region demands”, said Cuban Foreign Ministry, “is cooperation, not exclusion; solidarity, not meanness; respect, not arrogance; sovereignty and self-determination, not subordination.”

    That’s the problem with imperialist interest – meanness, arrogance, subordination. Imperialism doesn’t allow cooperation, solidarity, respect, dignity, sovereignty, self-determination.

    Otherwise, it wouldn’t have planned the summit arbitrarily as if it’s the sole holder of the meterstick of democracy and autocracy. It appears the Empire is the sole master for defining democracy, electoral process, legitimacy. But reality, a much different reality, will emerge tomorrow, as peoples in countries are learning from their experiences, as info on imperialism financed “democracy” programs are getting exposed at an increasing rate, as peoples in countries are increasingly opposing imperialist designs.

    For the Empire, this ruptured summit will stand as a symbol of its decreasing power of leadership in the region.

    It’s already facing competition from China in the region. It wouldn’t be easy to press out China now. Neither is it a quick task nor a few billion dollars’ job. The summit with assurances of a few billions of dollars, thus, will stand as a symbol of the Empire’s decline in a region which it considers as its backyard.

    The post Summit of the Americas: Isn’t it a dud? first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • For the Peoples of our Region, the Failure of Biden’s Summit of the Americas Would be a Welcome Event

    I applaud the decision by Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador not to attend this week’s so-called Summit of the Americas in Los Angeles and hope that by Wednesday a majority of the nations in our region would have joined him. However, I am hoping that unlike President Lopez Obrador who is still sending the Mexican foreign minister, other nations demonstrate that their dignity cannot be coerced and stay away completely. Why do I take this position?

    If the threat by the Biden Administration as host of the Summit not to invite Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela, all sovereign nations in the Americas’ region, was not outrageous enough, the announced rationale that the administration did not invite these nations because of their human rights record and authoritarian governance is an absurd indignity that cannot be ignored.

    The post For the Peoples of our Region, the Failure of Biden’s Summit of the Americas Would be a Welcome Event appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • For the Peoples of our Region, the Failure of Biden’s Summit of the Americas Would be a Welcome Event

    The Summit of the Americas is not the property of the host nation. The U.S. has no right to exclude, Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela, but has done so in disregard of their sovereignty. The U.S. is not fit to judge others or to be responsible for bringing nations together. Every leader in the hemisphere should boycott what has become a farcical event.

    I applaud the decision by Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador not to attend this week’s so-called Summit of the Americas in Los Angeles and hope that by Wednesday a majority of the nations in our region would have joined him. However, I am hoping that unlike President Lopez Obrador who is still sending the Mexican foreign minister, other nations demonstrate that their dignity cannot be coerced and stay away completely. Why do I take this position?

    If the threat by the Biden Administration as host of the Summit not to invite Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela, all sovereign nations in the Americas’ region, was not outrageous enough, the announced rationale that the administration did not invite these nations because of their human rights record and authoritarian governance is an absurd indignity that cannot be ignored.

    I firmly believe that the U.S. should not be allowed to subvert, degrade, and humiliate nations and the peoples of our region with impunity!  A line of demarcation must be drawn between the nations and peoples who represent democracy and life and the parasitic hegemon to the North which can only offer dependence and death. The U.S. has made its choice that is reflected in its public documents. “Full spectrum dominance,” is its stated goal. In other words – waging war against the peoples of our regions and, indeed, the world to maintain global hegemony. It has chosen war, we must choose resistance – on that, there can be no compromise!

    The peoples of our region understand that. It is historically imperative that the representatives of the states in our region come to terms with that and commit to resistance and solidarity with the states that are experiencing the most intense pressure from empire. The rhetorical commitment to Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela is not enough. The people want actions that go beyond mere denunciations of imperialism. The people are ready to fight.

    And part of this fight includes the ideological war of position. We cannot allow the U.S. to obscure its murderous history by dressing that history up in pretty language about human rights.

    The idea that the U.S., or any Western nation for that matter, involved in the ongoing imperialist project, could seriously see itself as a protector of human rights is bizarre and dangerous, and must be countered. The fact that the U.S. will still attempt to advance this fiction reflects either the height of arrogance or a society and administration caught in the grip of a collective national psychosis. I am convinced it is both, but more on that later.

    A cognitive rupture from objective reality, the inability to locate oneself in relationship to other human beings individually and collectively in the material world are all symptoms of severe mental derangement. Yet, it appears that this is the condition that structures the psychic make-up of all of the leaders of the U.S. and the collective West.

    It is what I have referred to as the psychopathology of white supremacy:

    A racialized narcissistic cognitive disorder that centers so-called white people’s and European civilization and renders the afflicted with an inability to perceive objective reality in the same way as others. This affliction is not reducible to the race of so-called whites but can affect all those who have come in contact with the ideological and cultural mechanisms of the Pan-European colonial project.

    How else can you explain the self-perceptions of the U.S. and West, responsible for the most horrific crimes against humanity in the annuals of human history from genocide, slavery, world wars, the European, African and Indigenous holocausts, wars and subversion since 1945 that have resulted in over 30 million lives lost – but then assert their innocence, moral superiority and right to define the content and range of human rights?

    Aileen Teague of the Quincy Institute points out that the U.S. position on disinviting nations to the Summit of the Americas because of their alleged “authoritarian governance,” is “hypocritical” and “inconsistent,” noting the U.S. historical support for Latin American dictators when convenient for US policy.

    Yet is it really hypothetical or inconsistent? I think not. U.S. policymakers are operating from an ethical and philosophical framework that informed Western colonial practice in which racialized humanity became divided between those who were placed into the category of “humans” which was constitutive of the historically expanded category of “white” in relationship to everyone else who was “not white,” and therefore, not fully human.

    The “others” during the colonial conquest literally did not have any rights that Europeans were bound to recognize and respect from land rights to their very lives. Consequently, for European colonialists they did not perceive any ethical contradictions in their treatment of the “others” and did not judge themselves as deviating from their principles and values. This is what so many non-Europeans do not understand. When Europeans speak to their “traditional values,” it must be understood that those values mean we – the colonized and exploited non-Europeans are not recognized in our full humanity.

    Is there any other way to explain the impressive solidarity among “white peoples” on Ukraine in contrast to the tragedies of Yemen, the six million dead in the Congo, Iraq – the list goes on.

    That is why it was so correct for the Black Alliance for Peace (BAP) to call for a boycott of the Summit of the Americas by all of the states in our region. BAP argued that the U.S. had no moral or political standing to host this gathering because it has consistently demonstrated that it did not respect the principles of self-determination and national sovereignty in the region. But even more importantly, it did not respect the lives of the people of this region.

    A boycott is only the minimum that should be done. However, we understand it will be difficult because we know the vindictiveness of the gringo hegemon and the lengths it will go to assert its vicious domination. In the arrogance that is typical of the colonial white supremacist mindset, the Biden White House asserts that the “summit will be successful no matter who attends.”

    Yet, if Biden is sitting there by himself, no manner of will or the power to define, will avoid the obvious conclusion that the world had changed, and with that change, the balance of power away from the U.S.

    And the people say – let it be done!

    The post For the Peoples of our Region, the Failure of Biden’s Summit of the Americas Would be a Welcome Event first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Latin American Nations Skip Summit of Americas for Excluding Cuba and Venezuela

    Top leaders from Mexico, Bolivia, Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador are all absent from the ninth Summit of the Americas in Los Angeles. Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador announced he would boycott the conference after the U.S. said it would not invite Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua. We speak with historian Alejandro Velasco and Roberto Lovato, award-winning Salvadoran American journalist and author, who calls the conference ​​”a failure of hemispheric proportions and a global embarrassment for the United States and for the Biden administration.” Lovato calls the Biden administration’s condemnation of some countries as anti-democratic hypocritical and says the absence of so many Latin American countries represents a decline in U.S. hegemony.

    TRANSCRIPT

    This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

    AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman, with Juan González, as we turn now to Los Angeles, where leaders from across the Western Hemisphere have gathered for the ninth Summit of the Americas the first time the United States is hosting the summit since 1994. And it’s the first summit since the pandemic.

    Migration and displacement are at the center of the discussions, with the United States leading efforts to prevent asylum seekers from reaching its southern border with Mexico. Vice President Kamala Harris Tuesday announced $1.9 billion in new private investment funding to Central American nations, calling it an attempt to stem migration from the region. The money is meant to so-called boost job opportunities for people to be able to stay in their home countries. But critics argue U.S. aid is rarely used to improve living conditions in Central America and other regions, fuels government corruption, is instead allocated to law enforcement and the militarization of borders.

    Coinciding with the start of the Summit of the Americas, a caravan of thousands of asylum seekers departed the southern Mexican city of Tapachula on Monday. This is an asylum seeker from Colombia.

    ROBINSON REYES: [translated] God willing, to the United States, God willing.

    REPORTER: [translated] Why are you in this caravan?

