HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK
---------------------------

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/opinion/2002/0417/2745022623OP17BROWNE.html

The Irish Times
April 17, 2002


The menace of the New World Order
Vincent Browne
         
We got a glimpse of the menace of the New World Order
last weekend, says Vincent Browne. On the morning of
Friday, Pan-American Day, President Bush hailed the
Democratic Charter of the Organisation of American
States (OAS approved by OAS members in Lima, Peru, on
September 11th last (coincidentally).

This charter proclaimed democratic principles and the
commitment of the OAS to support democracy throughout
the Americas, to investigate the overthrow of any
democratically elected government of a member-country
and, if necessary, to suspend the offender's
membership.

On Friday night Hugo Chavez, President of Venezuela,
elected with a huge democratic mandate, on the basis
of a constitution also endorsed by the overwhelming
majority, was overthrown in a military coup. He had
antagonised the US by condemning the "slaughter of
innocents" in the bombardment of Afghanistan; he had
rallied OPEC to push up the price of oil and in that
connection had visited other OPEC countries, including
Iraq, Iran and Libya; and he had expressed open
admiration for Fidel Castro. He had also regularly
castigated what he called the "savage neo-liberalism"
of the Washington controlled World Bank and IMF.

On Saturday morning South American presidents meeting
in Costa Rica condemned the coup and reaffirmed their
commitment to the Democratic Charter. As they met, the
White House spokesman, Ari Fleischer, uttered not a
word of condemnation of the coup and claimed Chavez
had provoked the crisis. Fleischer observed, with
implicit approval, "a transitional civilian government
has been installed".

Later on Saturday at a meeting of OAS ambassadors, the
US ambassador to the OAS, Roger Noriega, chastised his
fellow ambassadors for being more concerned about the
coup than they were about Chavez's allegedly
anti-democratic behaviour in the immediate prelude to
the coup (according to a report in the Washington
Post).

Following the restoration of Chavez to office on
Sunday, the US administration sought to recover lost
ground. "We'll be guided by the Inter-American
Democratic Charter," said a State Department
spokesman, Philip Reeker. There had not been a word
about the charter from Friday morning, until the coup
was found to have failed on Sunday.

With a little luck we will know much more about what
was behind the coup in a few months after Chavez has
conducted an inquiry and the perpetrators of the coup
have been put on trial. And it is likely that the Bush
administration will suffer even more embarrassment.

Yesterday the New York Times reported that senior
members of the administration had met several times in
recent months with those who led the coup. There were
conflicting accounts of what the administration
officials said. One version claimed that the
Venezuelans were told they would have to abide by
constitutional processes. Another said the Venezuelans
were given informal signals to proceed (with the
coup).

Given the retrospective endorsement there was for the
coup, isn't it unlikely there was not prospective
endorsement as well? All the more so when you remember
the impertinence of the American ambassador in Caracas
telling the President to "shut his mouth" on the
bombing of Afghanistan and the menace of Colin Powell
towards Chavez when he (Powell) recently gave evidence
to a congressional committee.

Such spectacular hypocrisy at the heart of American
foreign policy hardly comes as a surprise to those of
us who have been critics of American foreign policy.
What perhaps is a surprise is the response of that
former bastion of American liberalism, the New York
Times. On Saturday morning an editorial on the
Venezuelan coup opened with the sentence: "With
yesterday's resignation of President Hugo Chavez,
Venezuelan democracy is no longer threatened by a
would-be dictator". An extraordinary inversion of the
reality, which was that a democratically elected
President had been overthrown by an actual dictator.

We understand the trauma of September 11th, especially
for New Yorkers. But to have derailed judgment and
common sense so profoundly? Even within the cerebral
ivory towers of the New York Times leader-writers?
Hardly surprising then that the slaughter of innocents
in Afghanistan went largely unnoticed and certainly
uncriticised in the New York Times. That the
barbarisms of Israel inflicted on the Palestinians are
barely chastised. Mohammed Atta and his associates did
more than destroy the Twin Towers and kill 3,000
innocents on September 11th; they subverted the
liberal compassionate conscience of the US.

They did a little more as well. They cowed most of the
rest of the world into subservience and/or silence.
What did the European Union do in response to the coup
in Venezuela? It sat on its hands.

I was in Caracas two weeks ago and observed the
discrepancies between wealth and poverty on a scale I
had not seen before, not even in South Africa or
Dublin. Chavez has attempted to do something about
this in the teeth of opposition from the powerful
elite, who are supported by Washington, and the media,
which are controlled by the elite and virulently
hostile. He has won this round, but they will try
again and, next time, Washington will be better
prepared. And that's the way it is in the New World
Order.



 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/

---------------------------
ANTI-NATO INFORMATION LIST

==^================================================================
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84x2u.a9617B
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================

Reply via email to