There is a coup underway
in Venezuela. The pieces are all falling into place like a bad CIA
movie. At every turn a new traitor is revealed, a betrayal is born, full
of promises to reveal the smoking gun that will justify the
unjustifiable. Infiltrations are rampant, rumors spread like wildfire,
and the panic mentality threatens to overcome logic. Headlines scream
danger, crisis and imminent demise, while the usual suspects declare
covert war on a people whose only crime is being gatekeeper to the
largest pot of black gold in the world.
This week, as the New York Times showcased
an editorial degrading and ridiculing Venezuelan President Maduro,
labeling him “erratic and despotic” (“Mr. Maduro in his Labyrinth”, NYT
January 26, 2015), another newspaper across the Atlantic headlined a
hack piece accusing the President of Venezuela’s National Assembly,
Diosdado Cabello, and the most powerful political figure in the country
after Maduro, of being a narcotics kingpin (“The head of security of the
number two Chavista defects to the U.S. and accuses him of drug
trafficking”, ABC, January 27, 2015). The accusations stem from a former
Venezuelan presidential guard officer, Leasmy Salazar, who served under
President Chavez and was recruited by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency
(DEA), now becoming the new “golden child” in Washington’s war on
Venezuela.
Two days later, the New York Times ran a
front-page piece shaming the Venezuelan economy and oil industry, and
predicting its downfall (“Oil Cash Waning, Venezuelan Shelves Lie Bare”,
Jan. 29, 2015, NYT). Blaring omissions from the article include mention
of the hundreds of tons of food and other consumer products that have
been hoarded or sold as contraband by private distributors and
businesses in order to create shortages, panic, discontent with the
government and justify outrageous price hikes. Further, multiple ongoing
measures taken by the government to overcome the economic difficulties
were barely mentioned and completed disregarded.
Simultaneously, an absurdly
sensationalist and misleading headline ran in several U.S. papers, in
print and online, linking Venezuela to nuclear weapons and a plan to
bomb New York City (“U.S. Scientist Jailed for Trying to Help Venezuela
Build Bombs”, Jan. 30, 2015, NPR). While the headline leads readers to
believe Venezuela was directly involved in a terrorist plan against the
U.S., the actual text of the article makes clear that no Venezuelans
were involved at all. The whole charade was an entrapment set up by the
FBI, whose officers posed as Venezuelan officials to capture a
disgruntled nuclear physicist who once worked at Los Alamos and had no
Venezuela connection.
That same day, State Department
spokeswoman Jan Psaki condemned the alleged “criminalization of
political dissent” in Venezuela, when asked by a reporter about fugitive
Venezuelan general Antonio Rivero’s arrival in New York to plea for
support from the United Nations Working Committee on Arbitrary
Detention. Rivero fled an arrest warrant in Venezuela after his
involvement in violent anti-government protests that lead to the deaths
of over 40 people, mainly government supporters and state security
forces, last February. His arrival in the U.S. coincided with Salazar’s,
evidencing a coordinated effort to debilitate Venezuela’s Armed Forces
by publicly showcasing two high profile military officers – both former
Chavez loyalists – that have been turned against their government and
are actively seeking foreign intervention against their own country.
These examples are just a snapshot of
increasing, systematic negative and distorted coverage of Venezuelan
affairs in U.S. media, painting an exaggeratedly dismal picture of the
country’s current situation and portraying the government as
incompetent, dictatorial and criminal. While this type of coordinated
media campaign against Venezuela is not new – media consistently
portrayed former Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, elected president
four times by overwhelming majorities, as a tyrannical dictator
destroying the country – it is clearly intensifying at a rapid, and
concerning, pace.
The New York Times has a
shameful history when it comes to Venezuela. The Editorial Board
blissfully applauded the violent coup d’etat in April 2002 that ousted
President Chavez and resulted in the death of over 100 civilians. When
Chavez was returned to power by his millions of supporters and loyal
Armed Forces two days later, the Times didn’t recant it’s previous
blunder, rather it arrogantly implored Chavez to “govern responsibly”,
claiming he had brought the coup on himself. But the fact that the Times
has now begun a persistent, direct campaign against the Venezuelan
government with one-sided, distorted and clearly aggressive articles –
editorials, blogs, opinion, and news – indicates that Washington has
placed Venezuela on the regime change fast track.
