Drop Down MenusCSS Drop Down MenuPure CSS Dropdown Menu
Alternative Text Alternative Text Alternative Text Alternative Text
Survivor of US Drone Attack:
Obama Belongs on List of World's Tyrants

Poisoning Black Cities: Corporate Campaign to Ethnically Cleanse US Cities Massive Marches in Poland
Against Authoritarian Threat of Far-Right
Ethiopia’s Invisible Crisis: Land Rights Activists Kidnapped and Tortured

Global Perspectives Now Global Perspectives Now
Showing posts with label Latin America. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Latin America. Show all posts

America's Human Rights Violators Free to Roam, Write Books, Do Lectures — While Guatamala's Face Trial

Today you have Donald Trump and Ted Cruz competing over how horrible America's torture will be if they get elected - That's because generations of American human rights violators have gone free after they instituted their own programs of assassination, kidnapping and torture.

Top Row, From Left: Byron Diaz, Pablo Mérida, César Morales, Manuel Garcia, and Carlos  López - all recently arrested in Guatemala for human rights violations dating as far back as the 1970's and 80's, including mass murder and torture. Bottom Row, From Left: John Negroponte, James Steele, Henry Kissinger, Dick Cheney, George H. Bush - just a few of the Americans involved in human rights violations in Latin America (including Guatemala) and present-day depredations, and all of whom are walking around free with no fear of prosecution.—Ronald David Jackson
Top Row, From Left: Byron Diaz, Pablo Mérida, César Morales, Manuel Garcia, and Carlos  López - all recently arrested in Guatemala for human rights violations dating as far back as the 1970's and 80's, including mass murder and torture. Bottom Row, From Left: John Negroponte, James Steele, Henry Kissinger, Dick Cheney, George H. Bush - just a few of the Americans involved in human rights violations in Latin America (including Guatemala) and present-day depredations, and all of whom are walking around free with no fear of prosecution.—Ronald David Jackson


18 Former Guatemalan Military Officers Arrested for Crimes Against Humanity



By Annie Bird
Guatemalan authorities have arrested at least 18 high-ranking Guatemalan military officers yesterday on charges of crimes against humanity and forced disappearance, according to local press reports.

The arrests include retired generals Benedicto Lucas Garcia, head of the military under his now-deceased brother and former dictator Romeo Lucas Garcia, and Manuel Antonio Callejas y Callejas, long known for his high-level positions during the dirty war and his concurrent management of organized crime networks.

The crimes with which they are charged were part of operations conducted from a military base in the department of Coban between 1981 and 1988, including acts that formed part of the Maya Achi genocide. Exhumations at the base in 2012 recovered remains from over 550 victims–a fraction of the tens of thousands of killings the military is believed to have conducted in Alta and Baja Verapaz from that base but an important step in gathering evidence.

Arrests are ongoing. In a press conference Jan. 6, prosecutors declined to provide specific information regarding pending warrants. Journalists suggested that as many as 25 warrants exist. Initial hearings are expected to begin this Friday. There is no possibility of release pending trial on these charges.

These prosecutions are the result of over 20 years of efforts by the victims, coupled with hard-fought gains in cleaning up corruption in the justice system promoted by human rights and judicial reform activists. ADIVIMA, the association of Maya Achi genocide victims, is a co-complainant in the prosecution, along with the national victims associations, the Association of Relatives of the Detained/Disappeeared in Guatemala (FAMDEGUA) and the Mutual Support Group (GAM).

Unearthing Crimes of the Past and Present

The retired general who was in charge of the Coban base during much of the violence, Ricardo Mendez Ruiz, would undoubtedly have been among those arrested today had he not died on January 1, 2016. Mendez Ruiz maintained a high profile in Guatemala over the past several years due to the activities of his son of the same name. The younger Ricardo Mendez Ruiz is director of the Foundation Against Terrorism, which has promoted malicious legal complaints against those pursuing justice for the crimes committed during Guatemala’s dirty war–a form of political persecution backed by influential retired military officers.

[...]

Concern for the safety of those pursuing justice in Guatemala is heightened as the incoming president, Jimmy Morales, a founder of the National Convergence Front (FCN) party, is set to take office on January 14. Guatemala’s last elected president, Otto Perez Molina, was forced to resign in September 2015 to face corruption charges, and his party, the Partido Patriota (PP), partially collapsed in the scandal. Analysts described the FCN as the Plan B for the political networks that formerly backed the PP. The FCN and PP are both dominated by retired military officers.

The newly elected congress convened its first session yesterday. On the first day of the lawmakers four-year term, Congress was asked by prosecutors to impeach the newly elect FCN congressman and former military officer, Edgar Justino Ovalle Maldonado, so he can face charges of crimes against humanity and forced disappearance.

Concerns over the safety of justice advocates have heightened since the arrests. The former military men arrested today have close ties to Guatemala’s organized crime networks. Criminal groups in complicity with politicians operate regionally in Central America’s “Northern Triangle” of Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador, and are largely responsible for some of the highest murder rates in the world.

Read More


White Latino Racism on the Rise: It’s Time for a Serious Conversation on Euro-Diasporic Whiteness

When TV show host Steve Harvey recently named Miss Colombia as the winner of the Ms. Universe contest by mistake, thousands of tweets by Latinos (apparently most from Colombia) labeled Harvey a "Nigger." One person tweeted this response.
When TV show host Steve Harvey recently named Miss Colombia as the winner of the Miss Universe contest by mistake, thousands of tweets by Latinos (apparently most from Colombia) labeled Harvey a "Nigger." One person tweeted this response.


By William García
William García
William García
William García
A common misconnection that exists today rests on the notion that there are no racial hierarchies in Latin American countries or within the Latino communities in the United States. In other words, Latino (or Hispanic) is itself a race. For many, this conversation is a pointless squabble that halts the true need for unity amongst marginalized groups in the United States. Unfortunately, overlooking the importance of this issue has in fact delineated separation and a lack of interest in each other’s problems.
RELATED STORY: Afro-Brazilian Actress Taunted by Fellow Brazilians on Facebook After Revealing Her Natural Hair
RELATED STORY: Beautiful and Inspiring Photos from Brazil’s First Natural Hair Empowerment March
The shooting of unarmed African-American teenager Trayvon Martin by a half-Peruvian and half-White Jewish man named George Zimmerman, the rise of so-called Hispanic conservatives like Ted Cruz, Al Cardenas and Marco Rubio, and the examples of racist comments by Latinos in the media like Rodner Figueroa, have made it impossible to have a conversation of Latinos and race. It is becoming clear that Whites from Latin America, although marginalized by Anglo-Whites, have been able to pass as honorary Whites and benefit from the inequalities formed by White Supremacy. This is not new, and it has a history.
RELATED STORY: Why the US and Brazil Should Talk About Race
Many people who neglect to explore the history of Latin Americans in the United Sates fail to analyze people like the famous white Cuban Ricky Ricardo (Desi Arnaz), who penetrated the American television series “I Love Lucy” (1951) at a time when Black people were not even allowed to perform next to White actors. Lucy (Lucille Ball) was Arnaz’ real wife, and both enjoyed a long and prosperous career in the film industry. In 1954 Arnaz was even able to get a role as the famous Don Juan.

