Rumsfeld, Venezuela and World War III

World War III, the one the United States is going to lose, is getting closer and closer. On Wednesday Donald Rumsfeld told a news conference in Brazil that he “can't imagine why Venezuela needs 100,000 AK-47s.'' I’ll help you out, Don. Maybe it is because they feel they are going to be attacked by the United States, who has many more than 100,000 military assault rifles. It’s called self defense.

The United States has tried the first two options in their Hit Man arsenal (1. lend them too much money—can’t do that, they have lots of oil; 2. overthrow the government—tried and failed twice), to no effect. Not only that, but Hugo Chavez has been ridiculing Bush and his officials and making deals with Russia, China and Cuba and playing a leadership role in Latin America, befriending giants Brazil and Argentina. Options three (assassination-- they have been unsuccessful so far) and four (invasion) will soon come into play. Option three is tricky, since Chavez has announced to the world they are trying to kill him and that if he is killed George Bush will be personally responsible, and that, if Chavez is killed, Venezuela will cut off oil shipments to the United States which depends on Venezuela for almost twenty percent of its oil.

Why will the United States risk all-out war in their own hemisphere while bogged down in the Middle East without enough troops to hold Iraq let along Iran and Syria. Because they are the United States and that’s what they do. As retired CIA agent, Philip Agee said:

One thing that is very important for the Chavez movement, the Bolivarian movement here, to keep in mind always, is that the United States will never stop trying to turn the clock back. US interests are defined as the unfettered access to natural resources, to labor, and to the markets of foreign countries.

It is countries like the Latin American countries that assure prosperity in the United States. The more governments with their own agendas, with an element of nationalism, and that oppose US policies such as the neoliberal agenda come to power, the more of a threat these movement are seen to be in Washington, because what’s at stake is the stability of the political system in the United States, and the security of the political class in the United States.

So let’s see how our free press is spinning this one:

BRASILIA - Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on Wednesday issued the strongest U.S. condemnation yet of Venezuela's planned purchase of 100,000 AK-47 rifles, saying he couldn't ''imagine why'' Venezuela needed the weapons. Rumsfeld's denunciation on a four-day swing through Latin America appears to be the Bush administration's latest attempt to isolate Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez from his neighbors. The Herald reported last week that the administration has begun a top-to-bottom review of U.S. policy toward Venezuela, with the president becoming personally involved in the discussions.

Lower-level officials of the Bush administration have sounded the alarm for some time on the Venezuelan plan to buy the AK-47s from Russia, fearing that the weapons, munitions or rifles they replace could arm rebel groups fighting the government in Colombia. But this is the first time that a senior Cabinet-level official has used such blunt language.

In a news conference with José Alencar, Brazil's vice president and defense minister, Rumsfeld said that ''certainly I'm concerned'' when asked about the AK-47s.

''I can't imagine what's going to happen to 100,000 AK-47s. I can't imagine why Venezuela needs 100,000 AK-47s,'' Rumsfeld said of the purchase. ``And I just personally hope it doesn't happen, and I can't imagine that if it did happen, that it would be good for the hemisphere.''

The Bush administration can get some play by scaring the international public on the so-called weapons of mass destruction, but rifles? Is no other country allowed to have an army any more unless it is a US client state? Apparently not. Forget about the claim that Venezuela would hand them over to Colombian rebels. Venezuela will keep all of them to defend themselves against the United States and its client state in the region, Colombia. Most people in the United States don’t realize that Colombia is getting billions of dollars every year in military aid from the United States and has stationed there thousands of US Military “advisors” as well as uncounted thousands of US mercenaries, or “contractors” to use the euphemism currently preferred. These contractors are US military personnel who change clothes, get a pay raise, and act just like US troops would.

James Petras sees this as part of a strategy to get rid of both Castro and Chavez:

US strategy toward destroying the Cuban revolution is increasingly following a "two step" approach: first overthrow the Chavez government in Venezuela, cut off the energy supply and trade links and then proceed toward economic strangulation and military attack. The "two step" strategy against Cuba, involves the elaboration of a calibrated action plan to overthrow the Chavez government.

Washington's anti-Chavez efforts up till 2005 have resulted in severe defeats. These efforts have largely been based on an "insider" approach, utilizing the local ruling class, sectors of the army and the corrupt trade union bureaucracy. Not only have Washington's domestic instruments been defeated but they have been severely weakened for future use. Washington's support for the failed military coup resulted in the loss of several hundred counter-revolutionary officers who were forced to resign. Bush's support for the petroleum elite's lockout led to the expulsion of thousands of oil officials allied with Washington. The defeat of the referendum to expel Chavez, mobilized, politicized and radicalized millions of poor Venezuelans and demoralized Washington's middle class supporters. The result of these failed policies has been to turn Washington's attention to an "outsider" strategy: the key to which is incremental military intervention in association with the terrorist Uribe regime in Colombia.

