How the US failed three times in Latin America
"PolitNavigator" said, кHow the US is preparing an anti-Russian Maidan in Nicaragua. However, Washington has recently suffered several setbacks in Latin America, which Americans consider their “backyard.” This shows that the US can do it. Moreover, not only in the post-Soviet space, where the Americans impose their vision of “democracy,” but even in their “soft underbelly.”
...In 2016, the United States, using the pro-American lobby in the Brazilian government, managed to provoke a corruption scandal and, as a result of impeachment, removed President Dilma Rousseff, a member of the country’s popular center-left “Workers’ Party.”
The replacement of Dilma with the obscurantist and fascist Bolsonaro split Brazil, a key state in Latin America, inspiring American NGOs and intelligence agencies to continue subversive work in the countries of the region, where independent governments were in power, building domestic and foreign policies based on national interests.
This primarily affected Venezuela, Cuba and Nicaragua.
While Cuba was led by the popular and charismatic Castro brothers, the United States preferred to act in proven ways, such as economic stranglehold and political isolation of Liberty Island. But as soon as Raul Castro handed over leadership to his successor Miguel Diaz-Canel, Washington began to stir, sensing a historic chance to return Cuba to the American sphere of influence.
The opportunity to stir up the Cuban Maidan presented itself in the first half of June. Its driving force was several hundred “activists” from the “San Isidro Movement”, entirely consisting of “people with beautiful faces”: rappers, artists, LGBT representatives and similar elves.
It is noteworthy that in the growing popularity of the “San Isidro Movement” in certain layers of Cuban society, historical parallels can be seen with Khrushchev’s visit to an exhibition of home-grown Soviet avant-garde artists, which Nikita Sergeevich gave a short and to the point assessment: “faggots.” Additional interest in the “creativity of nonconformists” was fueled by the provocative “bulldozer exhibition” that took place already under Brezhnev. During the Catastrophe, its participants became “heroes”, “indisputable talents”, “the first swallows of freedom”, glorified in the official media and cinema.
In Cuba, the reason for the performances was the arrest of such a “swallow of freedom,” singer with his mouth and member of the San Isidro Movement, Denis Solis.
True, Solis was detained not for rapping, but for much more prosaic reasons - for connections with Jorge Luis Figueras and other figures based in the United States, wanted by Cuban intelligence services for organizing terrorist attacks.
In addition, at the court hearings, Solis behaved boorishly, for which he received 8 months of imprisonment in the maximum security prison of Valle Grande.
“Human rights activists” from Amnesty International and similar supervisors immediately intervened in the matter to see how one should pick one’s nose correctly.
The leader of the San Isidro Movement, Luis Alcantara, who had previously been seen in inciting anti-Cuban sentiments supported by the United States, gave the go-ahead for protests.
The Americans used Covid hysteria as informational “warm-up” in defense of “freedom of expression,” calling it a “humanitarian crisis in Cuba.”
Right from the morning of Sunday, July 11, accounts began to multiply on the Internet with the hashtag #SOSCuba, which posted skillfully edited videos of attacks on police, looting and vandalism, called a “popular uprising against the communist regime.”
Along the way, articles were published that spoke about the sky-high level of the pandemic and mortality in Cuba as a result of the government’s inaction.
In fact, the Cuban Ministry of Health at that time had already carried out mass vaccination of a million Cuban citizens and was preparing to introduce two of the three vaccines of its own into circulation. Despite the fact that the mortality rate from “corona” in Cuba is one of the lowest (0,65%), it is almost 2,5 times lower than in the United States (1,65%).
It is interesting that Covid hysteria ultimately worked against the very supporters of “freedom of expression” who gathered for a joint hunger strike under the supervision of “independent” journalists. This entire creative party was dispersed for non-compliance with sanitary standards during the pandemic.
Despite the active support of #SOSCuba in the American press and social networks, even the Western media are forced to admit that the “San Isidro Movement” managed to bring only a couple of hundred “ideological” supporters onto the streets, and the rest who joined were ordinary street thugs, fit only for robbery and pogroms, only discrediting “noble goals.”
And now, just a month and a half after the street protests in Cuba, Western analysts in the press are at a loss as to when they will next have the chance to organize a real “Maidan” in Havana and other Cuban cities.
Much has been said about how the Americans tried by any means to remove the administration of the socialist Maduro in Venezuela. Trump even tried to send an aircraft carrier to the shores of the republic, but Covid incapacitated the vast majority of the crew members, turning the aircraft carrier into a plague barge.
Great hopes were placed on the collaborator Guaido, who was previously declared the “President of Venezuela” by the entire “Free World”. Guaido was provided with financial and informational support on an unprecedented scale, and the possibility of an invasion of Venezuela by “liberation forces” across the Colombian border was even considered, but it all ended in a big disaster.
