 |
|
Homepage | Features | News Sources | Zimbabwe Special | Science Links | Venezuela |
| World News |
 |
Africa Links |  |
 |
|
Forums | |
|
|
Science Today | |
|
|
Crusade News | |
|
|
Caribbean | |
|
|
BOOKS | |
May 2002President is turning U.S. into serfdomPosted: Friday, May 31, 2002 By Jeane Morris May 31 In every job of responsibility, there is an evaluation conducted periodically. The president of the United States should not be excluded. Since taking office, President Bush has done the following. To benefit corporate contributors, he has: MORE World News Posted: Friday, May 31, 2002 • English farmer guilty over foot-and-mouth outbreak • US helicopter crashes in rescue bid • Judges Strike Down Internet Porn Filters • Judges say CIPA goes to far in blocking sites protected by free speech. • France pledges to improve Sangatte security • Last Body Recovered From Mount Hood • 7 Join U.s. List Of Drug Kingpins • U.s. Troops Kill Three Afghan Allies • Africa Celebrates Senegal Victory • Pakistan Hands US 14 Al-Qaeda Suspects • Texas Man to Be Tried for Heckling • Pakistan Says Indian Firing Kills Civilian • Top Democrat Slams DOJ Terror Guidelines • Confrontation At Milosevic Trial • Meeting will plan territories renewal • Rumsfeld to lecture India, Pak on the consequences of a nuclear war • Democracy, Soviet Style • Me first! 'War on terrorism' winking at nuclear terror • Pipe dreams • Guardian reporter sent for trial in Harare • U.s. Seeks Diplomatic Fix In S. Asia • Indians Flee Village Amid Shelling • Jesuit Magazine Blasts U.s. Media • Gunman shot after killing two • Putin motorcade car crashes • Shock defeat for World Cup favourites • World Cup 2002 opens • Market loses faith in shekel • No shift in U.S. policy till Mubarak meets Bush • Background / Mixed marriages, mixed loyalties • In Gaza hotel, bombers and anti-bombers discuss democracy • FBI: Um, But, We Did Issue a Warning! • New IBA chief bans use of term 'settlements' • Balkan President linked to Mafia • Confusion over Libyan Lockerbie offer • Europe votes to end data privacy • Israeli Troops Enter Nablus • Wolfotwitz Discusses India-pakistan • Anger over paramilitary industries on kibbutz • Violent snowstorm kills three climbers on Rainier • £1m Brinks robbery • Bush sends in Rumsfeld to prevent war over Kashmir • 23 massacred as Algerians vote in boycotted election • BA jet stuck in Antigua after sinking into runway • Indian nuke arsenal dwarfs Pakistan's : Jane's • US, China meet on cutting terror financing • British marines to keep border vigil • US still wavering on Middle East peace plan • Seal plague hits coasts of Scandinavia World News Posted: Thursday, May 30, 2002 • Evildoers' always perch on oil fields • Republicans seek to loosen Darwin's grip in schools • Jailed web publisher in solitary confinement • America Is Under Attack - By the Wealthy • We're Losing Our Civil Liberties for Nothing: David Morris • We're Losing Our Civil Liberties for Nothing • The September 11 X-Files • Defiant Pakistan threatens to use nuke • Feds: Ex-Agent Had Key Data • FBI and CIA coming on-line with new powers • Wrong, as a Matter of Law • Rebel Ambush Kills, Wounds India Troops • Violence mars Algeria election • Rumsfeld to visit India, Pakistan next week • Navy frigate stops Iraqi oil ship • China Called a Potential Threat • Somali Government loses ground > Militias have been fighting since 1991 • The complicity connection: What did the they know? • Chicanery under Cheney's watch: SEC to probe Halliburton • US civil libs go bye-bye • Earl Ofari Hutchinson: 'Who's jerking whom off on terror alerts' • American tragedy as cool photo op • Rebecca Knight: 'Liberty!' • On Bush's Trip, Some Discordant Messages • Report: Mexico To Delay Debt Plan • Two More Muslims Killed In India • Alarm as tribe offers land for nuclear dump • Stolen Cyanide Found In Mexico • Iranian Abandons Push To Improve U.S. Ties • Militants Raid Indian Post In Kashmir; 3 Are Killed • Body fluids protect against bugs • Benazir Bhutto: Musharraf must go • Sharon resists pressures to order new W. Bank assault • Marines launch Operation Buzzard to win Afghan hearts and minds • Shas would once again be part of the government: Israel • Indians keep their water weapon at bay • Restrained Delhi savours place in the sun • US congressmen seek contacts with N Korea • Indian Attack on Pak Likely to Harm US Troops • Militants livid with Musharraf • Program links U.S. evangelicals with Israel • No More Taxpayer Funds for the Failed Drug War in Colombia • Assailants shoot newspaper editor in Kashmir • Blair invites porn publisher to tea • Europe takes `nuclear option' as fish stocks slide • Marines launch new al-Qaida offensive near Pakistan border • Washington softens stance on UK steel tariffs • Sharon accused of undermining US peace moves • EU and Russia clash over Baltic enclave • The fugitive who hid her deadly secret for 32 years • Victory for Ben Ali makes a mockery of Tunisians A World Without War Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 by Noam Chomsky ZMag WSF 2 Featured Talk, Feb 2002 I hope you won't mind if I set the stage with a few truisms. It is hardly exciting news that we live in a world of conflict and confrontation. There are lots of dimensions and complexities, but in recent years, lines have been drawn fairly sharply. To oversimplify, but not too much, one of the participants in the conflict is concentrated power centers, state and private, closely interlinked. The other is the general population, worldwide. In old-fashioned terms, it would have been called "class war." Concentrated power pursues the war relentlessly, and very self-consciously. Government documents and publications of the business world reveal that they are mostly vulgar Marxists, with values reversed of course. They are also frightened -- back to 17th century England in fact. They realize that the system of domination is fragile, that it relies on disciplining the population by one or another means. There is a desperate search for such means: in recent years, Communism, crime, drugs, terrorism, and others. Pretexts change, policies remain rather stable. Sometimes the shift of pretext along with continuity of policy is dramatic and takes real effort to miss: immediately after the collapse of the USSR, for example. They naturally grasp every opportunity to press their agenda forward: 9-11 is a typical case. Crises make it possible to exploit fear and concern to demand that the adversary be submissive, obedient, silent, distracted, while the powerful use the window of opportunity to pursue their own favored programs with even greater intensity. These programs vary, depending on the society: in the more brutal states, escalation of repression and terror; in societies where the population has won more freedom, measures to impose discipline while shifting wealth and power even more to their own hands. It is easy to list examples around the world in the past few months. Their victims should certainly resist the predictable exploitation of crisis, and should focus their own efforts, no less relentlessly, on the primary issues that remain much as they were before: among them, increasing militarism, destruction of the environment, and a far-reaching assault against democracy and freedom, the core of "neoliberal" programs. The ongoing conflict is symbolized right now by the World Social Forum here and the World Economic Forum in New York. The WEF -- to quote the national US press -- is a gathering of "movers and shakers," the "rich and famous," "wizards from around the world," "government leaders and corporate executives, ministers of state and of God, politicians and pundits" who are going to "think deep thoughts" and address "the big problems confronting humankind." A few examples are given, for example, "how do you inject moral values into what we do?" Or a panel entitled "Tell Me What you Eat," led by the "reigning prince of the New York gastronomic scene," whose elegant restaurants will be "mobbed by forum participants." There is also mention of an "anti-forum" in Brazil where 50,000 people are expected. These are "the freaks who assemble to protest the meetings of the World Trade Organization." One can learn more about the freaks from a photo of a scruffy-looking guy, with face concealed, writing "world killers" on a wall. At their "carnival," as it is described, the freaks are throwing stones, writing graffiti, dancing and singing about a variety of boring topics that are unmentionable, at least in the US: investment, trade, financial architecture, human rights, democracy, sustainable development, Brazilian-African relations, GATS, and other marginal issues. They are not "thinking deep thoughts" about "big problems"; that is left to the wizards of Davos in New York. The infantile rhetoric, I presume, is a sign of well-deserved insecurity. The freaks at the "anti-forum" here are defined as being "opposed to globalization," a propaganda weapon we should reject with scorn. "Globalization" just means international integration. No sane person is "anti-globalization." That should be particularly obvious for the labor movement and the left; the term "international" is not exactly unknown in their history. In fact, the WSF is the most exciting and promising realization of the hopes of the left and popular movements from their modern origins for a true international, which will pursue a program of globalization concerned with the needs and interests of people, rather than of illegitimate concentrations of power. These, of course, want to appropriate the term "globalization," to restrict it to _their_ peculiar version of international integration, concerned with their own interests, those of people being incidental. With this ridiculous terminology in place, those who seek a sane and just form of globalization can be labelled "anti-globalization," derided as primitivists who want to return to the stone age, to harm the poor, and other terms of abuse with which we are familiar. The wizards of Davos modestly call themselves the "international community," but I personally prefer the term used by the world's leading business journal, the _Financial Times_: "the masters of the universe." Since the masters profess to be admirers of Adam Smith, we might expect them to abide by his account of their behavior, though he only called them "the masters of mankind" -- that was before the space age. Smith was referring to the "principal architects of policy" of his day, the merchants and manufacturers of England, who made sure that their own interests are "most peculiarly attended to" however "grievous" the impact on others, including the people of England. At home and abroad, they pursue "the vile maxim of the masters of mankind": "all for ourselves and nothing for other people." It should hardly surprise us that today's masters honor the same "vile maxim." At least they try, though they are sometimes impeded by the freaks -- the "great beast," to borrow a term used by the Founding Fathers of American democracy to refer to the unruly population that did not comprehend that the primary goal of government is "to protect the minority of the opulent from the majority," as the leading Framer of the Constitution explained in the debates of the Constitutional Convention. I'll return to these matters, but first a few words about the immediate topic of this session, which is closely related: "a world without war." We cannot say much about human affairs with any confidence, but sometimes it is possible. We can, for example, be fairly confident that either there will be a world without war or there won't be a world -- at least, a world inhabited by creatures other than bacteria and beetles, with some scattering of others. The reason is familiar: humans have developed means of destroying themselves, and much else, and have come dangerously close to using them for half a century. Furthermore, the leaders of the civilized world are now dedicated to enhancing these dangers to survival, in full awareness of what they are doing, at least if they read the reports of their own intelligence agencies and respected strategic analysts, including many who strongly favor the race to destruction. Still more ominous, the plans are developed and implemented on grounds that are rational within the dominant framework of ideology and values, which ranks survival well below "hegemony," the goal pursued by advocates of these programs, as