|
Page 1 of 3
 Reviewing James Petras' New Book: Part II Part II continues Petras' analysis of the global depression, regional wars, and the decline of America's empire. Obama's Latin American Policy At all times under all administrations, policy, not rhetoric, defines priorities, and it's no different for Obama. With regards to Latin America and its people, he's been hostile and dismissive by: -- allocating half a billion dollars "in military and related aid" to aid the right wing Calderon regime and militarizing the US - Mexican border; -- on the pretext of fighting drugs trafficking and regional security, funding to Mexico and Colombia goes for military purposes; Colombia gets the most - billions under Plan Colombia; economic aid is ignored; -- beyond the timeline of Petras' book, Hugo Chavez and other regional leaders voiced concern over Washington's intention to supply Colombia with new weapons and technology, continued billions for the hardline "Uribe doctrine," and of greatest concern the plan to access seven new military bases - three airfields, two naval installations, and two army bases besides nine others currently stationing US forces all supplemented by the reactivated Fourth Fleet in April 2008; -- continuing US trade policies that have been devastating to regional farmers and peasants; likely new protectionist measures will hurt them more; -- practicing the same Bush anti-Latino immigrant policies with talk now about new legislation to harden them and establish a new bracero policy; -- targeting regional left of center regimes, including Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, Nicaragua and Cuba; the latter's long-standing embargo remains in place despite some relaxed travel and other restrictions; and -- maintaining a three-fold regional strategy: (1) supporting hard right Colombian, Mexican and Peruvian regimes; (2) aiming for more influence over centrist governments in Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Uruguay and Paraguay; and (3) "isolating and weakening leftists and populist governments" in Cuba, Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia and Nicaragua. Overall, Obama is continuing the same Bush policies. Latin America remains a low priority, but military aid and an imperial agenda define it along with supporting the region's most hard right, repressive regimes. He also "talk(s) free markets while practicing protectionism," very typical of how America operates - one-way to benefit its corporate interests at the expense of its trading partners. The current economic crisis added a new wrinkle. Obama is "absorbing most of the hemisphere's credit (for his) financial bailout," so regional exporters are hard-pressed to finance their operations. Capital repatriated to America's domestic market compounds the problem by extending and deepening Latin America's recession. "All the major countries in the region are headed toward negative growth (exacerbated by) double-digit unemployment, rising levels of poverty, and mass protests." They're vulnerable because of the "production and development strategies (they) adopted" with emphasis on "privatization of all key productive sectors." Now in the face of their deepening crisis, center-left regimes (like in Brazil and Argentina) have made no or few provisions for unemployed workers, peasants, public employees and small business. Instead, (in pursuit of new markets and investors) "bankers, export elites and multi-national corporations" are favored as in America. However, Venezuela's center-left regime pursued an alternate strategy, including nationalizing key sectors, protecting vital social ones like food, and expanding agrarian reform to increase production. Chavez vows to maintain social services and is practicing Keynesian policies to do it - large-scale public investments combined with subsidizing the most needy. Still, Venezuela's dependence on oil revenues makes it vulnerable to declining prices, something very much in play today that threatens social stability along with high inflation and "mal-distribution of income, property and power." Overall throughout the continent, "Mass protests, general strikes, and other forms of social unrest are beginning to manifest themselves." America will try to capitalize on them to maintain dominance over its "back yard." Addressing Economic Needs Via Electoral Processes: The Case of Venezuela Democratic political processes require: -- "Free and equal competition for political office; -- access to the means of communication; and -- competing ideas and freedom to speak and act without physical or psychological coercion." In contrast, authoritarian and faux democratic regimes:-- control the mass media, access to it, and one-sidedly support free-market dominance to the exclusion of alternative systems; -- let monied interests control the process through unrestricted spending for favored candidates to the detriment of others, especially independent ones that are entirely shut out; -- exert state repression and vote-rigging to deny opposition candidates an equal chance; -- accept foreign financing for regime favorites, and -- allow other hard line tactics and embedded systems to make democratic governance impossible. The mass media play a crucial role. Their power influences public opinion, supports favored candidates, and it's no different in Venezuela than elsewhere. Yet Hugo Chavez and his party won impressive victories in every presidential, congressional and municipal election since 1998 by promising and delivering social changes - real ones for essential needs that lifted millions of out of poverty by using the nation's resources to help them. In recent years, other Latin American electoral systems have also been democratized as neoliberal practices receded, popular mass movements arose, and "oligarchic uprisings" for authoritarian rule were defeated. Venezuela represents the most impressive example. Prior to Chavez' election, the country had oligarchic rule for 40 years under two parties competing (like Republicans and Democrats) "to represent the petrol-rentier oligarchy, powerful importers, and the real estate-financial speculative elite." Both parties "pillaged the public treasury" until Chavez won office in December 1998 and reformed the system. He survived the Washington-backed April 2002 coup, the later in the year-early 2003 oil management lockout, the August 2004 recall election, and remains the most popular political figure in the country. It's prospered under his leadership, and Venezuelans have benefitted by policies delivering beneficial social change. Chavez deepened the nation's democracy through: -- elected community