Venezuela

The fightback
User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10750
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Venezuela

Post by blindpig » Fri Jan 25, 2019 8:43 pm

Image

Imperialism has concocted a new coup d'état, now against Venezuela
January 25, 2019 Freedom Newspaper 36 Views 0 comments
Maduro Moros is the president because he was elected by 67 percent of the voters. No one has chosen the golpista or is supported by a single vote. "
By: Humberto Vargas Carbonell

There is no doubt that a new form of coup d'état is underway in Venezuela. Until recently the blows were given by the military, usually trained in the so-called "School of Assassins"; now new modalities have been practiced. The novelty in the methods is practical although the generating element remains the same: American imperialism.
All the murdered, all the prisoners, all the exiles must be put in the macabre accounting of the American empire.

Before the orders were fulfilled by the military gorillas, now it is up to politicians without personality, without programs and without destiny. They are chosen to serve those who rule in the United States, without critical capacity and without ethical restraints.

They act runaway, with the lost control, for them the decisive thing is to obey: to be part of the interventionist clan. Make personal merits before the arrogant exploiter and demerit the people in which they were born.

That is the unfortunate fate of President Carlos Alvarado, fellow traveler of the worst of this America sacrificed at the altar of the Wall Street billionaires and in the redoubts of the so-called White House.

Momentarily you can deceive a people but difficult to deceive the story.
I do not know how many deceived the murderers of Juan Rafael Mora Porras and José María Cañas, but today, over the years, are the dregs of the country's history. This will be the inexorable fate of the nano-executors of the so-called "lima group".

The gringos want to recover the immense riches with which nature endowed the Venezuelan people. In the fake democracy governments managed to make them their own, now they do not have them because Venezuela became a Bolivarian Republic thanks to Comandante Chaves and his legitimate successor, President Maduro.

Maduro won the elections with the best electoral system in the world, according to the president of the USA, Carter. He obtained 67 percent of the votes, more than any of those who now intend to condemn him.

In the elections there was a massive accompaniment.

But, for reasons of patriotic hygiene, I think, the everlasting observers of the OAS and the United States were not invited. And this is the pretext for a new attempt at a coup against the legitimate government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.

An unknown character, member of an Assembly without functions, declares himself President; This can be done by any irresponsible and even any orate. But in this case the maneuver was announced by the Vice President of the United States and executed by his agents.
In Venezuela there is only one legitimate President, Nicolás Maduro Moros
We hope with optimism that the attempted coup fails once again and consolidates democracy and popular unity in Venezuela.

Venezuela is a country blocked by Yankee imperialism, each sacrifice of each Venezuelan is the responsibility of Yankee imperialism and its aides.

To just give an example. The United Kingdom illegally holds 14 tons of gold that are owned by the Venezuelan State.

The United States blocks and sanctions the country and political personalities.

Is this banditry a struggle for democracy? No. It is a war of prey for oil, for iron, for gold, and for other riches that are property of the Venezuelan people.
The people, the true people of Venezuela, make sacrifices to honor their history of struggle and the memory of the LIBERATOR, Simón Bolívar.

http://www.periodicolibertad.org/2019/0 ... venezuela/

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10750
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Venezuela

Post by blindpig » Sat Jan 26, 2019 1:16 am

SCENARIOS OF MILITARY INTERVENTION: THE CAPABILITIES OF VENEZUELA TO DEFEND ITSELF
Rubén Castillo

28 Sep 2018, 9:36 pm.

On July 4, 2018, the AP news agency in Bogotá stated that last year the president of the United States, Donald Trump, raised the idea of ​​a military intervention in Venezuela in meetings behind closed doors with its top officials and advisers and with presidents of the region in the framework of the General Assembly of the United Nations.

Recall, also, that in a press conference on August 11, 2017, Trump himself assured that the military option was open for our country. After this declaration, President Nicolás Maduro, in accordance with the military doctrine and focus of security and defence in the Bolivarian National Armed Forces (FANB), issued a series of instructions to develop a set of exercises, in civic-military union, as an answer to these aggressions.

Having said this and reviewing the precedents of the US government in the region and in the world, and understanding the softening-up strategy applied to the country in the economic, financial and propaganda fields, a military intervention to our territory is not ruled out. "All options are still on the table" with respect to Venezuela, where the military option is logically included, according to President Trump himself in the framework of the 73rd General Assembly of the UN.

From this assumption some questions arise: Is our FANB able to respond to a possible attack by the US? What would be the possible intervention scenarios that it would use? And finally, which of these theaters of operations would be developed and how would Venezuela act?

BOLIVARIAN MILITARY DOCTRINE, PROSPECTS FOR CONFLICT AND STRATEGIC FOCUS
Since the arrival of Hugo Chávez in 1999, the Venezuelan military paradigm has turned 180 degrees. The Strategic Operational Command of the Bolivarian Armed Forces emphasizes that the current general doctrine of the Venezuelan army is based "on Bolivarian military thought, under the strategic conception of a prolonged people's war, in order to carry out efficiently the planning, coordination and execution processes of military defence operations, cooperation in the maintenance of internal order and active participation in the development of the nation."

This new approach to national defence, which since the arrival of the Bolivarian Revolution has become integral in all areas that correspond to sovereignty, was accompanied by a series of elements in the procurement of weapons designed to face the possible scenario of an asymmetric or conventional war waged by external actors.

During the last decade, gradually but systematically, the Venezuelan military defence equipment has been upgraded to the point of having the capacity to deny the airspace to any type of aircraft that wants to fly over it without full authorization.

But beyond the fact of having modernized our entire weapons system, beyond all the military exercises that we have carried out inside or outside the territory, our greatest strategic advantage lies in our knowledge of the threats, in the systematic analysis of possible war scenarios that we could face, in efficiently distributing the defence of the territory through a Layered Integral Defence strategy, promoted from larger to smaller scale theaters by the REDI (Comprehensive Defence Region), the ADI (Comprehensive Defence Areas), the ZODI (Comprehensive Defence Zone), and finally, the ZOSE (Security Zones).

This aspect of any prospective conflict has as its operational focus the war of attrition or trench warfare, where the enemy is confronted in a staggered and stabbing way, emphasizing that each defence strategy varies according to the territory to which a certain component is assigned. This responds to the military maxim of the best possible understanding and use of the terrain to improve the efficiency of combat, and would be applied in case of an occupation scenario by exogenous forces.

In that sense, the Bolivarian Armed Forces recognize that the military confrontation, as a continuation of politics by other means, can vary in its forms, depending on the changing nature of the politics and the society in which it is waged. In this way, you can identify the balance point where the aggressor army is confronted, with the minimum number of casualties and loss of resources and the adaptation of the available resources, obtaining an advantage in a confrontation by way of a specific modality.

INTERVENTION SCENARIOS V'S CAPABILITIES OF THE BOLIVARIAN ARMED FORCES
In this regard, we must make it clear that for several years, Venezuela has experienced a scaled intervention process; only that the last phase, the military one, has not yet been fully developed and is still used as a threat.

This is so not because the United States, as a military force, lacks the resources to carry it out. It has all the military and logistical apparatus that would be necessary; however, as usual, its army does not go to war if in the target country there is an organized defence system capable of repelling or resisting the intervention over a prolonged period.

For that we only have to review recent history: Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, among other cases of recent times. In these countries the military intervention was realized after the military component of the nation was demoralized and weakened from within its internal structures, or previously worn down by internal armed conflicts of a mercenary and terrorist nature, also propitiated by the United States, with the objective of neutralizing the defensive capabilities of the target country.

With respect to Venezuela, and taking into account the margin of error implied by any projection, the intervention could take place under the hypothesis of three scenarios. Each and every one of them, also, entails a response scenario from the FANB.

Saturation Bombing and Lightning War

This scenario, although very appealing to enemy forces, because it bases its strategy on the so-called "softening-up fire" that allows reducing casualties to zero because they are attacks from a distance, at the moment represents the biggest obstacle and the most difficult strategy in an eventual military attack.

This is because the military and geostrategic conditions that Venezuela currently possesses do not allow it. With regard to the territorial dimension, our country has a layered defense system, consisting of an anti-aircraft defence system among the best in the world, which has already been tested by the US military forces in other latitudes (Syria, for example ) with adverse results.

The political and media cost of a large-scale intervention of this type is very high because it represents a high probability of failure. Today our country has equipment that detects the enemy presence in sea and air at a minimum of 300 km in a straight line and with a ceiling that is around 25 thousand meters high. Accompanied by Su-30MK2 aircraft, which have the ability to confront any enemy before it invades our airspace, the thesis of a Lightning War (occupying the target country in a few days with a minimum number of casualties) is extremely difficult to carry out. This is compounded by the existence of civil and military focal resistance points that may be encountered in a subsequent phase of the intervention.

The acquisition several years ago of the S-300VM medium-range air defence system, means that Venezuela has a staggered anti-aircraft defence system composed of ZU-23 anti-aircraft cannons, Buk-2M missile systems, and Russian Pechora-2M and S-300VM systems, capable of intercepting all kinds of targets, be they missiles or planes in a range of up to 200 kilometers. This defensive factor complicates the effectiveness of an eventual air campaign against the country.

Intervention from the border areas

There is a likelihood that a military intervention could be carried out within the triple border that our country has with Brazil, Colombia and Guyana. A military invasion from these locations would only be possible with the Colombian army, due to a specific geographical reason: it is the military force closest to the capital of the Republic and with greater accessibility, because there are communication channels that would facilitate such an attack.

Moreover, Brazil's reluctance to accept an intervention in Venezuela and the almost irrelevant role of Guyana in the current stage of the political conflict means that Colombia is where the first shots could come from.

Specifically in Colombia, the issue operates with a different logic. Even with the support of US military bases and personnel in its territory, operationally they would have to deal with the role that different armed groups that live in those areas near the Venezuelan border, such as the so-called Colombian Self-Defence Groups and the Bacrim (‘Criminal Bands’), who would also defend their interests and areas of influence in the event of a conflict initiated in spaces that they consider their exclusive territories.