During this time, White Latin Americans were seen as foreign, inferior and exotic and yet many passed and enjoyed White Privilege. Even all three of John Wayne’s wives were from Latin America at a time when anti-Black and anti-immigrant sentiments were powerful hateful discourses. Less mentioned is the famous Afro-Puerto Rican actor Juano Hernández, who to date is considered was one of the most successful pioneering Black actors of the African-American film industry. Despite Hernández being from Latin America, he had to take Black roles precisely because he was Black and experienced the same segregation as other Blacks in the United States. This was also common in Latin America, where Blacks were not allowed to be actors while Whites enjoyed wearing blackface and dehumanized black people.

 Juano Hernández (left) and Desi Arnaz with his wife Lucille Ball (right). Although they were both actors from the Hispanic Caribbean, Hernández and Arnaz were separated by race during the development of the United States film industry.
 Juano Hernández (left) and Desi Arnaz with his wife Lucille Ball (right). Although they were both actors from the Hispanic Caribbean, Hernández and Arnaz were separated by race during the development of the United States film industry.

According to Jill Lane, blackface was used as a way to create a Cuban identity independent from Spain. However, one can argue that Blackness was seen as a proxy for national discourse and not for racial democracy. Anti-Blackness was occurring transnationally between the United States and Latin America. A Euro-diasporic anti-Black establishment was taking place, a cruel phenomenon, which can be traced back to colonialism and African slavery. Arnaz was able to perform White roles and even marry Anglo-white actress, but the same could not be remotely fathomed for Hernández.
RELATED STORY: Afro-Colombian Areas Taking A Battering By Colombia's FARC Insurgents
While many invoke the idea of mestizaje (racial mixing) and the one-drop rule, it did not determine Latin American identity racially. The false idea that you were non-White if any of your ancestors was not White has been a common belief that undergirded racial categories and Whiteness as passing in the United States. Regardless if Arnaz was considered White or not, his Whiteness allowed him to pass and have access to Hollywood. Arnaz benefited from the system of White Supremacy. While Arnaz was able to remain Cuban (while also being marginalized), Hernández was not able to be Puerto Rican because he was Black.

The impossibility of Afro descendants from Latin America being able to play Latin American (or Latino) roles would be further marked after the Civil Rights Movement. Black people from Latin America were segregated and became part of Black communities in the United Sates. Eminent figures like Arturo Alfonso Schomburg, Carlos Cooks, Chano Pozo and Mario Bauza among others formed part of the Harlem Renaissance. From the 1950s through the 1970s, there was a rise and fall of an uneasy coalition between Latinos and African-Americans. A part from the internal conflicts and White backlash that resulted from the Civil Rights Movement, the most salient aftermath was the cementing of racial essentialisms. Blackness was seen solely as African-American and Latinos became “Brown” while Whiteness became Anglo-whites. These political racial constructions remained unquestioned until recently.

The rainbow coalition was an active coalition which consisted of many members such as Fred Hampton from the Black Panthers, William “Preacherman” Fesperan, Hy Thurman from the Young Patriots Organization, Jack (Junebug) Boykin, Jose Cha Cha Jimenez, the Puerto Rican founder of the Young Lords Party, among others.
The rainbow coalition was an active coalition which consisted of many members such as Fred Hampton from the Black Panthers, William “Preacherman” Fesperan, Hy Thurman from the Young Patriots Organization, Jack (Junebug) Boykin, Jose Cha Cha Jimenez, the Puerto Rican founder of the Young Lords Party, among others.

The discussion of Latino Whiteness was rarely brought up and instead focused and few focused Latino Blackness. For example, Felipe Luciano’s “Jíbaro My Pretty Nigger” encouraged his Blackness and Puertoricaness.



[...]

Today We are Paying the Price

The killing of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman caused many to revisit the notion of Latino Whiteness. The article published by Latino Rebels, The White Hispanic” Label: Yes, People, Racism is a Latino Thing, Too, actually made some good points at the need to revisit race and Latino identity while Cesar Vargas’ The Privilege of the White Hispanic: Leaving Out the Rest caused, to my amazement, a stir from White Latinos. Nonetheless, we also need African-Americans to begin embracing Afro-Latinos among other Black communities who do not conform to an African American nomenclature. Unfortunately, as I had predicted, anti-Black racism has reached their doorstep. Rodner Figueroa compared Michelle Obama to a simian from the Planet of the Apes and was fired from Univision.
- See more at: http://www.latinorebels.com/2015/12/21/white-latino-racism-on-the-rise-its-time-for-a-serious-conversation-on-euro-diasporic-whiteness/#sthash.LnCkrflg.dpuf
Today We are Paying the Price

The killing of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman caused many to revisit the notion of Latino Whiteness. The article published by Latino Rebels, The White Hispanic” Label: Yes, People, Racism is a Latino Thing, Too, actually made some good points at the need to revisit race and Latino identity while Cesar Vargas’ The Privilege of the White Hispanic: Leaving Out the Rest caused, to my amazement, a stir from White Latinos. Nonetheless, we also need African-Americans to begin embracing Afro-Latinos among other Black communities who do not conform to an African American nomenclature. Unfortunately, as I had predicted, anti-Black racism has reached their doorstep. Rodner Figueroa compared Michelle Obama to a simian from the Planet of the Apes and was fired from Univision.



Figueroa’s excuse was that he was “mixed.” However, Univision, one of the most anti-Black television channels I’ve ever seen, made firing Figueroa seem like an oxymoron.

This Saturday, the Miss Puerto Rico winner for the Miss America pageant was suspended for anti-Muslim tweets.

Last night, the African-American actor Steve Harvey was attacked on Twitter from racist White Latinos (and other Latinos as well and Anglo-whites) who wanted Miss Colombia to win the Miss Universe contest. These profile used abhorrent language, as the tweets below show. All this hatred came as a result of Harvey mistakenly naming Miss Colombia the winner instead of Miss Philippines, the real winner.