councils; -- encouraging, promoting and financing "a vast array of neighborhood cooperatives, peasant organizations and trade unions; -- "weakening....linkages between the oligarchic political and economic elites" and reducing authoritarian power over civil society; -- establishing publicly financed television and community radio stations to challenge the corporate media's control of information; -- supporting free expression, including by his fiercest opponents; and -- conducting free, fair, and open democratic elections that shame America's rigged ones favoring a corrupted two-party oligarchy. Today, the pro-Chavez United Socialist Party of Venezuela ((PSUV) enjoys overwhelming support as evidenced in the November 2008 election when it won 72% of state governorships and 58% of the popular vote. In February 2009, Venezuelans passed a constitutional amendment permitting an incumbent president and government officials to run for office without term limits. In other words, to let people vote their officials in or out, not party bosses in back rooms. Over the past decade, it shows in Venezuela: -- media choices are more diverse; -- more social classes than ever exist at state and local levels; -- the electoral process is free, fair and open as judged by independent observers; -- campaigns and procedures are less corrupt, violent and unable to be manipulated by the powerful; -- citizen participation is widespread and impressive; and -- governance under Chavez has lessened inequalities and encouraged the citizenry to participate in their democracy. Obstacles nonetheless remain, principally "in the continuation of vast concentrations of oligarchic wealth and ownership of strategic banking, mass media, real estate, agricultural lands, distribution networks and the manufacturing sectors." As a result, "vast social inequalities" exist, though less extreme than before 1999. Chavez's most pressing task is to "formulate a comprehensive socio-economic strategic plan to confront the global collapse of capitalism," especially in light of lower oil prices and demand. Advancing his social agenda depends on it. Masters of Defeat: Retreating Empire and Bellicose Bluster Despite America's imperial and diplomatic defeats, militarism under Obama continues to serve the usual constituencies that benefit, while at the same time unmet human needs are ignored and disdained. As the economic crisis deepens, reckless national resource amounts are diverted to powerful corporate interests and to maintaining America's imperial footprint globally in spite of clear failures with Iraq as Exhibit A. Over six years of war and occupation left "enormous military casualties and over a half a trillion in economic losses, without securing any political, military or natural resource gains." Iran is Exhibit B. Despite Israeli-Washington efforts to isolate the country, in October 2008, Shell Oil and the Austrian energy company OMV sponsored a Teheran conference promoting "gas export opportunities and potentials of the Islamic Republic of Iran." After losing out on tens of billions in potential oil revenues, Big Oil may have decided that "economic-centered empire building" is preferable to the military kind. Shell's move perhaps is an overture for what's to come if the Obama- Netanyahu axis doesn't intervene militarily to stop it. Afghanistan and Pakistan are Exhibits C and D with US forces targeting them both in a futile effort to secure control and extend America's South Asia influence. After nearly eight years of conflict and occupation, Taliban forces are now resurgent, and stepped up efforts to defeat them will likely prove as unsuccessful as previous campaigns. Yet vast sums are wasted trying while vital domestic needs go begging. America's one-sided Israeli support is equally futile and "has led to a sharp decline (of) US influence in the region" as well as enormous Arab street opposition that promises one day to explode. It's also been bad for business. "Zionist-Israeli usurpation of US Middle East policy has led to strategic losses of investments, markets, profits and partnerships for the entire multi-national oil and gas industry" as well as other global economic losses. Washington is also losing out in Latin America where its influence is waning. For business, it amounts to hundreds of billions in lost trade and investments as global competitors like China have profited at America's expense. Washington's belligerency has a price, and its fallout is also felt at home. Besides its declining competitiveness, America's economic strength has weakened. Conditions at home are in disarray, and "the financial system is disconnected from the real economy and on the verge of collapse...." It's only a matter of time before it rubs off on Obama and he's blamed for it, as well he should be, given the destructiveness of his economic policies. In lieu of progressive alternatives, administration extremists seek confrontation with Russia, China and Iran as well as Latin American states like Venezuela. These nations and others show more resistance, and most states prefer cooperative economic growth over futile military conflict - a lesson Washington and Israel have yet to learn, and they're paying for it. The Obama Regime, The Zionist Power Configuration and Regional Wars Obama's Israel-Firster officials and 51 influential Zionists organizations define America's counterproductive Middle East belligerency - an agenda destined to fail, yet it persists despite urgent domestic needs left unaddressed. Edward Said once said that in a matter of hours, the Israeli Lobby could marshal the entire Senate to come together for Israel on virtually anything - even policies counterproductive to America's best interests. In addition, outliers in both Houses of Congress are purged, appointments with dubious Israeli loyalties are blocked, and regional belligerency is the preferred option over diplomacy because Israel expects it with regards to Iraq under Saddam, Iran, Syria, Hezbollah in Lebanon and Gazans under Hamas - targeted by slow-motion genocide that continue with Washington's approval but couldn't persist without it, or Israel's illegal West Bank settlements either. For decades, and especially since 9/11, Muslims and Arabs have been ferociously targeted by vicious propaganda and military aggression. Obama is following the same agenda, in Afghanistan with stepped up efforts. America's pro-Israeli media as well as influential business, academic and other figures support open-ended militarism and all policies benefitting Israel regardless of their destructiveness. As a result, the US is in terminal decline with nothing in evidence to stop it.
|