Now, in terms of the military capabilities of both countries, according to the prestigious military portal Global FirePower, in its ranking of 2018, Venezuela and Colombia are virtually tied in firepower and military capabilities. However, in more specific lines, Venezuela leads. While the country has 696 combat tanks of different types, 57 self-propelled artillery vehicles and 52 rocket launchers (Smerch type), Colombia does not possess units of these key equipment for conventional or asymmetric land combat.

In terms of combat aircraft and towed artillery, Colombia outnumbers Venezuela, however, the quality of Russian equipment purchased by Venezuela in these categories demonstrate greater capacity than the US equipment bought by the neighboring State.

In anti-aircraft defense, for the expert in conflicts of the University of Rosario, Vincent Torrijos, "Colombia does not have a credible anti-aircraft defense system", which contrasts enormously with the capabilities acquired by Venezuela in this field for several years. Understanding this weakness and acting belatedly, General José Mauricio Mancera, head of strategic planning for the Colombian Air Force, indicated that it is necessary for the neighboring country to acquire an anti-missile system to have a "clearly defensive policy."

This, together with the regional defence capacity that has been installed through the formation of integral defence networks, knowledge of the terrain and the operational readiness for the containment of an occupation army using asymmetric warfare, put at risk the effectiveness of any military intervention that comes from Colombia, given the advantages that Venezuela has.

But beyond these aspects, one of the maxims in any war is that one must have the greatest control over the strategic variables that allow the balance to tip favorably, and for now neither Colombia nor the United States have total control of factors that range from geopolitics, disposition to real combat, and American internal drift.

Another key aspect that could limit the scope of an intervention through Colombia is the preparation of the FANB in ​​the defense of the territory, its high levels of articulation and its high morale, which in this cost-benefit relationship, would be a decisive influence in our favor.

Military intervention through irregular or terrorist factors

The political, strategic and also economic costs of the previous forms of intervention could open the scenario of an intervention through terrorist tactics.

Within the framework of the Plan for Recovery, Growth and Economic Prosperity, one of the actions taken by the Venezuelan government is aimed at equating the cost of gasoline with international prices, due to which service stations, fuel tanks and other components of PDVSA (the State-owned petroleum company), could become attack targets.

The regularization of the sale of gasoline and the affectation of contraband could precipitate the activation of armed groups linked to drug trafficking on the Colombian side, who are the main beneficiaries of this business. The exercises, a little over a month ago, of responding to damage to the bridge over Lake Maracaibo, together with the frustrated assassination attempt against President Nicolás Maduro, are signs that the model of intervention through unconventional warfare is on the agenda.

Given this, it is no coincidence that paramilitary groups such as the "Tren de Aragua" issued a statement a few days ago declaring a frontal war against the police forces, just at the moment when tensions with the United States are at their peak.

The permanent sabotage of the national electricity system, the increase in violence on the Colombian border due to the conflict of interests between paramilitaries and apparently isolated facts such as the discovery of a clandestine ammunition factoryin Cabudare (located in Lara state) indicate that the irregular route is being tested and financed behind the scenes in the absence of an electoral or politically viable option to remove Chavismo from power in the medium term.

In this sense, the intelligence and internal security apparatus (SEBIN, PNB and GNB) has played an important role in dismantling actions of this type, through the tactical positioning and handling of anticipated information, executed efficiently by the Force of Special Actions (FAES), as happened in January of this year in El Junquito, Miranda state, with the dismantling of Óscar Pérez's terrorist cell.

Because of the low political, economic and logistical costs that it represents for the United States, terrorism could be an option to be used to precipitate military intervention mechanisms in Venezuela, which is also not guaranteed of success given the capabilities of the national security apparatus to disarticulate mercenary factors and how it has taken the lessons provided by this type of interference in Iraq, Syria and Libya, to achieve greater effectiveness in the anticipation and detection of threats.

CLOSING REMARKS
We must consider that, for the Venezuelan government, geopolitics is also assumed as a defence policy that has a notorious influence.

Among the variables that could lead the US government to take the decision of a military intervention, the economic associations with China and Russia in Venezuela play a key role, as it involves an indirect confrontation with rising financial and military powers. A strong factor of dissuasion.

The Venezuelan strategy of integrating its foreign policy with that of China and Russia has been one of the most effective in this stage of the conflict. This is confirmed by President Nicolás Maduro's recent visit to China, the arrival to the Venezuelan coast of China's hospital ship "Arch of Peace" and the bilateral meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov before his address to the plenary of the General Assembly of the United Nations.

The projection of Maduro as interlocutor between competing powers and the use of national energy resources to generate counterbalances and geopolitical conditions that limit the scope of the intervention agenda, is a visible consequence of a strategy designed to avoid war as a strategic concept, at the same time that the political offensive and the willingness to fight are maintained.

This is where the United States has perhaps the biggest obstacle to overcome, if it wishes to continue with its plan to attack Venezuelan sovereignty: how to intervene in Venezuela without initiating a new front of semi-direct confrontation with Russia and China, at a time when they are on the offensive and every false step by Washington is used to weaken the hegemony of the US?

http://misionverdad.com/mv-in-english/s ... end-itself
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10750
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Venezuela

Post by blindpig » Sat Jan 26, 2019 12:28 pm

Business Insider

Venezuela's 'interim president' is in hiding — despite US backing — and appears to be failing one of his own 3 tests for securing power

Image
Juan Guaidó, the Venezuelan opposition leader who declared himself interim president, has disappeared from the public eye.

It comes as Venezuela's military leaders declared their support for embattled President Nicolás Maduro.

Guaidó previously said he needed the support of the Venezuelan people, the international community, and the military to secure power. He does not have military support.

Tens of thousands of people called on Maduro to step down this week. He has not budged.
Perhaps a couple 'tens of thousands' while many times that number are in the streets supporting the government. Ya won't see that on TV.
The long list of countries supporting his claim — including the US, the EU, and most of Venezuela's neighbors— gives him a good argument that he has persuaded the international community.
"Venezuela's neighbors", the toadies the US has suborned. Meanwhile the majority of the world's people stand with the Venezuelan government but ya won't see that on TV either.
"Amnesty is on the table. Those guarantees are for all those who are willing to side with the Constitution to recover the constitutional order," he told Univision.
Hiding, and now weaseling...this ain't going well.

https://www.businessinsider.com/venezue ... NUlnF0QAYw
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10750
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Venezuela

Post by blindpig » Mon Jan 28, 2019 2:29 pm

White House Won’t Rule Out Attacking Venezuela Militarily
Sen. Graham: Trump 'really hawkish' on Venezuela
Jason Ditz Posted on January 27, 2019Categories NewsTags Trump, Venezuela
While the indications are that the immediate US efforts on trying to impose regime change in Venezuela will be mostly economic, the White House also seems to be going out of its way to insist that attacking the South American country militarily is still “on the table.”

Mick Mulvaney said that the president wouldn’t be doing his job if he ruled out attacking Venezuela, telling reporters he is looking at that idea “extraordinarily closely” after having endorsed opposition leader Juan Guaido as president.

According to Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) it’s more than just not ruling out the idea. The hawkish senator reported that President Trump brought up the idea is a recent discussion with him and is “really hawkish” on Venezuela.

Graham says he advised Trump that attacking “could be problematic.” Trump was apparently shocked at this, expressing the belief that he thought Graham “wants to invade everybody.”

Trump’s big supporter on this seems to be Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), who says he believes “it’s just a matter of time” before there is regime change, and questions only “whether it will be peaceful or bloody.”

Trump has been on board with either since taking office, and has been talking up regime change virtually since taking office. This has included calling for coups d’etats in Venezuela, and repeatedly bringing up the idea of military intervention.

https://news.antiwar.com/2019/01/27/whi ... ilitarily/

If the US threw it's full militarily weight against Venezuela there would be little to be done but retreat into the back country, and all of the borders are unfriendly. But that is very unlikely as political considerations will demand a more 'nuanced response', like 'Bay of Pigs'...... Doesn't look as though the US will have any local proxies of 'weight', Bolo said 'no'(could be lying), Guyana is a military joke and Columbia is good at small scale murder but possesses no armor and Venezuela has hundreds of AFVs. Trump will want it very quickly resolved, loves 'seat of the pants' and ain't shy about firing generals who disagree with him....could be 'historic'.

OTOH, if Trump freaks out the JCS too bad they could 'Kennedy' his ass and blame Putin. That would work for them.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10750
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Venezuela

Post by blindpig » Tue Jan 29, 2019 2:48 pm

Coup in Venezuela: What Next?
Marco Teruggi, a Caracas‐based political commentator, examines the situation of the Bolivarian Government in the international chessboard.

By Marco Teruggi – Green Left Weekly
Jan 30th 2019 at 12.01am

https://venezuelanalysis.com/N4qm

Image
Venezuela is facing a point of no return. (Green Left Weekly)

The dice have been thrown and the game is on in Venezuela. This week has seen the country enter into new uncertain and dangerous terrain, although with some predictable elements. We have witnessed different variables develop, and now wait for new elements that may catalyse or justify an outcome.

The current chain of events seems to have been planned out step-by-step: the attempted theft of weapons by a group of members of the Bolivarian National Guard on the morning of January 21, followed by incidents of violence concentrated in the west of Caracas; US Vice-President Mike Pence’s video supporting Juan Guaidó and calling for demonstrations on January 23; the swearing-in of Guaidó; US President Donald Trump’s recognition of Guaidó a few minutes later; ongoing incidents of violence; the convening of a meeting of the Organization of American States (OAS) to seek recognition of the parallel government; the US$20 million announced by Pence for “humanitarian aid”; and yet more programmed violence.

Not everything went as planned. For now, there are two main variables at play: the international front and the violence.