The timing of Leamsy Salazar’s arrival
in Washington as an alleged DEA collaborator, and his public exposure,
is not coincidental. This February marks one year since anti-government
protests violently tried to force President Maduro’s resignation, and
opposition groups are currently trying to gain momentum to reignite
demonstrations. The leaders of the protests, Leopoldo López and María
Corina Machado, have both been lauded by The New York Times and other
‘respected’ outlets as “freedom fighters”, “true democrats”, and as the
Times recently referred to Machado, “an inspiring challenger”. Even
President Obama called for Lopez’s release from prison (he was detained
and is on trial for his role in the violent uprisings) during a speech
last September at an event in the United Nations. These influential
voices willfully omit Lopez’s and Machado’s involvement and leadership
of violent, undemocratic and even criminal acts. Both were involved in
the 2002 coup against Chavez. Both have illegally received foreign
funding for political activities slated to overthrow their government,
and both led the lethal protests against Maduro last year, publicly
calling for his ouster through illegal means.
The utilization of a figure such as
Salazar who was known to anyone close to Chavez as one of his loyal
guards, as a force to discredit and attack the government and its
leaders is an old-school intelligence tactic, and a very effective one.
Infiltrate, recruit, and neutralize the adversary from within or by one
of its own – a painful, shocking betrayal that creates distrust and fear
amongst the ranks. While no evidence has surfaced to back Salazar’s
outrageous claims against Diosdado Cabello, the headline makes for a
sensational story and another mark against Venezuela in public opinion.
It also caused a stir within the Venezuelan military and may result in
further betrayals from officers who could support a coup against the
government. Salazar’s unsubstantiated allegations also aim at
neutralizing one of Venezuela’s most powerful political figures, and
attempt to create internal divisions, intrigue and distrust.
The most effective tactics the FBI used
against the Black Panther Party and other radical movements for change
in the United States were infiltration, coercion and psychological
warfare. By inserting agents into these organizations, or recruiting
from within, that were able to gain access and trust at the highest
levels, the FBI was able to destroy these movements from the inside,
breaking them down psychologically and neutralizing them politically.
These clandestine tactics and strategies are thoroughly documented and
evidenced in FBI and other US government documents obtained through the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and published in in Ward Churchill and
Jim Vander Wall’s excellent book, “Agents of Repression: The FBI’s Secret Wars Against the Black Panther Party and the American Indian Movement” (South End Press, 1990).
Venezuela is suffering from the sudden
and dramatic plummet in oil prices. The country’s oil-dependent economy
has severely contracted and the government is taking measures to
reorganize the budget and guarantee access to basic services and goods,
but people are still experiencing difficulties. Unlike the dismal
portrayal in The New York Times, Venezuelans are not starving, homeless
or suffering from mass unemployment, as countries such as Greece and
Spain have experienced under austerity policies. Despite certain
shortages – some caused by currency controls and others by intentional
hoarding, sabotage or contraband – 95% of Venezuelans consume three
meals per day, an amount that has doubled since the 1990s. The
unemployment rate is under 6% and housing is subsidized by the state.
Nevertheless, making Venezuela’s economy
scream is without a doubt a rapidly intensifying strategy executed by
foreign interests and their Venezuelan counterparts, and it’s very
effective. As shortages continue and access to dollars becomes
increasingly difficult, chaos and panic ensue. This social discontent is
capitalized on by U.S. agencies and anti-government forces in Venezuela
pushing for regime change. A very similar strategy was used in Chile to
overthrow socialist President Salvador Allende. First the economy was
destroyed, then mass discontent grew and the military moved to oust
Allende, backed by Washington at every stage. Lest we forget the result:
a brutal dictatorship led by General Augusto Pinochet that tortured,
assassinated, disappeared and forced into exile tens of thousands of
people. Not exactly a model to replicate.
This year President Obama approved a
special State Department fund of $5 million to support anti-government
groups in Venezuela. Additionally, the congressionally-funded National
Endowment for Democracy is financing Venezuelan opposition groups with
over $1.2 million and aiding efforts to undermine Maduro’s government.
There is little doubt that millions more for regime change in Venezuela
are being funneled through other channels that are not subject to public
scrutiny.
President Maduro has denounced these
ongoing attacks against his government and has directly called on
President Obama to cease efforts to harm Venezuela. Recently, all 33
Latin American and Caribbean nations, members of the Community of Latin
American and Caribbean States (CELAC), publicly expressed support for
Maduro and condemned ongoing U.S. interference in Venezuela. Latin
America firmly rejects any attempts to erode democracy in the region and
will not stand for another US-backed coup. It’s time Washington listen
to the hemisphere and stop employing the same dirty tactics against its
neighbors.
Eva Golinger is the author of The Chavez Code. She can be reached through her blog.