they frankly insist. Wars over water, energy and other resources are not unlikely in the future, with consequences that could be devastating. For the most part, however, wars have had to do with the imposition of the system of nation-states, an unnatural social formation that that typically has to be instituted by violence. That's a primary reason why Europe was the most savage and brutal part of the world for many centuries, meanwhile conquering most of the world. European efforts to impose state systems in conquered territories are the source of most conflicts underway right now, after the collapse of the formal colonial system. Europe's own favorite sport of mutual slaughter had to be called off in 1945, when it was realized that the next time the game was played would be the last. Another prediction that we can make with fair confidence is that there won't be a war among great powers; the reason is that if the prediction turns out to be wrong, there will be no one around to care to tell us. Furthermore, popular activism within the rich and powerful societies has had a civilizing effect. The "movers and shakers" can no longer undertake the kinds of long-term aggression that were options before, as when the US attacked South Vietnam 40 years ago, smashing much of it to pieces before significant popular protest developed. Among the many civilizing effects of the ferment of the 1960s was broad opposition to large-scale aggression and massacre, reframed in the ideological system as unwillingness to accept casualties among the armed forces ("the Vietnam syndrome"). That is why the Reaganites had to resort to international terrorism instead of invading Central America directly, on the Kennedy-Johnson model, in their war to defeat liberation theology, as the School of the Americas describes the achievement with pride. The same changes explain the intelligence review of the incoming Bush-I administration in 1989, warning that in conflicts against "much weaker enemies" -- the only kind it makes sense to confront -- the US must "defeat them decisively and rapidly," or the campaign will lose "political support," understood to be thin. Wars since have kept to that pattern, and the scale of protest and dissent have steadily increased. So there are changes, of a mixed nature. When pretexts vanish, new ones have to be concocted to control the great beast while traditional policies are continued, adapted to new circumstances. That was already becoming clear 20 years ago. It was hard not to recognize that the Soviet enemy was facing internal problems and might not be a credible threat much longer. That is part of the reason why the Reagan administration, 20 years ago, declared that the "war on terror" would be the focus of US foreign policy, particularly in Central America and the Middle East, the main source of the plague spread by "depraved opponents of civilization itself" in a "return to barbarism in the modern age," as Administration moderate George Shultz explained, also warning that the solution is violence, avoiding "utopian, legalistic means like outside mediation, the World Court, and the United Nations." We need not tarry on how the war was waged in those two regions, and elsewhere, by the extraordinary network of proxy states and mercenaries -- an "axis of evil," to borrow a more up-to-date term. It is of some interest that in the months since the war was re-declared, with much the same rhetoric, after 9-11, all of this has been entirely effaced, even the fact that the US was condemned for international terrorism by the World Court and Security Council (vetoed) and responded by sharply escalating the terrorist attack it was ordered to terminate; or the fact that the very people who are directing the military and diplomatic components of the re-declared war on terror were leading figures in implementing terrorist atrocities in Central America and the Middle East during the first phase of the war. Silence about these matters is a real tribute to the discipline and obedience of the educated classes in the free and democratic societies. It's a fair guess that the "war on terror" will again serve as a pretext for intervention and atrocities in coming years, not just by the US; Chechnya is only one of a number of examples. In Latin America, there is no need to linger on what that portends; certainly not in Brazil, the first target of the wave of repression that swept Latin America after the Kennedy administration, in a decision of historic importance, shifted the mission of the Latin American military from "hemispheric defense" to "internal security" -- a euphemism for state terror directed against the domestic population. That still continues, on a huge scale, particularly in Colombia, well in the lead for human rights violations in the hemisphere in the 1990s and by far the leading recipient of US arms and military training, in accord with a consistent pattern documented even in mainstream scholarship. The "war on terror" has, of course, been the focus of a huge literature, during the first phase in the '80s and since it was re-declared in the past few months. One interesting feature of the flood of commentary, then and now, is that we are not told what "terror" is. What we hear, rather, is that this is a vexing and complex question. That is curious: there are straightforward definitions in official US documents. A simple one takes terror to be the "calculated use of violence or threat of violence to attain goals that are political, religious, or ideological in nature..." That seems appropriate enough, but it cannot be used, for two good reasons. One is that it also defines official policy, called "counterinsurgency" or "low-intensity conflict." Another is that it yields all the wrong answers, facts too obvious to review though suppressed with remarkable efficiency. The problem of finding a definition of "terror" that will exclude the most prominent cases is indeed vexing and complex. But fortunately, there is an easy solution: define "terror" as terror that _they_ carry out against _us_. A review of the scholarly literature on terror, the media, and intellectual journals will show that this usage is close to exceptionless, and that any departure from it elicits impressive tantrums. Furthermore, the practice is probably universal: the generals in South America were protecting the population from "terror directed from outside," just as the Japanese were in Manchuria and the Nazis in occupied Europe. If there is an exception, I haven't found it. Let's return to "globalization," and the linkage between it and the threat of war, perhaps terminal war. The version of "globalization" designed by the masters of the universe has very broad elite support, not surprisingly, as do the so-called "free trade agreements" -- what the _Wall Street Journal_, more honestly, has called "free investment agreements." Very little is reported about these issues, and crucial information is simply suppressed; for example, after a decade, the position of the US labor movement on NAFTA, and the conforming conclusions of Congress's own Research Bureau (the Office of Technology Assessment, OTA), have yet to be reported outside of dissident sources. And the issues are off the agenda in electoral politics. There are good reasons. The masters know well that the public will be opposed if information becomes available. They are fairly open when addressing one another, however. Thus a few years ago, under enormous public pressure, Congress rejected the "fast track" legislation that grants the President authority to enact international economic arrangements with Congress permitted to vote "Yes" (or, theoretically, "No) with no discussion, and the public uninformed. Like other sectors of elite opinion, the _WSJ_ was distraught over the failure to undermine democracy. But it explained the problem: opponents of these Stalinist-style measures have an "ultimate weapon," the general population, which must therefore be kept in the dark. That is very important, particularly in the more democratic society, where dissidents can't simply be jailed or assassinated, as in the leading recipients of US military aid, such as El Salvador, Turkey, and Colombia, to list the recent and current world champions (Israel-Egypt aside). One might ask why public opposition to "globalization" has been so high for many years. That seems strange, in an era when it has led to unprecedented prosperity, so we are constantly informed, particularly in the U.S., with its "fairy tale economy." Through the 1990s, the US has enjoyed "the greatest economic boom in America's history -- and the world's," Anthony Lewis wrote in the _New York Times_ a year ago, repeating the standard refrain from the left end of the admissible spectrum. It is conceded that there are flaws: some have been left behind in the economic miracle, and we good-hearted folk must do something about that. The flaws reflect a profound and troubling dilemma: the rapid growth and prosperity brought by "globalization" has as a concomitant growing inequality, as some lack the skills to enjoy the wondrous gifts and opportunities. The picture is so conventional that it may be hard to realize how little resemblance it has to reality, facts that have been well-known right through the miracle. Until the brief late '90s boomlet (which scarcely compensated for earlier stagnation or decline for most people), per capita growth in the "roaring '90s" was about the same as the rest of the industrial world, much lower than in the first 25 post-war years before so-called "globalization," and vastly lower than the war years, the greatest economic boom in American history, under a semi-command economy. How then can the conventional picture be so radically different from uncontroversial facts? The answer is simplicity itself. For a small sector of the society, the '90s really were a grand economic boom. That sector happens to include those who tell others the joyous news. And they cannot be accused of dishonesty. They have no reason to doubt what they are saying. They read it all the time in the journals for which they write, and it accords with their personal experience: it is true of the people they meet in editorial offices, faculty clubs, elite conferences like the one the wizards are now attending, and the elegant restaurants where they dine. It's only the world that is different. Let's have a quick look at the record over a longer stretch. International economic integration -- one facet of "globalization," in a neutral sense of the term -- increased rapidly before World War I, stagnated or declined during the interwar years, and resumed after World War II, now reaching levels of a century ago by gross measures; the fine structure is more complex. By some measures, globalization was greater before World War I: one illustration is "free circulation of labor," the foundation of free trade for Adam Smith, though not his contemporary admirers. By other measures, globalization is far greater now: one dramatic example -- not the only one -- is the flow of short-term speculative capital, far beyond any precedent. The distinction reflects some central features of the version of globalization preferred by the masters of the universe: to an extent even beyond the norm, capital has priority, people are incidental. The Mexican border is an interesting example. It is artificial, the result of conquest, like most borders, and has been porous in both directions for a variety of socioeconomic reasons. It was militarized after NAFTA by Clinton in order to block the "free circulation of labor." That was necessary because of the anticipated effects of NAFTA in Mexico: an "economic miracle," which would be a disaster for much of the population, who would seek to escape. In the same years, the flow of capital, already very free, was expedited further, along with what is called "trade," about 2/3 of which is now centrally-managed within private tyrannies, up from half before NAFTA. That is "trade" only by doctrinal decision. The effects of NAFTA on actual trade have not been examined, to my knowledge. A more technical measure of globalization is convergence to a global market, with a single price and wage. That plainly has not happened. With respect to incomes at least, the opposite is more likely true. Though much depends on exactly how it is measured, there is good reason to believe that inequality has increased within and across