    ROBINSON REYES: [translated] Brother, we’ve been here for almost a month, and they haven’t solved anything regarding the humanitarian visa. We want a future for our family. We are not violent. We just want a better future for our families.

    REPORTER: [translated] Are you aware that the Summit of Americas is being held?

    ROBINSON REYES: [translated] Yes, sir. That’s why we went out today. Truth is, it’s complicated, my friend. We just want them to give us permission to cross Mexico without any problems.

    AMY GOODMAN: Others in the caravan are from Venezuela and Cuba, two nations hurt by U.S. economic sanctions. This comes as the leaders of a number of Latin American countries have announced they will not attend the Summit of the Americas due to the U.S. refusal to invite Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela. On Monday, Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador announced he would boycott the talks. And the presidents of Bolivia, Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador have also said they will not attend the summit. This is Mexican President AMLO.

    PRESIDENT ANDRÉS MANUEL LÓPEZ OBRADOR: [translated] I believe in the need to change the policy imposed for centuries of exclusion, of wanting to dominate without any reason and not respecting each country’s sovereignty and independence. There cannot be a Summit of the Americas if all the American continent countries do not participate.

    AMY GOODMAN: Meanwhile, President Biden and far-right Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro are set to meet for the first time at the summit. Bolsonaro has echoed Trump-fueled, unfounded claims that cast doubt on the legitimacy of Biden’s 2020 election victory.

    For more, we’re joined by two guests. Roberto Lovato is an award-winning Salvadoran American journalist, author of Unforgetting: A Memoir of Family, Migration, Gangs, and Revolution in the Americas. He’s participating in the alternative, grassroots People’s Summit for Democracy in L.A.. And in New York, Alejandro Velasco is with us, Venezuelan American associate professor at NYU, where he’s a historian of modern Latin America, former executive editor of the NACLA Report on the Americas and the author of __Barrio Rising: Urban Popular Politics and the Making of Modern Venezuela_.

    Welcome to both of you coming back to Democracy Now! I wanted to begin with Alejandro. So, you have this summit, the first since the pandemic, where the Biden administration laid down the rule: no Venezuela, Cuba or Nicaragua at the summit. And so country after country is boycotting. They’ll have low-level people there, but the presidents of Bolivia, of El Salvador, of Honduras, of Mexico — which is a huge blow to President Biden — are now saying they won’t go. Talk about the significance of this and the exclusion of these countries.

    ALEJANDRO VELASCO: Right. Well, I mean, in large part, what it demonstrates is what I would like to call an unexpected — or, an unsurprising but disappointing continuation of policy of the U.S. towards Latin America. I mean, throughout the history of the Summit of the Americas, going to 1994, the United States has really used this as a way to either drive wedges between itself and the region or, as the region turned left over the course of the early part of the 21st century, in the early 2000s, the region used this as an opportunity to create distance from the United States. And so, the fact that there are these tensions between Latin America and the United States in the context of the summit is not surprising.

    However, what is surprising is the extent to which countries like Mexico, as you mentioned, are taking a very strong stand in boycotting and insisting, especially given the magnitude of bilateral relation issues that are at stake. I should also mention that even though some countries are attending, like Chile, with its new president, leftist President Gabriel Boric, Boric has said that he’s doing so under protest, and he’s going to indicate, and loudly, that the exclusion of these countries is indeed a sign of disrespect of the United States towards the region, and the issues that are on the table in terms of democracy promotion, etc., should be discussed democratically, not through enacting these kinds of boycotts.

    JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Professor, I wanted to ask you, in terms of the embarrassment to President Biden — here we’re talking about a president who has probably visited Latin America more than any leader in recent years — I think 16 times when he was vice president — and his top aide for Latin America policy, Juan Sebastian Gonzalez, has said that U.S. relations with Mexico are among the most important that the United States has, and yet now we see Biden going to a summit with — it’s really a demi-summit or a mini summit, because so many countries have decided not to participate. Your sense of what the message is here that Latin America is sending?

    ALEJANDRO VELASCO: Well, the message that Latin America is sending is that regardless of the ideological positioning — you have countries of the left, like Xiomara Castro in Honduras and certainly AMLO in Mexico, saying this is — “We will not stand for this kind of hegemonic imposition,” but even countries on the right, like El Salvador or Guatemala, they’re also not attending, because they have other kinds of differences with the United States. And so there’s a message of staking an independent ground.

    But I will say this regarding Biden and, as you rightly said, his long sort of presence in the region, I think partly what this demonstrates, again, is this tremendous disappointment on the part of some in Latin America that Biden actually is continuing some of the Trump-era policies that are largely dominated not by bilateral concerns or concerns about Latin America, but really much more by domestic concerns, places like Florida, Texas and others, where the right has really driven policies towards exclusion of certain countries of the region vis-à-vis the United States, and the idea that Biden might reverse some of those Trump-era policies, you know, to the extent that — the Cuba aperture under Obama, and then also aperture towards Venezuela to some extent, given oil necessities in the present, and yet none of that has happened. So, you know, to some extent — in fact, to a large extent, I would say, what the Biden administration’s policy with the summit demonstrates is a continuing subjugation, basically, of domestic concerns for the much more important bilateral and regional ones that otherwise might have been at stake.

    JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Yes, and I’d like to bring in Roberto Lovato, as well. Welcome back to Democracy Now!, Roberto. I wanted to ask you, in terms of — in the early part of his administration, President Biden announced a $4 billion aid package for Central America, hoping to stem the continued flight of Central Americans here. But here we’re looking at a situation where just in the past year the United States has allocated about $50 billion for Ukraine in military and humanitarian assistance to the Ukrainian people. And Ukraine has about the same — actually, a little less population size than these countries of Central America. Your sense of how U.S. dollars show the priorities that the country has in terms of foreign policy?

    ROBERTO LOVATO: Yeah, before anything, Juan, I just want to say that even before it started, the Summit of the Americas is, without a doubt, a failure of hemisphere proportions and a global embarrassment for the United States and for the Biden administration. I mean, the absence of part of the — a big — hundreds of millions — the leaders of hundreds of millions of people absent at this summit shows that the Biden administration’s talk about this being the “most diverse” — that’s a direct quote — summit ever is a farce.

    And so, in terms of where the money goes and U.S. policy vis-à-vis Ukraine versus Central America and Latin America, a lot of us in the Central American community have kind of noticed that when Ukrainian children and mothers came fleeing extreme violence and legitimately asking for political asylum, they were received with open arms. They were not caged and separated like children from Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras were, and are still being abused in places like the gulags of Texas.

    And so, you know, Vice President Harris was charged with dealing with immigration and dealing with Latin America. And, you know, let’s look at what all that — you know, she announced a billion-dollar program that was supposed to stem migration. And what it’s gotten her is, every president that she met with during her trip or on Skype or in meetings is absent at the summit. So, if you meet with Kamala Harris, you’re basically not going to come to the summit.

    So, you know, you have this ridiculous idea of a U.S.-led America Latina, America, the continent of America. And I think what we’re — beyond all this is the larger issue of the decline of U.S. hegemony and the reconfiguration of power on a global and hemispheric scale, especially when you look at, for example, the power of China to use its banks, its building infrastructure throughout South America, especially Brazil. And its trade partnerships with countries throughout the hemisphere are creating, I think, an opportunity for Latin America to play the U.S. and China off against each other to their benefit. And that’s part of what we’re seeing here in the speeches, like AMLO’s, who, by the way, has his own contradictions. Even though he makes nice speeches, go look at what he’s doing to Central Americans and Haitians, for example, and it’s not as pretty as the speeches sound. So, it’s an interesting summit that could benefit Latin America.

    AMY GOODMAN: Roberto, I’m looking at a piece just out from AP, and it said that Biden became concerned that even his Brazilian counterpart, Bolsonaro, was going to skip this week’s summit, so he dispatched a close adviser. And according to Bolsonaro’s aides, the gesture was met with a demand. “Bolsonaro said he would attend the Summit of the Americas only if Biden granted him a private meeting and also refrained from confronting him over some of the most contentious issues between the two men … He didn’t want any criticism over deforestation in the Amazon or warnings about [his] questioning of the Brazilian electoral system’s reliability as he prepares to campaign for another term.” Can you comment on the significance of this, and also saying that he won’t meet — Biden would not allow Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua at the same time that he is preparing to meet with Mohammed bin Salman in Saudi Arabia?

    ROBERTO LOVATO: You know, one of the purposes of the Summit of the Americas is to, quote-unquote, “foment democracy” in the region and build democratic structures. So that’s why — if Jair Bolsonaro is an example of the Biden administration’s ideas of democracy, what does that mean? I mean, I would be remiss if I didn’t mention that a fellow journalist, Dom Phillips of The Guardian, has disappeared in Brazil, and Bolsonaro did not send a helicopter, did not send the military to find him and an Indigenous researcher that’s with Phillips. And so, you know, what a measure of Biden’s seriousness [inaudible]. Is he going to ask about Dom Phillips in the meeting? Is he going to ask about all the Indigenous people that are killed? You know, the number of Indigenous people killed in Brazil has risen exponentially under Bolsonaro and on Biden’s watch, and Biden’s said nothing. All the while they’re criticizing and excluding Nicaragua, Venezuela and Cuba.