The US strategy against Cuba involves a joint US-Colombian attack of Venezuela backed by internal terrorists and the ruling class. This indirect attack on Cuba, involves complex, external preparation in cooperation with Colombia. First of all Washington and Uribe have greatly strengthened military bases surrounding the Venezuelan border. Secondly "trial military incursions" involving both Colombian military and paramilitary forces occur on a regular basis ­ testing Venezuelan defenses. In 2004 six Venezuelan soldiers were killed, a number of Venezuelan officials were bribed to kidnap a Colombian resistance leader and numerous cross border attacks killing and kidnapping Colombian refugees took place in Venezuela. Thirdly the US has provided nearly $3 billion dollars in military aid to Colombia, tripled the size of its armed forces (to over 275,000), greatly increased its air force combat units (helicopters, fighter bombers), provided advanced military technology and several thousand official and "contracted" military specialists. Fourthly Washington has recruited the Gutierrez regime in Ecuador, invaded Haiti,
established military bases in Peru and the Dominican Republic, and has engaged in navy maneuvers just off the Venezuelan coast in preparation for a military attack.Fifthly Colombia (under US tutelage) signed a joint military-intelligence cooperation agreement on December 18, 2004 with the Venezuelan Ministry of Defense, providing the US with "inside information" and serving as a possible source of infiltration of the Venezuelan Armed Forces to counter pro-Cuban officers.

The US is relying on a "triangular strategy" to overthrow the Chavez regime: A military invasion from Colombia, US intervention (air and sea attacks plus special forces to assassinate key officials) and an internal uprising by infiltrated terrorists and military traitors, supported by key media, financial and petrol elites. The strategy involves seizing state power, expelling the Cuban aid missions and breaking all agreements with Cuba.

Prior to this concerted military strategy, Washington has designed a propaganda campaign against the Cuban-Venezuelan alliance, Venezuela's attempts to rectify the enormous military deficit with Colombia by purchasing defensive arms, and raising the specter of Venezuela's "subversion" of Latin American regimes. The key to US policy is to prevent Venezuela from joining Cuba as an alternative social welfare regime to the US neo-liberal clients in Latin America. US aggression escalates as the agrarian reform expands, Venezuela prepares self-defense and Chavez diversifies trade and investment ties. Cuba's powerful support for Venezuela's social welfare programs has consolidated mass support for the Chavez regime and is a main base of defense for the radicalization of the process.As Venezuela confronts Washington's threats, it consolidates its ties with Cuba. The fate of the two projects become intertwined and bound together in a single common anti-imperialist alliance, despite the differences in social systems and political composition.

The US "external" strategy toward Venezuela and its "two step" approach toward Cuba face powerful limitations.

First of all the Colombian regime faces a powerful internal opposition: 20,000 veteran guerrilla fighters and millions of Colombians sympathetic to the agrarian reform program, independent foreign policy and political freedoms of the Chavez regime. It is very dangerous for Uribe to start a "two-front war" which might open the way to attacks on the principle cities including Bogotá.

The US is heavily tied down militarily in Iraq and puts a higher priority on war against Iran/Syria than Venezuela. The US intervention would be limited to air and sea attacks and Special Forces.

The war would mobilize millions of Venezuelans in a war of national liberation, defending their own land ­ homes, neighborhoods, families and friends. Moreover popular liberation wars radicalize the population and frequently lead to the confiscation of counter-revolutionary property. A failed invasion could push Venezuela toward greater socialization of the economy and eliminate the domestic elite.

Moreover, US economy and multi-nationals stand to lose a reliable supply of petroleum in a tight market and billions of dollars in investments ­ weakening the US position in the global energy market.

An invasion would likely to lead to a joint military defense pact between Venezuela and Cuba, which would counter-US policy in the Caribbean. Such an invasion would also be likely to provoke major unrest and instability throughout Latin America, threaten US clients and undermining neo-liberal regimes and policies.

For all these reasons, Washington's attempts to pursue the external, two step policy toward Venezuela and Cuba, while extremely dangerous to both countries, could have a boomerang effect, setting in its wake a new wave of anti-imperialist struggles throughout the region.

Up to now the escalation of US diplomatic and economic aggression against Cuba has led to the greater isolation of the US in Europe and throughout the Third World. An escalation of military aggression against Venezuela as part of a "two-step strategy" against Cuba could have even more severe consequences ­ the expansion of the revolutionary struggle in Colombia and the rest of Latin America.

If this scenario plays out with an invasion of Iran and Syria at the same time, who in the world will oppose the United States? Let’s see: Russia, China, Venezuela, France, Germany, Iran (together with a new Shiite belt including most of Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon) and perhaps Brazil. In other words, the holders of vast natural resources, including most of the oil, the manufacturing colossus of China (including high-tech weapons manufacturing in France and Germany), the strongest currency (the Euro) and a vast amount of the world’s land mass. The United States can count on the United Kingdom, Israel, and maybe India. It doesn’t look good; there would be much destruction and it is totally unnecessary, but we have a crazed psychopath for a president who likes to risk everything on a long shot and won’t listen to reason.