[Marxism] Venezuela: Colombia Journal - " The World's Warmonger"

[davidquarter@xxxxxxxxxxxx]

On 24 Feb 2005 at 10:42, mart wrote:

Forward from mart.
===================================
Colombia Journal - February 21, 2005
http://www.colombiajournal.org/colombia203.htm

The World's Warmonger

by Garry Leech

According to the Bush administration, it is  Venezuelan
President Chávez' desire to purchase weapons from
Russia that threatens to destabilize the Andean region,
not the $3 billion in military aid that Washington has
provided to Colombia over the past five years. Likewise,
in the Middle  East, it is Syria's efforts to obtain purely
defensive anti-aircraft missiles that pose a threat to
that region, not the $1 billion a year in U.S. military aid
to Israel. And on the nuclear front, while there is no
evidence that Iran is intending to build nuclear weapons,
it is the regime in Tehran that is threatening to further
destabilize the region, not President Bush's apparent
pledge to support any future Israeli attack against Iran.
Meanwhile, North Korea's withdrawal from the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in order to develop
nuclear weapons makes the Asian nation a "rogue state,"
but Washington's abandonment of the Anti-Ballistic Missile
Treaty (ABM) to build its missile defense system, which
could lead to the weaponization of space, apparently does
not justify the same anti-multilateralist label being applied
to the United States.


In December 2004, the Bush administration sent
a letter of protest to the Russian Embassy in
Washington, DC, and also expressed its concern
to Russia's defense and foreign ministers about
Moscow's decision to sell AK-47 automatic
weapons to Venezuela. The Bush administration
claims that President Chávez's arms purchases
pose a threat to neighboring Colombia and could
lead to a regional arms race, destabilizing the
Andean region. The Bush administration failed to
note the possibly destabilizing consequences of
Colombia's recent massive U.S.-funded military
build up.


A State Department spokesman stated: "Venezuela's
plans to purchase various types and large quantities
of weapons are extremely troubling. And we believe
that Venezuela should consult with its neighbors on
such armament acquisitions." Which raises the
obvious question: Has the United States ever
suggested that the Colombian government consult
with President Chávez or other regional leaders
regarding the massive amounts of military aid it has
received from Washington over the past five years?

This answer is definitely not.


The Bush administration also contributed to increasing
instability in the Andean region by supporting Colombia's
flagrant violation of Venezuelan sovereignty in December
2004. The U.S. Ambassador to Colombia William Wood
stated that the United States supported the Uribe
administration "100 percent," even after the Colombian
government admitted lying when it initially announced
that FARC guerrilla representative Rodrigo Granda had
been arrested in the Colombian city of Cúcuta. Instead,
the Colombian government had paid mercenaries to
kidnap Granda in the Venezuelan capital and smuggle
him across the border.


The Bush administration's confrontational rhetoric has
also included repeatedly labeling President Chávez as
anti-democratic. Such accusations reek of hypocrisy
given the Bush White House's immediate endorsement
of the military coup that temporarily overthrew the
democratically-elected Chávez in April 2002-not to
mention the likelihood of a U.S. role in the coup itself.
Not surprisingly, Colombia was the only other country
in the hemisphere to follow Washington's lead and
immediately recognize the coup government.


Clearly, Venezuela poses no military threat
to the United States. However, given the
horrendous history of U.S. military intervention
in Latin America, the Bush administration's
anti-Chávez rhetoric and the close military ties
between the United States and Colombia,
the Chávez government has plenty to fear from
Washington. And yet, Bush administration
officials would have us believe that it is the
United States that is being threatened by
Venezuela, whose only weapons are social
policies aimed at helping the poor and words
that criticize U.S. imperialism in the region.


The Bush administration has not only criticized
Russia's arms sales to Venezuela, but also
Moscow's recent announcement that it intends
to sell anti-aircraft missiles to Syria. The United
States has threatened Russia with sanctions
because it considers Syria a state supporter
of terrorism.


The Bush White House has not addressed Syria's
legitimate concerns with regard to defending itself
against acts of aggression by the better-armed
Israeli military. In September 2003, Israeli agents
carried out a car bombing in the Syrian capital of
Damascus and the Israeli Air Force has violated
Syrian sovereignty on numerous occasions by
bombing alleged Palestinian training camps.


According to the Bush administration, Syria's
purchase of purely defensive anti-aircraft
missiles to defend itself against blatant Israeli
violations of its airspace poses a threat to the
region. While Syrian policies may contribute
to the turmoil in the region, the Bush White
House refuses to entertain the possibility that
the provision of $1 billion a year in U.S.military
aid to Tel Aviv and Israel's repeated use of
U.S.-supplied weapons to attack neighboring
countries such as Syria, Lebanon and the
Occupied Territories may also be a significant
destabilizing factor.