    And, I mean, you know, Amy, I’ve been on your show talking about mass graves for quite some time. I visited mass graves in El Salvador, a country I just went to. And I visited mass graves in different countries throughout the hemisphere, including Mexico. And if you look at — I look at mass graves as a measure of democracy in the Americas. So, let’s look at one town in Mexico, Iguala, where the 43 students of the Ayotzinapa normal school were disappeared by forces trained in part by U.S. funding and training. And so, that one town has, within a square mile, more mass graves than all of Cuba, all of Venezuela, combined. OK? And I challenge any of my fellow journalists, in Latin America journalists, to prove me wrong on that. I’ve been doing this for some time.

    And so, I mean, look, Biden has also invited the president of Haiti, President Ariel Henry, who has been implicated in the murder of his predecessor, Jovenel Moïse. OK, this is the idea of democracy that’s being touted at the Summit of the Americas. And so, you know, Colombia, Iván Duque has blood all over his hand over the last couple of years in assassinations of social movement leaders, Indigenous people and others who are critical of the Colombian government, which is now hopefully going to take a turn left. The most recent polls are saying that — some recent polls are saying that the possibility of Petro, the left candidate, the former guerrilla candidate in Colombia, may win. And this is part of the kind of increasing leftward turn of the Americas that’s rising up from below, which is why we’re doing the People’s Summit for Democracy, where social movement leaders in the United States will join those of the Americas —

    JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Roberto — Roberto, if I can — we only have about a minute or so. I wanted to bring in Professor Velasco to ask him one question. Professor, you’re originally from Venezuela. I wanted to ask you. The United States and the European Union still officially recognize Juan Guaidó as the president of Venezuela. I’m wondering your sense of how the U.S. policy toward Venezuela has affected the situation in how Latin American countries regard the U.S.

    ALEJANDRO VELASCO: Well, I think this is an indication slightly of what Roberto was talking about, of the massive disconnect between a fiction or a facade of the summit and reality on the ground. The reality on the ground in Venezuela is that Juan Guaidó and the interim government that he represents actually has very little standing, even within the opposition. There’s tremendous amounts of dissension, of discontent within the opposition ranks towards Guaidó, in part not only because of failures to accomplish any of the stated goals, but also indications of corruptions that have besotted the interim government of Guaidó’s, as he calls it. And so, you know, the extent that the Biden administration continues to prop up Guaidó is really an indication not only that it has very little sense of what the reality is on the ground, but it actually has no policy towards the region.

    And I should correct you quickly, that actually lots of countries in the European Union — even though the European Union, as an entity, does continue officially to recognize Guaidó, lots of countries in the European Union have distanced themselves from Guaidó. And so, you know, the Biden administration continues, basically, these Trump-era policies, with no sense of changing them to actually attend to what’s happening in the region, rather than perpetuating policies that have clearly failed.

    AMY GOODMAN: Well, we want to thank you, Alejandro Velasco, NYU historian of modern Latin America, and Roberto Lovato, Salvadoran American journalist.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • A Factory Without Bosses: Voices from Indorca, Part I

    Industrias del Orinoco, C.A. (Indorca) is a factory without bosses in the industrial city of Puerto Ordaz in Bolívar state, the home of Venezuela’s basic industries. Indorca’s workers carried out a heroic three-year struggle to gain control of the factory after the former owner brought it to a halt. Since 2015, when Venezuela’s Ministry of Labor extended a mandate giving the workers control over Indorca, the enterprise has been democratically managed by the women and men who produce here day in and day out.

    In Part I of this two-part interview, the workers of Indorca tell us about their fight to keep the former bosses from dismantling the factory and regaining control of the plant. In Part II we will learn about the struggle to maintain the factory afloat in a sanctioned country and also about Indorca’s educational initiatives.

    The post A Factory Without Bosses: Voices from Indorca, Part I appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • A Summit against Democracy

    The summit convening in Los Angeles next week is yet another proof of the authoritarian and anti-democratic character of the elites that rule the United States. The exclusion of Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela from the meeting from the outset confirms this. This is an extremely serious fact, which leads to other very serious exclusions as well.The United States has disregarded the consensus of non-exclusion that had been reached, when Cuba had already participated in the VII and VIII versions of the Summit of the Americas in Panama and Lima after a general clamor of the governments and peoples of the region. This means that Washington does not understand, or does not want to realize, that the era of neo-liberal hegemony, when it could make and break countries and governments as it pleased, is over. Nor can it stand the fact that the peoples’ rejection of neo-liberalism and a clear trend towards the election of progressive governments, that are now present in Mexico, Bolivia, Honduras, Peru, Argentina, Chile and knocking on the door in Colombia with Petro, winning the first round, and in Brazil with Lula, whom all the poll have already declared him as the absolute winner, are once again gaining strength -as in the late 1990s and late 2000s- but now with more depth.  Of course, to this must be added Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua and the 6 brave Eastern Caribbean States that are part of ALBA, all of which share many ideas and foreign policy projections with the above mentioned and are now displaying a clear and accurate view of the current world at the IX ALBA Summit.

    The post A Summit against Democracy appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Maduro’s Success: Principled Resistance To Imperialism Pays Off

    The world has been stunned by a double wonder: Bolivarian Venezuela’s political survival and its miraculous economic recovery: the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean has reported that it expects the Venezuelan economy to grow for the first time since 2014, by 5 per cent, one of the highest in the region.

    Venezuela’s rate of inflation has come down from something like 10 million per cent, as reported by CNBC in 2019, and described as the “biggest economic disaster in modern history” by the Washington Post in the same year, to 7.1 per cent in September 2021 and to an incredible 1.4 per cent in March 2022.

    The March 2022 issue of the PSUV magazine Economia Politica y Revolucion reports that corn production, essential for arepas — Venezuela’s staple food — has increased by 60 per cent, rice 17 per cent, with an increase of non-oil exports of 76 per cent.

    The post Maduro’s Success: Principled Resistance To Imperialism Pays Off appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Venezuela Launches Tech Platform To Quickly Improve Public Services

    The Venezuelan government launched a new app-based initiative to address deteriorated public services that will facilitate a more direct means of communication between the citizenry and the government.

    President Nicolás Maduro toured the headquarters of a newly-opened rapid-response center, located inside the presidential palace of Miraflores on Saturday, saying the new system would “show the complaint, show the process and show the result, so that people can see processes and results.”

    Maduro said the aim was to break with the bureaucracy that often serves to delay a quick resolution, adding that issues related to water, education, and healthcare would be given priority.

    The post Venezuela Launches Tech Platform To Quickly Improve Public Services appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • And Then There Was No More Empire All of a Sudden

    Bisa Butler (USA), I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings, 2019.

    Empire denies its own existence. It does not exist as an empire but only as benevolence, with its mission to spread human rights and sustainable development across the world. However, that perspective means nothing in Havana nor in Caracas, where ‘human rights’ has come to mean regime change, and where ‘sustainable development’ has come to mean the throttling of their people through sanctions and blockades. It is from the standpoint of the victims of empire that clarity comes.

    US President Joe Biden is to host the Summit of the Americas in June, where he hopes to deepen Washington’s hegemony over the Americas. The United States government understands that its project of hegemony faces an existential crisis caused by the weaknesses of the US political system and the US economy, with limited funds available for investment within its own country, let alone for the rest of the world. At the same time, US hegemony faces a serious challenge from China, whose Belt and Road Initiative has been seen in large parts of Latin America and the Caribbean as an alternative to the International Monetary Fund’s austerity agenda. Rather than work alongside Chinese investments, the US is eager to use any means to prevent China from engaging with countries in the Americas. Along this axis, the US has revitalised the Monroe Doctrine. This policy, which will be two centuries old next year, claims that the Americas are the dominion of the United States, its ‘sphere of influence’, and its ‘backyard’ (although Biden has tried to be cute by calling the region the US’s ‘front yard’).

    Along with the International Peoples’ Assembly, we have developed a red alert on two instruments of US power – the Organisation of American States and the Summit of the Americas – as well as the challenge that the US faces as it tries to impose its hegemony in the region. The red alert is featured below and is available here as a PDF. Please read it, discuss it, and share it.

    What is the Organisation of American States?

    The Organisation of American States (OAS) was formed in Bogotá, Colombia in 1948 by the United States and its allies. Though the OAS Charter invokes the rhetoric of multilateralism and cooperation, the organisation has been used as a tool to fight against communism in the hemisphere and to impose a US agenda on the countries of the Americas. Roughly half of the funds for the OAS and 80 percent of the funds for the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), an autonomous organ of the OAS, come from the US. It is worth noting that – despite providing the majority of its budget – the US has not ratified any of the IACHR’s treaties.