countries. That is expected to continue. US intelligence agencies, with the participation of specialists from the academic professions and the private sector, recently released a report on expectations for 2015. They expect "globalization" to proceed on course: "Its evolution will be rocky, marked by chronic financial volatility and a widening economic divide." That means less convergence, less globalization in the technical sense, but more globalization in the doctrinally preferred sense. Financial volatility implies still slower growth and more crises and poverty. It is at this point that a clear connection is established between "globalization" in the sense of the masters of the universe and the increasing likelihood of war. Military planners adopt the same projections, and have explained, forthrightly, that these expectations lie behind the vast expansion of military power. Even pre-Sept. 11, US military expenditures surpassed those of allies and adversaries combined. The terror attacks have been exploited to increase the funding sharply, delighting key elements of the private economy. The most ominous program is militarization of space, also being expanded under the pretext of "fighting terror." The reasoning behind these programs is explained publicly in Clinton-era documents. A prime reason is the growing gap between the "haves" and the "have-nots," which is expected to continue, contrary to economic theory but consistent with reality. The "have-nots" -- the "great beast" of the world -- may become disruptive, and must be controlled, in the interests of what is called "stability" in technical jargon, meaning subordination to the dictates of the masters. That requires means of violence, and having "assumed, out of self-interest, responsibility for the welfare of the world capitalist system," the US must be far in the lead; I'm quoting diplomatic historian Gerald Haines, also the senior historian of the CIA, describing US planning in the 1940s in a scholarly study. Overwhelming dominance in conventional forces and weapons of mass destruction is not sufficient. It is necessary to move on to the new frontier: militarization of space, undermining the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, so far observed. Recognizing the intent, the UN General Assembly has reaffirmed the Treaty several times; the US has refused to join, in virtual isolation. And Washington has blocked negotiations at the UN Conference on Disarmament for the past year over this issue -- all scarcely reported, for the usual reasons. It is not wise to allow citizens to know of plans that may bring to an end biology's only experiment with "higher intelligence." As widely observed, these programs benefit military industry, but we should bear in mind that the term is misleading. Throughout modern history, but with a dramatic increase after World War II, the military system has been used as a device to socialize cost and risk while privatizing profit. The "new economy" is to a substantial extent an outgrowth of the dynamic and innovative state sector of the US economy. The main reason why public spending in biological sciences has been rapidly increasing is that intelligent right-wingers understand that the cutting edge of the economy relies on these public initiatives. A huge increase is scheduled under the pretext of "bioterror," just as the public was deluded into paying for the new economy under the pretext that the Russians are coming -- or after they collapsed, by the threat of the "technological sophistication" of third world countries as the Party Line shifted in 1990, instantly, without missing a beat and with scarcely a word of comment. That's also a reason why national security exemptions have to be part of international economic agreements: it doesn't help Haiti, but it allows the US economy to grow under the traditional principle of harsh market discipline for the poor and a nanny state for the rich -- what's called "neoliberalism," though it is not a very good term: the doctrine is centuries old, and would scandalize classical liberals. One might argue that these public expenditures were often worthwhile. Perhaps, perhaps not. But it is clear that the masters were afraid to allow democratic choice. All of this is concealed from the general public, though the participants understand it very well. Plans to cross the last frontier of violence by militarization of space are disguised as "missile defense," but anyone who pays attention to history knows that when we hear the word "defense," we should think "offense." The present case is no exception. The goal is quite frankly stated: to ensure "global dominance," "hegemony." Official documents stress prominently that the goal is "to protect US interests and investments," and control the "have-nots." Today that requires domination of space, just as in earlier times the most powerful states created armies and navies "to protect and enhance their commercial interests." It is recognized that these new initiatives, in which the US is far in the lead, pose a serious threat to survival. And it is also understood that they could be prevented by international treaties. But as I've already mentioned, hegemony is a higher value than survival, a moral calculus that has prevailed among the powerful throughout history. What has changed is that the stakes are much higher, awesomely so. The relevant point here is that the expected success of "globalization" in the doctrinal sense is a primary reason given for the programs of using space for offensive weapons of instant mass destruction. Let us return to "globalization," and "the greatest economic boom in America's history -- and the world's" in the 1990s. Since World War II, the international economy has passed through two phases: the Bretton Woods phase to the early '70s, and the period since, with the dismantling of the Bretton Woods system of regulated exchange rates and controls on capital movement. It is the second phase that is called "globalization," associated with the neoliberal policies of the "Washington consensus." The two phases are quite different. The first is often called the "golden age" of (state) capitalism. The second phase has been accompanied by marked deterioration in standard macroeconomic measures: rate of growth of the economy, productivity, capital investment, even world trade; much higher interest rates (harming economies); vast accumulation of unproductive reserves to protect currencies; increased financial volatility; and other harmful consequences. There were exceptions, notably the East Asian countries that did not follow the rules: they did not worship the "religion" that "markets know best," as Joseph Stiglitz wrote in a World Bank research publication shortly before he was appointed chief economist, later removed (and winning the Nobel prize). In contrast, the worst results were found where the rules were rigorously applied, as in Latin America, facts widely acknowledged, among others, by Jose' Antonio Ocampo, director of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), in an address before the American Economic Association a year ago. The "promised land is a mirage," he observed; growth in the 1990s was far below that of the three decades of "state-led development" in Phase I. He too noted that the correlation between following the rules and economic outcomes holds worldwide. Let us return, then, to the profound and troubling dilemma: the rapid growth and great prosperity brought by globalization has brought inequality because some lack skills. There is no dilemma, because the rapid growth and prosperity are a myth. Many international economists regard liberalization of capital as a substantial factor in the poorer outcomes of phase II. But the economy is a complex affair, so poorly understood that one has to be cautious about causal connections. But one consequence of liberalization of capital is rather clear: it undercuts democracy. That was understood by the framers of Bretton Woods: one reason why the agreements were founded on regulation of capital was to allow governments to carry out social democratic policies, which had enormous popular support. Free capital movement creates what has been called a "virtual Senate" with "veto power" over government decisions, sharply restricting policy options. Governments face a "dual constituency": voters, and speculators, who "conduct moment-by-moment referendums" on government policies (quoting technical studies of the financial system). Even in the rich countries, the private constituency prevails. Other components of investor-rights "globalization" have similar consequences. Socioeconomic decisions are increasingly shifted to unaccountable concentrations of power, an essential feature of neoliberal "reforms" (a term of propaganda, not description). Extension of the attack on democracy is presumably being planned, without public discussion, in the negotiations for a General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). The term "services," as you know, refers to just about anything that might fall within the arena of democratic choice: health, education, welfare, postal and other communications, water and other resources, etc. There is no meaningful sense in which transferring such services to private hands is "trade," but the term has been so deprived of meaning that it might as well be extended to this travesty as well. The huge public protests in Quebec last April at the Summit of the Americas, set in motion by the freaks in Porto Alegre a year ago, were in part directed against the attempt to impose the GATS principles in secret within the planned Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA). Those protests brought together a very broad constituency, North and South, all strongly opposed to what is apparently being planned by trade ministers and corporate executives behind closed doors. The protests did receive coverage, of the usual kind: the freaks are throwing rocks and disrupting the wizards thinking about the big problems. The invisibility of their actual concerns is quite remarkable. For example, _NYT_ economics correspondent Anthony DePalma writes that the GATS agreement "has generated none of the public controversy that has swirled about [WTO] attempts to promote merchandise trade," even after Seattle. In fact, it has been a prime concern for years. As in other cases, this is not deceit. DePalma's knowledge about the freaks is surely limited to what passes through the media filter, and it is an iron law of journalism that the serious concerns of activists must be rigidly barred, in favor of someone throwing a rock, perhaps a police provocateur. The importance of protecting the public from information was revealed dramatically at the April Summit. Every editorial office in the US had on its desk two important studies, timed for release just before the Summit. One was from Human Rights Watch, the second from the Economic Policy Institute in Washington; neither organization is exactly obscure. Both studies investigated in depth the effects of NAFTA, which was hailed at the Summit as a grand triumph and a model for the FTAA, with headlines trumpeting its praises by George Bush and other leaders, all accepted as Gospel Truth. Both studies were suppressed with near-total unanimity. It's easy to see why. HRW analyzed the effects of NAFTA on labor rights, which, it found, were harmed in all three participating countries. The EPI report was more comprehensive: it consisted of detailed analyses of the effects of NAFTA on working people, written by specialists on the three countries. The conclusion is that this is one of the rare agreements that has harmed the majority of the population in all of the participating countries. The effects on Mexico were particularly severe, and particularly significant for the South. Wages had declined sharply with the imposition of neoliberal programs in the 1980s. That continued after NAFTA, with a 24% decline in incomes for salaried workers, and 40% for the self-employed, an effect magnified by the rapid increase in unsalaried workers. Though foreign investment grew, total investment declined, as the economy was transferred to the hands of foreign multinationals. The minimum wage lost 50% of its purchasing power. Manufacturing declined, and development stagnated or may have reversed. A small sector became extremely wealthy, and foreign investors prospered. These studies