Clinton wants to occupy Mexico

US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton has declared that she wants the USA to intervene in Mexico "against drug gangs", the same it has been doing in Colombia and other countries. In fact she likened the decaying situation of Mexico to Colombia, however she claimed that the Plan Colombia, that has allowed the USA to establish an effective protectorate over the South American country, has been a success, what is plainly false - unless by success you mean taking over a whole country.

In this sense we must not forget that, on a similar pretext, the, until this year, famously demilitarized and rather prosperous, Republic of Costa Rica, allowed a few weeks ago the USA to take over it. Additionally the USA also controls Haiti, a major narcotrafficking hub (because of deep poverty and lack of democracy, thanks to Uncle Sam again). And we must not forget that, what used to be considered the main US base in Central America, Honduras, suffered a reactionary military coup last year, ousting the legitimate President and turning the country in a factual autocracy with US blessings.

Geopolitics of Middle America
Dark blue: USA and protectorates, light blue: US allies and their colonies
Red: Bolivarian bloc (ALBA), pink: other left-leaning governments
Green: Mexico

So now Hillary wants to add Mexico to the cyclops' menu. But this has rallied all Mexican politicians against. Even if this would not be the case, Mexico may indeed be a too big and too resentful piece of meat to swallowed by giant Uncle Sam. Mexico lists among the 20 largest economies of Earth, has a reasonably strong popular movement, and has many historical reasons to be wary of the USA, which took Texas, California and all what is between them and also partly invaded the Aztec country again during the Mexican Revolution.

There is already a lot of opposition in Mexico to the North American Free Trade Agreement (and the less known Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America) which is considered by many as the main culprit of the degeneration the country is suffering in the last decade or two.

The country's political system is however pretty much blocked by the fact that the PAN (conservatives) won the last elections by means of massive vote rigging. However the left is divided between those supporting AMLO and the PRD (social-democrats) and those who see no or little change possible with them. It is a clear case of "revolution needed urgently" and that is precisely why the USA wants to get greater direct control, probably. However it may well backfire, because a US invasion, even if sanctioned by Mexican institutions, would provide a rally point for all proud Mexicans who are never really happy about their beefy neighbor by the North.

News source: The Guardian.

Iceland massively rejects to pay private debt

93% of voters chose NO in the referendum to validate or reject the bill that approved massive payments to foreign investors for debts acquired by a private bank, Icesavings, now nationalized after going bankrupt.

The Parliament had approved the bill agreeing to pay 5 billion dollars in exchange for a loan of 10 billions and support for an entrance into EU that Icelanders do not seem to desire anymore. However the President of the small republic, in a rare show of politic honesty of the kind you seldom see anymore in this rotten old Europe, vetoed the bill and demanded a referendum that has finally ended in a total defeat for the government. I commented on this neocolonialist abuse in a previous post.

Source: Rebelión, BBC, etc.

Greece becomes a colony... in exchange of nothing

Greece has got just "good words" (and "not a cent" as the German economy minister put it) in exchange of ceding the control of its whole economy to the IMF and Brussels. The, ahem, "socialdemocratic" government is now approving the so-called "austerity measures" which include massive cut of social spending and high tax raises.

Naturally, this has caused some serious street warfare between police and revolutionaries, reminding of the serious conflict that took place last winter, still under conservative rule. Though divided, Greece has one of the strongest revolutionary traditions in modern Europe, so I still have hope that the people will overturn these abusive ultra-capitalist and colonialist measures for which, in the very words of PM Papandreou, they did not vote the socialdemocrats to power.

James Petras, whom I just now realize is Greek by ancestry, declared to Uruguayan Radio Centenari that "the worst in Greece is what the imperialist European countries like Germany, and also the USA, demand: that the control of the economy is transfered to the IMF, Germany and France. This is the colonization of the economy".

Source: Gara.

The recolonization of India?

