FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Bush Versus Chavez

by JAMES PETRAS

President Bush’s visit to Uruguay, Brazil, Colombia, Peru and Mexico reflects the ‘two tracks’ of US empire-building–military intervention and political-diplomatic instruments.

Bush’s visit to Latin America at this time is an attempt to gain support from client electoral rulers at a time when he has lost the support of over 75% of US public opinion, and is rejected by overwhelming majorities in Europe, the Middle East, Asia and Africa. Bush’s advisers and principal propagandists are counting on publicizing the friendly receptions by Lula, Vazquez, Uribe, Garcia and Calderon to counter the reality and public image of Bush as a mass murderer of the Iraqi and Afghani people.

Bush’s escalation of the war against Iraq and threat to bomb Iran has further marked his regime as the deadly enemy of humanity. When electoral politicians like Tabare Vazquez and Lula Da Silva embrace Bush, they provide a decorative mask to an imperial monster who has been exposed as the principal enemy of Latin America’s foremost anti-imperialist President Hugo Chavez.

Bush’s turn to a diplomatic approach toward consolidating imperial power in Latin America is the result of the failures and defeats of his military policies. The US attempt to conquer Iraq and Afghanistan by military force has failed: the resistance is stronger than ever.

The US invasion of Haiti and the overthrow of the elected President Aristide has failed to defeat mass popular resistance. Washington”s control over Haiti depends on the mercenary armies and officials of its client rulers in Uruguay, Brazil, Chile, Argentina, Peru and Bolivia.

The Bush regime’s effort to overthrow President Chavez has suffered several major defeats. The mass urban uprising of April 2002 defeated the US backed coup. From December 2002 through January 2003 the Venezuelan workers and the Chavez government defeated the bosses’ lockout of the petroleum industry, which had been backed by US oil companies and Washington. The great majority of popular classes defeated the US-financed referendum to impeach Chavez in 2004.

With each failed effort, the prestige of Bush declined while Chavez gained the admiration of the vast majority of Latin America people. The ‘Chavez model’ of a generous social welfare state, a mixed economy based on a strong state sector, and direct democracy via neighborhood assemblies stood in stark contrast to the failed regressive and stagnant neo-liberal models in the rest of Latin America.

Moreover Chavez’ generous sale of oil at subsidized prices to the poor countries of the Caribbean, Central and South America undermined the appeal of rapacious US ‘free trade’ policies in the region. Venezuela’s extensive trade and investment agreements with Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Ecuador and Colombia attracted support from sectors of the ‘national bourgeoisie’ and weakened US efforts to isolate the Chavez government.

In the Great Contest between Chavez and Bush, between national-popular welfare initiatives and the reactionary regressive neo-liberal status quo, there is no question that Chavez is winning and the US is losing influence. Bush’s visit to Latin American is an effort to recoup declining imperial influence by consolidating ties with both the rightist client regimes (Garcia in Peru and Calderon in Mexico) and the pseudo ‘center-left’ neo-liberal regimes of Vazquez and Lula. The purpose is to integrate these client regimes into the US economic and diplomatic orbit and to construct an anti-Chavez coalition. Given that Bush has no popular support in Latin America, he will only meet with client rulers behind closed doors with heavy security protecting him. Parallel to Bush’s visit, President Chavez will visit Argentina where tens of thousands of people will attend a mass public meeting to welcome him. The Chavez-Bush visits reflect the profound polarization in Latin America, in which the vast majority of the people and a few governments stand with Chavez while corrupt and discredited ‘ex-leftists’ embrace the emperor. Washington’s clients, Vazquez, Lula, and Calderon will answer to their people who demonstrate in the streets that the governments who welcome Bush do no represent their opinions or interests. No government can claim to be ‘progressive’ which welcomes and signs military base and free trade agreements with the worst imperial President in US history.