International front
Regarding the international front, the attempt to get the OAS to recognise Guaidó as president failed, with only 16 votes out of 34. This is not a new failure: the Lima Group (formed in 2017 by right-wing Latin American governments), now weakened by the Mexican government’s anti-interventionist stance, emerged out of a similar situation.

Moreover, the European Union did not formally recognise Guaidó and agreed – an unstable agreement opposed by governments like France – on the need to have new elections in Venezuela.

The axis of the current situation originates and rests in the US, which has called a meeting of the United Nations Security Council for January 26. What kind of debate and agreement will they seek there in terms of the parallel government? The strategy is reminiscent of the way in which the operation to oust the Libyan government was conducted in 2011.

On the second front, a program of violence is underway. The incidents of violence have moved through different poor areas of Caracas: west, south and the outer edges of the east, namely Petare, one of the most populated barrios [poor neighbourhoods].

There, particularly in the latter, armed groups have been activated and funded to generate violent actions, seeking to create a big impact in the media. These incidents are scheduled to start at night and are carried out in such a way to enable them to be promoted on social media.

Human rights organisation Surgentes has stated that, “at least 38% of demonstrations were violent, and in 28.5% of them there were confrontations with security forces, with firearms and other substantial elements”.

A Bolivarian National Guard sergeant was murdered, and two members of that institution were beaten up in an attempted lynching carried out in broad daylight, in a zone dominated by the opposition.

In this context, there has been a rising number of deaths of youths in poor areas mobilised by the right. This is a well-known situation: the same method was used in 2017, which at critical points saw Chavista youths burnt alive on the street and attacks on military bases.

This is all part of the escalation of events unfolding in Caracas and other parts of the country, with situations of violence in areas that are not part of the right’s social base combined with demonstrations such as the one on January 23.

This coup strategy integrates different variables: international pressure for recognition of the parallel government and chaos and deaths inside the country. This is the current situation.

What next? One of the planned steps is to activate the parallel government, whose power lies on the international front, though it has no power or impact inside the country.

This could mean economic actions, like attempts to freeze state assets or a takeover of CITGO, the US branch of Venezuelan state oil company PDSVA. These attacks would increase economic hardship and push the economy towards collapse, something that has been sought since the blockades and sabotage began.

Additionally, the opposition is expected to start an operation to bring in the “humanitarian aid” that Pence promised at the OAS meeting. Will this be a Trojan horse?

This set of steps, designed and promoted from outside the country, does not seem to indicate how they expect to oust Maduro — who was democratically elected — from the government.

Violence
When Guaidó has been asked, he has replied that military intervention is “an element of force that is on the table”. Regarding the possibility of a coup by the Bolivarian National Armed Forced (FANB), he said, “it is an element that is always worth considering”.

Guaidó’s strategy, which is part of a larger plan devised from abroad, cannot be carried out without a component of violence. What directions this violence will take remains to be seen.

We know about previous attempts in 2014 and 2017, of what is already at play, and of what they need to achieve their goal. Overwhelmed by his role and his own will for success, Guaidó has extended to Maduro the same offer of amnesty he has said he will give to civilians and the military.

The gap between the announcement of this coup against Maduro and its materialisation is still large. The army stated that they “will never accept a president imposed in the shadow of dark interests and self-proclaimed outside the law”.

Defence minister Vladimir Padrino López also stated that they will “avoid a confrontation between Venezuelans; it’s not a civil war, but dialogue that will solve Venezuela’s problems”. This last sentence should be taken with complete seriousness: one of the violent strategies of the coup plan relies on generating clashes between civilians.

The right has repeated that it will neither dialogue nor negotiate. Maduro has stated his willingness to do so, following the declarations of the governments of Mexico and Uruguay.

What then, if there is no dialogue? Venezuela faces a point of no return: that of accelerating attacks on many fronts to oust the elected government by force, and the start of a mass revenge.

Those leading this push reside in the US and, once again, are doing so in the name of freedom.

Translated from Pagina 12 by Pedro Alvarez.

The views expressed in the following statements are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Venezuelanalysis editorial staff.

Source: Green Left Weekly

https://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/14270

Maduro's offer of talks is pro forma, there are no possible points of agreement.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10750
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Venezuela

Post by blindpig » Tue Jan 29, 2019 5:15 pm

Venezuela Attorney General Begins Probe into Juan Guaido, Looks to Ban Travel

Image
Venezuela's Chief Prosecutor Tarek William Saab attends a news conference at the Supreme Court in Caracas, Venezuela Jan. 29, 2019 | Photo: Reuters

Published 29 January 2019

Tarek Wiliam Saab says that the actions of this citizen are causing detrimental harm to the nation which qualifies him from being banned from travel outside of Venezuela as a preliminary investigation begins.


The Attorney General of Venezuela Tareck William Saab reported Tuesday afternoon that a preliminary investigation by the Public Ministry against lawmaker and president of the in-contempt National Assembly, Juan Guaido based on his responsibility in various events that have occurred since January 22, which "have damaged the peace of the Republic, the economy and national pride" he added.

The facts against Guaido being investigated range from violent protests with deadly results to the implication of coercive measures carried out by the United States against Venezuela. All, occurred during January of this year.

Also, the prosecutor, who was at the Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ), announced that there are precautionary measures for the duration of the investigation, which prohibits Guaido from traveling outside of the country.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Ven ... -0012.html

"The best defense is a good offense." Johnny Unitas said that
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10750
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Venezuela

Post by blindpig » Tue Jan 29, 2019 6:43 pm

What happens in Venezuela going forward will have major consequences for the entire region and the world; and, with the U.S. already pushing countries to pick sides, the world may soon become as divided as it was immediately preceding WW II.

by Whitney Webb

January 26th, 2019

CARACAS, VENEZUELA — Since the decision of the Trump administration on Wednesday to recognize a member of the Venezuelan opposition, Juan Guaidó, as an unelected “interim president,” the situation in the South American country has become increasingly tense, with efforts to force the current government of Venezuela — led by Nicolás Maduro — out of power having grown in intensity over the past few days.

Despite the enormous pressure his government faces from both local and international sources, Maduro has managed to maintain his position thanks to a combination of factors. These include the loyalty of the country’s well-armed military, in addition to popular support from Venezuelans who recently voted for Maduro, as well as Venezuelans who may not like Maduro but prefer him to a politician hand-picked and foisted upon them by the United States.

Yet, the long-standing campaign of the United States to effect regime change in Venezuela — a campaign that has been ongoing ever since Hugo Chávez, Maduro’s predecessor and mentor, was elected in 1998 — has shown time and again that the U.S. is unwilling to let go of its dream of installing a “friendly” government in the world’s most oil-rich country.

For that reason, if the Trump administration’s attempt to simply install a Venezuelan president fails to produce the intended result (regime change), there is substantial concern that the U.S. will turn to other means to bring about a change in government, including the instigation of a new proxy war.

While direct military intervention by the U.S. has not been ruled out, it has long been seen as more probable — based on the U.S.’ troubling history of ousting leftist Latin American governments through right-wing coups — that the U.S. would follow the roadmaps it used to push for regime change in both Syria and Ukraine. In other words, the danger of another major proxy war — this time in Latin America — looms large and, much like what has transpired in Syria and Ukraine, the manufacture of such a conflict would again pit the U.S. against both Russia and China, both of which have invested heavily in Venezuela, and by extension in the current government, for nearly two decades.

Also troubling is the fact that the U.S. has already laid much of the groundwork for such a proxy war and the chaotic situation on the Venezuelan-Colombian border offers U.S. intelligence enough cover to funnel arms, money and personnel into Venezuela to further destabilize the country. If Maduro is to be believed, the U.S. has already been doing this for much of the past year.

Raising the temperature and the stakes
Juan Guaidó, a relative newcomer to Venezuelan politics and a founding member of the Popular Will political party, declared himself to be the new president of Venezuela on Wednesday, a move that was quickly backed by the U.S. with the support of all countries closely allied with the U.S. throughout the Americas, North and South.

The U.S. decision to back Guaidó, as has been pointed out by many analysts in recent days, was significant as it shows a clear effort by the U.S. to push the already tenuous situation in the country to its boiling point. Indeed, by effectively creating two governments within Venezuela, the clearest consequence is to deepen the rift in Venezuelan society by forcing the country’s citizens to choose sides.

Though Guaidó’s relatively short time in Venezuelan national politics gives him the benefit of having relatively little political baggage, his association with the Popular Will Party, known as Voluntad Popular in Spanish, makes it clear why he so quickly won the U.S.’ support.

Image
Juan Guaido speaks to the press as he leaves a public plaza where he spoke in Caracas, Venezuela, Jan. 25, 2019. Fernando Llano | AP

Popular Will was founded by Venezuelan opposition firebrand Leopoldo López. Lopez is a member of the upper echelons of Venezuela’s political aristocracy, educated in elite institutions like the Hun School of Princeton, a private boarding school whose alumni include Saudi princes as well as the children of U.S. presidents and Fortune 500 CEOs. He attended Kenyon College in Ohio and then Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government. Some journalists have asserted that López began a relationship with the CIA while at Kenyon.

A few years after beginning his political career, López — immediately prior to the U.S.-backed failed coup of 2002, in which he enthusiastically participated — began heading to Washington rather frequently “to visit the IRI (International Republican Institute) headquarters and meet with officials from the George W. Bush administration,” according to journalist Eva Golinger. The IRI is one of three foundations that comprise the National Endowment for Democracy, a U.S. government-funded NGO linked to numerous regime-change efforts abroad, including Egypt (2013) and Ukraine (2014). Notably, the IRI, along with the National Democratic Institute (NDI), both have funded Popular Will since its founding in 2010. López is currently the party’s national coordinator.

While the U.S.’ decision to back Guaidó was undeniably an effort to escalate the situation in Venezuela, the U.S. has also made it clear that it plans to continue pushing for escalation. Indeed, the U.S. has officially requested a UN Security Council meeting on Saturday “to discuss the ongoing crisis in Venezuela.” South Africa’s U.N. Ambassador Jerry Matjila stated that the “consultations” between the Security Council and U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo would be closed, though subsequent reports have claimed that the meeting would be open. The meeting, if it is approved by 9 out of 15 member states, will likely push for countries to choose between Guaidó and Maduro.

Given that the U.K., Spain and Germany have already backed Guaidó at the U.S.’ behest, more European nations are likely to follow, meaning that the international pressure facing the Maduro-led government will continue to grow following Saturday’s events. Thus, in addition to forcing the Venezuelan people to choose sides, the U.S. will likely be — over the weekend — forcing the international community to choose sides as well.

Notably, key countries — including Turkey, Russia, China as well as Maduro’s regional allies such as Mexico, Nicaragua, Bolivia and Cuba — have backed Maduro. Given the presence of both Russia and China, who hold veto power on the UN Security Council, any resolution by that body that would support Guaidó will be dead on arrival. Yet, if the U.S. is able to win the support of a significant number of countries in its bid to withdraw Maduro’s “legitimacy” — whether by diplomatic or more forceful means — the Trump administration may feel confident enough to take matters into its own hands. This makes the recent comments of a top Trump official stating that “all options are on the table” in regards to Venezuela equal parts significant and chilling.



Groundwork for Syria/Ukraine-style regime-change op already laid in Venezuela
In pursuit of regime-change agendas abroad and as part of a larger strategy of containment aimed at Russia and China, the U.S. has followed a roadmap in recent cases that includes some or all of the following elements: the manufacture of a “humanitarian” justification for regime change; funneling of arms and weapons into the country via its foreign borders; mass funding of the political opposition; and covert involvement of U.S. government agencies, particularly the CIA.

In the case of Syria, a CIA-backed revolt, along with a compliant international media and complex network of pro-regime-change “humanitarian” organizations, were critical in creating the current situation, which was further exacerbated by the influx of weapons and funds to “moderate rebels” via the CIA and later U.S. allies. A few years later, Ukraine followed a distinct but similar roadmap. As was noted last year by South Front, the U.S.-backed regime-change operation in Ukraine in 2014 involved an outsized role from the U.S. State Department, billions of dollars in U.S. funding of the political opposition, and the early involvement of the CIA.

Unsurprisingly, many of these elements are currently at play in Venezuela. Since the late Hugo Chávez came to power in the 1998 election, the U.S. has funded the Venezuelan opposition to the tune of over $100 million. The humanitarian justification has long been played up by the international media, which has placed sole responsibility for Venezuela’s economic and political crisis on the Maduro-led government, despite the role of U.S. sanctions and economic warfare, as well as the U.S. government and the Venezuelan opposition groups it funds colluding to create the conditions for the current political crisis in order to facilitate their regime-change plan.

Image
A man dressed as Uncle Sam holds a fake nuke and a placard showing OAS president as a dog, at an anti-imperialist march in Caracas, Venezuela, Aug. 14, 2017. Ariana Cubillos | AP

Though this last point is less known, it was confirmed following a leaked 2013 phone conversation of Maria Corina Machado, another key figure in the U.S.-funded Venezuelan opposition and another top political ally of Guaidó and his associate Leopoldo López. In the leaked conversation, Corina Machado describes what Ramon Guillermo Aveledo, the chairman of the opposition umbrella group Mesa de la Unidad Democrática, told Undersecretary for Latin American Affairs Roberta Jacobsen, whom he had recently met in Washington. During the call, Corina Machado stated:

I found out that Ramon Guillermo Aveledo told the State Department that the only way to resolve this is by provoking and accentuating a crisis, a coup or a self-coup. Or a process of tightening the screws and domesticating to generate a system of total social control.”

In addition, there is substantial evidence that the still chaotic situation on the Venezuelan-Colombian border offers plenty of opportunity for U.S. intelligence agencies to funnel arms, insurgents and other agents of destabilization into Venezuela. Furthermore, the conflict there could potentially be used as the pretext for a direct role for the U.S. military in escalating the situation in Venezuela.

For decades, the Venezuelan-Colombian border has been the sight of considerable violence, much of it the result of in-fighting among leftist and right-wing paramilitary groups vying for control of the regional drug trade. It is increasingly porous, allowing the flow of paramilitary fighters, migrants, smugglers and others between the two nations, resulting in various controversies that have seen Maduro close the border from August 2015 to July 2016 following an attack by a Colombian group on the Venezuelan military.

Since then, drug-fueled violence and Colombian concerns over the exodus of Venezuelan migrants have led Colombia to increasingly militarize its side of the border, though some analysts have claimed recent violence from the National Liberation Army (ELN) leftist paramilitary group has led the Colombian and Venezuelan authorities to leave major expanses of the border “to its fate.”

Given the precarious situation on the Venezuela-Colombia border, it is a weak point through which state actors wishing to destabilize Venezuela could easily act. Some evidence, including the aforementioned incident in August 2015, suggests that such action has already taken place. For instance, in March 2017, the Venezuelan military dismantled a right-wing paramilitary camp near the Colombian border, which was stocked with numerous supplies including stolen Venezuelan military uniforms, Colombian military uniforms and — most notable of all — U.S. army uniforms. At the time, teleSUR asserted that the discovery “substantiates claims that the U.S. Army is training right-wing paramilitaries to spread terror in the region.”

More recently, last year, Maduro asserted that Colombian paramilitary groups were “seeping through” the Venezuelan-Colombian border and had been planning to “carry out a series of provocations” before being intercepted by Venezuelan authorities. At the time, he had blamed Colombian oligarchs and the U.S. government for orchestrating the “infiltration.”

Though some may choose to discount Maduro’s claims, the CIA essentially admitted in 2017 that it was actively attempting to foment regime change in Venezuela. In July of that year, Mike Pompeo — then CIA director — stated:

We are very hopeful that there can be a transition in Venezuela and we the CIA is doing its best to understand the dynamic there, so that we can communicate to our State Department and to others.”

He then added:

I was just down in Mexico City and in Bogota a week before last talking about this very issue, trying to help them understand the things they might do so that they can get a better outcome for their part of the world and our part of the world.”

In addition, while the Venezuelan-Colombian border may be used to destabilize the situation by more covert means, the current situation along the border may also provide the U.S. a justification to intervene militarily. Indeed, the presence of the ELN group in both Venezuela and Colombia has led notable U.S. figures — such as the architect of the current coup, Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) — to offer them up as reasons to list Venezuela as a “state sponsor” of terror.

Rubio has been pushing for Venezuela to be added the U.S.’ State Sponsors of Terrorism list for months. Last Saturday, however, Rubio claimed in a tweet that ELN “operates from Venezuela where Maduro has given them safe harbor,” though the group is equally active in both Colombia and Venezuela, Venezuelan soldiers are frequent targets of ELN attacks, and pro-Maduro Venezuela outlets often characterize ELN as an “illegal group”.

Image
Donald Trump, Mike Pence and Sen. Marco Rubio meet with the wife of US-backed Venezuelan opposition leader, Leopoldo Lopez. White House Photo

Though Rubio provided no evidence to support the claim that Maduro has given ELN members “safe harbor,” the growing strength of the group and its violent tactics could be just the pretext the U.S. or its regional allies would need to intervene more directly in Venezuela, especially considering that U.S.-linked think tanks have claimed that the ELN is now present in half of Venezuela. Indeed, making Venezuela an official “state sponsor of terrorism” would allow the U.S. to greatly increase its pressure on the country, both economically and diplomatically.
Marco Rubio

@marcorubio
Left-wing terror group carried out the bombing that killed 21 people in #Colombia.

The groups leaders live in #Cuba under the protection of regime.

And the group operates from #Venezuela where Maduro has given them safe harbor. #StateSponsorsOfTerror https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/le ... story.html

873
8:42 AM - Jan 19, 2019
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Left-wing rebel group blamed for car bomb that killed 21 in Bogota
The attack may doom already stalled peace talks between the Colombian government and the National Liberation Army.

washingtonpost.com
931 people are talking about this
Other events that have occurred in the past few years have suggested that a role for the U.S. military is in the cards as well — a possibility only strengthened by the emerging “state sponsor” narrative already being fielded by Sen. Rubio. For instance, in 2017, the U.S. military held a major military drill and established a “temporary” military base in close proximity to Venezuela with the governments of Colombia, Peru and Brazil. Since then, following the recent election of Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil, a Colombian official stated, “If Bolsonaro helps topple Maduro with military intervention, he will have Colombia’s support.” Though Bolsonaro later claimed that he has “no interest” in a military intervention in Venezuela, several of the top officials in his government — including his Vice President, Hamilton Mourao — have repeatedly called for a “humanitarian intervention” in Venezuela. The size and scope of such an intervention, however, has yet to be determined.

These complex situations along its border, the confirmed role of the U.S. in bringing about the country’s political crisis, and the looming possibility of military intervention — by either the U.S. or its regional allies — show that Venezuela currently has many of the same elements that were present in Ukraine in 2014 and Syria in 2011. The U.S. seems intent on bringing about regime change in Caracas by any means necessary, but Washington’s success will largely depend on the actions of Venezuela’s most powerful foreign allies, who incidentally are both Washington’s chief rivals — Russia and China.



Russia and China’s skin in the game
In the event that the internal situation in Venezuela — thanks largely to external pressure — devolves into a major conflict between Guaidó-supporting and Maduro-supporting sides, it will only be a matter of time before both Russia and China join the fray — either directly or indirectly — to prevent a U.S.-backed regime-change effort from succeeding.

A major reason the involvement of Russia and China is a given is that both have invested a tremendous amount of money in the country, particularly after Venezuela’s relationship with the U.S. greatly decayed during the early years of Chavista rule.