    The OAS showed its true colours after the Cuban Revolution (1959). In 1962, at a meeting in Punta del Este (Uruguay), Cuba – a founding member of the OAS – was expelled from the organisation. The declaration from the meeting stated that ‘the principles of communism are incompatible with the principles of the inter-American system’. In response, Fidel Castro called the OAS the ‘US Ministry of Colonies’.

    The OAS set up the Special Consultative Committee on Security Against the Subversive Action of International Communism in 1962, with the purpose of allowing the elites in the Americas – led by the US – to use every means possible against popular movements of the working class and peasantry. The OAS has afforded diplomatic and political cover to the US’s Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) as it has participated in the overthrow of governments that attempt to exercise their legitimate sovereignty – sovereignty that the OAS Charter purports to guarantee. This exercise has gone all the way from the OAS’s expulsion of Cuba in 1962 to the orchestration of coups in Honduras (2009) and Bolivia (2019) to the repeated attempts to overthrow the governments of Nicaragua and Venezuela and ongoing interference in Haiti.

    Since 1962, the OAS has openly acted alongside the US government to sanction countries without a United Nations Security Council resolution, which makes these sanctions illegal. It has, therefore, regularly violated the ‘principle of non-interference’ in its own charter, which prohibits ‘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’ (chapter 1, article 2, section b and chapter IV, article 19).

    Diego Rivera (Mexico), Liberación del Peón (‘Liberation of the peon’), 1931.

    What is the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC)?

    Venezuela, led by President Hugo Chávez, initiated a process in the early 2000s to build new regional institutions outside of US control. Three major platforms were built in this period: 1) the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA) in 2004; 2) the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) in 2004; and 3) the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) in 2010. These platforms established inter-governmental connections across the Americas, including summits on matters of regional importance and technical institutions to enhance trade and cultural interactions across borders. Each of these platforms have faced threats from the United States. As governments in the region oscillate politically, their commitment to these platforms has either increased (the more left they have been) or decreased (the more subordinate they have been to the United States).

    At the 6th Summit of CELAC in Mexico City in 2021, Mexico’s President Andrés Manuel López Obrador suggested that the OAS be disbanded and that CELAC help to build a multilateral organisation at the scale of the European Union to resolve regional conflicts, build trade partnerships, and promote the unity of the Americas.

    Tessa Mars (Haiti), Untitled, Praying for the visa series, 2019.

    What is the Summit of the Americas?

    With the fall of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), the United States attempted to dominate the world by using its military power to discipline any state that did not accept its hegemony (as in Panama, 1989 and Iraq, 1991) and by institutionalising its economic power through the World Trade Organisation, set up in 1994. The US called the OAS member states to Miami for the first Summit of the Americas in 1994, which was subsequently handed over to the OAS to manage. The summit has convened every few years since to ‘discuss common policy issues, affirm shared values and commit to concerted actions at the national and regional level’.

    Despite its stronghold over the OAS, the US has never been able fully to impose its agenda at these summits. At the third summit in Quebec City (2001) and the fourth summit in Mar del Plata (2005), popular movements held large counter-protests; at Mar del Plata, Venezuela’s President Hugo Chávez led a massive demonstration, which resulted in the collapse of the US-imposed Free Trade Area of the Americas agreement. The fifth and sixth summits at Port of Spain (2009) and Cartagena (2012) became a battlefield for the debate over the US blockade on Cuba and its expulsion from the OAS. Due to immense pressure from the member states of the OAS, Cuba was invited to the seventh and eighth summits in Panama City (2015) and Lima (2018), against the wishes of the United States.

    However, the United States has not invited Cuba, Nicaragua, or Venezuela to the upcoming ninth summit to be held in Los Angeles in June 2022. Several countries – including Bolivia and Mexico – have said that they will not attend the meeting unless all thirty-five countries in the Americas are in attendance. From 8–10 June, a range of progressive organisations will hold a People’s Summit to counter the OAS summit and to amplify the voices of all the peoples of the Americas.

    Rufino Tamayo (Mexico), Animals, 1941.

    In 2010, the poet Derek Walcott (1930–2017) published ‘The Lost Empire’, a celebration of the Caribbean and of his own island, Saint Lucia, in particular as British imperialism retreated. Walcott grew up with the economic and cultural suffocation imposed by colonialism, the ugliness of being made to feel inferior, and the wretchedness of the poverty that came alongside it. Years later, reflecting on the jubilation of the retreat of British rule, Walcott wrote:

    And then there was no more Empire all of a sudden.
    Its victories were air, its dominions dirt:
    Burma, Canada, Egypt, Africa, India, the Sudan.
    The map that had seeped its stain on a schoolboy’s shirt
    like red ink on a blotter, battles, long sieges.
    Dhows and feluccas, hill stations, outposts, flags
    fluttering down in the dusk, their golden aegis
    went out with the sun, the last gleam on a great crag,
    With tiger-eyed turbaned Sikhs, pennons of the Raj
    to a sobbing bugle.

    The sun is setting on imperialism as we emerge slowly and delicately into a world that seeks meaningful equality rather than subordination. ‘This small place’, Walcott writes of Saint Lucia, ‘produces nothing but beauty’. That would be true of the entire world if we could get beyond our long, modern history of battles and sieges, warships, and nuclear weapons.

    The post And Then There Was No More Empire All of a Sudden first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • US to renew Chevron’s Venezuela licence

    Andreína Chávez Alava reports that United States President Joe Biden’s administration has authorised Chevron to negotiate its licence and “the terms of potential future activities in Venezuela” with Venezuelan state oil company, PDVSA.

    This post was originally published on Green Left.

  • Mark Esper’s Tell-Some Reveals US Plans for War and Terror Against Venezuela

    A new book from former Defense Secretary Mark Esper has revealed shocking new details about the Trump administration’s war on Venezuela. “A Sacred Oath: Memoirs of a Secretary of Defense During Extraordinary Times” admits that the Trump administration plotted to invade Venezuela and discussed assassinating President Nicolas Maduro, carrying out a wave of terrorist attacks on civilian infrastructure, and raising a mercenary army to start a Contra-style terror war. Esper also all but confirms Washington’s involvement in Operation Gideon – a botched military invasion of the country, and a 2018 attempt on Maduro’s life.

    The post Mark Esper’s Tell-Some Reveals US Plans for War and Terror Against Venezuela appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Call for ‘Workers Summit of the Americas’

    The Workers Summit of the Americas meeting, in Tijuana, Mexico, offers a space to join with all the peoples of “Our Americas.” We will counteract the OAS Summit of the Americas organized by the U.S. Department of State in Los Angeles. The countries of the continent besieged by the USA (Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba, among others) will not participate in the OAS farce. 

    The post Call for ‘Workers Summit of the Americas’ appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Why Are Colombian Election Candidates Auditioning in Washington?

    Staging a vice-presidential candidates debate in the run-up to Colombia’s May 29th national elections was entirely appropriate.  Nevertheless, the location of the event in Washington and its promotion by US-state functionaries requires some explanation. Because of its venue and sponsors, the affair had elements of an audition or a vetting process overseen by the US government.

    Along with the Washington consensus crowd, members of the Colombian diaspora attended the May 13th event, especially supporters of popular vice-presidential candidate Francia Márquez. Afro-descendent environmentalist Márquez is running with presidential candidate Gustavo Petro. Their frontrunning ticket could be the first administration on the left in Colombian history.

    Vice-presidential debate hosts

    The debate was hosted by the US Institute of Peace, a federal agency entirely funded by the US Congress. The board of the institute must by law include the US secretaries of defense and state along with the head of the Pentagon’s National Defense University. Activities include spreading “peace” in such oases of made-in-the-USA tranquility as Iraq, Sudan, Afghanistan, and Libya.

    If these officials pass for peacemakers in Washington’s inside-the-beltway world, who, one might ask, would be left to lead a military academy? Answer: the very same people, which is entirely the point of a US government “peace” agency.

    Co-hosts of the event were the Atlantic Council and the Woodrow Wilson Center. The former is known as “NATO’s think tank.” Its board of honorary directors is composed of four former secretaries of defense, three former secretaries of state, a former head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and a former Homeland Security official.

    The Woodrow Wilson Center is a semi-governmental entity, whose current head, Mark Andrew Green, was executive director of the McCain Institute for International Leadership and before that head of the CIA front organization USAID. Rounding out their board are Betsy DeVos, Trump’s secretary of education, and Antony Blinken, Biden’s current secretary of state.

    Colombia – US client state

    Colombia is the leading client state of the US in the Americas. The South American nation was touted by both Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden in their US presidential campaigns as a model for the rest of Latin America. This so-called model nation was partially paralyzed for four days starting on May 5 when the private paramilitary group Clan del Golfo imposed a national armed strike in retaliation for the extradition to the US of its leader on drug trafficking charges.

    Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos, for example, boasted in 2013 in reference to Colombia’s regional role as a US client state: “If somebody called my country the Israel of Latin America, I would be very proud. I admire the Israelis, and I would consider that as a compliment.”

    According to the Task Force on the Americas, Colombia has been turned into a regional US military and political staging area. Plan Colombia and Plan Patriota constructed one of the most sophisticated armies in the world even though Colombia has no external wars.

    As the US’s leading regional proxy, Colombia is appropriately a land of superlatives. It is the leading recipient of US military and foreign aid in the hemisphere. According to Colombian academic Rena Vegas, the US has approximately 50 military units along with US agencies, headed by the CIA and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), which “operate daily and freely to intervene in the country.”

    Also, not inconsequently, Colombia is the most dangerous place to be a union activist. North American corporations there (e.g., Chiquita, Coca Cola, Drummond) have employed paramilitaries to do their dirty work.

    Colombia likewise gets the largest allocation of DEA funds. Also, not inconsequently, it is the world’s largest source of illicit cocaine, according to the CIA. The US war on drugs in Colombia has served as a smokescreen for massive repression against popular movements by the country’s military and allied paramilitary organizations.

    In 2017, Colombia became one of NATO’s Global Partners and its first in Latin American. In February, Colombia conducted a provocative joint naval drill with NATO near Venezuela, which included a nuclear submarine. Then on March 10, Colombia became a “Major Non-NATO Ally” of the US, giving the narco-state special access to military programs. Biden explained: “This is a recognition of the unique and close relationship between our countries.”

    Summit of the Americas

    In short, Colombia is the poster child for the US Monroe Doctrine, an assertion of US hegemony over the hemisphere dating back to 1823. Biden recently made a cosmetic change to the Monroe Doctrine risibly proclaiming that our southern neighbors are no longer in our “backyard” but rather in our “front yard.”

    However, many Latin American and Caribbean nations believe that they are sovereign countries. So Biden’s recent call for a Summit of the Americas in Los Angeles on June 6-10, which would exclude Nicaragua, Cuba, and Venezuela, faces significant pushback. Mexican President Lopez Obrador said he’ll shun the meeting along with the heads of state of over a dozen Caribbean countries, Bolivia, Guatemala, and possibly Brazil.

    Over half of the chief execs in the Americas have tentatively spurned the imperial summons. Unless Biden makes amends or more likely twists some arms, he’ll find Los Angeles a lonely place.

    Meanwhile counter-summits have been organized by social movements in Los Angeles on June 8-10 and followed by another in Tijuana on June 10-12, which may be attended by nationals barred from entering the US.

    Colombia’s relations with Venezuela

    Colombia has served as the main staging ground for US destabilization efforts against Venezuela. Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro accused Colombian President Iván Duque of plotting to sow unrest through the targeted killing of Venezuelan security forces along their shared border. A year ago, US-backed mercenaries trained in Colombia were caught in Venezuela before they could follow through on their plan to assassinate the Venezuelan president.

    Despite tremendous pressure from the US, the leading Colombian presidential candidate, Gustavo Petro, has stated that he intends to restore relations with neighboring Venezuela. Nevertheless, Petro has regularly made critical remarks about Venezuela, a country slated for regime change by Washington. While not mentioning Petro by name, Venezuelan President Maduro has called those who capitulate to US pressures “the cowardly regional left.”

    More recently Petro falsely characterized political prisoner Alex Saab of being allied with the far right. Venezuelan diplomat Saab is currently imprisoned in the US even though he should be afforded diplomatic immunity from prosecution under the Vienna Convention. The Venezuelan National Assembly unanimously passed a resolution condemning Saab’s treatment as what its president, Jorge Rodríguez, called an “act of immeasurable hypocrisy” by the US.

    Petro/Márquez campaign survives assignation attempts

    Given the domination of Colombia by its US-backed military, Petro is concerned not only about winning the election but surviving afterward. Both Petro and his running mate Márquez have already survived assassination attempts on the campaign trail.

    Breaking the constitutional requirement for neutrality by the armed forces, the commander of the Colombian army issued a direct attack against Petro. This prompted Medellín’s mayor to warn: “We are one step away from a coup.”

    Petro, a former leftist guerilla and onetime mayor of Bogotá, has since shifted toward the center politically. But in comparison to the far-right rule of former President Álvaro Uribe and his successors in Colombia, Petro and Márquez appear relatively left and their election would be a sea change for the better.

    Colombia has had leftist candidates assassinated – that is the genesis of the guerilla opposition – but none have survived to assume the presidential office. The win would be a necessary step in the left’s long struggle to free their troubled country from its erstwhile subjugation to the colossus to the north. Then, perhaps, their political candidates won’t feel compelled to audition in Washington.

    The post Why Are Colombian Election Candidates Auditioning in Washington? first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • For Biden’s Summit of the Americas, Obama’s Handshake With Raúl Castro Shows the Way

    On May 16, the Biden administration announced new measures to “increase support for the Cuban people.” They included easing travel restrictions and helping Cuban-Americans support and connect with their families. They mark a step forward but a baby step, given that most U.S. sanctions on Cuba remain in place. Also in place is a ridiculous Biden administration policy of trying to isolate Cuba, as well as Nicaragua and Venezuela, from the rest of the hemisphere by excluding them from the upcoming Summit of the Americas that will take place in June in Los Angeles.

    This is the first time since its inaugural gathering in 1994 that the event, which is held every three years, will take place on U.S. soil. But rather than bringing the Western Hemisphere together, the Biden administration seems intent on pulling it apart by threatening to exclude three nations that are certainly part of the Americas.

    For months, the Biden administration has been hinting that these governments would be excluded. So far, they have not been invited to any of the preparatory meetings and the Summit itself is now less than a month away. While former White House press secretary Jen Psaki and State Department spokesman Ned Price have repeated that “no decisions” have been made, Assistant Secretary of State Brian Nichols said in an interview on Colombian TV that countries that “do not respect democracy are not going to receive invitations.”

    Biden’s plan to pick and choose which countries can attend the Summit has set off regional fireworks. Unlike in the past, when the U.S. had an easier time imposing its will on Latin America, nowadays there is a fierce sense of independence, especially with a resurgence of progressive governments. Another factor is China. While the U.S. still has a major economic presence, China has surpassed the U.S. as the number one trading partner, giving Latin American countries more freedom to defy the United States or at least stake out a middle ground between the two superpowers.

    The hemispheric reaction to the exclusion of three regional states is a reflection of that independence, even among small Caribbean nations. In fact, the first words of defiance came from members of the 15-nation Caribbean Community, or Caricom, which threatened to boycott the Summit. Then came regional heavyweight, Mexican President Manuel López Obrador, who stunned and delighted people around the continent when he announced that, if all countries were not invited, he would not attend. The presidents of Bolivia and Honduras soon followed with similar statements.

    The Biden administration has put itself in a bind. Either it backs down and issues the invitations, tossing red meat to right-wing U.S. politicians like Senator Marco Rubio for being “soft on communism,” or it stands firm and risks sinking the Summit and U.S. influence in the region.

    Biden’s failure at regional diplomacy is all the more inexplicable given the lesson he should have learned as vice president when Barack Obama faced a similar dilemma.

    That was 2015, when, after two decades of excluding Cuba from these Summits, the countries of the region put down their collective feet and demanded that Cuba be invited. Obama had to decide whether to skip the meeting and lose influence in Latin America, or go and contend with the domestic fallout. He decided to go.

    I remember that Summit vividly because I was among the bevy of journalists jostling to get a front seat when President Barack Obama would be forced to greet Cuba’s President Raúl Castro, who came into power after his brother Fidel Castro stepped down. The momentous handshake, the first contact between leaders of the two countries in decades, was the high point of the summit.

    Obama was not only obligated to shake Castro’s hand, he also had to listen to a long history lesson. Raúl Castro’s speech was a no-holds-barred recounting of past U.S. attacks on Cuba—including the 1901 Platt Amendment that made Cuba a virtual U.S. protectorate, U.S. support for Cuban dictator Fulgencio Batista in the 1950s, the disastrous 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion and the scandalous U.S. prison in Guantanamo. But Castro was also gracious to President Obama, saying he was not to blame for this legacy and calling him an “honest man” of humble origins.

    The meeting marked a new era between the U.S. and Cuba, as the two nations began to normalize relations. It was a win-win, with more trade, more cultural exchanges, more resources for the Cuban people, and fewer Cubans migrating to the United States. The handshake led to an actual visit by Obama to Havana, a trip so memorable that it still brings big smiles to the faces of Cubans on the island.

    Then came Donald Trump, who skipped the next Summit of the Americas and imposed draconian new sanctions that left the Cuban economy in tatters, especially once COVID hit and dried up the tourist industry.

    Until recently, Biden has been following Trump’s slash-and-burn policies that have led to tremendous shortages and a new migration crisis, instead of reverting to Obama’s win-win policy of engagement. The May 16 measures to expand flights to Cuba and resume family reunifications are helpful, but not enough to mark a real change in policy—especially if Biden insists on making the Summit a “limited-invite only.”