The future of Uruguay and Brazil will not be determined by the ‘vende-patria’ agreements signed by the Presidents behind the closed doors of presidential palaces, but by the huge bellicose parliaments of the streets who demonstrate their repudiation of Bush and who affirm their anti-imperialist principles.

JAMES PETRAS, a former Professor of Sociology at Binghamton University, New York, owns a 50 year membership in the class struggle, is an adviser to the landless and jobless in brazil and argentina and is co-author of Globalization Unmasked (Zed). His new book with Henry Veltmeyer, Social Movements and the State: Brazil, Ecuador, Bolivia and Argentina, will be published in October 2005. He can be reached at: jpetras@binghamton.edu

 

 

More articles by:
Weekend Edition
February 16, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Jeffrey St. Clair
American Carnage
Paul Street
Michael Wolff, Class Rule, and the Madness of King Don
Andrew Levine
Had Hillary Won: What Now?
David Rosen
Donald Trump’s Pathetic Sex Life
Susan Roberts
Are Modern Cities Sustainable?
Joyce Nelson
Canada vs. Venezuela: Have the Koch Brothers Captured Canada’s Left?
Geoff Dutton
America Loves Islamic Terrorists (Abroad): ISIS as Proxy US Mercenaries
Mike Whitney
The Obnoxious Pence Shows Why Korea Must End US Occupation
Joseph Natoli
In the Post-Truth Classroom
John Eskow
One More Slaughter, One More Piece of Evidence: Racism is a Terminal Mental Disease
John W. Whitehead
War Spending Will Bankrupt America
Dave Lindorff
Trump’s Latest Insulting Proposal: Converting SNAP into a Canned Goods Distribution Program
Robert Fantina
Guns, Violence and the United States
Robert Hunziker
Global Warming Zaps Oxygen
John Laforge
$1.74 Trillion for H-bomb Profiteers and “Fake” Cleanups
CJ Hopkins
The War on Dissent: the Specter of Divisiveness
Peter A. Coclanis
Chipotle Bell
Anders Sandström – Joona-Hermanni Mäkinen
Ways Forward for the Left
Wilfred Burchett
Vietnam Will Win: Winning Hearts and Minds
Tommy Raskin
Syrian Quicksand
Martha Rosenberg
Big Pharma Still Tries to Push Dangerous Drug Class
Jill Richardson
The Attorney General Thinks Aspirin Helps Severe Pain – He’s Wrong
Mike Miller
Herb March: a Legend Deserved
Ann Garrison
If the Democrats Were Decent
Renee Parsons
The Times, They are a-Changing
Howard Gregory
The Democrats Must Campaign to End Trickle-Down Economics
Sean Keller
Agriculture and Autonomy in the Middle East
Ron Jacobs
Re-Visiting Gonzo
Eileen Appelbaum
Rapid Job Growth, More Education Fail to Translate into Higher Wages for Health Care Workers
Ralph Nader
Shernoff, Bidart, and Echeverria—Wide-Ranging Lawyers for the People
Chris Zinda
The Meaning of Virginia Park
Robert Koehler
War and Poverty: A Compromise with Hell
Mike Bader – Mike Garrity
Senator Tester Must Stop Playing Politics With Public Lands
Kenneth Culton
No Time for Olympic Inspired Nationalism
Graham Peebles
Ethiopia: Final Days of the Regime
Irene Tung – Teófilo Reyes
Tips are for Servers Not CEOs
Randy Shields
Yahoomans in Paradise – This is L.A. to Me
Thomas Knapp
No Huawei! US Spy Chiefs Reverse Course on Phone Spying
Mel Gurtov
Was There Really a Breakthrough in US-North Korea Relations?
David Swanson
Witness Out of Palestine
Binoy Kampmark
George Brandis, the Rule of Law and Populism
Dean Baker
The Washington Post’s Long-Running Attack on Unions
Andrew Stewart
Providence Public School Teachers Fight Back at City Hall
Stephen Cooper
Majestic Meditations with Jesse Royal: the Interview
David Yearsley
Olympic Music
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail