Culture and Life

by Rob Gowland

This just in

The US market is flooded with drugs just now. The price of heroin and 
cocaine has plummeted as suppliers have become "overstocked".

This collapse in the price of drugs is a serious setback for the US 
Government's clandestine operations. Agencies like the CIA rely on drug 
trafficking and the laundering of drug money to finance the more unsavoury 
of their covert activities, as well as providing funding for their anti-
union underworld allies, for illicit speculative ventures in shares and 
currency, and for political campaigns.

Help is at hand, however. US client Bolivia is aggressively destroying the 
coca plantations of its impoverished peasants, the Bolivian army 
"persuading" them to switch to growing alternative, legal crops.

Bolivia's current President is General Hugo Banzer Suares, a graduate of 
the US army's infamous School of the Americas (SOA, popularly known as the 
"School of Assassins") at Fort Benning, Georgia.

General Suares was formerly dictator of Bolivia in the 1970s, at the time 
CIA stooge Pinochet was bloodily suppressing democracy in Chile.

Together with other right-wing South American regimes, the two dictators 
joined in setting up Operation Condor, the deadly intelligence operation 
that set out to hunt down and eliminate all South American progressives 
including social reformers, unionists, religious leaders, communists, 
socialists and all who defended the rights of the poor.

Today Suares poses as a champion of democratic rights and a fierce opponent 
of the drug trade. In reality, he is another "deputy" for the US sheriff.

The main source of "coke" from South America coming to the US is Bolivia's 
neighbour Colombia. The toiling masses of Colombia have been waging a 
guerrilla war against the pro-US puppet government and its massive US-
backed military for many years. Now at last they are within sight of 
victory.

A very worried US Government is pouring arms and money into Colombia, on 
the pretext of waging the "war on drugs".

The guerrillas are designated as "drug dealers" or "in league with drug 
dealers", the US forces are not US military but "Drug Enforcement Agency" 
forces. And the moon is made of green cheese.

Fears are mounting that the already heavy US presence in Colombia will 
become a full-scale intervention, even a possible new Vietnam-type war.

All eyes are on the major US newspapers and CNN for the tell-tale planted 
"incident" that could provide the trigger for this intervention.

So there was considerable interest in an Associated Press report on 
November 4 headed "Guerrillas spotted in Bolivia, official says". Bylined 
by George Gedda, the story was an obvious plant.

Even the opening sentence containing the crux of the story — "Bolivian 
authorities have learned of the presence of three Colombian guerrillas in 
their country" — contained a caveat to save AP's reputation if the plant 
got exposed: "but it is not clear whether they are engaging in subversive 
activities".

Given the breadth of the US definition of "subversive activities", 
especially by left-wing guerrillas, what else could they be doing? 
R&R? Fishing?

The next sentence added some unsubstantiated "backing" for the report: 
"There have been repeated reports in recent months of border crossings by 
Colombian rebels into Venezuela, Panama and Ecuador." Suddenly we have a 
pattern — who needs substantiation?

The next sentence (still only the third in the story) takes the cake, 
however: "These incidents are of concern to some US lawmakers [naming no 
names, of course] who believe the administration should move more 
aggressively to help the Colombian Government reach a peace settlement with 
the rebels."

Come again? These Colombian guerrillas are supposedly violating the borders 
of at least four of their neighbours, presumably preparing to "destabilise" 
those countries, and the US, bastion of "kick-butt" foreign policy, is 
going to "move aggressively" to reach a peace settlement with them? 
Pull the other one.

Not content with this kite-flying, the story goes on to float two 
possible scenarios, both designed to solicit US military intervention in 
the region.

Quoting Bolivia's Minister of Government Walter Guiteras, who curiously 
waited until he was in Washington for the hemispheric drug summit to reveal 
the presence of the three Colombians.

The story raised the possibility that the Colombians were "seeking to block 
Bolivia's ambitious campaign to eradicate coca production" without 
explaining why. If, as the US claims the Colombian guerrillas are engaged 
in drug production and trafficking, they would want a competitor to 
maintain production.

Unless the implication is that the Colombian guerrillas also control 
Bolivia's drug trade! But, in case that line wasn't swallowed, the story 
had an alternative one: "He [Guiteras] also suggested the Colombians may be 
trying to recruit Bolivians for guerrilla training in Colombia as part of 
an effort to depose Bolivia's elected government."

Just to make sure we got the message, the next paragraph reminded us that 
Che Guevara once tried to foment revolution in Bolivia.

The rest of the story consisted of statistics about how many hectares of 
coca leaf have been eradicated this year (13,530).

Then it quoted Bolivia's Vice President Jorge Quiroga who demanded more 
money from the US, saying the current US aid figure of $50 million must be 
doubled over the next two years for "Bolivia to be able to meet its goals". 
And for the Bolivian leadership to put some serious money into their Swiss 
bank accounts, most likely.

The story ends with a quote — his usual flannel — from retired US General 
Barry McCaffrey, Clinton's adviser on the "war on drugs".

McCaffrey, whose one-eyed championing of a military solution to the problem 
of drugs has lost him all credibility with social and health activists, was 
all praise for the Bolivian actions. As of course he would be.

The AP story was not, in itself, the trigger for increased US intervention 
in South and Central America. But it is clearly part of a process of 
softening up public opinion to accept the necessity of such US action.

Stopping drugs is not US policy. The US championed the cause of the KLA in 
Kosovo, despite their involvement in the drug trade being well documented.

With the CIA allegedly now controlling 80 percent of the global drug trade, 
the US is able to use drug trafficking or the threat of drug 
trafficking as it pleases to further its real aim of global economic 
domination.

Watch for further interesting "news reports" from Colombia and Bolivia, and 
their neighbours, in the months to come.