confirm what had been reported in the business press and academic studies. The _WSJ_ reported that although the Mexican economy was growing rapidly in the late '90s after a sharp post-NAFTA decline, consumers suffered a 40% drop in purchasing power, the number of people living in extreme poverty grew twice as fast as the population, and even those working in foreign-owned assembly plants lost purchasing power. Similar conclusions were drawn in a study of the Latin American section of the Woodrow Wilson Center, which also found that economic power had greatly concentrated as small Mexican companies cannot obtain financing, traditional farming sheds workers, and labor-intensive sectors (agriculture, light industry) cannot compete internationally with what is called "free enterprise" in the doctrinal system. Agriculture suffered for the usual reasons: peasant farmers cannot compete with highly-subsidized US agribusiness, with effects familiar throughout the world. Most of this was predicted by critics of NAFTA, including the suppressed OTA and labor movement studies. Critics were wrong in one respect, however Most anticipated a sharp increase in the urban-rural ratio, as hundreds of thousands of peasants were driven off the land. That didn't happen. The reason, it seems, is that conditions deteriorated so badly in the cities that there was a huge flight from them as well to the US. Those who survive the crossing -- many do not -- work for very low wages, with no benefits, under awful conditions. The effect is to destroy lives and communities in Mexico and to improve the US economy, where "consumption of the urban middle class continues to be subsidized by the impoverishment of farm laborers both in the United States and Mexico," the Woodrow Wilson Center study points out. These are among the costs of NAFTA, and neoliberal globalization generally, that economists generally choose not to measure. But even by the highly ideological standard measures, the costs have been severe. None of this was allowed to sully the celebration of NAFTA and the FTAA at the Summit. Unless they are connected to activist organizations, most people know about these matters only from their own lives. And carefully protected from reality by the Free Press, many regard themselves as somehow failures, unable to take part in the celebration of the greatest economic boom in history. Data from the richest country in the world are enlightening, but I'll skip the details. The picture generalizes, with some variation of course, and exceptions of the kind already noted. The picture is much worse when we depart from standard economic measures. One cost is the threat to survival implicit in the reasoning of military planners, already described. There are many others. To take one, the ILO reported a rising "worldwide epidemic" of serious mental health disorders, often linked to stress in the workplace, with very substantial fiscal costs in the industrial countries. A large factor, they conclude, is "globalization," which brings "evaporation of job security," pressure on workers, and a higher workload, particularly in the US. Is this a cost of "globalization"? From one point of view, it is one of its most attractive featurs. When he lauded US economic performance as "extraordinary," Alan Greenspan stressed particularly the heightened sense of job insecurity, which leads to subdued costs for employers. The World Bank agrees. It recognizes that "labor market flexibility" has acquired "a bad name...as a euphemism for pushing wages down and workers out," but nevertheless, "it is essential in all the regions of the world... The most important reforms involve lifting constraints on labor mobility and wage flexibility, as well as breaking the ties between social services and labor contracts." In brief, pushing workers out, pushing wages down, undermining benefits are all crucial contributions to economic health, according to prevailing ideology. Unregulated trade has further benefits for corporations. Much, probably most, "trade" is centrally-managed through a variety of devices: intrafirm transfers, strategic alliances, outsourcing, and others. Broad trading areas benefit corporations by making them less answerable to local and national communities. This enhances the effects of neoliberal programs, which regularly have reduced labor share of income. In the US, the '90s were the first postwar period when division of income shifted strongly to owners of capital, away from labor. Trade has a wide range of unmeasured costs: subsidizing energy, resource depletion, and other externalities not counted. It also brings advantages, though here too some caution is necessary. The most widely hailed is that trade increases specialization -- which reduces choices, including the choice to modify comparative advantage, otherwise known as "development." Choice and development are values in themselves: undermining them is a substantial cost. If the American colonies had been compelled to accept the WTO regime 200 years ago, New England would be pursuing its comparative advantage in exporting fish, surely not producing textiles, which survived only by exorbitant tariffs to bar British products (mirroring Britain's treatment of India). The same was true of steel and other industries, right to the present, particularly in the highly protectionist Reagan years -- even putting aside the state sector of the economy. There is a great deal to say about all of this. Much of the story is masked in selective modes of economic measurement, though it is well known to economic historians and historians of technology. As everyone here is aware, the rules of the game are likely to enhance deleterious effects for the poor. The rules of the WTO bar the mechanisms used by every rich country to reach its current state of development, while also providing unprecedented levels of protectionism for the rich, including a patent regime that bars innovation and growth in novel ways, and allows corporate entities to amass huge profits by monopolistic pricing of products often developed with substantial public contribution. Under contemporary versions of traditional mechanisms, half the people in the world are effectively in receivership, their economic policies managed by experts in Washington. But even in the rich countries democracy is under attack by virtue of the shift of decision-making power from governments, which may be partially responsive to the public, to private tyrannies, which have no such defects. Cynical slogans such as "trust the people" or "minimize the state" do not, under current circumstances, call for increasing popular control. They shift decisions from governments to other hands, but not "the people": rather, the management of collectivist legal entities, largely unaccountable to the public, and effectively totalitarian in internal structure, much as conservatives charged a century ago when opposing "the corporatization of America." Latin American specialists and polling organizations have observed for some years that extension of formal democracy in Latin America has been accompanied by increasing disillusionment about democracy, "alarming trends," which continue, analysts have observed, noting the link between "declining economic fortunes" and "lack of faith" in democratic institutions (_Financial Times_). As Atilio Boron pointed out some years ago, the new wave of democratization in Latin America coincided with neoliberal economic "reforms," which undermine effective democracy, a phenomenon that extends worldwide, in various forms. To the US as well. There has been much public clamor about the "stolen election" of November 2000, and surprise that the public does not seem to care. Likely reasons are suggested by public opinion studies, which reveal that on the eve of the election, 3/4 of the population regarded the process as largely a farce: a game played by financial contributors, party leaders, and the Public Relations industry, which crafted candidates to say "almost anything to get themselves elected" so that one could believe little they said even when it was intelligible. On most issues, citizens could not identify the stands of the candidates, not because they are stupid or not trying, but because of the conscious efforts of the PR industry. A Harvard University project that monitors political attitudes found that the "feeling of powerlessness has reached an alarming high," with more than half saying that people like them have little or no influence on what government does, a sharp rise through the neoliberal period. Issues on which the public differs from elites (economic, political, intellectual) are pretty much off the agenda, notably questions of economic policy. The business world, not surprisingly, is overwhelmingly in favor of corporate-led "globalization," the "free investment agreements" called "free trade agreements," NAFTA and the FTAA, GATS, and other devices that concentrate wealth and power in hands unaccountable to the public. Also not surprisingly, the great beast is generally opposed, almost instinctively, even without knowing crucial facts from which they are carefully shielded. It follows that such issues are not appropriate for political campaigns, and did not arise in the mainstream for the November 2000 elections. One wouold have been hard-pressed, for example, to find discussion of the upcoming Summit of the Americas and the FTAA, and other topics that involve issues of prime concern for the public. Voters were directed to what the PR industry calls "personal qualities," not "issues." Among the half the population that votes, heavily skewed towards the wealthy, those who recognize their class interests to be at stake vote for those interests: overwhelmingly, for the more reactionary of the two business parties. But the general public splits its vote in other ways, leading to a statistical tie. Among working people, noneconomic issues such as gun ownership and "religiosity" were primary factors, so that people often voted against their own primary interests -- apparently assuming that they had little choice. What remains of democracy is to be construed as the right to choose among commodities. Business leaders have long explained the need to impose on the population a "philosophy of futility" and "lack of purpose in life," to "concentrate human attention on the more superficial things that comprise much of fashionable consumption." Deluged by such propaganda from infancy, people may then accept their meaningless and subordinate lives and forget ridiculous ideas about managing their own affairs. They may abandon their fate to the wizards, and in the political realm, to the self-described "intelligent minorities" who serve and administer power. From this perspective, conventional in elite opinion particularly through the last century, the November 2000 elections do not reveal a flaw of US democracy, but rather its triumph. And generalizing, it is fair to hail the triumph of democracy throughout the hemisphere, and elsewhere, even though the populations somehow do not see it that way. The struggle to impose that regime takes many forms, but never ends, and never will as long as high concentrations of effective decision-making power remain in place. It is only reasonable to expect the masters to exploit any opportunity that comes along -- at the moment, the fear and anguish of the population in the face of terrorist attacks, a serious matter for the West now that, with new technologies available, it has lost its virtual monopoly of violence, retaining only a huge preponderance. But there is no need to accept these rules, and those who are concerned with the fate of the world and its people will surely follow a very different course. The popular struggles against investor-rights "globalization," mostly in the South, have influenced the rhetoric, and to some extent the practices, of the masters of the universe, who are concerned and defensive. These popular movements are unprecedented in scale, in range of constituency, and in international solidarity; the meetings here are a critically important illustration. The future to a large extent lies in their hands. It is hard to overestimate what is at stake. World News Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 • Bungling Bushies Wrong About Cuba • U.S. abusing basic human rights in war on terror • A series of warnings about a terror plot • FIFA chief is easily re-elected to 