India (then also including other countries, like Pakistan and Bangladesh) used to be considered the central piece of the British empire, the jewel of the crown. It was not, of course, to the benefit of Indians themselves but to the benefit of the British Empire and more precisely of the British capitalists. It was such a common place that when the Nazis outlined their plans for the conquest and colonization of Russia, they said they wanted it to become "the India of Germany".

Since independence however India has maintained a highly protectionist policy, for good or bad. This has to some extent favored the national capital up to the point that some years ago Mittal bought European steel industries becoming a global number one in the sector. Any pragmatic economist will have to admit that protectionism, even if it has some downs, is generally beneficial for the national capital and hence for the nation as whole, very specially if such country is not in a hegemonic position. Neither France nor Germany, much less Russia, Japan or China would have developed their economies without some level of protectionism. The situation might have been slightly different for the great powers of the Capitalist era, Britain first and the USA later, but even these have practiced protectionism to some extent and continue to do so.

Now I read at Asia Times Online that India is yielding to the pressure by USA and specially EU to broadly open its market. An Indian diplomat, speaking anonymously, seems to have declared that there is an understanding between the EU and his government that tariffs should be removed from 90% of all goods traded by both sides.

Is this good for India? On one side, Indian products would have an increased and comparatively affluent market, on the other, European capitalists may find interesting to outsource part of their production to the Asian giant, where salaries are much much lower and de facto regulations on workers' rights and environmental issues are much lower in general. On first sight, it might even look beneficial for India and perilous for Europe, at least for the European working class, mostly unable to compete with a huge and overexploited labor force, sometimes highly qualified.

But there are serious issues for India too: European subsidized food producers, heavily reconverted by the dark magic of Brussels' policies into large mechanized landowners can totally disrupt the Indian primary sector, dumping masses of farmers into increased misery. EU also has a GNP that is 14 times that of India, which means that, even if it may be a good market for certain Indian products, it will also have the upper hand in all negotiations: it won't be an equal partnership for sure.

Finally there is serious concern over all social issues, including ecology and labor rights. It is well known that labor in India, specially unqualified labor and notably large numbers of children, are exploited in very poor conditions. Certifications exist denying such practices but they are generally not worth the paper they are written on. Of course, neither Brussels nor New Delhi are paying any attention to such concerns: they are only interested in what may benefit their respective capitalist classes. For example a business lobbyist grunted at a draft of such treaty because it would include products considered to be of critical importance to the exporters he represented. This means that EU will pressure for a deal that is not as good for Indian exporters and is better for European capitalist interests.

Meanwhile social and environmental pressure groups are kept at bay from the halls of the EU decision-makers. And that's surely the case also in India.

Is this part of the price (price or prize?, hard to say: look at poor Mexico for comparison) that India gets for sliding towards the Atlantic bloc? How good or bad is it going to be for India and particularly for the Indian people? And for Europeans too, barring a few capitalists: is it going to be any good? After all commodity prices are relatively low in Europe and quality standards are generally high, so one wonders what will India export: pieces for car makers, some textiles, raw steel and loads of tea and other "exotic" commodities that can't be produced in Europe.

I would like second opinions, of course, but I'm under the impression that any such treaty will leave India too dependent on EU for a balanced national development.

Should Iceland pay bank debts with taxpayer's money?

The President of the small North Atlantic country, Olafur Ragnar Grimsson, has vetoed a bill designed to satisfy the blood-sucking international financial institutions such as the IMF and the EU by using taxpayers' money to pay debts acquired by a now nationalized private bank, owed to mostly Dutch and British citizens.

If the bill would be approved, each Icelander would have to pay 12,000 euros on average, for debts they did not generate. I'm not sure how are salaries in Iceland but here it would amount to a full year salary for the typical low wage worker.

In exchange they would get a roughly 10 billion dollar loan. So in exchange of paying more than 5 billion dollars, they'd get a loan that would further indebt the nation. It looks like a total neocolonial scam of the ones the infamous IMF usually organizes.

President Grimsson has yielded to a civic campaign that demands a referendum on the matter. If the bill goes to referendum it is very likely it will be rejected. Logically normal citizens see absolutely no point nor logic on assuming the debt generated by private capitalists.

Source: BBC.

The perpetuation of poverty: analyzing Bangla Desh

Now and then seems wise to recall why poverty exists and is perpetuated in spite of the overproduction we have, including many countries that pay farmers to produce less, not more.

Vicenç Navarro picks one of the poorest countries in the world, Bangla Desh, as case study. Why is Bangla Desh poor? Does it not produce enough food? It does and even exports it because their inhabitants don't have enough money to pay for it. The crucial problem, like elsewhere, is that wealth is concentrated in very few hands: 16% of rural Bangladeshis own 75% of the land and this olygarchy rules the country (75% of parliament members own huge land swaths). These have absolutely no interest in redistributing even a fraction of that wealthin order to increase the internal demand: they are just interested in perpetuating their power and wealth.

So constitutionally land redistribution, what is just a self-evident need in order to create a "middle class" that can drive demand and serve as backbone of the country's sociology, is just illegal. No matter who wins in the polls (the usual clone-party pseudo-democratic regime, with the occasional military intervention), nothing can change. Only a violent revolution can in fact change things in such a country but the odds are against it and keeping people semi-illiterate and ignorant, and stranded in religious false promises, helps the olygarchy to perpetuate the status quo.

This is of course not just the case of Bangla Desh but of so many other countries through the world, in dire need of a revolution with some blood and specially some good wealth redistribution. And this applies, in my opinion, also to supposedly wealthy countries like the USA, that are in dire need of some wealth redistribution too. By the moment, all they got is further taxes to pay the bankers who suck their blood. Why not put them in jail, as they deserve?
.

Corrupt African dictators remain impune in France

A court case against the corrupt dictators of Equatorial Guinea, T. Obiang, Gabon, O. Bongo, and Congo, Republic, D. Sassou-Nguesso, who own many luxuries in France, has been halted on demand from the public attorneys on ground that the NGO that initiated the prosecution has no ability to do so.

Transparency International will appeal to the supreme court.

This seems just another move by the ultra-conservative French government to prevent the prosecution of their loyal puppet tyrants in Middle Africa. When people asks where is "neocolonialism", it's there: in undemocratic corrupt tyrants appointed and protected by the metropolis who suck the blood of their countries.

Source: Al Jazeera.
.

Honduras coup turning into revolution

Honduran President, Manuel "Mel" Zelaya returned to Honduras via Nicaragua yesterday where he was welcomed by thousands of Hondurean citizens but also by a very strong military display, that attacked the people and eventually caused Zelaya's return to Nicaragua, as he declared he did not want to be "cause of violence".

The situation is still confuse and it is possible that the army has murdered citizens again, as the troops used live fire, injuring several.

Class war takes over Honduras

Meanwhile the situation in Honduras is turning into a popular revolution, as reported by local journalist Oswaldo Martínez to Gara:

After 24 days resistence is permanent. This is something unpredent in the history of the country. I am a block away from a barricade placed at the very center of San Pedro Sula, the industrial capital of the country. Resistence is very strong and organized. We have reports that the people has breached several military checkpoints. Road blockades begin at 9:00 and do not end till the night. There is a determined class war. This can't be stopped.

Yesterday was the second day of general strike in support for the President, that has been ranked as "a success" by the president of the Unitary Workers' Confederation of Honduras, Juan Barahona. The main harbours were completely blocked and the roads leading to Tegucigalpa were blocked for hours as well. Several emblematic buildings have been occupied by demonstrators as well.

For Oswaldo Martínez, the coupists never expected such a reaction from the people. They got their calcualtions totally wrong.

Clinton barks

I just watched at BBC International to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton barking at Zelaya's attempt to restore legality and democracy in the Central American country. She said that he was being "reckless" and that he should abide by the already defunct plan of mediation by Costarrican President Oscar Arias, a loyal ally of the United States, according to Fidel Castro, who believes this mediation is nothing but a delaying tactic.

Obviously the USA is stepping out of their calculated ambiguity and becoming more expressly supportive of the coupists.