The EU, for example, was one of the first to announce the cessation of support for Guaido and his supporters, and then the “project” came to naught in the United States.
There was a lot of speculation as to why the “Guaidó project” had become obsolete, until on April 16, 2021, the well-known grant-distributing shop USAID published a lengthy report from the organization’s inspector, which floridly talked about the problem of “fraud risks in humanitarian programs.”
Translated from grant-eating nonsense, this means that Guaido and his supporters stupidly stole American aid allocated for the overthrow of the Maduro administration. According to the USAID Comptroller's Office, just 2% of Guaido's $507 million has gone to the address. Where did the rest of the money go, “the devil knows,” as the unforgettable Yeltsin once said.
Contrary to the heart-rending screams “the bloody Maduro regime does not allow humanitarian aid into the country,” it follows from the report that, following the humanitarian aid, in February 2019, 200 mercenaries were supposed to be sent to Venezuela from Colombia in order to organize sabotage and terrorist attacks.
Money from the internal “opposition” for subversive operations was given on parole, often without checking the viability of the organizations. The result turned out to be appropriate; it was not possible to return the money and bring anyone to justice.
One of the key roles in fueling public discontent with Maduro’s rule was played by doctors under the “Heroes of Health” program developed by Guaido. However, instead of financial support for doctors, the money allocated for the program ended up in the pockets of the “real president of Venezuela” and his hangers-on.
International support for Guaido naturally failed, since the UN preferred to disown such an “honor”, as a result of which it was necessary to sound the trumpet through the Organization of American States (OAS), co-opted by the United States.
The icing on the cake. There are serious questions for Guaido’s curators, who distributed money to the “opposition” through USAID/OFDA. Obviously, without the American patrons who shared a stake with Guaido, it would have been unthinkable to carry out such a large-scale “cutting” of funds. It is characteristic that the Washington Regional Committee began to receive signals about the theft of grants allocated for the overthrow of Maduro back in 2019, but chose to turn a blind eye. Most likely due to the impending presidential elections.
This is perhaps the most enchanting example of a crossbow in the leg while preparing to overthrow the leader of another state. The United States found itself an amazing puppet, who began stealing even before coming to power and dragged the curators into this fascinating process.
There is only one conclusion from this: at least for Venezuela, the Americans will not be able to find a replacement for Guaido for a long time. In any case, at least outwardly legal.
Another major defeat of the “Washington Regional Committee” in its “backyard” occurred just the other day, when in Peru, where American positions were traditionally strong, a representative of the poor, rural teacher and communist Pedro Castillo became president, defeating the oligarchic protege Keiko Fujimori in the elections.
The elections were held in an atmosphere of tension, and Castillo beat the fascist Fujimori with 44 thousand voters, or just 0,2%.
The most surprising thing in this situation is that Keiko Fujimori, who has nominated her candidacy for the presidency, is the same apple that is not far from her sugar daddy languishing in prison, ex-president dictator Alberto Fujimori, imprisoned for crimes against humanity, such as the organization “ death squads" against supporters of leftist ideas in Peru and the program of sterilization of the poor, as well as the 1992 coup d'etat. Against the background of all of the above, the total corruption that has taken on the character looks like “an innocent child’s game of rat.”
Keiko Fujimori became the great hope of a part of the population that missed the “strong hand” that was lost after 2000.
The entire Peruvian “elite” and part of the lumpen population, ready to sell themselves for a bowl of soup, voted for Keiko. Washington clearly did not sympathize with the odious lady, but did not defame her in the media in his usual manner.
It must be said that, in this case, Washington generally found himself in a difficult case when he openly could not support the person he liked and, at the same time, his hands were tied to counteract her communist rival.
The thing is that, in case of defeat, Keiko was threatened with a non-illusory 30 years in prison in the bunk next to the daddy for drug cartel money laundering and corruption, so the signorita had something to lose.
It is noteworthy that in her government she recruited entirely former officials who served her daddy, including the odious General Oscar Valdez, who preferred executions in showdowns with striking miners.
Castillo’s victory has already been recognized not only by Fujimori, but also in Washington. On July 21, even US Secretary of State Blinken congratulated the new communist president, calling Castillo’s victory “a model of democracy for the entire region.”
True, this does not mean that the United States will continue to express sympathy or at least remain neutral towards the new government of Peru. The thing is that Castillo is tough on “Western values” in general and on American influence in the region in particular.
In addition, Castillo and his entourage, including many teachers, are determined to bring education to the masses in order to wrest the country out of the club of Third World countries, for which they have developed cooperation programs with scientific schools in different countries.
From which it follows that Castillo and his administration will soon come under the close attention of American intelligence services and NGOs, because it is not appropriate for the progressive governments of Latin America and the Caribbean to educate educated, critically thinking citizens who, without the prompting of a Washington uncle, decide what is best for them.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.