2d term • Bush is Beyond Embarrassment • Dozens injured in bomb blasts in India, authorities say • Venezuela Coup Leader Leaves Country • UK equipment being used in Israeli attacks • No arms embargo on India and Pakistan • Four Israelis killed in separate West Bank shooting attacks • Wake-up call • The rhetoric of war • This goofy estrangement • Texas Inmate Executed By Injection • Palestinian shoots three teenagers in Jewish settlement • Pakistan tests third missile as war rhetoric heats up • Victory for Ben Ali makes a mockery of Tunisians • Texan who killed at 17 is executed despite protests • Rights 'trampled' by war on terror • India: 3,000 Al-Qaeda, Taliban Ready at Kashmir Border • India Ruling Party Using War Rhetoric to Save Sagging Poll Numbers • Israel Continues Bethlehem Assault, 6 Dead • India Again Rejects Talks • Israel continues Bethlehem raid • From Britain, remains of the darkest days World News Posted: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 • Kashmir - whose 'war on terrorism'? • All cultures are not equal • Kathy Wilson: 'The subliminal presidency' • Israel Launches New Spy Satellite • Major Israeli Defense Firm Reports Profits • Washington considers adding Cairo to "Axis of Evil" • Protesters in Gaza urge Israel to free journalists • Brit fury as US graffiti mocks 'trash' marines • US warplanes again strike Iraqi air defenses-Pentagon • U.S. Performing Secret Experiments in Case of Germ Attack • Many in U.S. blame Bush for Sept. 11: Poll • Turkey tightens controls on the net • US defence firms revel in spending spree • Pro-Israeli Lobby a Force to Be Reckoned With • India hits back over 'dangerous' speech • Israel's 'army' of Palestinian informers • Military ties make Pakistan's militants hard to control • IDF leaves Qalqilyah; terror cell arrested in Bethlehem • Fatal fall in Denver follows Six Flags death in Georgia • Colombia may be set for the bloodiest chapter yet in 38 years • Taleban leaders warn of more attacks • U.S. media and their ignorance partly blamable for E. Timor's mysery • 'Bottle' and 'oil': Islam's classical difficulties • Slavery's role at Williamsburg • China's Communists Look To UK Labor As Future of Party • Key Arms Suppliers on Subcontinent • Britain Has Armed Both Sides on Subcontinent • Arms Export Row Damages UK Peace Mission • Weapons salesmen turn peacemongers • Colombians claim immunity over killing • Musharraf keeps tension high • Defiant Musharraf refuses to back down over Kashmir • MI5 agent will not face Bloody Sunday inquiry • No 10 denies move to block sale of Hawk jets to India • Eleven soldiers, nine rebels killed in India's northeast • Nuclear fear: 'Death of the Indian subcontinent' • Pakistan has failed to offer even the tiniest olive branch • Seventeen killed as Khartoum bombs villages in south Sudan: rebels • FBI chiefs so lax agents felt they were spies • Sharp note from FBI whistleblower • China seeks return of 300 fighters caught in Afghanistan • Ex-Afghan king ready to accept role as head of state, endorses Karzai • Suicide bomber kills three in Petah Tikva • Musharraf: we will not start a war • Russian Woman Wounded In Explosion • Rasta row shakes Swazi royals • United States Human Rights Violations Undermine Global Leadership Do as we say, not as we do Posted: Monday, May 27, 2002 by Gary Younge If George Bush wishes to claim victimhood for himself or his nation he will have to stand at the back of a very long line. The horrific events of September 11 gave Americans a taste of the world's pain; it did not give them a monopoly on suffering. The truth is, so long as Bush pushes ahead with this mindless, murderous military campaign and a world trade regime which discriminates against the poor and undermines democracy, he will remain a legitimate focus for anti-war and anti-globalisation protests. MORE Calls for the resignation of George W. Bush Posted: Monday, May 27, 2002 VHeadline.com : Sunday, May 26, 2002 -- Bob Chapman's INTERNATIONAL FORECASTER ( international financial, economic, political and social commentary) says in this weekend's issue that word is starting to filter out that the Pentagon had forces on standby to provide logistical support to the coup conspirators, which attempted to overthrow the Hugo Chavez government in Venezuela. "The US government wanted to remove Mr. Chavez because he strongly backed OPEC, he initiated relations with Libya, he kept US planes out of Venezuelan airspace, he traded with and has good relations with Cuba, he rejected plan Columbia and he is against the Latin American Free Trade Area." The International Forecaster continues: As you can see if you disagree with the US government you are overthrown or assassinated. What great foreign policy? Sort of on a par with Attila the Hun. The Bush cabal operates like Imperial Rome. You either comply or we destroy you. MORE Argentine Crisis is Serious Posted: Monday, May 27, 2002 by Charley Reese The economic crisis in Argentina is grave. Unemployment is now 20 percent, only 5 percent below ours during the Great Depression. It is no longer an inconvenience. People are now reaching the point where they simply have no money for food or medicine. In the meantime, the International Monetary Fund refuses to make any loans because the Argentine provincial governments didn't cut their budgets enough to suit the international financiers. Thus, the human tragedy in Argentina provides a lesson Americans ought to learn. The present international banking system is exploitive and destructive and must be changed. So, for that matter, is our domestic banking system. MORE World News Posted: Monday, May 27, 2002 • Two people killed in Petah Tikva suicide attack • IDF leaves Qalqilyah; terror cell arrested in Bethlehem • Pakistan to crack down on militants • France goes soft as Bush flies in • Ocean on Mars is frozen undergound • Do as we say, not as we do • Final minutes of World Trade Centre revealed • Trade not aid • Bush Backs Palestinian Changes • Security heavy as Colombians vote for new President • Eleven feared dead after cars plunge into river from wrecked road bridge • 'Odd Couple' visit Uganda as storm brews over aid • We may disagree with the US, but we share the same goals • Afghan Villagers Angry Over US Raid • 'Suicide bomber' distraught over relationship break-up • Stolen generations fury at memorial `whitewash' • Musharraf has not yet stopped cross-border infiltration:Powell • Russia To Help Arm India • Japan to Unify Military Forces • Iran Tests Israel-Range Missile • Stay Out of Colombia's Civil War • Bush Presses Pakistan on Kashmir Raids • Colombia Gives Asylum To Coup Leader • Israel steps up raids in Palestinian territories • Pakistan has secretly built up nuclear arsenal • Vajpayee plays the terrorist card with the West • Poverty drives Kashmiris into army of 'enemy' • Israeli to be indicted for supplying explosives to Jewish terror cell • Sharon wants Shas back in gov't, but won't 'crawl,' aides say • Israel and U.S. at odds on Palestinian reform • Ben-Eliezer: IDF stops 90% of bombers; IDF enters Qalqilyah • Geurrillas and troops clash in Colombia, 17 dead • President counters his critics in Europe > In Paris, Chirac cites strains over 'real issues' • Bush struggles to hold coalition • Bush administration exports misery to Africa with farm bill • The view from Arkansas: 'Court-appointed commander' • Mark Shields: 'Election won't be about terrorism' Don't wag your finger at us, Mr. Bush Posted: Sunday, May 26, 2002 by Henry Porter There's a lot about President Bush's manner, breezing through Europe and telling us all to pull our socks up, that makes you want to wipe the smile off his face. 'Iraq ought to be on the minds of the German people,' he said to a TV station in Berlin, 'because the Iraq government is a dangerous government.' Well, yes, but how exactly has Saddam's stance changed since this time last year when America was enjoying the first month's of George Bush's carefree unilateralism and Iraq was some way down the agenda? MORE World News Posted: Sunday, May 26, 2002 • Bush's actions can be compared to serious crimes • If you wanted Clinton impeached, take a look at Bush • Pundit Pap: Pootie-Poot patter • Matthew Miller: 'What we're in is not a war' • Cranky Bush gets testy at press conference • Jennifer Van Bergen: 'Is DOJ saying that Gore won Florida?' • Alvaro Uribe Elected in Colombia • Missile tests lift tension • Hardliner Alvaro Uribe wins Colombian poll • Russia opens military supply line for India • Bush speaks on Pakistan, meets with French president • Barge hits bridge in Oklahoma • France struggles in win over South Korea; Zidane injured • Hippo capsizes canoe in Malawi, 11 die • Afghan blast kills eight Pakistani children • Political opposition leader killed in Bangladesh • Frantic bid to avert nuclear conflict • Mexico Bus Crash Kills 14; Injures 16 • Dozens of Venezuelans Rally For Coup Chief • When Uncle Sam meets 'Stan • Don't wag your finger at us, Mr Bush • Why Bush's deal with Putin doesn't make the world safer • Bush grins again after summit hiccup • US plan to strike enemy with Valium • Huddled masses and muddled asses • New barriers widen gulf on West Bank • Pakistan marks Prophet's birth with a missile • Governments must tackle prejudice, not reinforce it • Brand new start of it: out of ol' New York • More Bodies Retrieved From Taiwan Plane Crash • 205 dead after train crash • 13 dead after Brazilian prison riot • Castro: On War on Terror > Our struggle is not and never will be against the people of the US • Two die in fresh violence in Gujarat • 11 civilians killed in Indian shelling • Ill-considered intervention World News Posted: Saturday, May 25, 2002 • There is a firestorm coming, and it is being provoked by Mr Bush • Israelis Raid Bethlehem, Shooting Erupts • Like our Prime Minister, Mr Putin has come to terms with US hegemony • Bush and Putin clash over Iran after signing treaty to cut nuclear missiles • From Salt to Sort: is this the end of arms control? • 18 Iraqis Hurt In Allied Airstrike • Mexico Bus Crash Kills 11 • Colombians Prepare For Election • Bush Protesters Arrested In Russia • Electrocution Kills 60 Party Guests • Israeli Fire Kills 2 Farm Workers • 196 Die In Mozambique Train Crash • Bush, Putin Press Pakistan On Kashmir • Youth stage a rave dance against Israeli occupation • 'Swift, devastating' response: Cheney • Plane crashes with 222 on board • Israeli Troops Keep Hold on West Bank City • US House okays $29m anti-terror bill • Indian affairs official says firing retaliation from the White House • Pakistan has gone too far, says India • Monkey say, monkey do • Armed and dangerous • Pragmatic Putin accepts offer he couldn't refuse • Hawks persuaded to hold off Iraqi invasion • The shadow of fear • Israeli Army fences off Palestinian areas • Dangerous game of state-sponsored terror that threatens nuclear conflict • Venezuela's fleeting president seeks Colombian sanctuary • Rambling Clinton strolls off with $250,000 • Iranian police raid shops to end the scourge of Barbie • Bush backs off Iraq invasion • Finger of blame points directly at the FBI for ignoring warnings • US investigators unable to link 'shoe bomber' to bin Laden • Britain to hand back remains of colonial-era Aborigines • Seven killed as fighting flares in Mogadishu • The road to ruin • The Israel Lobby • Colombian War's Uneven Burden • China's Rivals Slow to Grasp Export Might • Bush and Putin announce energy partnership • 42 die in shoe factory fire Wise Up, Mr. Bush Posted: Friday, May 24, 2002 President Bush continues to delude himself that Israel's prime minister, Ariel Sharon, is interested in peace. Mr. Sharon has no intention of ever seriously negotiating with the Palestinians. First it was the violence, then it was Yasser Arafat, and now Mr. Sharon says he won't negotiate until the Palestinian Authority cleans up corruption and becomes more democratic — presumably according to his definition. MORE World News Posted: Friday, May 24, 2002 • Heavy firefights in Tulkarem; Israel destroys factories in Gaza Strip • Palestinian groups reject U.S. aid, protesting American support of Israel • US to decide on whether Russia is market economy > US interested in boosting oil imports from Russia • U.S., coalition forces raid in compound in Afghanistan killing 1 • Gunmen attack home of Somalia's interior minister • Fire in shoe factory kills at least 30 in India • Sixty feared dead in new Bangladesh