[Peace-discuss] Comment re. "South of the Border"

Thu Oct 7 22:45:50 CDT 2010

  I think it's a mistake to see this as an opposition.  For more that a century 
the goal of American foreign policy - representing the desires of dominant 
domestic social groups -  has been the control of the world economy.  "Manifest 
Destiny" didn't stop at the edge of the Pacific.  That's what caused the 
unpleasantness with Japan 70+ years ago.

As the only undamaged major country to emerge from WWII, the US could put its 
imperial desires into practice. Control of energy was both a goal and a tactic.

George Kennan was the head of the State Department policy planning staff in the 
late 1940s. In a secret document in February 1948 (PPS23), he outlined the basic 
thinking of US planners;

"We have about 50 percent of the world's wealth, but only 6.3 percent of its 
population.... In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and 
resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of 
relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity.... We 
need not deceive ourselves that we can afford today the luxury of altruism and 
world-benefaction.... We should cease to talk about vague and..., unreal 
objectives such as human rights, the raising of the living standards, and 
democratization. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in 
straight power concepts. The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, 
the better."

That was obviously the situation in regard to the invasion of Iraq:

"The real reason for the invasion, surely, is that Iraq has the second largest 
oil reserves in the world, very cheap to exploit, and lies right at the heart of 
the world's major hydrocarbon resources, what the State Department 60 years ago 
described as "a stupendous source of strategic power." The issue is not access, 
but rather control (and for the energy corporations, profit). Control over these 
resources gives the US "critical leverage" over industrial rivals, to borrow 
Zbigniew Brezinski's phrase, echoing George Kennan when he was a leading planner 
and recognized that such control would give the US "veto power" over others. 
Dick Cheney observed that control over energy resources provides "tools of 
intimidation or blackmail" -- when in the hands of others, that is. We are too 
pure and noble for those considerations to apply to us, so true believers 
declare -- or more accurately, just presuppose, taking the point to be too 
obvious to articulate."

On 10/7/10 10:17 PM, John W. wrote:
> Blum is correct.  Thanks for the perspective, Mort.
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 9:13 PM, Brussel Morton K. <mkbrussel at comcast.net 
> <mailto:mkbrussel at comcast.net>> wrote:
>
>     From Bill Blum:
>     http://killinghope.org/bblum6/aer86.html
>
>
>         The secret to understanding US foreign policy
>
>     In one of his regular "Reflections" essays, Fidel Castro recently
>     discussed United States hostility towards Venezuela. "What they really
>     want is Venezuela's oil," wrote the Cuban leader. ^9
>     <http://killinghope.org/bblum6/aer86.html#note-9> This is a commonly-held
>     viewpoint within the international left. The point is put forth, for
>     example, in Oliver Stone's recent film "South of the Border". I must,
>     however, take exception.
>
>     In the post-World War Two period, in Latin America alone, the US has had a
>     similar hostile policy toward progressive governments and movements in
>     Guatemala, Salvador, Nicaragua, Honduras, Grenada, Dominican Republic,
>     Chile, Brazil, Argentina, Cuba, and Bolivia. What these governments and
>     movements all had in common was that they were/are leftist; nothing to do
>     with oil. For more than half a century Washington has been trying to block
>     the rise of any government in Latin America that threatens to offer a
>     viable alternative to the capitalist model. Venezuela of course fits
>     perfectly into that scenario; oil or no oil.
>
>     This ideology was the essence of the Cold War all over the world.
>
>     The secret to understanding US foreign policy is that there is no secret.
>     Principally, one must come to the realization that the United States
>     strives to dominate the world. Once one understands that, much of the
>     apparent confusion, contradiction, and ambiguity surrounding Washington's
>     policies fades away. To express this striving for dominance numerically,
>     one can consider that since the end of World War Two the United States has:
>
>         * Endeavored to overthrow more than 50 foreign governments, most of
>           which were democratically-elected.
>         * Grossly interfered in democratic elections in at least 30 countries.
>         * Waged war/military action, either directly or in conjunction with a
>           proxy army, in some 30 countries.
>         * Attempted to assassinate more than 50 foreign leaders.
>         * Dropped bombs on the people of some 30 countries.
>         * Suppressed dozens of populist/nationalist movements in every corner
>           of the world. ^10 <http://killinghope.org/bblum6/aer86.html#note-10>
>
>     The United States institutional war machine has long been, and remains, on
>     automatic pilot.
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Peace-discuss mailing list
>     Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net <mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>     http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20101007/23a1ff49/attachment-0001.html>