Read More




A common misconnection that exists today rests on the notion that there are no racial hierarchies in Latin American countries or within the Latino communities in the United States. In other words, Latino (or Hispanic) is itself a race. For many, this conversation is a pointless squabble that halts the true need for unity amongst marginalized groups in the United States. Unfortunately, overlooking the importance of this issue has in fact delineated separation and a lack of interest in each other’s problems.
The shooting of unarmed African-American teenager Trayvon Martin by a half-Peruvian and half-White Jewish man named George Zimmerman, the rise of so-called Hispanic conservatives like Ted Cruz, Al Cardenas and Marco Rubio, and the examples of racist comments by Latinos in the media like Rodner Figueroa, have made it impossible to have a conversation of Latinos and race. It is becoming clear that Whites from Latin America, although marginalized by Anglo-Whites, have been able to pass as honorary Whites and benefit from the inequalities formed by White Supremacy. This is not new, and it has a history.
Many people who neglect to explore the history of Latin Americans in the United Sates fail to analyze people like the famous white Cuban Ricky Ricardo (Desi Arnaz), who penetrated the American television series “I Love Lucy” (1951) at a time when Black people were not even allowed to perform next to White actors. Lucy (Lucille Ball) was Arnaz’ real wife, and both enjoyed a long and prosperous career in the film industry. In 1954 Arnaz was even able to get a role as the famous Don Juan.
During this time, White Latin Americans were seen as foreign, inferior and exotic and yet many passed and enjoyed White Privilege. Even all three of John Wayne’s wives were from Latin America at a time when anti-Black and anti-immigrant sentiments were powerful hateful discourses. Less mentioned is the famous Afro-Puerto Rican actor Juano Hernández, who to date is considered was one of the most successful pioneering Black actors of the African-American film industry. Despite Hernández being from Latin America, he had to take Black roles precisely because he was Black and experienced the same segregation as other Blacks in the United States. This was also common in Latin America, where Blacks were not allowed to be actors while Whites enjoyed wearing blackface and dehumanized black people.
- See more at: http://www.latinorebels.com/2015/12/21/white-latino-racism-on-the-rise-its-time-for-a-serious-conversation-on-euro-diasporic-whiteness/#sthash.LnCkrflg.dpuf
A common misconnection that exists today rests on the notion that there are no racial hierarchies in Latin American countries or within the Latino communities in the United States. In other words, Latino (or Hispanic) is itself a race. For many, this conversation is a pointless squabble that halts the true need for unity amongst marginalized groups in the United States. Unfortunately, overlooking the importance of this issue has in fact delineated separation and a lack of interest in each other’s problems.
The shooting of unarmed African-American teenager Trayvon Martin by a half-Peruvian and half-White Jewish man named George Zimmerman, the rise of so-called Hispanic conservatives like Ted Cruz, Al Cardenas and Marco Rubio, and the examples of racist comments by Latinos in the media like Rodner Figueroa, have made it impossible to have a conversation of Latinos and race. It is becoming clear that Whites from Latin America, although marginalized by Anglo-Whites, have been able to pass as honorary Whites and benefit from the inequalities formed by White Supremacy. This is not new, and it has a history.
Many people who neglect to explore the history of Latin Americans in the United Sates fail to analyze people like the famous white Cuban Ricky Ricardo (Desi Arnaz), who penetrated the American television series “I Love Lucy” (1951) at a time when Black people were not even allowed to perform next to White actors. Lucy (Lucille Ball) was Arnaz’ real wife, and both enjoyed a long and prosperous career in the film industry. In 1954 Arnaz was even able to get a role as the famous Don Juan.
During this time, White Latin Americans were seen as foreign, inferior and exotic and yet many passed and enjoyed White Privilege. Even all three of John Wayne’s wives were from Latin America at a time when anti-Black and anti-immigrant sentiments were powerful hateful discourses. Less mentioned is the famous Afro-Puerto Rican actor Juano Hernández, who to date is considered was one of the most successful pioneering Black actors of the African-American film industry. Despite Hernández being from Latin America, he had to take Black roles precisely because he was Black and experienced the same segregation as other Blacks in the United States. This was also common in Latin America, where Blacks were not allowed to be actors while Whites enjoyed wearing blackface and dehumanized black people.
- See more at: http://www.latinorebels.com/2015/12/21/white-latino-racism-on-the-rise-its-time-for-a-serious-conversation-on-euro-diasporic-whiteness/#sthash.LnCkrflg.dpuf

The 'First Free African Town' in the Americas? — It's In Mexico

Statue of Gaspar Yanga.  Photo by Erasmo Vasquez Lendechy via Wikipedia.
Statue of Gaspar Yanga.
Photo by Erasmo Vasquez Lendechy via Wikipedia.
By Lupita Peimbert
It is called Yanga. In the middle of intense vegetation in southeastern Veracruz, a state along the Mexican Gulf, the town of Yanga is evidence to the presence and settlement of Africans in Mexico.

On our way to the Port of Veracruz, we stopped at Yanga and saw the agricultural fields full of caña and corn surrounding the area, also rich in coffee plantations; the tropical weather invites you to be outside, under the sun's open arms.

Yanga claims to have been the first free African town in the Americas, proclaimed on October 3, 1631. Afro-Mexicans proudly share the story of “El Yanga,” apparently an enslaved prince from the Yang-Bara tribe from Gabon, who helped slaves to be free from the Spanish around 1570.

One of the town’s plazas shows his statue, presenting El Yanga as a defiant, proud man.

The main plaza, the portales, and the main church are as typical as in many other Mexican towns inviting serene strolls. Yanga is peaceful and emanates longevity. Many centuries and people have lived and died there, perhaps oblivious to history, yet making history themselves.

Reprinted with permission from Global Voices.

Race in Costa Rica: A 68-Year-Old Book Is Fueling a Major Debate

Promotional banner for the orchestral adaptation of “Cocorí”. This new adaptation triggered a new wave of controversy about racism in Costa Rica. Photo taken from the Facebook profile for the National Symphony Orchestra of Costa Rica.
Promotional banner for the orchestral adaptation of “Cocorí”. This new adaptation triggered a new wave of controversy about racism in Costa Rica. Photo taken from the Facebook profile for the National Symphony Orchestra of Costa Rica.

By Shirley Campbell,  Translated by by Marianna Breytman
How is it that a short children's story written in the late 1940s is generating a hurricane of controversy today that is dividing little Costa Rica?

The story, a book called Cocorí, is a collection of the adventures of a black child in the (almost isolated) Caribbean community in Costa Rica. At the time, the book won several international prizes and is probably the most translated Costa Rican book in history. For many years, it was required reading for children in primary school. Nonetheless, a few years ago, in response to pressure from various social groups, the book ceased to be compulsory. Today, it is available only as elective reading.

In the book, Cocorí is a black boy living with his mother in a port. One day, after the arrival of a ship to the coast, he meets a blonde girl. At their first meeting, both children are surprised. Cocorí is surprised by the girl's blonde hair and the girl confuses Cocorí with a monkey. Following this confusion, she thinks that Cocorí's skin has been filled with soot, since she has never seen a black boy. After exchanging a few snails for a rose, Cocorí promises to bring the girl a little squirrel monkey. Cocorí manages to capture the monkey and returns to the ship, but it's gone. Cocorí's sadness grows when he finds his rose withered with all of its petals on the ground. From there, he decides to wander the lands in search of an answer to the question: Why do certain things live for many years while others live for so few?

The trigger for the current controversy came during a scene in a musical by the National Symphony Orchestra of the Ministry of Culture and Youth, performed for young students at the National Theater.