ferry accident • Differences on Iran Exposed at Bush-Putin Summit • Sixty Feared Dead in New Bangladesh Ferry Accident • Milwaukee Archbishop Denies Sex Report • Pope Accepts US Bishop's Resignation • FBI Was Warned of Sept. 11 Hijacker • I'm not guilty, says Habib in first letter • America's relationship with Europe • Bomb explodes at Israeli fuel depot • Bureaucratic bungle by British sowed seeds of present conflict • Security fears as man lunges at Pope • Japanese lash out as whaling vote is lost • Pakistan primes its people for war • Was Barak telling the truth? • Visa detainees allege beatings • Junk food firms fear being eaten alive by fat litigants • Swiss millionaire dies in apparent ritual suicide • Whitewashing the past • Royal Marines in Afghan firefight • Looking into the nuclear abyss • Venezuelan Coup Figurehead Escapes • 1 person hurt as bomber blows himself up outside Tel Aviv club • US believes Musharraf has broken 3 promises • Palestinian militants vow to avenge assassinations • Israel ex-PM's disparagement of the Palestinians began long ago • Australia offers Afghan asylum seekers £3,800 to go home • India and Pakistan do not understand what nuclear war means World News Posted: Thursday, May 23, 2002 • Venezuelan coup figurehead seeks refuge in Colombian embassy • Fifteen Wounded in Indian Kashmir Grenade Attack • U.S. Warplanes Attack Iraqi Weapon Sites • No current plans to attack Iraq: Bush • Third suicide bombing in four days kills two Israelis • Bush Staff Answers Enron Subpoenas • Scare on United Airlines as firecrackers found in lavatory • Conference Rejects Japan's Whaling Wish • Ex-Klansman Convicted of 1963 Church Bombing • Britain 'in deal to shut Sangatte' • 2 FBI Agents Charged With Taking Part in Stock Fraud • Arafat and Sharon face similar domestic crises • The way we will live in 2032... • Hundreds of guards protect French squad after warnings • Fla. Counties Consider Vote Changes • Fire Destroys Israeli Embassy • British Embassy staff ordered out of Pakistan • Japan Rebuffed In Fight to Ease Ban on Whaling • Steel Fight Escalates In Asia • Chandra Levy's body found in woods • East Timor is independent. So long as it does as it's told • Armed monk storms Thai Parliament • Clashes as Bush lands in Berlin • Frail Pope visits flock of 120 Azeri faithful • Florida counties to be sued for purging black voters from rolls • Texas Man Executed For Murder • India's war cry over Kashmir • President Bush should listen to what he is told during his European trip • Bush tells Europe: our fight is not over • Red Cross attacks exile of Palestinians • Bush's plumbers have fooled no-one • Low blow: TV catches policeman punching child • Chirac 'to grant himself pardon' • Al-Qa'eda rocket attack ignored as Marines pull out • 11 killed in Assam violence • Barbed wire spreading • Why shouldn’t third world states have nuclear bombs? Putin and Bush: another show Posted: Thursday, May 23, 2002 Moscow is getting ready to meet George W.Bush. Bush's visit that was planned for May 23-26 is being presented as a fact of historical significance, but it's unlikely that it will go as far as the comparison with the famous meetings between Roosevelt and Stalin. But the fact that Bush gave Putin a nickname Pootie-Poot is saving the situation. The increasing scandal around the September 11 events became a background for Bush's visit to Moscow. US mass media are exaggerating the main issue: whether the US President knew about the attacks that were prepared for September 11. If he did, then why didn't he warn the nation? Famous scandal is threatening not only to smear the upcoming visit, but also to seriously undermine the positions of the main fighter against the "international Islamic terrorism". MORE Venezuelan coup figurehead seeks refuge in Colombian embassy Posted: Thursday, May 23, 2002 www.nandotimes.com CARACAS, Venezuela (May 23, 2002 9:16 p.m. EDT) - The businessman who become Venezuela's interim president during the short-lived overthrow of Hugo Chavez escaped from house arrest Thursday and took refuge in the Colombian embassy, where he has asked for political asylum. Pedro Carmona, 60, disappeared after going for a walk outside his home in a western Caracas neighborhood Thursday morning, a day after an appeals court ordered him transferred from house arrest to jail, his lawyer said. Carmona faces up to 20 years in prison for rebellion and conspiracy for the April 12 coup, which was reversed two days later, bringing Chavez back to power and landing Carmona in custody. MORE Dictator-for-a-Day Pedro Carmona Estanga flown his luxurious coop! Posted: Thursday, May 23, 2002 VHeadline.com Law enforcement agencies in Caracas have been in a frenzy all day trying to locate Dictator-for-a-Day Pedro Carmona Estanga who apparently went out for a walk today in the grounds of his luxurious La Arboleda residence in Santa Eduvigis. The 61-year-old former Employers' Federation (Fedecamaras) president had been conceded house arrest because of his age and was scheduled to give account to State Political & Security (DISIP) investigators of his part in the April 11 coup d'etat. The Supreme Tribunal of Justice (TSJ) 6th appeals court had only yesterday revoked a house arrest order and Carmona Estanga was due to have been picked up this morning on the explicit orders of 25th Control Judge Josefina Gomez Sosa for transfer to the cells at DISIP HQ in the Helicoide. VHeadline.com has received confirmed information from intelligence sources that Carmona Estanga has now been located to the Colombian Embassy in Caracas and that he is preparing a request for political asylum. Earlier, it had been claimed that he had already been flown out of Venezuela but it is now seen as a diversionary tactic suggested by his CIA handlers as they seek to cover up Washington's illegal involvement in the conspiracy to overthrow the legitimate government of President Hugo Chavez. MORE World News Posted: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 • Two killed, 37 wounded in suicide bombing in Rishon Letzion • IDF kills leading militant, two others near Nablus • More than 1,000 die in Indian heat wave, official says • 30 feared drowned as boat capsizes in Uganda • Extremists will get mass destruction weapons - US • The Indian perspective: Crisis in Indo-Pak Relations-II • Unclear U.S. Role Leaves Middle East Process at Impasse • Carter, Bush Discuss Cuba Visit • Cubans reject Bush conditions for ties • Justice To File Suit Over 2000 Voting • U.S. Plans Suits Over Bush's Presidency 2000 Vote > Rights Violations Alleged In 3 Counties in Florida • Merrill Lynch agrees to pay $100 million fine over stocks • Venezuela Coup Inquiry Threatened, Expert Says • Buddhist Monk Fires Shot Near Thai Parliament • Kyrgyz Govt. Resigns Amid Civilian Deaths Scandal • US raises terror weapon fears • Murder of moderate separatist brings Kashmir war closer • Jack Straw sent in amid fears of nuclear crisis • Iran Casts Dragnet for Barbie Dolls • Australia Sells Sept. 11 Handbag • Israeli Soldiers Raid Villages • U.S. Not Worried About Afghan Prison • Some Pre-Sept. 11 Documents Released • US: Weakening of PA increased attacks on Israel • Report: Iran most active terror sponsor -CNN • Libya's nuclear aims worry U.S., Israel • British diplomats close Pakistan offices • Nuclear war threat over Kashmir crisis • Kashmir Villagers bury foreign militants but do not praise them • Bush comes face to face with Europe's distrust • UN to feed 500,000 needy Palestinians • US forces' paper attacks Marines • Thousands march in Berlin protest against Bush visit • Thousands of Berlin police in Bush alert • US hopes to reassure Europeans • Feds Say No Guns for Pilots • America’s Pro-Terrorism Foreign Aid Program World News Posted: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 • Israeli researcher is growing featherless fowls • India: Hurriyat leader Abdul Ghani Lone shot dead • Abdul Ghani Lone: The moderate hardliner • Israelis Blockade West Bank Village • U.S. Troops Raid Afghan Compound • Khatami Stresses Iran's Commitment to Ties With African Nations • Hundreds of polygraph tests planned in anthrax investigation • Bush's hard line on Cuba preserves hurtful stalemate • Embargo farrago > The US stance on Cuba looks increasingly anachronistic in the light of its support for countries such as Saudi Arabia and China. • Israel's most wanted say the war goes on • Ashcroft drawn into row over September 11 • Why has the FBI investigation into the anthrax attacks stalled? • Hell returns to border as India steps up pressure on Pakistan • Spread of Sharia law does not threaten Nigeria, says President • Background / suicide bombs fuel pressure to fence off W. Bank • Sharon fires Shas ministers after losing budget vote • ASEAN to intensify anti-terror war > 'Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN)' • Iran, Kuwait hold defence negotiations • Iceland Walks Out Of Whaling Summit • Sharon Dismisses Cabinet Ministers • Cuba: No Change In Bush Line • Quarter of mammals faced with extinction • Hell returns to border as India steps up pressure on Pakistan • Once again, the US must take the lead through a diplomatic minefield • Hoon was kept in dark over removal of marines leader • Falklands veteran who has struggled to impress in the media spotlight • Albright lashes Bush and casts doubt on denial • Brace for fight over oil, Australia told • Analysis / Only PM is to blame for his problems • Danger: Another cycle of violence • Pakistan calls for border monitors to help ease crisis • Bush will use Berlin stage to demand war on Saddam • 'Trigger-happy' US at odds with 'toothless' Europe • Rebel leader's son killed by car bomb in Beirut • The moon - a gigantic leap for the Chinese World News Posted: Monday, May 20, 2002 • U.S. troops arrive in Georgia to train tiny military • Palestinians await riposte after suicide bombing • India Unifies Military, 5 Die in Camp Attack • East Timorese By the Thousands Exult in Their Independence • UK Afghan Marines chief replaced • More than half of Britons believe they live in a racist society • US-Russia relations ‘pootiful’ • U.S. Special Forces Land in Georgia • U.S. physician accused of terrorist ties freed from Israeli jail • Cheney Warns against expanded inquiry into administration’s actions • Israeli army set to strike after 3 die in Netanya • Obscure group claims responsibility for bombing, Pearl murder • Japan demand resumption of commercial whaling • US alarm as Kashmir fighting flares again • Indian PM musters support for military action in Kashmir • Eastward expansion makes nonsense of Commission dogma • India announces stepped-up mobilization in Kashmir • Colour us free, cry jubilant Timorese • US braces for second wave of terror • CIA: lots of money, but not many successes • MP calls for change to Rabbit Proof Fence posters • Explosion damages Canadian synogogue in Quebec; no injuries • Four die in suicide blast • Sierra Leone President wins re-election • East Timor celebrates becoming a nation • U.S. Soldier Killed In Afghanistan • The value of paranoia • Bush Won't Ease Hard-line Vs. Cuba • Bush Hardens Stance on Cuba Embargo • The new Iron Lady • Bush's love of Pootie-Poot Putin • Whaling ban in danger as Japan's influence grows • Dollar Falls, Tokyo Stocks Rise • Ayatollah Calls For Tehran-Baku Cooperation on Caspian • The making of a suicide bomber The Decline and Fall of the American Empire Posted: Sunday, May 19, 2002 "The corporate grip on opinion in the United States is one of the wonders of the Western world. No First World country has ever managed to eliminate so entirely from its media all objectivity — much less dissent." MORE World News Posted: Sunday, May 19, 2002 • Whaling Activists Face Off in Japan • Three killed, 58 injured in suicide attack in Netanya • India PM Meets Opposition Leader • 5 killed in pre-dawn strike on army camp • Thousands protest globalization at Madrid summit • U.N. observers says corpses bobbing in Congo River • The White House is on the defensive over warning revelations • Allies ‘fought locals, not the enemy’ • Bush squeezes Cuba to keep Miami's 'Little Havana' sweet • Bush told in August of specific threat to US • US picks up new terror warnings ¥ "Wag the dog? Just can't trust a burning Bush!" • Al Qaeda messages hint at another attack: NY Times • East Timorese count down to birth of a nation • Unmanned Spy Plane Crashes in Pakistan • Palestinians bid to loosen