By a large margin, the largest foreign sponsors of Venezuela following the rise of the Chavista movement have been Russia and China. Though no exact measures of their investments in the South American nation are available, China is believed to have invested around $70 billion, in the form of loans as well as social projects and maintenance of the country’s oil production infrastructure. Most of those loans are set to be paid back to China in the form of Venezuelan crude. In addition, China and Venezuela have formed several joint ventures involving the production of automobiles, mobile phones and computers, among other goods. These investments and connections make China by far Maduro’s largest and most influential foreign sponsor and creditor.

However, as Foreign Policy wrote in 2017:

If Venezuela collapses …, China faces a large risk of diplomatic and financial blowback. Opposition politicians are well aware that China propped up … Maduro rule. A new Venezuelan government could well refuse to honor the Maduro-era obligations entirely and look to Washington for support instead.”

Russia is believed to have lent and invested around $17 billion in Venezuela over the past 20 years, significantly less than China. However, Russia — through state-run companies such as Rosneft — has gained significant ownership stakes in at least five major Venezuelan oil fields along with several decades worth of the future outputs of Venezuelan-held natural gas fields in the Caribbean. In addition, and most significantly from the U.S. perspective, in 2017 Venezuela offered 49.9 percent of Citgo — its wholly owned U.S. subsidiary — along with three Gulf Coast refineries and its pipeline network as collateral to Rosneft for $1.5 billion.

Rosneft’s interests in Venezuela are so great that its executive chairman, Igor Sechin, stated in 2017 that “we will never leave and no one will be able to kick us out of there.” Yet, as Leonid Bershidsky recently wrote in Bloomberg, “If Maduro falls and a U.S.-backed government takes his place, it’s highly likely that the Russian projects will be suspended and Venezuela’s debts won’t be repaid.”

In addition to the tremendous amount of money on the line for both nations, neither Russia nor China is willing to let the world’s most oil-rich country — with more proven crude oil reserves than Saudi Arabia — see its current government, which is friendly to their interests but hostile to those of the U.S., be toppled and replaced with its polar opposite. Not only would a new U.S.-backed government in Venezuela endanger the billions of dollars in loans that Maduro’s government owes to both countries, it would also endanger the independence of all of Latin America.

Indeed, many Latin American governments in recent years have been targeted by the U.S. for regime change, and most of these attempts were successful, including those in Honduras (2009), Brazil (2016) and Paraguay (2012). Venezuela, with its significant oil and gold reserves, is the obvious prize in the region but also arguably the strongest country opposed to U.S. dominance of the region. Were Venezuela to fall, it would greatly weaken the governments of Maduro’s regional allies, particularly Nicaragua and Cuba.

This is underlined by National Security Adviser John Bolton’s recent creation of a new Latin American “Axis of Evil” that he terms the “Troika of Tyranny,” encompassing Venezuela, Cuba and Nicaragua. If Venezuela’s government is toppled, Bolton has already given the signal as to which nations will be the subsequent targets of regime-change efforts elsewhere in Latin America. Thus, Russia and China — lest they wish to see a domino effect of the toppling of most of the remaining Latin American countries not dominated by the U.S. — are more likely than not to do everything in their power to prevent the collapse of Maduro’s government.

Image
China’s President Xi Jinping, right, and Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro speak near a bust of late Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez at an apartment complex built under an agreement between China and Venezuela in Caracas, July 21, 2014. Xi Jinping. Fernando Llano | AP

It is also important to point out that, for its part, the United States can’t really back away either. While the U.S. strategy of “containing” Russia and China has been largely focused on starting and fomenting proxy wars in both geopolitically strategic areas and on their doorsteps, Russia and China’s strategy has been more covert and aimed at reducing their dependence on the U.S.-backed financial system, particularly the U.S. dollar.

This effort to undermine the U.S. dollar has frequently targeted the petrodollar, which has been a major factor in past U.S. military interventions, such as the toppling of Saddam Hussein in Iraq and later Muammar Gaddafi in Libya. In 2017 Maduro, like Hussein and Gaddafi before him, stopped selling Venezuelan oil in dollars. In order to shore up the petrodollar system amid its own looming economic recession, the United States needs a government in Venezuela that will denominate the sale of its oil in dollars to keep the cornerstone of its global hegemony, the U.S. dollar, in demand despite unprecedented threats to its value.

Thus, with neither the U.S. nor its rivals able to back down without ceding a major geopolitical and strategic advantage to the other, it is almost assured that, as the situation in Venezuela escalates, the involvement of all three will soon make Venezuela the most watched country — and the most dangerous — in the world.



“Another bloody battlefield of the color revolution”?
Given the enormity of their investments in Venezuela and their eagerness to keep the world’s largest oil reserves controlled by a government friendly to them but hostile to their greatest rival, Russia and China have unsurprisingly condemned in no uncertain terms the U.S.’ recent decision to recognize Guaidó as Venezuela’s “legitimate” president.

Russia’s response not only warned the U.S. against the “catastrophic consequences” of its effort to escalate the fragile situation in Venezuela but also hinted that the U.S. decision would lay the groundwork for a civil war. On Thursday, Russia’s deputy foreign minister, Sergei Ryabkov, told International Affairs, “We warn against this … We believe that this would be a catastrophic scenario that would shake the foundations of the development model we see in the Latin American region.” In a phone call to Maduro, Russian leader Vladimir Putin described the U.S. move as “destructive interference.”

Then the Russian Foreign Ministry issued a separate statement that described the U.S. move to recognize Guaidó as president as being ”aimed at deepening the split in Venezuelan society, increasing the conflict on the streets, sharply destabilizing the internal political system and further escalation of the conflict,” with such escalation being “fraught with catastrophic consequences.” Some media outlets compared this statement to those made by Russia during past international exchanges with the West prior to intervention in Libya and Syria.

Since then, Russian military contractors have been deployed to Venezuela, which prompted Maduro to promise that Venezuela will not become another “Syria or Libya.” Some reports have claimed that the Russian military contractors have “been charged with stopping opposition sympathizers or members of Maduro’s own forces from detaining him.”

China’s response also hinted that the U.S. decision was aimed at stoking an internal war in the country. In an article published by the Chinese government-aligned Global Times, Beijing stated:

In recent years, Washington has enhanced its interference in affairs of Venezuela and Cuba and attempted to regain influence in Latin America. The fast recognition of Guaidó signaled the strong U.S. desire to intervene in Venezuela’s internal affairs.”

The article went on to note:

All sides must keep calm and be alert about possible provocation to militarily intervene in Venezuela … The international community should encourage forces of Venezuela to peacefully solve the issue within the framework of dialogue. Picking sides will not be conducive to the solution, but intensify the rivalry, worsen the situation and possibly push the nation into long-term turmoil.”

It ultimately added, “Venezuela should not be another bloody battlefield of the color revolution.”

The fact that the responses of both the Russian and Chinese governments to the U.S. decision to back Guaidó directly stated that the U.S. move is set to create another U.S.-backed proxy war masquerading as a “color revolution” is highly significant. Indeed, such clear assertions of this reality not only show how clearly the U.S. is pushing for a major escalation in Venezuela but also show that both Russia and China are aware that their interests in the country are under threat as a direct result of this U.S. push. This greatly increases the likelihood that any continued push for escalation from Washington will trigger strong responses from both countries and could quickly devolve into a tit-for-tat that could eventually develop into a major military conflict.



Is this how WW III gets going?
The current situation in Venezuela — if the U.S. continues to push for fresh escalations — has the potential to morph into one of the world’s most dangerous proxy wars, owing to the size of the prize (world’s largest oil reserves included) and the fact none of the major parties involved can back away without making major concessions to their chief geopolitical rivals. Russia and China, as previously stated, are unlikely to stand idly by as the U.S. installs a government that would undo their years of investment in the country and refuse to pay back billions in loans. Indeed, Russia has already sent military contractors into Venezuela, setting a precedent that could see more significant Russian support for Venezuela in the coming months.

Beyond that is the fact that the U.S. has made it clear that Venezuela if it succumbs to regime change, is merely the first on the new “Troika of Tyranny” list of leftist Latin American governments that the Trump administration seeks to topple. The goal is to make a Latin America that is obedient to the U.S., a crucial part of the ultimate U.S. goal of maintaining the existing unipolar world order. However, both Russia and China know that this goal is a microcosm of Washington’s end game and that they are both the ultimate targets. Such an agenda is hardly a secret given that it is directly stated in the Pentagon’s National Defense Strategy.

However, it would be naive to assume that the U.S. will be planning to escalate only in Venezuela and not in other U.S. proxy conflicts such as Ukraine and Syria. Indeed, just two months ago, there was a flare-up in Ukraine in what is now known as the “Kerch Strait Incident” and provocations in Syria have commonly occurred throughout the conflict, particularly during moments when it seemed things were finally dying down. These flashpoints and more — such as the South China Sea, among others — can all be pressed on rotation by the U.S. in an effort to disorient its Russian and Chinese rivals.

Thus, Venezuela may become host to the latest in what is now a series of proxy wars and flashpoints across the world that Washington has erected as part of its long-term goal of preventing the formation a multipolar world order. And it may quickly become the most dangerous in terms of drawing larger world powers into the conflict, making the risk of a wider world war a striking possibility that cannot be ignored. What happens in Venezuela going forward will have major consequences for the entire region and the world; and, with the U.S. already pushing countries to pick sides, the world may soon become as divided as ever, with the risk of another “great war” looming large.

https://www.mintpressnews.com/us-follow ... sh/254265/

War with Russia, naw, I don't expect any significant deployment, perhaps some genuine advisers to optimize Russian made defensive systems.
China, not yet, but I expect significant 'economic activity'...
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10750
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Venezuela

Post by blindpig » Tue Jan 29, 2019 9:52 pm

Updated List of who supports Maduro:

Mexico 🇲🇽
Bolivia 🇧🇴
Cuba 🇨🇺
Russia 🇷🇺
Turkey 🇹🇷
Syria 🇸🇾
Uruguay 🇺🇾
China 🇨🇳
Iran 🇮🇷
South Africa 🇿🇦
Nicaragua 🇳🇮
Suriname 🇸🇷
El Salvador 🇸🇻
Barbados 🇧🇧
Trinidad & Tobago 🇹🇹
Western Sahara 🇪🇭
Greece 🇬🇷
Belarus 🇧🇾
Laos 🇱🇦

Courtesy Warrior Reports@WarriorReports
25m25 minutes ago
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10750
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Venezuela

Post by blindpig » Wed Jan 30, 2019 12:33 pm

I would normally spit on Max Blumenthal's bi-line but there's some goog information in this.

Image

Juan Guaidó is the product of a decade-long project overseen by Washington’s elite regime change trainers. While posing as a champion of democracy, he has spent years at the forefront of a violent campaign of destabilization.
By Dan Cohen and Max Blumenthal

Before the fateful day of January 22, fewer than one in five Venezuelans had heard of Juan Guaidó. Only a few months ago, the 35-year-old was an obscure character in a politically marginal far-right group closely associated with gruesome acts of street violence. Even in his own party, Guaidó had been a mid-level figure in the opposition-dominated National Assembly, which is now held under contempt according to Venezuela’s constitution.

But after a single phone call from from US Vice President Mike Pence, Guaidó proclaimed himself president of Venezuela. Anointed as the leader of his country by Washington, a previously unknown political bottom-dweller was vaulted onto the international stage as the US-selected leader of the nation with the world’s largest oil reserves.

Echoing the Washington consensus, the New York Times editorial board hailed Guaidó as a “credible rival” to Maduro with a “refreshing style and vision of taking the country forward.” The Bloomberg News editorial board applauded him for seeking “restoration of democracy” and the Wall Street Journal declared him “a new democratic leader.” Meanwhile, Canada, numerous European nations, Israel, and the bloc of right-wing Latin American governments known as the Lima Group recognized Guaidó as the legitimate leader of Venezuela.

While Guaidó seemed to have materialized out of nowhere, he was, in fact, the product of more than a decade of assiduous grooming by the US government’s elite regime change factories. Alongside a cadre of right-wing student activists, Guaidó was cultivated to undermine Venezuela’s socialist-oriented government, destabilize the country, and one day seize power. Though he has been a minor figure in Venezuelan politics, he had spent years quietly demonstrated his worthiness in Washington’s halls of power.

“Juan Guaidó is a character that has been created for this circumstance,” Marco Teruggi, an Argentinian sociologist and leading chronicler of Venezuelan politics, told The Grayzone. “It’s the logic of a laboratory – Guaidó is like a mixture of several elements that create a character who, in all honesty, oscillates between laughable and worrying.”

Diego Sequera, a Venezuelan journalist and writer for the investigative outlet Misión Verdad, agreed: “Guaidó is more popular outside Venezuela than inside, especially in the elite Ivy League and Washington circles,” Sequera remarked to The Grayzone, “He’s a known character there, is predictably right-wing, and is considered loyal to the program.”

While Guaidó is today sold as the face of democratic restoration, he spent his career in the most violent faction of Venezuela’s most radical opposition party, positioning himself at the forefront of one destabilization campaign after another. His party has been widely discredited inside Venezuela, and is held partly responsible for fragmenting a badly weakened opposition.

“‘These radical leaders have no more than 20 percent in opinion polls,” wrote Luis Vicente León, Venezuela’s leading pollster. According to León, Guaidó’s party remains isolated because the majority of the population “does not want war. ‘What they want is a solution.’”

But this is precisely why Guaidó was selected by Washington: He is not expected to lead Venezuela toward democracy, but to collapse a country that for the past two decades has been a bulwark of resistance to US hegemony. His unlikely rise signals the culmination of a two decades-long project to destroy a robust socialist experiment.

Targeting the “troika of tyranny”
Since the 1998 election of Hugo Chávez, the United States has fought to restore control over Venezuela and is vast oil reserves. Chávez’s socialist programs may have redistributed the country’s wealth and helped lift millions out of poverty, but they also earned him a target on his back.

In 2002, Venezuela’s right-wing opposition briefly ousted Chávez with US support and recognition, before the military restored his presidency following a mass popular mobilization. Throughout the administrations of US Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama, Chávez survived numerous assassination plots, before succumbing to cancer in 2013. His successor, Nicolas Maduro, has survived three attempts on his life.

The Trump administration immediately elevated Venezuela to the top of Washington’s regime change target list, branding it the leader of a “troika of tyranny.” Last year, Trump’s national security team attempted to recruit members of the military brass to mount a military junta, but that effort failed.

According to the Venezuelan government, the US was also involved in a plot, codenamed Operation Constitution, to capture Maduro at the Miraflores presidential palace; and another, called Operation Armageddon, to assassinate him at a military parade in July 2017. Just over a year later, exiled opposition leaders tried and failed to kill Maduro with drone bombs during a military parade in Caracas.

More than a decade before these intrigues, a group of right-wing opposition students were hand-selected and groomed by an elite US-funded regime change training academy to topple Venezuela’s government and restore the neoliberal order.

Training from the “‘export-a-revolution’ group that sowed the seeds for a NUMBER of color revolutions”
On October 5, 2005, with Chávez’s popularity at its peak and his government planning sweeping socialist programs, five Venezuelan “student leaders” arrived in Belgrade, Serbia to begin training for an insurrection.

The students had arrived from Venezuela courtesy of the Center for Applied Non-Violent Action and Strategies, or CANVAS. This group is funded largely through the National Endowment for Democracy, a CIA cut-out that functions as the US government’s main arm of promoting regime change; and offshoots like the International Republican Institute and the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs. According to leaked internal emails from Stratfor, an intelligence firm known as the “shadow CIA,” CANVAS “may have also received CIA funding and training during the 1999/2000 anti-Milosevic struggle.”

CANVAS is a spinoff of Otpor, a Serbian protest group founded by Srdja Popovic in 1998 at the University of Belgrade. Otpor, which means “resistance” in Serbian, was the student group that gained international fame — and Hollywood-level promotion — by mobilizing the protests that eventually toppled Slobodan Milosevic.

This small cell of regime change specialists was operating according to the theories of the late Gene Sharp, the so-called “Clausewitz of non-violent struggle.” Sharp had worked with a former Defense Intelligence Agency analyst, Col. Robert Helvey, to conceive a strategic blueprint that weaponized protest as a form of hybrid warfare, aiming it at states that resisted Washington’s unipolar domination.


Image
Otpor was supported by the National Endowment for Democracy, USAID, and Sharp’s Albert Einstein Institute. Sinisa Sikman, one of Otpor’s main trainers, once said the group even received direct CIA funding.

According to a leaked email from a Stratfor staffer, after running Milosevic out of power, “the kids who ran OTPOR grew up, got suits and designed CANVAS… or in other words a ‘export-a-revolution’ group that sowed the seeds for a NUMBER of color revolutions. They are still hooked into U.S. funding and basically go around the world trying to topple dictators and autocratic governments (ones that U.S. does not like ;).”

Stratfor revealed that CANVAS “turned its attention to Venezuela” in 2005, after training opposition movements that led pro-NATO regime change operations across Eastern Europe.

While monitoring the CANVAS training program, Stratfor outlined its insurrectionist agenda in strikingly blunt language: “Success is by no means guaranteed, and student movements are only at the beginning of what could be a years-long effort to trigger a revolution in Venezuela, but the trainers themselves are the people who cut their teeth on the ‘Butcher of the Balkans.’ They’ve got mad skills. When you see students at five Venezuelan universities hold simultaneous demonstrations, you will know that the training is over and the real work has begun.”

Birthing the “Generation 2007” regime change cadre
The “real work” began two years later, in 2007, when Guaidó graduated from Andrés Bello Catholic University of Caracas. He moved to Washington, DC to enroll in the Governance and Political Management Program at George Washington University, under the tutelage of Venezuelan economist Luis Enrique Berrizbeitia, one of the top Latin American neoliberal economists. Berrizbeitia is a former executive director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) who spent more than a decade working in the Venezuelan energy sector, under the old oligarchic regime that was ousted by Chávez.

That year, Guaidó helped lead anti-government rallies after the Venezuelan government declined to to renew the license of Radio Caracas Televisión (RCTV). This privately owned station played a leading role in the 2002 coup against Hugo Chávez. RCTV helped mobilize anti-government demonstrators, falsified information blaming government supporters for acts of violence carried out by opposition members, and banned pro-government reporting amid the coup. The role of RCTV and other oligarch-owned stations in driving the failed coup attempt was chronicled in the acclaimed documentary The Revolution Will Not Be Televised.

That same year, the students claimed credit for stymying Chavez’s constitutional referendum for a “21st century socialism” that promised “to set the legal framework for the political and social reorganization of the country, giving direct power to organized communities as a prerequisite for the development of a new economic system.”

From the protests around RCTV and the referendum, a specialized cadre of US-backed class of regime change activists was born. They called themselves “Generation 2007.”

The Stratfor and CANVAS trainers of this cell identified Guaidó’s ally – a street organizer named Yon Goicoechea – as a “key factor” in defeating the constitutional referendum. The following year, Goicochea was rewarded for his efforts with the Cato Institute’s Milton Friedman Prize for Advancing Liberty, along with a $500,000 prize, which he promptly invested into building his own Liberty First (Primero Justicia) political network.



Friedman, of course, was the godfather of the notorious neoliberal Chicago Boys who were imported into Chile by dictatorial junta leader Augusto Pinochet to implement policies of radical “shock doctrine”-style fiscal austerity. And the Cato Institute is the libertarian Washington DC-based think tank founded by the Koch Brothers, two top Republican Party donors who have become aggressive supporters of the right-wing across Latin America.