    Biden needs to move quickly. He should invite all the nations of the Americas to the Summit. He should shake the hands of every head of state and, more importantly, engage in serious discussions on burning hemispheric issues such as the brutal economic recession caused by the pandemic, climate change that is affecting food supplies, and the terrifying gun violence–all of which are fueling the migration crisis. Otherwise, Biden’s #RoadtotheSummit, which is the Summit’s twitter handle, will only lead to a dead end.

    The post For Biden’s Summit of the Americas, Obama’s Handshake With Raúl Castro Shows the Way first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Bolivian President Not To Attend Non-Inclusive Americas Summit

    Bolivia’s President Luis Arce warned that he will not attend the next Summit of the Americas if the United States excludes Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela.

    “Consistent with the Bolivian Plurinational State’s principles and values, I reaffirm that a Summit of the Americas, which excludes American countries, will not be a full Summit of the Americas. If the exclusion of sister nations persists, I will not participate,” Arce tweeted.

    The post Bolivian President Not To Attend Non-Inclusive Americas Summit appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Venezuela And Iran Deepen Cooperation To Overcome US Sanctions

    Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro held a meeting with Iranian Oil Minister Javad Owji in Caracas to strengthen energy cooperation as the two oil producing countries ramp up efforts to offset US sanctions. On Monday, Maduro hosted Owji and other Iranian officials in Miraflores Palace where they held a “productive meeting” to “deepen the ties of brotherhood and cooperation [between the nations] in energy matters.” In a Twitter post, the Venezuelan mandatary expressed his gratitude for Iran’s ongoing support in the Caribbean country’s struggle to recover the economy under US sanctions. President Maduro pledged “to continue advancing along the path of mutual benefit and complementarity for our peoples.”

    The post Venezuela And Iran Deepen Cooperation To Overcome US Sanctions appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Biden Vacillates As Venezuela’s Maduro Gains Ground

    Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro’s repeated calls for dialogue with the U.S. in order to normalize relations seem to be paying off.

    His openness to rapprochement contrasts with the Biden administration’s nebulousness regarding the degree to which Washington is willing to recognize Maduro as president (full diplomatic recognition is out of the question).

    Biden’s use of sanctions as a bargaining chip to wrest concessions from Caracas is a harder sell than former President Donald Trump’s regime-change narrative on the basis of the preposterous Responsibility to Protect (R2P) principle, sometimes referred to as “humanitarian intervention.”

    Over the last two months, the flip flops and timidity of the Biden administration have been put on full display.

    The post Biden Vacillates As Venezuela’s Maduro Gains Ground appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Iran and Venezuela Energy Cooperation

    PressTV Interview with Peter Koenig

    Iran and Venezuela are poised to enter a new era to fight US sanctions. Their cooperation in Hydrocarbons – production as well as trade – may help them gradually detach from western sanctions.

    An idea brought forward in this interview is their joint exit from the dollar-dominated trade economy, by selling their petrol and gas in one or more other currencies than the US-dollar or even the Euro. Ideally, they may want to join the Russian move of selling gas for rubles instead of US dollars.

    This brilliant Russian initiative, of course, has been a major “explosion” in Europe and elsewhere in the world, but most countries eventually accept this new payment mode – one that is totally delinked from the US dollar and its little brother, the Euro.

    It is a move away from the SWIFT transfer system which makes countries vulnerable to sanctions because using SWIFT – the western payment mode – all transfers have to transit via US banks, thus increasing vulnerability to western, mostly US, interference or sanctions.

    After all, still today 84% of all energy used in the world stems from hydrocarbons, as compared to some 87% in the year 2000. And this despite much talk of shunning petrol and gas, the Paris Climate Agenda, and especially propagating a Green Agenda – empty words, manipulating people’s minds towards a new form of capitalism.

    Another strategy which both countries are actively considering, is increasingly delinking their trading from the west and orienting their economies towards the east; i.e., the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), the Association of South Asian Nations (ASEAN), uniting 11 Asian countries, plus Russia and China. Earlier this year, Iran has been admitted as a member of the SCO.

    These Eastern block economies together make up for about 50% of Mother Earth’s population and at least a third of the world’s GDP. Becoming part of this union is definitely a decisive step away from western domination and sanctions. See full interview (PressTV-PK – video 12 min – 3 May 2022)

    ttp://www.urmedium.com/c/presstv/109212

    The post Iran and Venezuela Energy Cooperation first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • On Venezuela, Only Hawkish ‘Dissent’ Allowed

    When it comes to Venezuela, corporate journalists have historically had little to criticize, given Washington’s “maximum pressure” regime-change efforts.  However, a recent unexpected trip by a high-level US delegation to Caracas to meet with Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro opened the spectrum of opinion ever so slightly. Besides the traditional bias and dishonest coverage, a familiar pattern emerged: Just like with Russia/Ukraine, the only allowed criticism of official policy comes from the right, demanding that the US be as extreme as possible in dealing with its “enemies.”

    The post On Venezuela, Only Hawkish ‘Dissent’ Allowed appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • On Venezuela, Only Hawkish ‘Dissent’ Allowed

     

    Another NATO war means a media establishment in a propaganda frenzy once again. Corporate media outlets have cheered Washington for throwing fuel to the fire in Ukraine, with some demanding that the administration escalate yet more (FAIR.org, 1/28/22, 2/28/22, 3/18/22, 3/22/22). Be it through their choice of pundits, or their own reporters haranguing White House officials for not sending enough weaponry, one thing is clear enough: Elite media will only criticize official foreign policy for not being hawkish enough.

    When it comes to Venezuela, corporate journalists have historically had little to criticize, given Washington’s “maximum pressure” regime-change efforts (FAIR.org, 12/19/20, 4/15/20, 1/22/20, 9/24/19, 6/26/19, 5/1/19).  However, a recent unexpected trip by a high-level US delegation to Caracas to meet with Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro opened the spectrum of opinion ever so slightly. Besides the traditional bias and dishonest coverage, a familiar pattern emerged: Just like with Russia/Ukraine, the only allowed criticism of official policy comes from the right, demanding that the US be as extreme as possible in dealing with its “enemies.”

    Media to Guaidó’s rescue

    Reuters: Venezuela's opposition presses U.S. to hold off its consideration of oil imports

    “Political winds shifted against any proposal to ease the US sanctions,” Reuters (3/22/22) reported–as though hostile media coverage wasn’t part of those “political winds.”

    The early March talks, which broached subjects such as sanctions relief and Venezuela resuming oil supplies to the US, were soon discontinued after backlash from hardliners. But they had one clear loser: US-backed self-proclaimed “Interim President” Juan Guaidó, who was “sidelined” (Washington Post, 3/11/22). The Jeff Bezos–owned paper reported that the “notable leader” was left out of the plans (though his “notable” status is very dubious at the moment—AP, 3/2/22). The Post article acknowledged further down that the opposition figure “has little practical authority in the country and little influence outside.”

    However, in Guaidó’s hour of need, corporate journalists came to his aid, treating as newsworthy that the hardline oppositionist was “angered” (Miami Herald, 3/7/22) or “astonished” (El País, 3/10/22) about not being informed of his Washington bosses’ plans in advance.

    Efforts to prop up the fading politician included the oft-repeated lie that he is recognized by “more than 50” (Washington Post, 3/9/22) or “almost 60” countries (AFP, 3/7/22), which was true in 2019. The current number, based on a recent UN General Assembly vote to recognize the credentials of the Maduro government, is 16 (Venezuelanalysis, 12/8/21).

    Soon after, news outlets gave Guaidó the floor to “press” the White House against dealing with the Venezuelan government, as well as to warn oil corporations such as Chevron to not pursue increased activity in Venezuela and “stick with democracy” (Reuters, 3/22/22), which in this instance stands for unconstitutionally replacing an elected president with a legislator whose term expired in 2020.

    A Guaidó aide even asked, “What’s the value of the commodity of freedom?” Given how cheaply US officials and their media stenographers bring it up, not that high.

    Reuters went further than most in the damage-control operation, telling readers more than two weeks after the fact that “the US officials met Guaidó after attending the meeting with Maduro.” The claim is very dubious, given prior reporting that the opposition frontman and the US delegation “didn’t meet face to face” (Washington Post, 3/11/22). Given Guaidó’s communications policy, which prompted him to boast of a phone call with Slovakia’s foreign minister, it seems unlikely he would host a White House delegation and stay quiet about it.

    Inventing ‘hostages’

    WSJ: Hostages for Oil From Venezuela?

    Wall Street Journal (3/9/22): Easing sanctions against Venezuela “would reward a rogue regime for taking American hostages with little energy benefit.”

    The one “consequence” of the surprise Caracas summit was the release of two detained US citizens, Gustavo Cárdenas and Jorge Fernández. Cárdenas was one of the “Citgo 6” oil executives sentenced in 2020 for corruption, whereas Fernández was arrested in 2021 after allegedly entering the country illegally from Colombia while carrying a drone.