President Bush also recently pledged to support
Israel if it decides to turn its U.S.-supplied
weaponry against Iran. The Bush administration's
threatening rhetoric towards Iran is intended, as is
also the case with Venezuela and Syria, to make
the country an international pariah and to
eventually achieve regime change. The Bush
administration has repeatedly accused Iran of
violating the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
(NPT) because U.S. officials believe Tehran
intends to build nuclear weapons.


Astoundingly, Washington is not threatening the
Iranian government because it is developing
nuclear weapons, but because it might develop
them. This is clearly a case of the Bush
administration taking its new pre-emptive strike
doctrine to the extreme.


U.S. officials are most concerned about Iran's plans
to enrich uranium, which is a necessary ingredient
for nuclear energy but can also be used in nuclear
weapons.However, neither the building of nuclear
power plants northe enrichment of uranium
constitute a violation of the NPT. In fact, while the
International Atomic Energy Agency admits that it
would like to more closely monitor Iran's nuclear
energy project, it has definitively stated that Tehran
has not violated the NPT. Furthermore, Article 4
of the NPT states that nothing should impede a
country's "inalienable right" to develop nuclear
energy.


The fact that Iran has not violated the NPT has
not discouraged the Bush administration from
continuing its propaganda campaign intended
to convince the U.S. public and the world
otherwise. At the same time it is propagandizing
against Iran, the Bush administration is itself
violating the NPT by developing a new generation
of nuclear weapons called "mini-nukes" and
"bunker busters." These new weapons violate
Article 2 of the NPT, which calls on states "not
to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear
weapons or other nuclear explosive devices."
The Bush government has also failed to live up
to its obligations under Article 6 of the NPT
calling on nuclear powers to commit themselves
to nuclear disarmament.


Washington's propaganda alleges that Iran's intentions
to build nuclear weapons pose a threat to the Middle
East. It fails to the destabilizing effects of the U.S.
invasion and occupation of Iraq or President Bush's
outspoken support of possible Israeli aggression
against Iran.


The hypocrisy of the Bush administration is also
evident in its relations with North Korea. While
the United States is busy developing a new
generation of nukes, the Bush White House has
tried desperately to politically isolate North
Korea because of its nuclear weapons program.
However, unlike Iran, North Korea is no longer
beholden to the NPT, having pulled out of the
treaty in April 2003. As a result, North Korea
is now in the category of non-NPT states that
possess nuclear weapons along with Israel,
India and Pakistan.


Apparently though, Israel, India and Pakistan are
permitted to possess nuclear weapons because they
are allies of the United States, or so goes Bush
administration logic. In contrast, North Korea has
long been an enemy of the United States and has
had to confront increasingly threatening rhetoric
from Washington and more than 30,000 U.S.
troops and scores of U.S. Air Force bombers
stationed on its southern border.


Bush administration attempts to force North Korea,
even after its withdrawal from the NPT, to refrain
from developing nuclear weapons is clearly
hypocritical given the U.S. withdrawal from the
Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM) in order to
develop its missile defense system, or "Star Wars"
project. As the Bush White House is accusing North
Korea of destabilizing Asia with its nuclear weapons
program, the United States is attempting to establish
an anti-missile system that could include basing
weapons in pace.


The placement of weapons in earth's orbit by the
United States, as some defense planners have
called for, would go far beyond destabilizing one
region of the globe, it would threaten the entire
planet and beyond.


While global nuclear disarmament is clearly the
desired goal of many nations, the United States
is undermining such a possibility by developing
its own new generation of nukes and selectively
targeting some countries that are developing
nuclear weapons while ignoring others. At the
same time, it is the Bush administration that is
threatening nations in every corner of the world,
particularly those regimes critical of the U.S.
global military and economic project. While there
are valid reasons to be concerned about some of
these countries targeted by the Bush
administration, they are no more a destabilizing
factor than some U.S. allies, or the United States
itself for that matter.


The hypocrisy of the Bush administration is clearly
evident in its targeting of alleged rogue states -
Venezuela, Syria, Iran and North Korea-while
supporting non-democratic and repressive regimes
in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan
and Azerbaijan, among others. The Bush
administration's  militaristic rhetoric and actions
have not only resulted in increasing numbers of
people around the globe viewing U.S. foreign
policy as a significant destabilizing factor in
international relations, it has also made clear
exactly who is the world's principle warmonger.

==============================================

Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Click here and get your free* stock car racing gift.
http://click.topica.com/caadc7Ya84x2ucgHtdaf/PermissionData
-------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------
ANTI-NATO INFORMATION LIST
--^----------------------------------------------------------------
This email was sent to: davidquarter@xxxxxxxxxxxx

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84x2u.cgHtda.ZGF2aWRx
Or send an email to: ANTINATO-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxx

For Topica's complete suite of email marketing solutions visit:
http://www.topica.com/?p=TEXFOOTER
--^----------------------------------------------------------------




_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism