[image: Grandin: 'Of the 190-odd countries on this planet, a staggering 54
participated in various ways in this American torture system.' (photo:
Jonathan McIntosh)]
Grandin: 'Of the 190-odd countries on this planet, a staggering 54
participated in various ways in this American torture system.' (photo:
Jonathan McIntosh)

[image: go to original
article]<http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175650/tomgram%3A_greg_grandin%2C_why_latin_america_didn%27t_join_washington%27s_counterterrorism_posse/>

The Latin American Exception

By Greg Grandin, TomDispatch

18 February 13



*How a Washington global torture gulag was turned into the only gulag-free
zone on earth.*


he map 
tells<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/02/05/a-staggering-map-of-the-54-countries-that-reportedly-participated-in-the-cias-rendition-program/>
the
story. To illustrate a damning new report, "Globalizing Torture: CIA Secret
Detentions and Extraordinary Rendition," recently published by the Open
Society Institute, the Washington Post put together an equally damning
graphic: it's soaked in red, as if with blood, showing that in the years
after 9/11, the CIA turned just about the whole world into a gulag
archipelago.

Back in the early twentieth century, a similar red-hued map was used to
indicate the global reach of the British Empire, on which, it was said, the
sun never set. It seems that, between 9/11 and the day George W. Bush left
the White House, CIA-brokered torture never saw a sunset either.

All told, of the 190-odd countries on this planet, a staggering 54
participated in various ways in this American torture system, hosting
CIA "black
site <http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/08/13/070813fa_fact_mayer>"
prisons, allowing their airspace and airports to be used for secret
flights, providing intelligence, kidnapping foreign nationals or their own
citizens and handing them over to U.S. agents to be
"rendered"<http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/7789/tom_engelhardt_dolce-vita>
to
third-party countries like Egypt and Syria. The hallmark of this network,
Open Society writes, has been torture. Its report documents the names of
136 individuals swept up in what it says is an ongoing operation, though
its authors make clear that the total number, implicitly far higher, "will
remain unknown" because of the "extraordinary level of government secrecy
associated with secret detention and extraordinary rendition."

No region escapes the stain. Not North America, home to the global gulag's
command center. Not Europe, the Middle East, Africa, or Asia. Not even
social-democratic Scandinavia. Sweden turned over at least two people to
the CIA, who were then rendered to Egypt, where they were subject to
electric shocks, among other abuses. No region, that is, except Latin
America.

What's most striking about the Post's map is that no part of its wine-dark
horror touches Latin America; that is, not one country in what used to be
called Washington's "backyard" participated in rendition or
Washington-directed or supported torture and abuse of "terror suspects."
Not even Colombia, which throughout the last two decades was as close to a
U.S.-client state as existed in the area. It's true that a fleck of red
should show up on Cuba, but that would only underscore the point: Teddy
Roosevelt took Guantánamo Bay Naval Base for the U.S. in 1903 "in
perpetuity."

*Two, Three, Many CIAs*

How did Latin America come to be territorio libre in this new dystopian
world of black sites and midnight flights, the Zion of this militarist
matrix (as fans of the Wachowskis' movies might put it)? After all, it was
in Latin America that an earlier generation of U.S. and U.S.-backed
counterinsurgents put into place a prototype of Washington's twenty-first
century Global War on Terror.

Even before the 1959 Cuban Revolution, before Che Guevara urged
revolutionaries to create "two, three, many Vietnams," Washington had
already set about establishing two, three, many centralized intelligence
agencies in Latin America. As Michael McClintock shows in his indispensable
book Instruments of Statecraft, in late 1954, a few months after the CIA's
infamous coup in Guatemala that overthrew a democratically elected
government, the National Security Council first recommended strengthening
"the internal security forces of friendly foreign countries."

In the region, this meant three things. First, CIA agents and other U.S.
officials set to work "professionalizing" the security forces of individual
countries like Guatemala, Colombia, and Uruguay; that is, turning brutal
but often clumsy and corrupt local intelligence apparatuses into efficient,
"centralized," still brutal agencies, capable of gathering information,
analyzing it, and storing it. Most importantly, they were to coordinate
different branches of each country's security forces - the police,
military, and paramilitary squads - to act on that information, often
lethally and always ruthlessly.

Second, the U.S. greatly expanded the writ of these far more efficient and
effective agencies, making it clear that their portfolio included not just
national defense but international offense. They were to be the vanguard of
a global war for "freedom" and of an anticommunist reign of terror in the
hemisphere. Third, our men in Montevideo, Santiago, Buenos Aires, Asunción,
La Paz, Lima, Quito, San Salvador, Guatemala City, and Managua were to help
synchronize the workings of individual national security forces.

The result was state terror on a nearly continent-wide scale. In the 1970s
and 1980s, Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet's Operation
Condor<http://books.google.com/books?id=EfKjP7zyGYcC&pg=PA207&lpg=PA207&dq=%22Bernardo+Leighton%22+rome+1975&source=bl&ots=2DGuICF7-f&sig=PsFct0HkHvwm0AmCReXfXISkLQs&hl=en&sa=X&ei=NuMUUb6TBbC70QHW_4H4DQ&ved=0CEoQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=%22Bernardo%20Leighton%22%20rome%201975&f=false>,
which linked together the intelligence services of Argentina, Brazil,
Uruguay, Paraguay, and Chile, was the most infamous of Latin America's
transnational terror consortiums, reaching out to commit mayhem as far away
as Washington D.C. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_Letelier>,
Paris<http://books.google.com/books?id=G497QpeEqpwC&pg=PA127&dq=%22operation+condor%22+paris+france&hl=en&sa=X&ei=BykYUbzDL6KA0AGw5IBQ&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22operation%20condor%22%20paris%20france&f=false>,
and 
Rome<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_Letelier%20Washington%20D.C.,%20Paris,%20and%20http://books.google.com/books?id=G497QpeEqpwC&pg=PA127&dq=%22operation+condor%22+paris+france&hl=en&sa=X&ei=BykYUbzDL6KA0AGw5IBQ&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=rome&f=false>.
The U.S. had earlierhelped put in
place<http://shr.aaas.org/guatemala/ceh/mds/spanish/cap2/vol1/intel.html>
similar
operations elsewhere in the Southern hemisphere, especially in Central
America in the 1960s.

By the time the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, hundreds of thousands of
Latin Americans had been tortured, killed, disappeared, or imprisoned
without trial, thanks in significant part to U.S. organizational skills and
support. Latin America was, by then, Washington's backyard gulag. Three of
the region's current presidents - Uruguay's José Mujica, Brazil's Dilma
Rousseff, and Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega - were victims of this reign of
terror.

When the Cold War ended, human rights groups began the herculean task of
dismantling the deeply embedded, continent-wide network of intelligence
operatives, secret prisons, and torture techniques - and of pushing
militaries throughout the region out of governments and back into their
barracks. In the 1990s, Washington not only didn't stand in the way of this
process, but actually lent a hand in depoliticizing Latin America's armed
forces. Many believed that, with the Soviet Union dispatched, Washington
could now project its power in its own "backyard" through softer means like
international trade agreements and other forms of economic leverage. Then
9/11 happened.

*"Oh My Goodness"*

In late November 2002, just as the basic outlines of the CIA's secret
detention and extraordinary
rendition<http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175582/tomgram%3A_alfred_mccoy,_perfecting_illegality/>
programs
were coming into shape elsewhere in the world, Secretary of Defense Donald
Rumsfeld flew 5,000 miles to Santiago, Chile, to attend a hemispheric
meeting of defense ministers. "Needless to say," Rumsfeld nonetheless said,
"I would not be going all this distance if I did not think this was
extremely important." Indeed.

This was after the invasion of Afghanistan but before the invasion of Iraq
and Rumsfeld was riding high, as well as dropping the phrase "September
11th" every chance he got. Maybe he didn't know of the special significance
that date had in Latin America, but 29 years earlier on the first 9/11, a
CIA-backed coup by General Pinochet and his military led to the death of
Chile's democratically elected president Salvador Allende. Or did he, in
fact, know just what it meant and was that the point? After all, a new
global fight for freedom, a proclaimed Global War on Terror, was underway
and Rumsfeld had arrived to round up recruits.

There, in Santiago, the city out of which Pinochet had run Operation
Condor, Rumsfeld and other Pentagon officials tried to sell what they were now
terming <http://www.defense.gov/News/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=42482> the
"integration" of "various specialized capabilities into larger regional
capabilities" - an insipid way of describing the kidnapping, torturing, and
death-dealing already underway elsewhere. "Events around the world before
and after September 11th suggest the advantages," Rumsfeld said, of nations
working together to confront the terror threat.

"Oh my goodness," Rumsfeld
told<http://dir.groups.yahoo.com/group/950_The_Panama_Connection/message/1729>
a
Chilean reporter, "the kinds of threats we face are global." Latin America
was at peace, he admitted, but he had a warning for its leaders: they
shouldn't lull themselves into believing that the continent was safe from
the clouds gathering elsewhere. Dangers
exist<http://www.defense.gov/speeches/speech.aspx?speechid=308>,
"old threats, such as drugs, organized crime, illegal arms trafficking,
hostage taking, piracy, and money laundering; new threats, such as
cyber-crime; and unknown threats, which can emerge without warning."

"These new threats," he added ominously, "must be countered with new
capabilities." Thanks to the Open Society report, we can see exactly what
Rumsfeld meant by those "new capabilities."

A few weeks prior to Rumsfeld's arrival in Santiago, for example, the U.S.,
acting on false information supplied by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police,
detained Maher Arar, who holds dual Syrian and Canadian citizenship, at New
York's John F. Kennedy airport and then handed him over to a "Special
Removal Unit." He was flown first to Jordan, where he was beaten, and then
to Syria, a country in a time zone five hours ahead of Chile, where he was
turned over to local torturers. On November 18th, when Rumsfeld was giving
his noon speech in Santiago, it was five in the afternoon in Arar's
"grave-like" cell in a Syrian prison, where he would spend the next year
being abused.

Ghairat Baheer was captured in Pakistan about three weeks before Rumsfeld's
Chile trip, and thrown into a CIA-run prison in Afghanistan called the Salt
Pit. As the secretary of defense praised Latin America's return to the rule
of law after the dark days of the Cold War, Baheer may well have been in
the middle of one of his torture sessions, "hung naked for hours on end."

Taken a month before Rumsfeld's visit to Santiago, the Saudi national Abd
al Rahim al Nashiri was transported to the Salt Pit, after which he was
transferred "to another black site in Bangkok, Thailand, where he was
waterboarded." After that, he was passed on to Poland, Morocco, Guantánamo,
Romania, and back to Guantánamo, where he remains. Along the way, he was
subjected to a "mock execution with a power drill as he stood naked and
hooded," had U.S. interrogators rack a "semi-automatic handgun close to his
head as he sat shackled before them." His interrogators also "threatened to
bring in his mother and sexually abuse her in front of him."

Likewise a month before the Santiago meeting, the Yemini Bashi Nasir Ali Al
Marwalah was flown to Camp X-Ray in Cuba, where he remains to this day.

Less than two weeks after Rumsfeld swore that the U.S. and Latin America
shared "common values," Mullah Habibullah, an Afghan national, died "after
severe mistreatment" in CIA custody at something called the "Bagram
Collection Point." A U.S. military investigation "concluded that the use of
stress positions and sleep deprivation combined with other mistreatment...
caused, or were direct contributing factors in, his death."

Two days after the secretary's Santiago speech, a CIA case officer in the
Salt Pit had Gul Rahma stripped naked and chained to a concrete floor
without blankets. Rahma froze to death.

And so the Open Society report goes... on and on and on.

*Territorio Libre*

Rumsfeld left Santiago without firm commitments. Some of the region's
militaries were tempted by the supposed opportunities offered by the
secretary's vision of fusing crime fighting into an ideological campaign
against radical Islam, a unified war in which all was to be subordinated to
U.S. command. As political scientist Brian Loveman has noted, around the
time of Rumsfeld's Santiago visit, the head of the Argentine army picked up
Washington's latest set of themes, insisting that "defense must be treated
as an integral matter," without a false divide separating internal and
external security.

But history was not on Rumsfeld's side. His trip to Santiago coincided with
Argentina's epic financial meltdown, among the worst in recorded history.
It signaled a broader collapse of the economic model - think of it as
Reaganism on steroids - that Washington had been promoting in Latin America
since the late Cold War years. Soon, a new generation of leftists would be
in power across much of the continent, committed to the idea of national
sovereignty and limiting Washington's influence in the region in a way that
their predecessors hadn't been.

Hugo Chávez was already president of Venezuela. Just a month before
Rumsfeld's Santiago trip, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva won the presidency of
Brazil. A few months later, in early 2003, Argentines elected Néstor
Kirchner, who shortly thereafter ended his country's joint military
exercises with the U.S. In the years that followed, the U.S. experienced
one setback after another. In 2008, for instance, Ecuador evicted the U.S.
military from Manta Air Base.

In that same period, the Bush administration's rush to invade Iraq, an act
most Latin American countries opposed, helped squander whatever was left of
the post-9/11 goodwill the U.S. had in the region. Iraq seemed to confirm
the worst suspicions of the continent's new leaders: that what Rumsfeld was
trying to peddle as an international "peacekeeping" force would be little
more than a bid to use Latin American soldiers as Gurkhas in a revived
unilateral imperial war.

*Brazil's "Smokescreen"*

Diplomatic cables released by Wikileaks show the degree to which Brazil
rebuffed efforts to paint the region red on Washington's new global gulag
map.

A May 2005 U.S. State Department
cable<https://github.com/alx/cablegate/blob/master/classification/CONFIDENTIAL/05BRASILIA1396.txt>,
for instance, reveals that Lula's government refused "multiple requests" by
Washington to take in released Guantánamo prisoners, particularly a group
of about 15 Uighurs the U.S. had been holding since 2002, who could not be
sent back to China.

"[Brazil's] position regarding this issue has not changed since 2003 and
will likely not change in the foreseeable future," the cable said. It went
on to report that Lula's government considered the whole system Washington
had set up at Guantánamo (and around the world) to be a mockery of
international law. "All attempts to discuss this issue" with Brazilian
officials, the cable concluded, "were flatly refused or accepted
begrudgingly."

In addition, Brazil refused to cooperate with the Bush administration's
efforts to create a Western Hemisphere-wide version of the Patriot
Act<http://www.aclu.org/free-speech-national-security-technology-and-liberty/reform-patriot-act-myths-realities>.
It stonewalled, for example, about agreeing to
revise<http://cablesearch.org/cable/view.php?id=08BRASILIA504> its
legal code in a way that would lower the standard of evidence needed to
prove conspiracy, while widening the definition of what criminal conspiracy
entailed.

Lula stalled for years on the initiative, but it seems that the State
Department didn't realize he was doing so until April 2008, when one of its
diplomats wrote a memo calling Brazil's supposed interest in reforming its
legal code to suit Washington a "smokescreen." The Brazilian government,
another Wikileaked cable
complained<http://www.cablegatesearch.net/cable.php?id=09BRASILIA1206>,
was afraid that a more expansive definition of terrorism would be used to
target "members of what they consider to be legitimate social movements
fighting for a more just society." Apparently, there was no way to "write
an anti-terrorism legislation that excludes the actions" of Lula's
left-wing social base.

One U.S. diplomat
complained<http://www.cablegatesearch.net/cable.php?id=09BRASILIA1206>
that
this "mindset" - that is, a mindset that actually valued civil liberties -
"presents serious challenges to our efforts to enhance counterterrorism
cooperation or promote passage of anti-terrorism legislation." In addition,
the Brazilian government worried that the legislation would be used to go
after Arab-Brazilians, of which there are many. One can imagine that if
Brazil and the rest of Latin America had signed up to participate in
Washington's rendition program, Open Society would have a lot more Middle
Eastern-sounding names to add to its list.