Online, many Internet users have spoken out against censoring the work of fiction, saying the unfiltered story is an important form of free expression:


No to CENSORING #Cocori. we have the right to listen to the musical

Regarding censoring #Cocori: “Politically correct art does not exist” -Carlos Rubio, writer and expert in children's literature


In the day of books and copyrights, we get the censorship (gagging) of #Cocorí

Beyond the musical adaptation and discussions of the book, a larger debate about racism has erupted in Costa Rica. On blogs like Diego Delfino, the conversation has focused on the country's own unique experience with racism:

Is Costa Rica racist or not? Definitely. How is it possible to understand that Costa Ricans are so uncomfortable with the mere suggestion that a book could be read differently through different eyes and would it perhaps be opportune to listen to those who appreciate it that way? They prefer to get angry, radicalize the discussion, and completely discredit those who have already been historically marginalized before understanding that in all that plurality of voices and opinions, there is an abundance of equally valuable and interesting points of view, which wouldn't hurt to at least take into account.

On Facebook, Harold Robinson Davis responded to those who accuse Cocorí's critics of censoring popular Costa Rican culture:

There are those who want to divert the focus of the discussion, citing illegitimate arguments in defense of “free speech” or fighting “censorship”. This falls falls under its own weight […] Whoever wants to educate their children with the “values” that this book conveys is free to do so in their own home. (I warn you though that this is a recipe for disaster: with each passing day in this globalized world, diversity and tolerance are essential values for success … or simply for coexistence)

Winston Washington shared his personal experience, also on Facebook:

At the age of 31, I understand and somewhat regretfully forgive those who made my life hell with the blessed Cocorí. We are not Cocorí, no black person in Costa Rica is Cocorí, we don't like Cocorí, he makes a bad impression on us, significantly bad, he does not represent us. The cartoon is unbearable, with his ignorant eyes and his red-colored lip, in the vaudeville style of the late 19th century and the start of the 20th, with the “whites” wearing blackface, parodying the customs of African descendants.
Controversies and attacks against public representatives

Controversies and attacks against public representatives

The Human Rights Commission of the Legislative Assembly has asked Minister of Culture Elizabeth Fonseca not to endorse these concerts, considering that the work contains racist connotations and spreads racist stereotypes against people of African descent. The Minister of Culture welcomed the initiative. Throughout this process, the debate has become more aggressive, focusing particularly on two public representatives: Epsy Campbell, the president of the Human Rights Commission of the Legislative Assembly, and Maureen Clarke, from the National Liberation Party—both of whom are of African descent.

In defense of the book, various groups have emerged on Facebook, criticizing the representatives who claim its protagonist is depicted in a racist way. Some of the criticism has become abusive, and Campbell had to close her social media accounts. Her supporters even launched a petition calling for state protection, after she received certain physical threats.


How this controversy will end remains a mystery, for now. The debate continues, extending beyond the book and the story, pitting those who see it as part of Costa Rican tradition and identity against others who feel this particular tradition dehumanizes people of African descent.

Many in and sympathetic to the Afro-Costa Rican community hope today's debate results in new legislation that criminalizes discrimination in all forms and brings the country closer to the image it has tried to project abroad: a society that respects and celebrates diversity.


Reprinted with permission from Global Voices.

Obama's War Plans Against Venezuela: Another Act of Imperial Desperation

U.S. manic belligerence towards Venezuela may seem counterproductive, given Washington’s growing isolation in Latin America. But the logic of imperialism dictates that it must destroy the Venezuelan model of economic and political development. “Venezuela is no threat to US ‘national security,’ but its resistance to Empire is a threat to US hegemony.”





By Danny Haiphong
“Washington's increasingly isolated position in Latin America brought Obama to the conclusion that he had no other choice but to desperately threaten Venezuela into submission.”
President Obama has declared war on the Bolivarian government of Venezuela. The executive order, signed by Obama on March 9th, labeled the socialist country a "threat to national security." This came directly after the Obama Administration announced sanctions on Venezuela in December of late last year. Obama pushed the sanctions forward after engaging in talks with Cuba that freed the remaining members of the Cuban Five. Obama justified the sanctions as a necessary step to prevent "human rights violations" against the fascist right wing, US-backed opposition in Venezuela.

However, Obama's war on Venezuela has zero to do with concern for "human rights." Obama's open declaration of war is yet another attempt on the part of Washington to utilize the human rights industry to stave off imperial decline. US capital, now only 17 percent of the world's GDP, is waging worldwide military warfare to make up for severe losses in economic influence. The rate of profit, and thus US corporate and dollar hegemony, is on the path of collapse. Finance and corporate capital has calculated that escalated military force must be globalized if it is to sustain worldwide capitalist domination.

Venezuela is no stranger to US capitalism's desperate acts of self-preservation through military strangulation. In 2002, the fascist oligarchy and the CIA temporarily ousted former president and revolutionary leader Hugo Chavez. The Venezuelan people freed Chavez within days and set back Washington's agenda in Latin America. In 2014, Washington-backed fascists went on the offensive once again. The right-wing oligarchy burned government buildings, sabotaged social programs, and attacked pro-Bolivarian Venezuelans (especially Afro-Venezuelans) wherever they could be found. But despite the millions agencies like National Endowment for Democracy poured into the fascist uprising, the Bolivarian government prevented Washington's plot to destabilize Venezuela's sovereignty.
“Finance and corporate capital has calculated that escalated military force must be globalized if it is to sustain worldwide capitalist domination.”
Venezuela is no threat to US "national security," but its resistance to Empire is a threat to US hegemony. The Bolivarian revolution is an expression of self-determination. The capitalist dictators that rule Washington are on a war against self-determination all over the world. Neo-colonial robbery and plunder has become completely antagonistic to the interests of the oppressed. Venezuela's example has spread throughout Latin America through alliances such as ALBA and UNASUR, both of which have come steadfastly to the Bolivarian nation’s defense.

The Bolivarian revolution's primary inspiration to the world lies in the concrete ways it has worked to separate the nation from the misery of neo-colonialism. Through the redistribution of its oil wealth, Venezuela has reduced structural poverty more than any other nation in the region from almost 50 percent in 1998 to well below 10 percent in 2014. Housing, education, and healthcare are human rights in Venezuela. Bolivarian missions have vastly expanded working class Venezuela's access to the basic necessities of life. The socialist transition in Venezuela has eradicated illiteracy, dramatically reduced the infant mortality rate, and built mass organizations such as Bolivarian Circles that have placed the destiny of Venezuela in the hands of its working class majority.