Arafat’s grip • Hamas leaves possibility open of participating in PA elections • Israel forces internal movement permits on Palestinians • Marines' chief under fire for Afghan 'farce' • Why Israel's 'seruvniks' say enough is enough • Palestinians press ahead with election plans • What British marines need now is an enemy to fight • Australian SAS troops attacked in mountains • European Union strikes deal on 13 Nativity Church militants • Two Israeli Arabs killed by IDF in separate West Bank incidents • Palestinian resignation offer • 'Secret' war prevents us from learning the truth • India expels envoy after massacre • UN: Saudi Punishment Breaks Treaty • Marines' chief under fire for Afghan 'farce' • Bush, Putin bond strong as Europe ups criticism • Vietnam Votes for National Assembly World News Posted: Saturday, May 18, 2002 • 200 Indian Muslims flee to Bangladesh: Officials • Hamas founder rules out halt to attacks on Israel • Pakistan-India border firing increases, villagers flee • President defends response as more terror memos emerge • Shawn Fanning Returns As Napster Is Sold For $8 Million • Police think they've found Pearl's body • US jets 'fire on wedding celebration by mistake' • No election until Israel withdraws, Arafat says • Blast kills teenager after Israelis enter Jenin • Alarm as Afghan bug spreads to more servicemen • Doctors fear Afghan bug may have spread to Britain • Bush was given hijack warning by British intelligence • US intelligence efforts fractured • FBI knew of Qaeda pilot training • Lay off US Powell tells Europeans • UK angry at US rights criticism • India will battle alone against terrorism: minister • India, Pakistan trade fire at several fronts, blast rocks Kashmir • Ashcroft Flying High • British troops fly in to fight uncertain enemy • UK Marines engaged in major battle or not? • This is no time for criticism: Cheney • Bristling warship ordered out of Dili • Australian troops in Taliban ambush • Arafat `did not plan attacks' • Fires break out on ferry in North Sea, helicopters rushed in • Five dead as Indian and Pakistani troops exchange fire on border • Carter ends visit, calls for change in Cuba policy • East Timor rises from ruins as newest nation • Lay off US Powell tells Europeans • Israel launches new raid in Jenin • Bush insists: 'I had no warning about Sept 11' • UK angry at US rights criticism • What do you give a Bush with everything? • Not black and white • President Leading In Sierra Leone Vote • The US media is right to end its deference and ask hard questions of Mr Bush Venezuela and Censorship Posted: Friday, May 17, 2002 by John Pilger Last month, I wrote about Venezuela, pointing out that little had been reported in this country about the achievements of Hugo Chavez and the threat to his reforming government from the usual alliance of a corrupt local elite and the United States. When the conspirators made their move on 12 April, the response of the British media provided an object lesson in how censorship works in free societies. MORE World News Posted: Friday, May 17, 2002 • US quietly puts down roots in Georgia • India Swelters in Deadly Heat Wave • Japan imposes retaliatory tariffs on US steel • Study Finds Likely Carcinogen in Many Foods • French court fines Church of Scientology • Alarm bells rang before September 11, but Bush and America slept on • Bush under fire over revelation he was warned of terror attack • Was the British deployment in Afghanistan a PR stunt? • US asks a disturbing question: What did the President know? • Bush warned of possible hijacks • Mosque that thinks it's a missile site • Arafat to hold presidential elections within six months • London 'fall guy' cleared of plot to kill Afghan opposition leader • More than 300 British troops in Afghanistan are in quarantine • Bush snubs Carter call to end Cuba embargo • Insurers face £8bn asbestos payout • US energy secretary sees Senate OK of Yucca site • Texas Father Executed For Killing Son • Mexico on high alert after cyanide heist • Israeli soldiers carry out new West Bank raids • Russia lines up with US on missile shield • Thief's mother destroys treasures worth $2.5bn • Dutch add to Europe-wide swing to the right • US: 'No clear evidence' Arafat directed terror attacks • Four men shot dead in Alabama video store • Jordan’s first woman MP jailed • Why didn’t the US president share his pre-9/11 knowledge? • Dutch government to get tough on immigrants • Pakistan Puts Some Forces on High Alert as India Plans Reprisal • Envoy To India May Be Recalled Home • Connecticut priest accused of sexual misconduct commits suicide • Dan Rather says U.S. patriotism leads some journalists to self-censorship World News Posted: Thursday, May 16, 2002 • U.S. to speed weapons to supplant Crusader • Death Toll in N.Colombia Nears 80 • Six more army medics return after mystery illness • Somali warlord 'still alive' • US soldiers worry aid workers • Iraq Accepts U.N. Oil-For Food Deal • U.S. and Israel Disagree on West Bank Security • Sharon: Appoint interim Palestinian government • Lindh Defense Raises 1st Amendment Challenge to Case • U.S. May Launch Nuclear Attacks on Iraq • India Links Pakistan To Attack In Kashmir • 108 Rabbis-to-Be Sign in Sympathy With Palestinians • Malaysia backs Saddam ouster • Israel's new West Bank 'border' • US lawmakers call for sanctions against Arafat, PLO • Al-Qaeda worth $5 billion: Italian secret service • US Sanctions Chinese Firms to Tech Transfers to Iran • Pak asks US to avoid raids in tribal areas • Air photo shoot terrifies Sydney • Israeli Troops Carry Out New West Bank Raids • Palestinian Killed in West Bank Raid • Drugs, Terror and Tuna: How Goals Clash • Mystery bug strikes Army medics in Afghanistan • Ramon: Israel must unilaterally separate from Palestinians • Israel holds American for involvement in terror activity • NASA fears attack on shuttle carrying Israeli astronaut • Arafat promises reforms but fails to dispel doubts • Radioactive flood threat to people of Central Asia • New Delhi threatens retaliation for Jammu killings • Philosophy professor poised to become Dutch prime minister • Hypocritical Bush condemns Castro while chumming up to real despots • China Lets Two North Koreans Leave • Fears of India-Pakistan war increase after attack • Bush wins the final battle for star wars • GIs Battle 'Ghosts' in Afghanistan • Bush warned of Bin Laden hijack plot • The chilling dullness of our politicians • Far right comes second in Dutch poll • Bush appointed oil giant's candidate • The global warning Bush must heed • U.N. Condemns Liberia Rebel Attacks • CBS TV shows tape of Pearl beheading • Round the world in 27 seconds • Iraq May Be Considering Inspections • Mystery bug strikes Army medics in Afghanistan • Bush rejects Carter's call to end Cuba ban • These spurious charges of anti-Semitism reveal a growing cultural divide • Caribbean’s cold war thaw begins The axis of nonsense Posted: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 Washington's war is going à la carte. Each passing week is placing both new targets and new justifications for attack on the menu for military action. There is now not the slightest pretence that the scope of the US's regime-change wishlist is in any way tethered to the attacks of September 11. Instead, the world is witnessing the rapid emergence of a plan to dispose of any government hateful to the sight of US ultra-conservatism. MORE World News Posted: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 • Poll puts Fortuyn's party in second spot • Arafat faces growing anger over siege deals • Chavez tells of telephone tip-off that helped him turn back coup • Secret report by the U.S. Department of State • Military Coup - Myth or Reality • Russia and Nato reach historic deal • George Bush? He's nice but dim, says crown prince • Israel has seized 42% of West Bank, report says • The axis of nonsense • Deep currents flow beneath the Dutch calm waters • UN backs revised sanctions to blunt criticism on Iraq • Kashmir rebels kill 30 in army shoot-out • The Cold War is over, but who has won the peace? • Philippines President orders more troops to fight terror • India dangles $4.3 billion arms carrot before US • Saddam deploys tanks to avert Kurdish uprising • Protests Turn Ugly as Pro-Palestinian and Pro-Israeli Forces Face Off • Israeli held over link to Jewish bomb plot in East J'lem • Land stolen from Palestinians, Israeli group charges • Musharraf facing serious challenge over hardline 'guest fighters' • Russia "blinked" on arms to save summit treaty - US • At Least 30 Killed In Raid in Kashmir • Arafat to make unexpected address to Palestinian Leg. Council • Accused Priest In Baltimore Shot • Israel Cancels Emergency Reservist Call-Ups • US Plans a High-Tech Kashmir Border to Keep Peace • Arafat faces growing anger over siege deals • Renegade Rattles Israeli Nuke Program • China and US at odds over embassy's Korean refugees • Voting Enthusiastic in First Sierra Leone Post-War Poll • Use of Race in Law School Entry Upheld • French arrest UK woman, 'international call-girl ring' World News Posted: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 • It's No Way to Treat A Second Lady > Eminem's new CD: "[Bleep] you, Miss Cheney!" • 'Plague of rats' hits West London • Jewish Settlers Confess to Bomb Plot, Says Lawyer • Former President Jimmy Carter backs Castro on 'Bush admin lie' • U.S. Decision on Kyoto ruled out for ten years • Hindus set terms for Muslims' return to villages • Time for U.S. to scrap Cuba embargo • A Republic or An Empire • Rethink the Bush doctrine from the bottom up • Israeli Settlements control 42% of West Bank • Doubts raised over al-Qaeda arms cache find PR • Behind Enemy Lines: Fact or Fiction? • Cant and the Middle East • What Bush should do about the Middle East • Robert Fisk: Why does John Malkovich want to kill me? • War in Afghanistan: A $28 Billion Racket • Forget Kyoto deal for another 10 years, says Bush adviser • Rights Group Examines Israeli Land • Carter Questions Cuba Terror Claims • Conditions for jailed Taliban 'like Auschwitz' • Jenin visit called off during Arafat's tour of West Bank • Yeah Right! UK marines insist hunt for al-Qaida was a success • Fortuyn's party heading for government, says poll • Shelling provokes terror in Liberia's capital • Thousands of reservists still on stand-by for Gaza strike • Time for a rethink in the wake of rash emergency call-ups • Saudis putting on the pressure to stop suicide attacks • No army, no problem -- but NATO's Iceland fears changing US priorities • Diplomatic dust-up over 'damaged dignity' • 'Ocean of prejudice' still laps against Castro's island • Carter revels where presidents fear to tread • Bush administration hints at veto of controversial trade bill • Hillary Clinton tipped for 2004 campaign • Bush returns to subsidies to support farmers • Gunmen Kill Gorillas In Rwanda Editorial comment: Changing Chávez Posted: Monday, May 13, 2002 Published: May 13 2002 19:31 www.news.ft.com Hugo Chávez has evidently emerged chastened by the violence and political crisis that briefly separated him from Venezuela's presidency last month. His more moderate stance - signalled in recent cabinet appointments and a marked change in his rhetoric - is welcome. But last month's coup and counter-coup have increased Venezuela's problems. Mr Chávez has much to do if he is to restore stability. Since his return to the presidency, Mr Chávez has sought to open dialogue with the opposition and has reshaped his government to appease military and civilian critics. Economic policy has changed, with the departure from the government of Jorge Giordani, the leftwing ideologue at the centre of policymaking since Mr Chávez's landslide election victory three years ago. His replacement, Felipe Perez, a Chicago-educated economist, is expected to be more responsive to private sector critics. This signal of a more moderate path accompanies a 10 percentage point increase in Mr Chávez's approval rating since the coup. However, these changes are relatively minor in view of the scale of political polarisation, divisions within the armed forces and deep-rooted private sector suspicions of Mr Chávez. He must also put far-reaching land and other reforms on hold to allow for much fuller discussion and proper planning. The rushed introduction of these measures in November contributed to the groundswell of opposition against Mr Chávez earlier this year. MORE Opec