Finally, cable after Wikileaked cable revealed that Brazil repeatedly
brushed off efforts by Washington to isolate Venezuela's Hugo Chávez, which
would have been a necessary step if the U.S. was going to marshal South
America into its counterterrorism posse.

In February 2008, for example, U.S. ambassador to Brazil Clifford Sobell
met with Lula's Minister of Defense Nelson Jobin to complain about Chávez.
Jobim told <http://wikileaks.org/cable/2008/02/08BRASILIA236.html> Sobell
that Brazil shared his "concern about the possibility of Venezuela
exporting instability." But instead of "isolating Venezuela," which might
only "lead to further posturing," Jobim instead indicated that his
government "supports [the] creation of a 'South American Defense Council'
to bring Chavez into the mainstream."

There was only one catch here: that South American Defense Council was
Chávez's idea in the first place! It was part of his effort, in partnership
with Lula, to create independent institutions parallel to those controlled
by Washington. The memo concluded with the U.S. ambassador noting how
curious it was that Brazil would use Chavez's "idea for defense
cooperation" as part of a "supposed containment strategy" of Chávez.

*Monkey-Wrenching the Perfect Machine of Perpetual War*

Unable to put in place its post-9/11 counterterrorism framework in all of
Latin America, the Bush administration
retrenched<http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CC8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thenation.com%2Fblog%2F158492%2Fbuilding-perfect-machine-perpetual-war-mexico-colombia-security-corridor-advances&ei=VA0VUaLEEILC0QGqtIHAAQ&usg=AFQjCNGjkvFdV8KIBEvBKOKUTCuRAW3BIQ&bvm=bv.42080656,d.dmg>.
It attempted instead to build a "perfect machine of perpetual war" in a
corridor running from Colombia through Central America to Mexico. The
process of militarizing that more limited region, often under the guise of
fighting "the drug wars," has, if anything, escalated in the Obama years.
Central America has, in fact, become the only place Southcom - the Pentagon
command that covers Central and South America - can operate more or less at
will. A look at this other
map<https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&source=embed&msa=0&msid=200051002538340819949.000499e6cb90476b05f73&ll=3.776559,-83.496094&spn=45.09916,79.013672&z=4>,
put together by the Fellowship of Reconciliation, makes the region look
like one big landing strip for U.S. drones and drug-interdiction flights.

Washington does
continue<http://upsidedownworld.org/main/content/view/1884/68/%20one%20thing%20then%20http://www.diariolaprimeraperu.com/online/politica/centro-de-operaciones-e-inteligencia-usa-en-vrae_36734.html>
to
push and probe further south, trying yet again to establish a firmer
military foothold in the region and rope it into what is now a less
ideological and more technocratic crusade, but one still global in its
aspirations. U.S. military strategists, for instance, would very much like
to have 
<http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CE4QFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dtic.mil%2Fcgi-bin%2FGetTRDoc%3FAD%3DADA505390&ei=2JoVUZKrJbS40gHQq4Bg&usg=AFQjCNGwuq0Lpl1E1hWeeKDvJxNdJPvC_w&bvm=bv.42080656,d.dmQ>an
airstrip in French Guyana or the part of Brazil that bulges out into the
Atlantic. The Pentagon would use it as a stepping stone to its increasing
presence<http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175567/tomgram%3A_nick_turse,_america%27s_shadow_wars_in_africa_>
in
Africa, coordinating the work of Southcom with the newest global command,
Africom.

But for now, South America has thrown a monkey wrench into the machine.
Returning to that Washington Post map, it's worth memorializing the simple
fact that, in one part of the world, in this century at least, the sun
never rose on US-choreographed torture.
------------------------------

*Greg Grandin is a TomDispatch
regular<http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174873/greg_grandin_the_unholy_trinity>
and
the author of Fordlandia: The Rise and Fall of Henry Ford’s Lost
Jungle City<http://www.amazon.com/dp/0312429622/ref=nosim/?tag=tomdispatch-20>,
a finalist for a Pulitzer Prize. Later this year, his new book, Empire of
Necessity: Slavery, Freedom, and Deception in the New World, will be
published by Metropolitan Books.*


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to