In 2015, Venezuela's national assembly announced a "Socialist Offensive" to curb the challenges presented by its enemies. The fascist, US-backed oligarchy's ability to conduct economic terrorism in Venezuela has held back the Bolivarian process. US imperialism hopes that the oligarchy, with Washington's support, can wrestle dominance in Venezuela back from the people. However, the oligarchy has failed to destabilize the Bolivarian revolution. Washington's increasingly isolated position in Latin America brought Obama to the conclusion that he had no other choice but to desperately threaten Venezuela into submission.
“Everywhere China invests, Washington seeks to engulf in flames.”
Another factor in Washington's war on Venezuela not mentioned in the corporate media is the growing influence of China in Latin America. In January, China announced that it would invest 250 billion in Latin America over the next decade. Venezuela is set to receive 20 billion over this period for infrastructure development. China, despite having a large stake in the US capitalist economy, is at the top of the list of Washington’s destabilization agenda. The permanent capitalist crisis has stripped Washington of the title of top economic superpower. That title now belongs to China. So, everywhere China invests, Washington seeks to engulf in flames. In response to Chinese investment in Africa, the US has sponsored the destabilization of Sudan, Libya, and has installed over 50 AFRICOM installations spread across all but two African nations. As China seeks to develop relations with Russia, Eurasia, and Latin America, expect Washington to escalate global warfare in these regions regardless of the consequence.

During my participation on a panel entitled "The inescapable reality of Neo-liberalism", I was scoffed at by a professor at Skidmore College who did not believe that "humanitarian intervention" and imperialist warfare constituted examples of neo-liberalism. Yet, every US imperial intervention (all seventy plus of them) since 1945 has been conducted for neo-liberal capitalism’s geopolitical and economic interests. To separate imperialist warfare from the interests of neo-liberal capitalism is inherently misleading and backward. Washington's declared war on Venezuela is case in point. The neo-liberal Empire is dying and losing influence in a region that was once under its brutal neo-colonial control. It has no choice but to point its guns in every direction in hopes of bringing Venezuela back into its orbit. Don't expect the people of Venezuela to take the bait.

___________
Danny Haiphong is an organizer for Fight Imperialism Stand Together (FIST) in Boston. He is also a regular contributor to Black Agenda Report. Danny can be reached at wakeupriseup1990@gmail.com and FIST can be reached at bostonfist@gmail.com.​


 Reprinted with permission from Black Agenda Report.

Jeb Bush Hires The Same Squad of Killers, False Flaggers, and Coverup Artists That Surrounded Reagan and George Bush

This cast of characters were hands-on in a wide variety of skullduggery: Involvement in the failed U.S.-sponsored invasion of Cuba and the JFK assassination (Porter Goss), assisted in mass murder by right-wing death squads in Latin America (John Negroponte), helped with the invasion of Iraq by pushing the myth of  Saddam Hussein's "weapons of mass destruction" and helped precipitate 9/11's "New Pearl Harbor" (Paul Wolfowitz and Stephen Hadley), the cover-up of the US Navy shoot down of TWA Flight 800 and torture of Afghan prisoners (Michael Chertoff), helped with George Bush's fake "terror alerts" (Tom Ridge), and more.

Top Row: Tom Ridge, Michael Chertoff, Porter Goss. Bottom Row: Michael Hayden, John Negroponte, Paul  Wolfowitz, Stephen Hadley.
Top Row: Tom Ridge, Michael Chertoff, Porter Goss. Bottom Row: Michael Hayden, John Negroponte, Paul
Wolfowitz, Stephen Hadley.

By
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) will deliver a speech on Wednesday that seeks to distance his foreign policy views from the previous two Bush presidents, saying, according to early excerpts, that while he admires his presidential family members, “I am my own man.”

“[M]y views are shaped by my own thinking and own experiences,” Bush will say as he lays out a vision that calls for increased military spending in order to project strength and encourage peace worldwide.

“Having a military that is equal to any threat is not only essential for the commander in chief … it also makes it less likely that we will need to put our men and women in uniform in harm’s way,” he will say. “Because I believe, fundamentally, that weakness invites war … and strength encourages peace.”

The remarks come just days after Bush brushed aside questions about his view of President George W. Bush’s wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and as the Florida governor and presumptive GOP frontrunner works to define himself in the early days of the 2016 campaign.

Yet Jeb Bush’s efforts to distance himself from his brother’s foreign policy may only be skin deep.

According to Reuters’ Steve Holland, Bush has tapped a “diverse” roster of former George W. Bush and George H. W. Bush officials to advise his burgeoning campaign on foreign policy, including key architects of the 2002 invasion of Iraq.

The list of advisers provided to Reuters by a campaign aide includes Paul Wolfowitz and Stephen Hadley, as well as former George W. Bush Homeland Security Secretaries Tom Ridge and Michael Chertoff, and Bush adviser Meghan O’Sullivan.

Wolfowitz, who served as Deputy Secretary of Defense in the George W. Bush administration, began advocating an attack on Iraq shortly after the Sep. 11 attacks, established “what amounted to a separate government” to push for war and invited journalists to secret meetings in order to lay out the foundation for his plans. Wolfowitz established the Office of Special Plans in the Pentagon that ignored the conclusions of the intelligence community and fed policy makers and the media discredited claims of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.

Read More

CIA ‘Torture’ Practices Started Long Before 9/11 Attacks — Torture Was Used Decades Before 9/11

The idea that U.S. torture began in response to the 9/11 attacks is just another super myth perpetuated by American politicians and America's mainstream media. In fact, torture by the CIA and U.S. soldiers was in widespread use in Vietnam, and American "specialists" trained the armies of Latin America's dictatorships in methods of torture during the notorious "Dirty Wars" in the Reagan Era.—Ronald David Jackson

U.S. soldiers "water boarding" a prisoner in Vietnam.
U.S. soldiers "water boarding" a prisoner in Vietnam.

By Jeff Stein
“The CIA,” according to the Senate Intelligence Committee, had “historical experience using coercive forms of interrogation.” Indeed, it had plenty, said the committee’s report released Tuesday: about 50 years’ worth. Deep in the committee’s 500-page summary of a still-classified 6,700-page report on the agency’s use of “enhanced interrogation techniques” after 9/11 there is a brief reference to KUBARK, the code name for a 1963 instruction manual on interrogation, which was used on subjects ranging from suspected Soviet double agents to Latin American dissidents and guerrillas.

The techniques will sound familiar to anybody who has followed the raging debate over interrogation techniques adopted by the CIA to break Al-Qaeda suspects in secret prisons around the world. When the going got tough, the CIA got rough.



The 1963 KUBARK manual included the “principal coercive techniques of interrogation: arrest, detention, deprivation of sensory stimuli through solitary confinement or similar methods, threats and fear, debility, pain, heightened suggestibility and hypnosis, narcosis and induced regression,” the committee wrote.

Many such methods were used on a Cold War-era Soviet defector whom a few CIA officials suspected of being a double agent. They came to light in a congressional investigation over 25 years ago. “In 1978, [CIA Director] Stansfield Turner asked former CIA officer John Limond Hart to investigate the CIA interrogation of Soviet KGB officer Yuri Nosenko using the KUBARK methods—to include sensory deprivation techniques and forced standing,” the committee reported.

Hart found the methods repugnant, he told a congressional committee investigating the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. “It has never fallen to my lot to be involved with any experience as unpleasant, in every possible way as...the investigation of this [Nosenko] case and...the necessity of lecturing upon it and testifying,” Hart told the committee. “To me, it is an abomination, and I am happy to say that it is not in my memory typical of what my colleagues and I did in the agency during the time I was connected with it.”