chief warned Chavez about coup Posted: Monday, May 13, 2002 Greg Palast Monday May 13, 2002 The Guardian The Venezuelan president, Hugo Chavez, had advance warning of last month's coup attempt against him from the secretary general of Opec, Ali Rodriguez, allowing him to prepare an extraordinary plan which saved both his government and his life, an investigation has revealed. Mr Rodriguez, who is Venezuelan and a former leftwing guerrilla, telephoned Mr Chavez from the Vienna headquarters of the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries, of which Venezuela is an important member, several days before the attempted overthrow in April. He said Opec had learned that some Arab countries, later revealed to be Libya and Iraq, planned to call for a new oil embargo against the United States because of its support for Israel. The Opec chief warned Mr Chavez that the US would prod a long-simmering coup into action to break any embargo threat. It was likely to act on April 11, the day a general strike was due to start. It was Venezuela which shattered the oil embargo of 1973 by replacing Arab oil with its own huge reserves. The warning - revealed by a Newsnight investigation to be shown on BBC2 tonight - explains the swift and safe return of Mr Chavez to power within two days of his April 12 capture by military officers under the direction of the coup leader, Pedro Carmona. Until now, it was unclear why Mr Carmona - who had declared himself president - and the military chiefs who backed the coup surrendered without firing a shot. The answer to the mystery, Newsnight was told by a Chavez insider, is that several hundred pro-Chavez troops were hidden in secret corridors under Miraflores, the presidential palace. Juan Barreto, a leader of Mr Chavez's party in the national assembly, was with Mr Chavez when he was under siege. Mr Barreto said that Jose Baduel, chief of the paratroop division loyal to Mr Chavez, had waited until Mr Carmona was inside Miraflores. Mr Baduel then phoned Mr Carmona to tell him that, with troops virtually under his chair, he was as much a hostage as Mr Chavez. He gave Mr Carmona 24 hours to return Mr Chavez alive. Escape from Miraflores was impossible for Mr Carmona. The building was surrounded by hundreds of thousands of pro-Chavez demonstrators who, alerted by a sympathetic foreign affairs minister, had marched on it from the Ranchos, the poorest barrios. Mr Chavez told Newsnight that, after receiving the warning from Opec, he had hoped to stave off the coup entirely by issuing a statement to mollify the Bush adminstration. He pledged that Venezuela would neither join nor tolerate a renewed oil embargo. But Mr Chavez had already incurred America's wrath by slashing Venezuelan oil output and rebuilding Opec, causing oil prices to nearly double to over $20 a barrel. His opponents had made it clear that they would not abide by Opec production limits and would reverse his plan to double the royalties charged to foreign oil companies in Venezuela, principally the US petroleum giant Exxon-Mobil. The US government's panic over the calls for an oil embargo, made public by Iraq and Libya on April 8 and 9, also explains what Venezuelans see as the state department's ill-concealed and clumsy support for the coup attempt. Mr Chavez told Newsnight: "I have written proof of the time of the entries and exits of two US military officers into the headquarters of the coup plotters - their names, whom they met with, what they said - proof on video and on still photographs." Last month the Guardian reported a former US intelligence officer's claims that the US had been considering a coup to overthrow the Venezuelan president for nearly a year. Newsnight is on BBC2 at 10.30pm Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2002 NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. World News Posted: Monday, May 13, 2002 • Russia, Kazakhstan divide portion of Caspian Sea • Heat spell kills dozens in India • U.S. has no evidence of Cuban bioweapons technology, Carter says • End of Crusader, End of United? • Dostum is offering to divide Afghanistan • Jewish extremist network 'targeting Palestinians' • Sixth Briton sent to US prison camp • Carter to see 'germ war' laboratories on Cuba visit • Sharon's party rejects his plea on Palestinian statehood • Cyprus wants 13 Palestinian fighters to get out within days • US envoy in talks to avert Kashmir war • US infuriated by Pakistan's go-slow war • US oil giant quits Amazon project • Sharon loses key vote to rightwing • Israeli peace protesters out in force • Warm Havana welcome for former US president • White House alarm: Moscow plans nuclear tests • Reporter fights call to testify on Bosnia war • Israelis dump plan for army raid on Gaza • Life's a beach party as calypso comes to Sydney • West Yorkshire: Children killed in attack by arsonists • Four arrested after arson attack kills seven in family • Singer Dionne Warwick arrested. World News Posted: Sunday, May 12, 2002 • North Koreans seek asylum after entering Canadian Embassy • The contra government • Pope Praises End of Bethehem Siege • Carter Takes on U.S.-Cuba Relations • 10 Die in Train Derailment in India • Why is America behaving this way? A letter to European friends • US on Pak elections: We are watching • Burmese junta hints at power sharing deal with Suu Kyi • US forces in Pakistan come under fire • Investigators probe cause of fatal train derailment • Siege ends but tanks remain poised • Gunmen Open Fire On Party In Mexico • Hamas brands agreement 'suspect' • Secret report on alleged communism to be released • Austria cautious over exiled militants • How a British coup ended siege • Greece to take in Palestinian militants • Fidel Castro faces non-violent challenge • Oil fuels US army role in Georgia The US presents itself as the peace-broker in the Middle East. The reality is different Posted: Saturday, May 11, 2002 by Noam Chomsky A year ago, the Hebrew University sociologist Baruch Kimmerling observed that "what we feared has come true - War appears an unavoidable fate", an "evil colonial" war. His colleague Ze'ev Sternhell noted that the Israeli leadership was now engaged in "colonial policing, which recalls the takeover by the white police of the poor neighbourhoods of the blacks in South Africa during the apartheid era". Both stress the obvious: there is no symmetry between the "ethno-national groups" in this conflict, which is centred in territories that have been under harsh military occupation for 35 years. MORE Fear as a Weapon Posted: Saturday, May 11, 2002 By Heather Wokusch In effect, the human being should be considered the priority in a political war. And conceived as the military target . . . the human being has his most critical point in his mind. Once the mind has been reached, the 'political animal' has been defeated without necessarily receiving bullets. Much has been made of Le Pen's scandalous victory in France, and greater Europe's wartime march towards the right. This while the US Administration uses its convenient terror war to justify massive internal societal engineering to the right. What's behind both? Fear. No small wonder that Le Pen's proclaimed ideals were "famile, travail, patrie" (family, labor, homeland), a motto borrowed from war-torn 1940s France when the society turned inwards to traditional, authoritative, xenophobic values. No surprise either that the zero-tolerance crime policies of Le Pen (like those of Bush) ignore root causes, focusing instead on quick and dirty alternatives like the death penalty, more imprisonment and targeting outsiders. Fear leaves little room for logic or moral platitudes - it demands simplistic responses to otherwise complex problems. Granted, it's hard not to be fearful when those in power, such as US Secretary of State Colin Powell, say that the war on terror won't end "in our lifetime" and new countries are added to the "evil" list every day. It can be even harder though to rally behind battles that seem more like grotesque bullying than anything resembling justice or assisting the oppressed. Which explains why the masses must be mobilized "in a wide scale of activities and at the highest emotional level" to support the government and its wars - according to "Psychological Operations In Guerrilla Warfare", the above-mentioned (declassified) CIA manual. Presumably intended to have been used against foreign populations, the PSYOP brainwashing techniques capitalizing on fear seem disturbingly familiar today. According to the manual, "In places and situations wherever possible . . . explain the operation of weapons to the youths and young men . . . they are the potential recruits for our forces." Pretty easy task now that military contractors own major news networks, and propaganda pieces on the latest sexy fighting technology are de rigueur. Accordingly, the US budget for military recruitment has skyrocketed in recent years, paying for 24/7 "cyber recruiters" on newly pumped-up army websites. And not to be overlooked, the schoolyard's tiny Rambos in training can get "Operation Enduring Freedom" bubble gum cards, or the cool new action figure "Tora Bora Ted, Swift Freedom Delta Force Night OPS." The overwhelming message is clear. Facing a conflict? Scared? Just grab a gun and aim! Yet we still act surprised when some messed-up kid, who has taken the weapons message a bit too seriously, goes commando and blows away classmates in the lunchroom. The manual also suggests: "Be prepared with simple slogans in order to explain to the people, whether in an intentional form or by chance, the reason for the weapons" - reasons such as "The weapons will be for winning freedom: they are for you" and "Our weapons are in truth, the weapons of the people, yours." Or in weapons-producer Lockheed Martin's current lingo, the F-22 fighter is an "anti-war" plane, and "the perception of peace means less jobs for Americans." Even more to the point, another weapons manufacturer refers to its military technology with: "Someone's father, someone's daughter, someone's son -- Who will bring them home? McDonnell Douglas will." Simple slogans hide fear and confusion by turning guilt-ridden acts of war into sanitized niceties. Bombing the life out of Afghanistan becomes "Enduring Freedom", butchery in Somalia is "Restore Hope", and the neverending terror war is "Noble Eagle." Lofty names to hide the carnage and mask our inherent complicity. But fancy names alone can't hide staggering war-machine profits. Right after September 11, when most companies took a dive, Lockheed Martin's share value rose by a full 30%. (Purely coincidence that a top executive of Lockheed Martin, Bruce Jackson, wrote most of the current US Administration's foreign policy platform.) Purely coincidence too, that just weeks after 9-11, Bush's home state of Texas was granted the largest military order in history - a $200 billion contract for a new fighter. We feign surprise as blood flows in the Middle East, conveniently forgetting that the US war machine provides Israel with billions in military aid annually, thus compelling its Arab neighbors to buy increasingly sophisticated US military weaponry to compensate. (Saudi Arabia alone has forked over $33.5 billion to the US war machine in the last ten years.) Nations in conflict that we've armed to the teeth. The body count rises each day, as we shake our heads and wonder why those people just can't get along. Meanwhile, US Vice President Dick Cheney warns that the US is considering military action against "40-50" countries and Bush adviser Richard Perle explains, "This is total war. We are fighting a variety of enemies. There are lots of them out there . . . If we let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely, and we don't try to piece together clever diplomacy but just wage a total war, our children will sing great songs about us years from now." But which version of the world should go forth is the burning question. Is neverending "total war" really the goal? Is the authoritative, xenophobic leadership demanded by war desirable? Each day we are trained to be fearful and to see weaponry as the solution. That makes the War on Terror seem like a war on the hearts and minds of common citizens. And for those unlucky souls in Cheney's "40-50" countries, or the thousands who have already been slaughtered as collateral damage, the War on Terror is looking more like terrorism everyday. |
|
Back to Top |