Wikileaks published a 2007 email from American ambassador to Venezuela William Brownfield sent to the State Department, National Security Council and Department of Defense Southern Command praising “Generation of ’07” for having “forced the Venezuelan president, accustomed to setting the political agenda, to (over)react.” Among the “emerging leaders” Brownfield identified were Freddy Guevara and Yon Goicoechea. He applauded the latter figure as “one of the students’ most articulate defenders of civil liberties.”

Flush with cash from libertarian oligarchs and US government soft power outfits, the radical Venezuelan cadre took their Otpor tactics to the streets, along with a version of the group’s logo, as seen below:



“Galvanizing public unrest…to take advantage of the situation and spin it against Chavez”
In 2009, the Generation 2007 youth activists staged their most provocative demonstration yet, dropping their pants on public roads and aping the outrageous guerrilla theater tactics outlined by Gene Sharp in his regime change manuals. The protesters had mobilized against the arrest of an ally from another newfangled youth group called JAVU. This far-right group “gathered funds from a variety of US government sources, which allowed it to gain notoriety quickly as the hardline wing of opposition street movements,” according to academic George Ciccariello-Maher’s book, “Building the Commune.”

While video of the protest is not available, many Venezuelans have identified Guaidó as one of its key participants. While the allegation is unconfirmed, it is certainly plausible; the bare-buttocks protesters were members of the Generation 2007 inner core that Guaidó belonged to, and were clad in their trademark Resistencia! Venezuela t-shirts, as seen below:


Is this the ass that Trump wants to install in Venezuela’s seat of power?
That year, Guaidó exposed himself to the public in another way, founding a political party to capture the anti-Chavez energy his Generation 2007 had cultivated. Called Popular Will, it was led by Leopoldo López, a Princeton-educated right-wing firebrand heavily involved in National Endowment for Democracy programs and elected as the mayor of a district in Caracas that was one of the wealthiest in the country. Lopez was a portrait of Venezuelan aristocracy, directly descended from his country’s first president. He was also the first cousin of Thor Halvorssen, founder of the US-based Human Rights Foundation that functions as a de facto publicity shop for US-backed anti-government activists in countries targeted by Washington for regime change.

Though Lopez’s interests aligned neatly with Washington’s, US diplomatic cables published by Wikileaks highlighted the fanatical tendencies that would ultimately lead to Popular Will’s marginalization. One cable identified Lopez as “a divisive figure within the opposition… often described as arrogant, vindictive, and power-hungry.” Others highlighted his obsession with street confrontations and his “uncompromising approach” as a source of tension with other opposition leaders who prioritized unity and participation in the country’s democratic institutions.


Popular Will founder Leopoldo Lopez cruising with his wife, Lilian Tintori
By 2010, Popular Will and its foreign backers moved to exploit the worst drought to hit Venezuela in decades. Massive electricity shortages had struck the country due the dearth of water, which was needed to power hydroelectric plants. A global economic recession and declining oil prices compounded the crisis, driving public discontentment.

Stratfor and CANVAS – key advisors of Guaidó and his anti-government cadre – devised a shockingly cynical plan to drive a dagger through the heart of the Bolivarian revolution. The scheme hinged on a 70% collapse of the country’s electrical system by as early as April 2010.

“This could be the watershed event, as there is little that Chavez can do to protect the poor from the failure of that system,” the Stratfor internal memo declared. “This would likely have the impact of galvanizing public unrest in a way that no opposition group could ever hope to generate. At that point in time, an opposition group would be best served to take advantage of the situation and spin it against Chavez and towards their needs.”

By this point, the Venezuelan opposition was receiving a staggering $40-50 million a year from US government organizations like USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy, according to a report by the Spanish think tank, the FRIDE Institute. It also had massive wealth to draw on from its own accounts, which were mostly outside the country.

While the scenario envisioned by Statfor did not come to fruition, the Popular Will party activists and their allies cast aside any pretense of non-violence and joined a radical plan to destabilize the country.

Towards violent destabilization
In November, 2010, according to emails obtained by Venezuelan security services and presented by former Justice Minister Miguel Rodríguez Torres, Guaidó, Goicoechea, and several other student activists attended a secret five-day training at the Fiesta Mexicana hotel in Mexico City. The sessions were run by Otpor, the Belgrade-based regime change trainers backed by the US government. The meeting had reportedly received the blessing of Otto Reich, a fanatically anti-Castro Cuban exile working in George W. Bush’s Department of State, and the right-wing former Colombian President Alvaro Uribe.

At the Fiesta Mexicana hotel, the emails stated, Guaidó and his fellow activists hatched a plan to overthrow President Hugo Chavez by generating chaos through protracted spasms of street violence.

Three petroleum industry figureheads – Gustavo Torrar, Eligio Cedeño and Pedro Burelli – allegedly covered the $52,000 tab to hold the meeting. Torrar is a self-described “human rights activist” and “intellectual” whose younger brother Reynaldo Tovar Arroyo is the representative in Venezuela of the private Mexican oil and gas company Petroquimica del Golfo, which holds a contract with the Venezuelan state.

Cedeño, for his part, is a fugitive Venezuelan businessman who claimed asylum in the United States, and Pedro Burelli a former JP Morgan executive and the former director of Venezuela’s national oil company, Petroleum of Venezuela (PDVSA). He left PDVSA in 1998 as Hugo Chavez took power and is on the advisory committee of Georgetown University’s Latin America Leadership Program.

Burelli insisted that the emails detailing his participation had been fabricated and even hired a private investigator to prove it. The investigator declared that Google’s records showed the emails alleged to be his were never transmitted.

Yet today Burelli makes no secret of his desire to see Venezuela’s current president, Nicolás Maduro, deposed – and even dragged through the streets and sodomized with a bayonet, as Libyan leader Moammar Qaddafi was by NATO-backed militiamen.

The alleged Fiesta Mexicana plot flowed into another destabilization plan revealed in a series of documents produced by the Venezuelan government. In May 2014, Caracas released documents detailing an assassination plot against President Nicolás Maduro. The leaks identified the Miami-based Maria Corina Machado as a leader of the scheme. A hardliner with a penchant for extreme rhetoric, Machado has functioned as an international liaison for the opposition, visiting President George W. Bush in 2005.


Machado and George W. Bush, 2005
“I think it is time to gather efforts; make the necessary calls, and obtain financing to annihilate Maduro and the rest will fall apart,” Machado wrote in an email to former Venezuelan diplomat Diego Arria in 2014.

In another email, Machado claimed that the violent plot had the blessing of US Ambassador to Colombia, Kevin Whitaker. “I have already made up my mind and this fight will continue until this regime is overthrown and we deliver to our friends in the world. If I went to San Cristobal and exposed myself before the OAS, I fear nothing. Kevin Whitaker has already reconfirmed his support and he pointed out the new steps. We have a checkbook stronger than the regime’s to break the international security ring.”

Guaidó heads to the barricades
That February, student demonstrators acting as shock troops for the exiled oligarchy erected violent barricades across the country, turning opposition-controlled quarters into violent fortresses known as guarimbas. While international media portrayed the upheaval as a spontaneous protest against Maduro’s iron-fisted rule, there was ample evidence that Popular Will was orchestrating the show.

“None of the protesters at the universities wore their university t-shirts, they all wore Popular Will or Justice First t-shirts,” a guarimba participant said at the time. “They might have been student groups, but the student councils are affiliated to the political opposition parties and they are accountable to them.”

Asked who the ringleaders were, the guarimba participant said, “Well if I am totally honest, those guys are legislators now.”

Around 43 were killed during the 2014 guarimbas. Three years later, they erupted again, causing mass destruction of public infrastructure, the murder of government supporters, and the deaths of 126 people, many of whom were Chavistas. In several cases, supporters of the government were burned alive by armed gangs.

Guaidó was directly involved in the 2014 guarimbas. In fact, he tweeted video showing himself clad in a helmet and gas mask, surrounded by masked and armed elements that had shut down a highway that were engaging in a violent clash with the police. Alluding to his participation in Generation 2007, he proclaimed, “I remember in 2007, we proclaimed, ‘Students!’ Now, we shout, ‘Resistance! Resistance!'”

Guaidó has deleted the tweet, demonstrating apparent concern for his image as a champion of democracy.



On February 12, 2014, during the height of that year’s guarimbas, Guaidó joined Lopez on stage at a rally of Popular Will and Justice First. During a lengthy diatribe against the government, Lopez urged the crowd to march to the office of Attorney General Luisa Ortega Diaz. Soon after, Diaz’s office came under attack by armed gangs who attempted to burn it to the ground. She denounced what she called “planned and premeditated violence.”


Guaido alongside Lopez at the fateful February 12, 2014 rally
In an televised appearance in 2016, Guaidó dismissed deaths resulting from guayas – a guarimba tactic involving stretching steel wire across a roadway in order to injure or kill motorcyclists – as a “myth.” His comments whitewashed a deadly tactic that had killed unarmed civilians like Santiago Pedroza and decapitated a man named Elvis Durán, among many others.

This callous disregard for human life would define his Popular Will party in the eyes of much of the public, including many opponents of Maduro.

Cracking down on Popular Will
As violence and political polarization escalated across the country, the government began to act against the Popular Will leaders who helped stoke it.

Freddy Guevara, the National Assembly Vice-President and second in command of Popular Will, was a principal leader in the 2017 street riots. Facing a trial for his role in the violence, Guevara took shelter in the Chilean embassy, where he remains.

Lester Toledo, a Popular Will legislator from the state of Zulia, was wanted by Venezuelan government in September 2016 on charges of financing terrorism and plotting assassinations. The plans were said to be made with former Colombian President Álavaro Uribe. Toledo escaped Venezuela and went on several speaking tours with Human Rights Watch, the US government-backed Freedom House, the Spanish Congress and European Parliament.

Carlos Graffe, another Otpor-trained Generation 2007 member who led Popular Will, was arrested in July 2017. According to police, he was in possession of a bag filled with nails, C4 explosives and a detonator. He was released on December 27, 2017.