But the CIA reached for KUBARK when U.S.-backed Latin American military regimes were faced with human rights protests, left-wing subversion and armed insurgencies. “Just five years” after Hart expressed his dismay about torture on Capitol Hill, “in 1983 a CIA officer incorporated significant portions of the KUBARK manual into the Human Resource Exploitation (HRE) Training Manual, which the same officer used to provide interrogation training in Latin America in the early 1980s,” the Intelligence Committee report said. The new HRE manual was also “used to provide interrogation training to” a party whose name was censored in the committee’s report but was almost certainly the Nicaraguan Contras, a rebel group the CIA created to overthrow the Marxist revolutionary government in Managua.

[...]

The CIA’s Vietnam interrogation centers, jointly run in most cases with its South Vietnamese counterparts, were chiefly designed to extract information from captured Communist guerrillas, spies and suspected underground political agents, in order to launch attacks. Sometimes, however, a confession was used to then parade an apostate through South Vietnamese-controlled neighborhoods, like a trophy.

And prisoner abuse, including torture in so-called “tiger cages,” was common, according to many witnesses and other sources over the years. In 1969, the Army filed murder charges against the commander of the Green Berets in Vietnam and seven of his men after they used hallucinogenic drugs on a suspected double agent and killed him after he failed to confess. The charges were eventually dropped after a fierce lobbying campaign by then-CIA director Richard Helms, who feared a trial would expose abuses under the agency’s secret Phoenix assassination program.

Read More




If You're Disappointed In Obama — You Might Hate A Hillary Presidency: She Admits Role in Aftermath of Overthrow of Elected Honduran President — After Lying About It

Hillary cites war criminal Henry Kissinger in laying out her "vision" for "sustaining America's leadership."

When Hillary Clinton says 'Hard Choices," she's talking about things like helping to  overthrow an elected government and replacing it with a squad of corrupt killers.  (Photo by Mike Mozart)
When Hillary Clinton says 'Hard Choices," she's talking about things like helping to
overthrow an elected government and replacing it with a squad of corrupt killers.
(Photo by Mike Mozart)
By
In a recent op-ed in The Washington Post, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton used a review of Henry Kissinger’s latest book, “World Order,” to lay out her vision for “sustaining America’s leadership in the world.” In the midst of numerous global crises, she called for return to a foreign policy with purpose, strategy and pragmatism. She also highlighted some of these policy choices in her memoir “Hard Choices” and how they contributed to the challenges that Barack Obama’s administration now faces.

The chapter on Latin America, particularly the section on Honduras, a major source of the child migrants currently pouring into the United States, has gone largely unnoticed. In letters to Clinton and her successor, John Kerry, more than 100 members of Congress have repeatedly warned about the deteriorating security situation in Honduras, especially since the 2009 military coup that ousted the country’s democratically elected President Manuel Zelaya. As Honduran scholar Dana Frank points out in Foreign Affairs, the U.S.-backed post-coup government “rewarded coup loyalists with top ministries,” opening the door for further “violence and anarchy.”

The homicide rate in Honduras, already the highest in the world, increased by 50 percent from 2008 to 2011; political repression, the murder of opposition political candidates, peasant organizers and LGBT activists increased and continue to this day. Femicides skyrocketed. The violence and insecurity were exacerbated by a generalized institutional collapse. Drug-related violence has worsened amid allegations of rampant corruption in Honduras’ police and government. While the gangs are responsible for much of the violence, Honduran security forces have engaged in a wave of killings and other human rights crimes with impunity.

[...]

First, the confession: Clinton admits that she used the power of her office to make sure that Zelaya would not return to office. “In the subsequent days [after the coup] I spoke with my counterparts around the hemisphere, including Secretary [Patricia] Espinosa in Mexico,” Clinton writes. “We strategized on a plan to restore order in Honduras and ensure that free and fair elections could be held quickly and legitimately, which would render the question of Zelaya moot.”

This may not come as a surprise to those who followed the post-coup drama closely. (See my commentary from 2009 on Washington’s role in helping the coup succeed here, here and here.) But the official storyline, which was dutifully accepted by most in the media, was that the Obama administration actually opposed the coup and wanted Zelaya to return to office.

The question of Zelaya was anything but moot. Latin American leaders, the United Nations General Assembly and other international bodies vehemently demanded his immediate return to office. Clinton’s defiant and anti-democratic stance spurred a downward slide in U.S. relations with several Latin American countries, which has continued. It eroded the warm welcome and benefit of the doubt that even the leftist governments in region offered to the newly installed Obama administration a few months earlier.

Clinton’s false testimony is even more revealing. She reports that Zelaya was arrested amid “fears that he was preparing to circumvent the constitution and extend his term in office.” This is simply not true. As Clinton must know, when Zelaya was kidnapped by the military and flown out of the country in his pajamas on June 28, 2009, he was trying to put a consultative, nonbinding poll on the ballot to ask voters whether they wanted to have a real referendum on reforming the constitution during the scheduled election in November. It is important to note that Zelaya was not eligible to run in that election. Even if he had gotten everything he wanted, it was impossible for Zelaya to extend his term in office. But this did not stop the extreme right in Honduras and the United States from using false charges of tampering with the constitution to justify the coup.

Read More

China’s Foreign Aid: How Big Is It and What Is Its Aim?

Illustration by futureatlas.com.
Illustration by futureatlas.com.
China has greatly increased its foreign aid to developing countries in the recent years. On one hand China hopes to promote bilateral relations with recipient countries to enhance economic and trade cooperation; on the other the fast rising nation is shouldering its international responsibilities and promoting poverty reduction.


By Luo Jianbo and Zhang Xiaomin

ABSTRACT: From 2010 to 2012, China allocated a total of 89.34 billion yuan (14.41 billion U.S. dollars) worth of foreign assistance. This amount no doubt is much smaller than the official development assistance of some big traditional donors such as the United States. However, as a developing country, China has tried its best in this regard. There is no need to deny that, by providing foreign aid, China hopes to promote bilateral relations with recipient countries, and to enhance the economic and trade cooperation with them. But most importantly, China is committed to promoting poverty reduction and development of the recipient countries, so as to finally realize the goal of common development together with other developing countries. China is willing to shoulder its international responsibility.

At present China has become the second largest economy in the world and is more and more engaged in the Asian and African affairs. As a result, China’s foreign aid has become a heated topic all over the world. How big is China’s foreign aid? How much of it goes to Africa? What are China’s motives? These questions have constantly been raised by the international community. However, no final answers have been provided so far. This article aims to address the above questions from the perspective of Chinese scholars.

HOW BIG IS CHINA’S FOREIGN AID?