    Outlets were happy enough to echo the administration’s claim that the two had been “wrongfully detained” (Al Jazeera, 3/9/22) and were used as “political pawns” (BBC, 3/11/22), but not so much to offer details on the corruption charges brought against the Citgo 6. Certainly none connected Fernández’s drone arrest to the assassination attempt against Maduro in August 2018, which used explosive-laden drones brought in from Colombia.

    Some went even further by referring to the imprisoned US citizens in Venezuela as “hostages” (CNN, 3/16/22; Wall Street Journal, 3/9/22). It seems no crimes can be committed by US nationals in countries deemed evil by Washington.

    Similarly apologetic were the references to Luke Denman and Airan Berry, former US Green Berets serving 20-year sentences after taking part in Operation Gideon, a failed paramilitary/mercenary invasion of Venezuela. Despite their own confessions and public statements by Gideon organizer Jordan Goudreau confirming their involvement, the two former soldiers are only “accused in a plot” against Maduro (Washington Post, 3/6/22; CNN, 3/8/22).

    The Washington Post brought up the case of Matthew Heath, a “former Marine who was arrested while traveling along the Caribbean coast of Venezuela,” without noting that he was caught with heavy weaponry and explosives (Venezuelanalysis, 9/14/20).

    An overdose of Rubio

    NYT: Venezuela could be a fill-in for Russian oil, but critics fear aiding another strongman.

    The New York Times (3/8/22) quoted Sen. Robert Menendez (D.-N.J.) as saying the US “risks perpetuating a humanitarian crisis” by lifting sanctions that have killed over 100,000 Venezuelans.

    To the extent that the media establishment was willing to entertain the possibility of Washington engaging with Caracas again, it did so on its familiar dishonest, US exceptionalist terms. As such, corporate pundits (NPR, 3/13/22; Financial Times, 3/13/22; Washington Post, 3/11/22) weighed the pros and cons of dealing with an “authoritarian” government. Others called it “autocratic” (Guardian, 3/14/22; Financial Times, 3/12/22; CNN, 3/8/22). The New York Times used both (3/8/22).

    Laying down the law, Western journalists wrote that, in order for negotiations to proceed, Biden wants “progress toward restoring democratic governance” (Bloomberg, 3/10/22) and Maduro must “set aside his authoritarian impulses” (AP, 3/10/22), thus establishing both the Venezuelan president’s dictatorial tendencies and the country’s lack of “democratic governance” as background facts.

    Likewise reheated were the unsubstantiated “fraud” claims concerning Maduro’s 2018 reelection (New York Times, 3/8/22; AFP, 3/7/22; Reuters, 3/6/22; see FAIR.org, 5/23/18), and the evidence-free “narco-terrorism” charges (BBC, 3/13/22; New York Times, 3/8/22; Washington Post, 3/11/22; see FAIR.org, 9/24/19). Reuters (3/22/22) ridiculously accused the Venezuelan president of “dragging his feet toward new elections” when the country’s constitution stipulates they be held in 2024.

    But the most remarkable aspect of coverage was that the US politicians asked to weigh in on the Biden administration’s calculations were invariably foreign policy hawks. CNN (3/8/22) cited no less than five US politicians criticizing the rapprochement and the possibility of sanctions relief. The most featured by far was Sen. Marco Rubio (R.–Florida), who got to ramble unopposed about “narco-dictators” (Washington Post, 3/6/22; Bloomberg, 3/30/22; Financial Times, 3/13/22; Newsweek, 8/3/22).

    No corporate outlet sought the opinion of those US representatives who in the recent past have strongly called for sanctions relief because of their documented impact on the civilian population (Venezuelanalysis, 8/14/21, 6/17/21, 2/11/21).

    The sanctions script

    Whether to lift or relax sanctions imposed on Venezuela in recent years is—leaving aside the Guaidó charade—the key decision facing Washington. Multilateral bodies and human rights rapporteurs have decried the measures, which have led to over 100,000 deaths, according to former UN Special Rapporteur Alfred de Zayas.

    Despite a growing consensus demanding their removal, corporate media have stuck to their routinely dishonest coverage of sanctions and their consequences (FAIR.org, 6/4/21). A key misrepresentation across the board (CNN, 3/8/22; BBC, 3/11/22; Bloomberg, 3/10/22; Financial Times, 3/6/22, 3/13/22; Reuters, 3/9/22) is that sanctions against Venezuela’s oil sector only began in 2019.

    In fact, the first key blow against the industry came in August 2017, when state oil company PDVSA was shut out of global credit markets. Studies on crude output pinpoint a sharper drop beginning at this point, and $6 billion in lost revenue in 12 months. The seminal report by the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) also begins with the 2017 sanctions. Whether a concerted effort or lazy copy-paste, saying that the measures began only in 2019 is a disingenuous way to claim that Venezuela’s economic collapse has nothing to do with US sanctions.

    Viewing the sanctions debate though the prism of US imperial interests, corporate journalists will  state baldly that the deadly measures are meant to “force Maduro” from power (Washington Post, 3/6/22; Financial Times, 3/6/22); Washington’s right to do so is never in question. As such, Biden changing course is presented as a “gamble” at best (Bloomberg, 3/15/22) or a “strategic blunder” at worst (Wall Street Journal, 3/7/22). The argument against sanctions is that they are “counterproductive,” because they are “ineffective in reducing the power of the government” (Forbes, 3/24/22). Regime change remains openly the goal.

    Readers are assured that sanctions were “intended to help restore Venezuelan democracy” (Guardian, 3/6/22) or “bring reform” (Washington Post, 3/9/22). Nowhere to be found are details of the devastating harm these unilateral measures inflict on the civilian population. Consequences, from lost crops to resurgent epidemics, are out of sight and out of mind.

    Faced with the White House contemplating changes (even for the wrong reasons) to policies that have brought tremendous suffering for ordinary people, corporate media opted to obfuscate the sanctions’ impact, present the debate in the most US-exceptionalist terms, and platform the most hardline positions. In this way, the media establishment manufacture consent for silently killing Venezuelans.

     

    The post On Venezuela, Only Hawkish ‘Dissent’ Allowed appeared first on FAIR.

    This post was originally published on FAIR.

  • President Maduro: Duque Plans Military Strikes In Venezuela

    The president of Venezuela, Nicolás Maduro, denounced this Saturday in the framework of the V Congress of the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV), his Colombian counterpart Iván Duque of orchestrating a plan to assassinate police and military in the Caribbean country. “Iván Duque is leaving and is desperate to harm Venezuela, he has activated plans with criminal gangs by states and infiltrating through the border, mafia groups that come to attack police and military, the Venezuelan public force”, warned the president. At the same time, the Venezuelan head of state asserted that the intelligence is gathering information and is alert for any attack, “we are behind these plans with strategic, police and popular intelligence”, he added.

    The post President Maduro: Duque Plans Military Strikes In Venezuela appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Self-Government In Times Of Blockade: Luisa Cáceres Commune

    Eastern Venezuela is home to extensive petroleum extraction and processing operations which have their hub in the cities of Barcelona and Puerto la Cruz in Anzoátegui state. The Luisa Cáceres de Arismendi Commune, one of the most advanced communes in the country, grew up in the shadow of this multibillion-dollar business in one of Barcelona’s working-class neighborhoods. This is a rapidly-growing commune – remarkable because of its success in an urban context – which focuses on recycling and waste disposal to maintain itself.

    The post Self-Government In Times Of Blockade: Luisa Cáceres Commune appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • The Venezuela Coup, 20 Years Later

    Above Photo: Pedro Carmona swearing in as president following the April 2002 coup. The enduring legacy of Venezuela’s short-lived 2002 coup d’etat, and the subsequent countercoup, for US-Latin American relations. On April 11, 2002, Venezuela’s democratically elected government, headed by Hugo Chávez Frías, was ousted in a military coup d’etat. Then, dramatically, two days later, the […]

    The post The Venezuela Coup, 20 Years Later appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Venezuela: Thousands March To Commemorate Coup Defeat Anniversary

    Big crowds took to the streets of Caracas on Wednesday, April 13, to mark the twentieth anniversary of a short-lived coup. On April 11, 2002, US-backed civilian and military elites ousted democratically elected President Hugo Chávez following a massive media campaign and false flag violence. A self-proclaimed “transition government” took power the next day and was endorsed by Washington and a handful of other countries. However, a massive popular response in the ensuing 48 hours, especially from popular neighborhoods on the hillsides of the capital, pushed loyal military sectors into action. The coup was defeated and Chávez returned to the presidency in the early hours of April 14, 2002. To commemorate the coup defeat’s twentieth anniversary, two Chavista marches featuring tens of thousands of people were held in Caracas. The mobilizations, which included delegations and high-profile politicians from throughout the country, took off from different points before converging on Miraflores Presidential Palace in the afternoon.

