This series on the blog started with an observation. The five permanent countries in the UN Security Council are perpetrators of genocide. What happens when the security of the world is place upon the shoulders of its 5 most genocidal countries ? We get the hypocritical posturing common to the pre-fight boxing weigh-ins. Of course the posturing is amplified to dangerous levels with many lives at stake.
I believe that what Russia is doing in Crimea is wrong especially given the history of what happened in the Ukraine. It creates a grim picture for the former countries once under Soviet control. But before I can denounce Russia’s actions I have to be honest. My own country has done the same which warrants deep meditation into the existence of sovereignty and freedom.
The nation is in a precarious predicament. Not only are most American unable to locate Crimea on a map, we lack a moral position on which to base our response to the invasion of Crimea. (Given our history of invasion). I have decided to paste from this article 3/5 US invasion mentioned into this post. As you read if you choose to, would you mind sharing your thoughts on the following questions:
- If the US started out as an oligarchy and continues to masquerade as one behind the guise of democracy, what keeps the government from spying on and using propaganda to sway public opinion ?
- If many Americans are disenfranchised from voting, who does our foreign policy benefit?
Iran in 1953: Installing the Shah
Agents from the CIA operated closely with British intelligence, seeking to install a new puppet shah in Iran. The two powers wanted access to Iran’s oil fields and were also concerned that the country might otherwise fall behind the Iron Curtain, signaling a major setback in the nascent Cold War. Two years before, the Iranian people had elected a president, and the Shah, a hereditary ruler, had fled the country. Moves to nationalize the country’s oil production threatened the supremacy of the Anglo-Persian oil company, later to become British Petroleum. Planning documents for the coup, declassified last year, state “No remedial action other than the covert action plan set forth below could be found to improve the existing state of affairs.” The documents reveal how in the months leading up to the coup British and American agents started placing articles in the American and Iranian media criticizing the new administration. They organized street protests, trained and equipped pro-Shah forces and helped convince the Iranian army to join with the revolution. The democratically elected leader was ousted, and the Shah returned to power. He would rule, with the backing of the West, until the Islamic revolution in 1979.
Chile in 1973: Richard Nixon getting his hands dirty
Documents declassified in 2003 reveal how the CIA played a key role in backing a bloody coup that left a president dead and thousands in prison. Unusually for secretive regime change campaigns, President Richard Nixon personally signed off $700,000 in funding toward the operation, as well as pouring millions through secretive channels to right-wing Chilean parties.
“It is firm and continuing policy that Salvador Allende [the leftist president of Chile] be overthrown by a coup,” a CIA analyst wrote in 1970. “It is imperative that these actions be implemented clandestinely and securely so that the USG [U.S. government] and American hand be well hidden.”
To convince the Chilean people that submitting themselves to a military dictatorship was a necessary evil, the CIA conducted a series of false flag operations — bombings across Chile designed to look like terror attacks. The CIA was also given orders to “make the economy scream” to “prevent Allende from coming to power or to unseat him.”
The 1973 coup marked the beginning of 17 years of U.S.-sponsored bloodshed in Chile. The regime went on to authorize the killings or disappearances of over 3,000 Chileans.
Grenada in 1983: “Doing a Putin”
The 1983 American invasion of Grenada bears more than a passing resemblance to Putin’s strategy against Ukraine. A tropical island with a population of 90,000, Grenada had recently won independence from the last vestiges of the British Empire. A leftist Grenadian president, who President Ronald Reagan didn’t much like, subsequently seized power in a military takeover of the island’s government.
A small number of American students on the island provided Washington with a convenient excuse to invade and topple the government. Just like in Crimea, those seeking to justify the presence of U.S. Marines on Grenadian soil claimed locals supported the invasion.
The American public loved the bold move. Criticisms from the United Kingdom, Canada and the United Nations were rarely aired by the American press, even when the UN called the invasion “a flagrant breach of international law.”