In 2008, NYU Wagner School released a report which pointed out that China’s foreign assistance and government-supported economic projects in Africa, Latin America, and Southeast Asia grew from less than $1 billion in 2002 to $27.5 billion in 2006. [1] In 2012 and 2013, AidData, based at the College of William and Mary, compiled a database of thousands of media reports on Chinese-backed projects in Africa from 2000 to 2011. According to the database, China financed 1,673 projects in 50 African countries, amounting to a total of $75 billion of Chinese government’s official financial aid commitments, roughly similar in volume with the U.S. Foreign Aid to Africa (which reached $90 billion in the same period). [2] Unfortunately, in the above statistics, China’s foreign aid to Africa was apparently exaggerated a great deal, for it muddled up China’s foreign aid to Africa with China’s investment in Africa.

China's Information Office of the State Council issued the first White Paper on China's foreign aid in 2011. According to the 2011 white paper, China’s total foreign aid provided from 1950s to the end of 2009 amounted to 256.29 billion yuan ( The Chinese government didn’t put it in US dollars in the White Paper), 45.7% of which went to African countries. [3] On 10 July 2014, a second White Paper on China’s foreign aid was released. According to the reported statistics in this paper, foreign aid offered by China totaled 89.34 billion yuan (about 14.41 billion US dollars), 51.8% of which went to African countries.

Just as what the foreign observers have noticed, China’s foreign aid has been increasing tremendously ever since 2000. Based on the information, data and references available, the writers estimate the amount of China’s aid and the percentages of foreign aid in GNI since 2000 .as follows: China’s foreign aid increased from $0.64 billion, accounting for 0.05% of GNI in 2000, to $5.04 billion, accounting for 0.095% of GNI in 2009. From 2010 to 2012, China allocated a total $14.41 billion worth of foreign aid, accounting for 0.06% of the GNI in this period.

Table 1 China’s foreign aid since 2000 and the percentage of GNI

 China’s foreign aid since 2000 and the percentage of GNI
cc Pz
Factually, it can be demonstrated that that China’s foreign aid has fast increased over the past decade. However, the total volume of foreign aid from China is still small in comparison with the Western traditional donors’ aid. In fact, there still lies a great gap between China and the traditional donors in this regard. Take 2012 for example (Table 2). During that year, the United States offered a total of $30.824 billion worth of foreign aid to Africa, accounting 0.19% of its GNI; the United Kingdom offered a total of $13.892 billion, accounting for 0.56% of its GNI; Germany, France and Japan provided $12.939 or 0.37% of GNI, $12.028 billion or 0.45%, and $10.605 billion, or 0.17%, respectively. Although none of the above-mentioned countries reached the target of foreign aid accounting for 0.7% of its GNI, a goal set by the United Nations early in the 1970s, they did provide tremendous amount of foreign aid to developing countries.

Table 2 Net foreign aid of main donors and its percentage in GNI in 2012

Net foreign aid of main donors and its percentage in GNI in 2012
cc Pz
Source: OECD, “DAC Members' Net Official Development Assistance in 2012”,
http://www.oecd.org/statistics/(2014-07-22)

Measuring the volume of China’s foreign aid has sparked a huge debate about what should be counted as aid and what should not. Some foreign analysts and scholars just mix the government concessional loans with other commercial loans by the Export-Import Bank of China, China Development Bank and other commercial banks. Some have simply confused China’s foreign aid with investment. Consequently, they exaggerated a great deal the actual volume of China’s foreign aid. The financial resources for China’s foreign aid mainly include three types: grant (aid gratis), interest-free loans and concessional loans. From 2010 to 2012, China provided a total of 32.32 billion yuan worth of grants, accounting for 36.2% of its foreign aid volume; 7.26 billion yuan worth of interest-free loans, taking up 8.1% of its foreign aid volume and 49.76 billion yuan worth of concessional loans, accounting for 55.7% of its total foreign aid volume. The concessional loans are raised by the Export-Import Bank of China on the market, with the loan interests lower than the benchmark interest of the People’s Bank of China, the central bank, and the difference is covered by the State in the form of financial subsidies. At present, the annual interest rate of China’s concessional loans stands at 2% to 3%, and the period of repayment usually ranges from 15 to 20 years (including five to seven years of grace).

It should be noted that China Development Bank doesn’t provide foreign aid at all, and the concessional loans granted by the Export-Import Bank of China are just one part of its business. Both banks support Chinese enterprises in conducting overseas businesses through offering commercial loans and providing financing and investment services. For example, in recent years, the Export-Import Bank of China financed the Ethiopian Oriental Industrial Park and the Ethiopian Railway Project; China Development Bank offered financial support to the Guangdong Guangken Rubber Group Co., Ltd. for the construction of its manufacturing/processing base in Southeast Asia, namely the Oman Salalah power Generation and Sea Water Desalination Project, and invested $198 million to support Wanbao Grains & Oils Co., Ltd in the construction of Mozambique Agribusiness Project, the largest one of its kind by China in Africa which can create an integrated chain from crop planting, food processing and warehousing to distribution. However, the funds offered for all the above-mentioned projects by the afore-mentioned banks are non-concessional development funds. They can’t therefore be counted as foreign aid at all.

As a developing country, China by no means plans to keep up with Joneses in regard to foreign aid. According to the poverty standard set by the UN, China still has more than 100 million people living in poverty, which means that China still faces the difficult challenge of poverty reduction and development. On the other hand, when you take the size of its economy into consideration, China is indeed a big power, and in fact it is ranked as one of the fastest developing countries in the world in recent years. Accordingly, the international community expects China to shoulder more and more international responsibilities. Offering foreign aid to underdeveloped countries especially those suffering from humanitarian crises, is also an important way for China to demonstrate and prove that it is a responsible power. Thus, it can be predicted that China will surely increase its foreign aid concomitant with its economic development in the coming years.

WHAT IS THE AIM OF CHINA’S FOREIGN AID?

During the past decades harsh criticism has been leveled against China, accusing China of using aid to recipient countries, to scramble for resources and overseas markets there; to dig for political support from them or especially to maintain close relations with some rogue states.

There is no need to deny that China’s foreign aid serves its overall foreign relations and national interests. China also expects to deepen relations with recipient countries and win the hearts and minds of the people of those countries - just as Western donors do. By providing foreign aid, China demonstrates its willingness to shoulder more and more increasing responsibilities. These can facilitate China to enhance its soft power and image within the international community. At the same time, by helping recipient countries build some economic development-related projects, China expects to reap trade, investment and contracts opportunities overseas, especially for Chinese enterprises going abroad. As a developing country, China never considers foreign aid simply as a donation, but an important form of South-South cooperation to advance the mutual benefit, win-win and common development of China and other developing countries.

The international community should also recognize that, other than the pursuit of its own national interest, China’s foreign aid prioritizes poverty reduction and economic development of the recipient countries. The Chinese people, just like any other people in the world, are imbued with a strong sense of humanitarianism. Although the Chinese political system is different from that of Western countries, the Chinese government is fully aware of its international responsibilities beyond its national interests and strives to fulfill them adequately. Currently, China is dedicated to the path of peaceful development and the realization of common development and prosperity of the whole world. As we all know, many developing countries and regions of the world are facing challenging problems related to poverty, civil wars, conflicts, humanitarian crisis and so on. It is so manifestly obvious that China is doing its best to shoulder more international responsibilities by helping recipient countries tackle the above-mentioned problems, through providing foreign aid to them.

Just as the 2014 White Paper on China’s foreign aid put it, the Chinese government “has endeavored to integrate the interests of the Chinese people with the interests of the people of other countries, providing assistance to the best of its ability to other developing countries within the framework of South-South cooperation to support and help other developing countries, especially the least developed countries.”

From 2010 to 2012, China helped build 80 residential housing and affordable housing projects in other developing countries, totaling about 600,000 square meters in floor space; China helped build about 80 medical facilities projects in recipient countries, providing them with about 120 batches of medical equipment and medicine, and dispatching 55 medical teams composed of 3,600 medical workers to nearly 120 medical centers in 54 countries, treating nearly 7 million patients. Moreover, China donated 1.5 billion yuan worth of materials and cash assistance in emergency humanitarian aid to more than 30 countries. [4]

At the same time, China attaches great importance to fundamentally enhancing development capacities of recipient countries when providing aid for them. China not only gives them the fish, but most importantly, teaches them how to fish so as to help those countries blaze a path of self-dependent development. From 2010 to 2012, China undertook the construction of 580 complete projects, and completed 170 technical cooperation projects in 61 countries and regions related to transportation, communication, electric power, energy, industry, agriculture and education. In recent years, China increased cooperation with developing countries in the field of human resources development by holding training sessions for officials and technical personnel and on-the-job academic education programs in China, and shared with them China’s experience with regard to poverty reduction, development and public administration.

China provides foreign aid mainly in the form of undertaking projects instead of delivering money directly to the recipient countries. China is in charge of the allocation and expenditure of money and the projects are undertaken, constructed and managed by Chinese enterprises, to make sure that the money is made good use of and spent as it should, to enhance the efficiency of the aid projects and to ensure that the money will not be embezzled or pocketed by some greedy and corrupt officials in recipient countries. In fact, even the Associated Press (AP), an American news agency highlighted the advantage of this model. In an article published - on 9 February 2012 and titled: “China skirting African corruption in direct aid”, AP pointed out that “instead of giving cash, the Chinese government prefers to pay Chinese companies to build roads and structures, bypassing local politicians, powerbrokers and construction crews, and to deliver them completed”, adding that, “this model helps defeat the inefficiencies and cash-pocketing corruption associated with other systems of foreign aid delivery”, and “Beijing's efforts to produce turn-key projects are winning fans.” [5] At the same time, since the cost of Chinese personnel, materials and management are lower than those of Western countries, China, compared with Western countries, can achieve more in Africa in terms of development with similar amount of foreign aid.

Nevertheless, to succeed in the long term, China still needs to gradually adjust its foreign aid policy to the new situation whereby China is becoming a more and more global player shouldering increasing responsibilities. Measures can be taken as the following. First, China needs to reduce its tied-aid and open part of its foreign aid market to the international society and especially to the recipient countries. Thus, the recipient countries can participate more in the aid projects so as to create more employment opportunities for the locals and give them new skills. Second, to enhance aid efficiency and effectiveness in the future, China needs to invite more Chinese and African NGOs to participate in the foreign aid. Third, China needs to lower the annual interest rate of concessional loans, and increase grants to the least developed countries. Last but not least, when adhering to the “non-interference” principle, China needs to actively take advantage of foreign aid to help the recipient countries strengthen the building of governance capacity to realize political stability and good governance. If all other developing countries opt for the path of development and good governance, it will contribute to the peace and development of the whole world. Without any doubt, China will benefit a lot from that.

END NOTES

[1] NYU Wagner School, “Understanding Chinese Foreign Aid: A Look at China’s Development Assistance to Africa, Southeast Asia and Latin America”, April 25, 2008.

[2] Austin Strange, Bradley Parks, Michael J. Tierney, Andreas Fuchs, Axel Dreher & Vijaya Ramachandran, “China’s Development Finance to Africa: A Media-Based Approach to Data Collection”, Center for Global Development, Working Paper 323, April 2013.

[3] Jonathan Weston, Caitlin Campbell & Katherine Koleski, China’s Foreign Aid Assistance in Review: Implications for the United States, U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, Updated September 1, 2011, pp.1-14; Michael Klare & Daniel Volman, “America, China & the scramble for Africa’s Oil”, Review of African Political Economy, No.108, 2006, pp.297-309; Thomas J. Christensen, “Shaping China’s Global Choices Through Diplomacy”, testimony before the U.S. – China Economic and Security Review Commission, March 18, 2008.

[4] Information Office of the State Council of PRC, “China's Foreign Aid (2014)”, July 2014, Beijing.

[5] Rodney Muhumuza, “China skirting African corruption in direct aid”, Associated Press, February 9, 2012.

∗ Luo Jianbo, director and professor of the Center for African Studies, Party School of Central Committee of CPC. His study covers China-Africa relations, African integration, China’s foreign aid. Zhang Xiaomin is associate professor of Beijing Foreign Studies University. His field covers China-Africa relations and China’s foreign aid.


Reprinted with permission from Pambazuka News.

“Racism is Not an Issue in Latin America” — Seriously?

Screen capture from Flawed Beauty, a video on racism in Brazil's fashion industry.
Screen capture from Flawed Beauty, a video on racism in Brazil's fashion industry.
By Ángel Carrión
In an opinion piece for the New York Times titled “Latin America's Talent for Tolerance,” Enrique Krauze proposes the notion that Latin America is less prone to racism:
[...] European-style racism — which not only mistreats and discriminates but also persecutes and, in the very worst cases, tries to exterminate others because of their ethnicity — has been the exception and not the rule in modern Latin America.
Krauze's opinion piece prompted blogger Julio Ricardo Varela to question the validity of his position in an article written for Latino Rebels:
At the beginning of the piece, Krauze starts with FIFA’s “Say No To Racism” campaign,”a message” that “was particularly directed toward the soccer stadiums of Europe, where there have been many instances of racial taunting and physical aggression by hostile fans against African and other black players.” Just a few sentences later, Krauze is quick to let us know that such racism doesn’t occur in the Americas: “the stadiums of Latin America have for the most part been free of this phenomenon, despite the fervent nationalism and fanaticism of the fans.” I am guessing that neither Krauze nor his Times editor did some actual fact-checking because in just five minutes, I was able to locate several examples of racism in Latin American stadiums.
After pointing out that so-called “European-style racism is what formed Latin America in the first place,” Varela concludes with these words:
When we as Latin Americans admit the truth and confront it head on, only then can real change occur. In the meantime, the literal whitewashing of Latin American history needs to be monitored and when it appears in mass media, we must all do our best to quickly call out this ignorant attitude. The only way to transform society is to ensure that we don’t allow certain opinions to become the standard. We can do better, and we will. One tweet at a time.
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...