Leopoldo Lopez, the longtime Popular Will leader, is today under house arrest, accused of a key role in deaths of 13 people during the guarimbas in 2014. Amnesty International lauded Lopez as a “prisoner of conscience” and slammed his transfer from prison to house as “not good enough.” Meanwhile, family members of guarimba victims introduced a petition for more charges against Lopez.

Yon Goicoechea, the Koch Brothers posterboy and US-backed founder of Justice First, was arrested in 2016 by security forces who claimed they found found a kilo of explosives in his vehicle. In a New York Times op-ed, Goicoechea protested the charges as “trumped-up” and claimed he had been imprisoned simply for his “dream of a democratic society, free of Communism.” He was freed in November 2017.

David Smolansky, also a member of the original Otpor-trained Generation 2007, became Venezuela’s youngest-ever mayor when he was elected in 2013 in the affluent suburb of El Hatillo. But he was stripped of his position and sentenced to 15 months in prison by the Supreme Court after it found him culpable of stirring the violent guarimbas.

Facing arrest, Smolansky shaved his beard, donned sunglasses and slipped into Brazil disguised as a priest with a bible in hand and rosary around his neck. He now lives in Washington, DC, where he was hand picked by Secretary of the Organization of American States Luis Almagro to lead the working group on the Venezuelan migrant and refugee crisis.

This July 26, Smolansky held what he called a “cordial reunion” with Elliot Abrams, the convicted Iran-Contra felon installed by Trump as special US envoy to Venezuela. Abrams is notorious for overseeing the US covert policy of arming right-wing death squads during the 1980’s in Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Guatemala. His lead role in the Venezuelan coup has stoked fears that another blood-drenched proxy war might be on the way.

Four days earlier, Machado rumbled another violent threat against Maduro, declaring that if he “wants to save his life, he should understand that his time is up.”

A pawn in their game
The collapse of Popular Will under the weight of the violent campaign of destabilization it ran alienated large sectors of the public and wound much of its leadership up in exile or in custody. Guaidó had remained a relatively minor figure, having spent most of his nine-year career in the National Assembly as an alternate deputy. Hailing from one of Venezuela’s least populous states, Guaidó came in second place during the 2015 parliamentary elections, winning just 26% of votes cast in order to secure his place in the National Assembly. Indeed, his bottom may have been better known than his face.

Guaidó is known as the president of the opposition-dominated National Assembly, but he was never elected to the position. The four opposition parties that comprised the Assembly’s Democratic Unity Table had decided to establish a rotating presidency. Popular Will’s turn was on the way, but its founder, Lopez, was under house arrest. Meanwhile, his second-in-charge, Guevara, had taken refuge in the Chilean embassy. A figure named Juan Andrés Mejía would have been next in line but reasons that are only now clear, Juan Guaido was selected.

“There is a class reasoning that explains Guaidó’s rise,” Sequera, the Venezuelan analyst, observed. “Mejía is high class, studied at one of the most expensive private universities in Venezuela, and could not be easily marketed to the public the way Guaidó could. For one, Guaidó has common mestizo features like most Venezuelans do, and seems like more like a man of the people. Also, he had not been overexposed in the media, so he could be built up into pretty much anything.”

In December 2018, Guaidó sneaked across the border and junketed to Washington, Colombia and Brazil to coordinate the plan to hold mass demonstrations during the inauguration of President Maduro. The night before Maduro’s swearing-in ceremony, both Vice President Mike Pence and Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland called Guaidó to affirm their support.

A week later, Sen. Marco Rubio, Sen. Rick Scott and Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart – all lawmakers from the Florida base of the right-wing Cuban exile lobby – joined President Trump and Vice President Pence at the White House. At their request, Trump agreed that if Guaidó declared himself president, he would back him.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo met personally withGuaidó on January 10, according to the Wall Street Journal. However, Pompeo could not pronounce Guaidó’s name when he mentioned him in a press briefing on January 25, referring to him as “Juan Guido.”

By January 11, Guaidó’s Wikipedia page had been edited 37 times, highlighting the struggle to shape the image of a previously anonymous figure who was now a tableau for Washington’s regime change ambitions. In the end, editorial oversight of his page was handed over to Wikipedia’s elite council of “librarians,” who pronounced him the “contested” president of Venezuela.

Guaidó might have been an obscure figure, but his combination of radicalism and opportunism satisfied Washington’s needs. “That internal piece was missing,” a Trump administration said of Guaidó. “He was the piece we needed for our strategy to be coherent and complete.”

“For the first time,” Brownfield, the former American ambassador to Venezuela, gushed to the New York Times, “you have an opposition leader who is clearly signaling to the armed forces and to law enforcement that he wants to keep them on the side of the angels and with the good guys.”

But Guaidó’s Popular Will party formed the shock troops of the guarimbas that caused the deaths of police officers and common citizens alike. He had even boasted of his own participation in street riots. And now, to win the hearts and minds of the military and police, Guaido had to erase this blood-soaked history.

On January 21, a day before the coup began in earnest, Guaidó’s wife delivered a video address calling on the military to rise up against Maduro. Her performance was wooden and uninspiring, underscoring the her husband’s limited political prospects.

At a press conference before supporters four days later, Guaidó announced his solution to the crisis: “Authorize a humanitarian intervention!”

While he waits on direct assistance, Guaidó remains what he has always been – a pet project of cynical outside forces. “It doesn’t matter if he crashes and burns after all these misadventures,” Sequera said of the coup figurehead. “To the Americans, he is expendable.”

https://grayzoneproject.com/2019/01/29/ ... up-leader/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10750
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Venezuela

Post by blindpig » Wed Jan 30, 2019 3:03 pm

Image
The Agency for International Development of the State Department is in charge of sending "humanitarian aid" by the United States (Photo: USAID)

HUMANITARIAN AID VERSUS BLOCKADE: FIGURES FROM THE THEFT TO VENEZUELA
29 Jan 2019 , 11:22 pm .

Already installed the "parallel government" on Venezuelan soil from the National Assembly controlled by the opposition and temporarily directed by Voluntad Popular (VP), the United States proposes to send a "humanitarian aid" to directly support the delegation in charge of carrying out a coup d'état against the administration of President Nicolás Maduro.

This time, from the headquarters of the Organization of American States (OAS) in Washington, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo offered the opposition the amount of 20 million dollars in the aforementioned "help", a ridiculous figure compared to what that the Venezuelan State spends again and again for the importation of food and medicines for the population.

In a column by our analyst Franco Vielma of 2018 it is shown that such "aid" turns out to be more a tip than real assets that would support the acquisition of goods and services to solve the problems of the people in the midst of an acute economic crisis in Venezuela .

Between 2017 and 2018, the European Union and the White House would have sent some 60 million dollars in the so-called "aid". That amount would only serve to supply, for example, 6% of the Venezuelan population in rice consumption.

"The hyper-promotional 'humanitarian aid', in addition, would reach to acquire, just, 1 million 500 thousand combos (CLAP), which is significantly less than the coverage made by the Venezuelan State through 5 million combos to the same number of families, including in that program with a variable frequency range between 30 and 45 days ".

So you can continue to consider those 20 million dollars pledged by Pompeo less than a tip, because they do not reach the 60 million dollars of the last two years, besides being a small fraction of the 18 billion dollars stolen Venezuela with the latest sanctions announced by the Treasury Department, which represent the budget for Health and Education in Spain for three years.

Especially if we take into account that the United States, through the financial system based on the dollar and the relevant institutions, has blocked and stolen other billions in currencies that belong to the Venezuelan public treasury and that could have been spent on the necessary importation. of food and medicine for the benefit of the population.

For this reason we have insisted from this rostrum that the "humanitarian aid" of the United States does not help; rather, it seems to apply to the detriment of majorities and in favor of corporate interests, as in the case of the Clinton Foundation in devastated Haiti at the beginning of this decade.


DOES THE BOLIVARIAN GOVERNMENT NOT ACCEPT HUMANITARIAN AID?
The continuous rejection by the State led by President Maduro of accepting the "humanitarian aid" of the United States and Europe have more to do with factors of interference and military consent on the part of those actors than for not wanting to harbor a genuine initiative .

For example, the program of the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) on the treatment of certain diseases in Venezuela has been included in the framework of the State's health plans for years, especially since 2018 due to malaria outbreaks. , diphtheria and measles that have been diagnosed lately.

On the PAHO website you can see in detail all the assistance the organization did in conjunction with public institutions, with an agreement signed last June to begin collaboration in the delivery of medicines and contraceptives and training in the management of epidemics.

In January 2019 alone , PAHO delivered IVSS medications to some 3,000 Venezuelan patients, as well as 3 million antiretroviral drugs, and helped Venezuela achieve 95% vaccination coverage for measles and diphtheria.

It is expected that the collaboration in humanitarian assistance will be maintained according to the agreements arranged between the Ministry of Popular Power for Health and PAHO.

Also, in November 2018, the United Nations (UN) approved resources through the Common Emergency Response Fund (CERF) for the amount of 9.2 million dollars for humanitarian programs in Venezuela, with the cooperation of the State. It included health and nutritional assistance to pregnant women, nursing mothers at risk and children under 5 years of age.

The funds would also serve vulnerable people by moving into border communities and strengthening priorities in public health centers.

Two clear examples that the Bolivarian Government has not rejected any humanitarian aid, but rather has accepted it in order to solve some of the most serious problems suffered by vulnerable sectors of the country, due to the impact on distribution and production circuits derived from the blockade imposed by the United States.

The US "aid", on the other hand, has had unfortunate precedents for the countries that have accepted the deployment of their soldiers in order to install "humanitarian" missions that, we repeat, do not help but aggravate the contexts since they are covert interventions for exercise control over the populations attacked, replacing, de facto, the States in the sanitary and food area.

Not for nothing, one of the main narrative covers for the aggressions of the United States are the so-called "humanitarian interventions".

http://misionverdad.com/La-Guerra-en-Ve ... -contrario

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

Post Reply