Sources: Gara, BBC, Al Jazeera and Voltairenet (for Castro's interesting opinions on recent Central American history).


Update Jul 26: Pedro Magdiel Martínez, 23, supporter of the President, was found death with signs of torture near the border with Nicragua. According to neighbours he was arrested the day before accused of "smoking marihuana". Police denies that the arrested and the victim are the same person.

Zelaya remains at the border looking for another opportunity to cross into Honduras but it's not clear if tiredness may catch the supporters. Some apparently regretted bitterly that he did not continue into the heart of the country when he had the chance

Source: Gara.
.

No two states solution for Palestine

From CBS News (quite neutral and even "subversive" for a US media report, albeit balanced):



Then what? A single state multiethnic solution has always been the Palestinian option and the only realistic and fair democratic alternative.

But who will bell the cat?

____________________________________

Update: the Gaza Justice Action Center believes that Bob Simon (reporter) and Robert G. Anderson (producer), as well as the CBS, deserve our congratulations and support for making a (sadly rare) great impartial job with this program. You can send them a support note at this link.
.

Colombia: the reign of terror

Colombia has been recently in the media limelight but the reality of this country, where paramilitary squads, paid by Chiquita and protected by the government, rule the streets and where the army kills peasants impunely and claims they are rebels, is largely unknown.

Al Jazeera explores today this cruel reality of the US protectorate, where 50% of wealth is owned by 10% of the people and 20% lives on $2 per day or less. They begin with the murder of a union leader, Luis Mayusa, in August, just one of at least 27 murders of this kind in 2008. Then mention how there is fear that the proposed free trade agreement with the USA will cause labor conditions to worsen even more. Finally they adress the strong connections of paramilitary gangs (recently amnestied by the government but which have not ceased to act anyhow) with corporations and the administration.

It is little wonder that there is such a strong guerrilla going on, certainly. Colombia is a terror state and has been that way for many decades. When you buy Chiquita fruit, think that you are financing the murder of innocent people in the streets of Colombia.

Bread and rice revolutions have started.

Hungry masses have attempted to seize the Presidential palace in Haiti (read more). They have failed by the moment but the situation is untenable anyhow.

Ironically, Haiti is occupied by a multinational force since the USA and France decided that they did not want popular (and rather socialist) premier Aristide to stay in power anymore, in 2004. They sold it as a "peackeeping mission" but was the typical colonialist intervention in the line of those of Roosevelt one hundred years before. These forces have done nothing to alleviate the poverty and lack of prospects of the most impoverished country of America and to that it's been added the brutally rising staple food prices everywhere, fuelled by speculation basically.

The rioters, that have been demonstrating and plundering around Haitian cities these last days at the cry of "We are hungry!"

Revolters retreated only under heavy fire from UN troops.

Haiti's wealth is concentrated in some 1% of affluent families while the vast majority of people lives in the most abject poverty. In 1990 the last brutal dictatorship was ousted by a popular revolution that placed fromer priest Bertrand Aristide as new President. The revolution was soon followed by another coup. Aristide returned in 1994 supported by US President Bill Clinton who had vowed to do so in his campaign. But as soon as the conservatives took power in Washington again, they started plotting against him, causing some obscure conflicts with mafious bands that were used as pretext for the joint US-French intervention: they kidnapped Aristide and sent him to Central Africa.

Since then the country has been under an occupation force under the pretext of the UN. The 2006 elections gave massive victory to a former Aristide ally: René Preval. While this helped somewhat to restore political stability after the colonialist coup, the real deep socio-economical problems of the country have been unadressed for these last years and now they seem to come back as surge that may oust not just the President but also the UN force, that has already become a target of the rioters.

Haiti is not the only nation that is suffering major unrest related to food prices but the tension is still building up. In the next months and years, as the deep structural global economic crisis becomes more and more evident everywhere we will see more and more conflicts caused by such matters and many governments toppled by the revolters one way or another, while agricultural lands are seized and companies nationalized in an effort to save something from the market-generated chaos.

As someone I know used to sign with: it has already begun.