    The post Venezuela: Thousands March To Commemorate Coup Defeat Anniversary appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • US’s Flaunting Of Diplomatic Immunity Challenged In Court

    Venezuelan diplomat Alex Saab’s case took a dramatic turn as his legal defense team denounced the US government’s flagrant failure to respect long-standing diplomatic immunity conventions. Saab’s lawyer, David Rivkin, called the US government’s arguments before the 11th Circuit Court in Miami “utterly dangerous.” “The implication,” he added is that “because you are a disfavored regime, because you’re Venezuela under Maduro…we’re going to treat you as somehow you lost the Westphalian entitlement to sovereignty.” And with that, Rivkin pretty much summed up the US imperial view of the world.

    At issue at the April 6 hearing was Saab’s claim to diplomatic immunity under the Vienna Convention on Diplomat Relations.

    The post US’s Flaunting Of Diplomatic Immunity Challenged In Court appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Imprisoned Venezuelan Diplomat Contests Extraterritorial Judicial Abuse

    Venezuelan diplomat Alex Saab’s case took a dramatic turn as his legal defense team denounced the US government’s flagrant failure to respect long-standing diplomatic immunity conventions. Saab’s lawyer, David Rivkin, called the US government’s arguments before the 11th Circuit Court in Miami “utterly dangerous.” “The implication,” he added is that “because you are a disfavored regime, because you’re Venezuela under Maduro…we’re going to treat you as somehow you lost the Westphalian entitlement to sovereignty.” And with that, Rivkin pretty much summed up the US imperial view of the world.

    At issue at the April 6 hearing was Saab’s claim to diplomatic immunity under the Vienna Convention on Diplomat Relations. This international law, to which the US is a signatory, affords accredited diplomats absolute protection from arrest and prosecution even in time of war. Referring to the war in Ukraine, Saab’s attorney reminded the court that the principle at stake is “vital to the effective functioning of diplomacy for all states…[which] is all the more imperative these days.”

    Charges against Alex Saab

    Alex Saab, who was appointed as a special envoy by Venezuela in 2018, was initially detained on orders of the US on June 12, 2020. He was en route from Caracas to Tehran when his plane made a fueling stop in Cabo Verde. Saab had in his possession his diplomatic passport and other documents (see them on online) commensurate with his diplomatic mission.

    Saab had been on a mission to procure humanitarian supplies of basic food, fuel, and medicine for Venezuela from Iran in legal international trade but in circumvention of the illegal US sanctions and blockade of Venezuela. The US had identified Saab as a key player in the resistance to the US’s economic war against Venezuela.

    After being held in tortuous conditions in Cabo Verde for nearly 500 days, the US kidnapped Saab a second time and has imprisoned him in Miami since October 16, 2021. Washington did not have an extradition treaty with Cabo Verde and did not inform Saab’s lawyers or family before flying him to the US.

    The US government dropped its initial seven counts of money laundering and retained only one count of “conspiracy” to money launder, to which Saab pleaded not guilty in US District Court last November. That charge carries a maximum penalty of 20 years imprisonment. In this instance of extraterritorial judicial overreach by Washington, the defense has noted that Saab is neither a US citizen nor was the alleged crime committed in the US.

    Functional denial of immunity

    A half a year from now, Saab is scheduled to go on trial in the 8th District Court on the single conspiracy charge. His appearance this April 6 at the 11th Circuit Court was on appeal on the grounds that, like any other diplomat, he is protected by the Vienna Convention, which affords him absolute immunity from prosecution.

    Saab’s attorney, Rivkin, argued before the appellate court that “every day Mr. Saab is in prison is a grave breach. It’s almost a First Amendment type situation. It’s irreparable harm to him. It’s irreparable harm to the sovereign state whose diplomatic agent he is.”

    The US government attorney on April 6 maintained in court that Saab’s “claim of special envoy status is simply a ruse made up by a rogue nation to allow a defendant to escape criminal charges in the US.” On this basis, US prosecutor Jeremy Sanders argued that Saab should just wait however many more years behind bars it takes until after the conspiracy charge is adjudicated in the lower court. Then, if found guilty, he could try to contest his denial of diplomatic immunity.

    Even Circuit Court Judge Jordan challenged the US government attorney, using the hypothetical example of a state court criminally charging a US president. The judge quipped that rather than wait for the lower count trial to proceed, “you’d be up at the appellate court in a heartbeat, arguing that that issue had to be resolved immediately. Right?”

    Judge Luck, also on the three-judge panel, added that “the failure to rule on it [diplomatic immunity] is itself a decision to bring someone in, to haul someone into court when they are not otherwise required or entitled to be in court;” that is, a “functional denial of immunity” in Judge Jordan’s words.

    The court “will take the matter under advisement,” which is legalese to say they will mull it over as Saab continues to languish in prison.

    International support for Alex Saab

    Meanwhile, outside the courthouse, William Camacaro, head of the US #FreeAlexSaab Campaign, along with its honorary chair, Puerto Rican liberation hero, Oscar López Rivera, led a demonstration in support of Saab. Similar support rallies were held elsewhere in North America and internationally.

    The Venezuelan National Assembly unanimously passed a resolution condemning what its president, Jorge Rodríguez, called an “act of immeasurable hypocrisy” by the US.

    The National Lawyers Guild called for Saab’s immediate release, commenting that the case reflects on “the extent to which the US government will go in order to enforce its unilateral coercive measures and economic sanctions against Venezuela, Iran and other targeted nations.”

    This is a politically motivated case, not a legal one, and is “really about the international order and viability of diplomacy,” according to counsel Femi Falana. Falana was Saab’s lead attorney before the regional Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) Court of Justice, which twice ordered Saab to be liberated when he was held in Cabo Verde.

    Venezuela’s successful resistance to US economic warfare

    The Biden administration, which had continued Trump’s “maximum pressure” blockade of Venezuela, is showing signs of needing to make amends with its Latin American neighbor. An already inflationary US economy has been rendered yet more volatile with Washington’s sanctions on Moscow causing increased prices at the gas pump. This led to a visit that would have been unthinkable for Washington a few months earlier.

    A high-level US delegation visited Caracas in early March to meet with Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, presumably to negotiate an oil trade deal. While there has been no official confirmation of such a deal, the visit implicitly recognized the legitimacy of the elected president of Venezuela, handing Maduro a major victory. Meanwhile, the hapless Juan Guaidó, recognized as the “interim president” of Venezuela only by the US and a few of its most sycophantic allies, may soon be history.

    According to the UN, the US sanctions initially reduced Venezuelan government revenues by an extraordinary 99% and fueled astronomic hyperinflation. Venezuela’s successful resistance, aided by Saab and many others, has foiled the US attempt to foment regime change through imposition of what the UN calls “unilateral coercive measures,” a form of collective punishment and economic warfare. Rather, Venezuela’s once devastated economy is rejuvenating.

    In the last month, Venezuela’s inflation slowed down to 1.4%, which is lower than before Obama first imposed sanctions in 2015. The national consumer price index has been below 10% for the last seven months. The investment bank Credit Suisse projects a remarkable 20% GDP growth in 2022 and 8% more in 2023 for Venezuela. According to political analyst Ben Norton, “the worst of this US-fueled economic crisis has passed.”

    Alex Saab was instrumental in the economic turnaround. Venezuelan National Assembly President Rodríguez credited Saab with helping to “overcome the most brutal attack the country suffered,” which is precisely why the US has persecuted him. And the Venezuelan government has made clear that they will not abandon, in the words of President Maduro, their “kidnapped” diplomat.

    The post Imprisoned Venezuelan Diplomat Contests Extraterritorial Judicial Abuse first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Venezuela’s Great Housing Mission Achieves Major Milestone Of Delivering 4 Million Homes

    On April 7, the socialist government of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro celebrated the delivery of a record 4 million homes to its citizens as part of a social housing program called the Great Housing Mission of Venezuela (GMVV). During a joint radio and television broadcast, President Maduro emphasized that the handing over of the 4 million homes was a “historic” event and a “world record.” “Nothing and no one is going to stop us,” he added.

    The post Venezuela’s Great Housing Mission Achieves Major Milestone Of Delivering 4 Million Homes appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Venezuela’s Economy Will Grow 20% In 2022, Despite Illegal US Sanctions, Predicts Western Bank

    The major Switzerland-based bank Credit Suisse has predicted that Venezuela’s real GDP growth will be 20% in 2022. The prominent Western financial institution also forecasted that Venezuela’s real GDP will increase by an additional 8% in 2023. These predictions come despite an illegal US blockade imposed on Venezuela, which has starved the government of revenue, locked it out of the international financial system, and fueled an economic crisis. The top United Nations expert on sanctions estimated that the Venezuelan government lost 99% of its revenue due to the Western unilateral coercive measures, which are illegal under international law.

    The post Venezuela’s Economy Will Grow 20% In 2022, Despite Illegal US Sanctions, Predicts Western Bank appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.