The Latest Confrontation Between the US Empire and Evo Morales and Hugo Chavez

by Stephen Lendman

I’ve said before it’s easy to know what the empire is
thinking (especially its powerful movers and shakers
sitting in corporate boardrooms) by reading the Wall
Street Journal daily as I do.  Despite its heavy
pro-empire bias, readers can also get some real news
and information - something nearly impossible
elsewhere in the corporate media especially from the
venerable New York Times I’ve before labeled the
closest thing we have in the US to an official
ministry of information and propaganda. 

I’ll return to that subject another time, but for now
I want to highlight the May 25 front page feature
article in the Journal titled “New President Has
Bolivia Marching to Chavez’s Beat.” The sub-title is
even worse - “Venezuelan Populist Pushes Anti-US Latin
Alliance; Has He Gone Too Far?” And below that and
still headlined - “Cuban Doctors in the House.”

I hope readers understand from that language what’s
quite clear to me: a virtual call to arms against Hugo
Chavez and Evo Morales, two leaders who likely more
than any others believe that since their people
elected them, they have an obligation to serve them
and not the interests of a belligerent and dominant
Northern neighbor.

What Evo Morales and Hugo Chavez Are Doing Jointly
That’s Roused the US Ire

The WSJ attack begins by its implied condemnation that
right after being elected Morales told foreign steel
companies they would have to renegotiate a proposed
deal to develop a huge iron ore deposit known as El
Mutun.  The Journal also complained that the Bolivian
government invited Venezuelan experts to help them in
the bargaining, which, of course, was logical and
sensible if such help was available.  The outcome of
the negotiation was that Bolivia demanded a new
agreement that was much fairer to the Bolivian people
than the one-sided one the previous government
accepted.  The foreign steel producers weren’t too
pleased, and neither was the Journal.

The WSJ was just getting warmed up as it then
complained both nations joined with Cuba in a Free
Trade Agreement of the People (much like Venezuela’s
ALBA) which is much different from the one-sided ones
the US demands with it getting all and developing
nations giving everything, “take it or leave it.”
Under the agreement, Venezuela pledged to supply
Bolivia with 200,000 barrels of crude and refined
products a month at below-market prices and in return
buy 200,000 tons of Bolivian soybeans a year as well
as quantities of chestnuts and almonds.  Chavez also
will provide 5,000 scholarships and 100 advanced
internships for Bolivians to study in Venezuela.  And
while other foreign energy companies are freezing
their Bolivian investments, the Venezuelan state-owned
energy company PdVSA is investing in a number of
Bolivian projects including a new gas separation plant
and jointly owned filling stations with the
Argentinian oil company YSFB.  Venezuela is also
taking a leading role in the development of Bolivia’s
El Mutun iron ore deposits further strengthening the
ties between the two nations.

My point in listing the above arrangements is that all
nations should be working cooperatively with each
other doing these same sorts of things to maintain
their independence and benefit their people.  The
Journal, however, is indignant about them - meaning,
of course, that Bolivia is taking its lead from
Venezuela and daring to go around the dominant US “our
way or the highway” kind of agreements that steal from
poor nations to make powerful US corporations richer
and more powerful.  But the Journal just kept pouring
it on expressing its ire (by implication) that
Venezuelan technocrats dare to help Bolivia set
policies on a range of issues from health care to land
reform to nationalizing the oil, natural gas and other
industries.  These plans are intended to help the
Bolivian people benefit fairly from their own natural
resources and for Cuban doctors and teachers to be
used in poor areas to set up clinics and schools and
give the people essential social services they never
had before.

Hugo Chavez will also loan Bolivia $100 million “to
implement (its) potentially explosive promise to
redistribute some 12.4 million acres of state-owned
property to indigenous groups” - a first step in a
broader program to put unproductive state and private
lands that don’t have clear title in the hands of the
people who need it and will use it to benefit them and
the nation.  The Journal calls this land reform plan
a “time bomb” that could lead to a “civil war,” -
incredibly hostile language.  They’re also upset that
Morales is purging his military of some of its
high-ranking officers, requiring every public official
to take an almost 50% pay cut, and stipulating that no
bureaucrat can earn more than his own salary of
$22,000 a year (compared to George Bush’s $400,000
while he spends half his time at his Texas “ranch”
raking in the bucks and not the hay). 

Evo Morales has accomplished all this in just four
months since he was inaugurated as Bolivia’s President
on January 24th of this year.  And while the US empire
and WSJ are upset and angry, the Bolivian people love
him and show it in the approval rating he’s earned
that now exceeds 80% or nearly threefold higher than
how George Bush currently scores.  No matter, the
Journal pours it on further.  It berates Chavez for
using his oil wealth to lead a “bloc of anti-American
countries in the region and beyond,” has lent hundreds
of millions of dollars to Argentina and Equador
(imagine the arrogance of going around the IMF and
World Bank that specialize in impoverishing developing
nations to enrich giant corporations) and supports
Iran’s right to enrich uranium and develop its
commercial nuclear industry as that country has every
legal right to do without outside interference. 

And now the clincher - I can barely contain myself.
Because of this alliance and what’s emerging from it,
the Journal claims Chavez and Morales “threaten to
undo years of political and economic ‘liberation’
(does it get more Orwellian than that) in South
America and is the latest in a series of
energy-security threats.”  I can only think of an
expressive Yiddish term that best explains my reaction
to that statement - what unmitigated “chutzpah.”  For
those who don’t know the term, it means an extreme
level of arrogance and insolence.

It’s quite unacceptable to the US empire that these
two leaders would dare act as all leaders should.  And
the Wall Street Journal feels the same way and says it
clearly or by none too subtle implication throughout
its lengthy feature article today.  The message from
it indicates there’s trouble ahead for Hugo Morales
and Evo Morales, and it’s coming from the USA.

What It All Means

I’ve written a lot in recent months about how the US
is stepping up its hostile rhetoric against Hugo
Chavez in preparation to launching its fourth attempt
to oust the Venezuelan leader after failing to do it
three previous times.  This morning’s Journal article
clearly indicates Evo Morales has been elevated to
likely co-equal status with President Chavez after
just four short months in office.  Of course, Fidel
Castro has been on the US’s hit list for over 45 years
and is probably more in jeopardy now than he’s been
for some time.  The US simply won’t allow any nation
to function outside its orbit of influence, especially
those rich in natural resources like Venezuela,
Bolivia and Iran.  Iran in particular has been the
target of the most extreme US venom for no other
reason than it’s oil rich like Iraq and Venezuela and
its leadership won’t sell out its sovereignty to a
hostile US demanding it. 

The Wall Street Journal provides empire watchers a
useful service - a window through which to view likely
US intentions and to be able to do it on a daily
basis.  Today’s article is one such view and an
important one.  It steps up the hostile rhetoric one
more notch and provides one more clear sign that these
two nations must brace for what seems certain US
action against them to remove their leaders and
replace them with ones again subservient to US wishes.
Hugo Chavez and Evo Morales do anything but that and
as such represent the greatest threat above all others
to US continued dominance in the region - a good
example that left unchecked may grow and spread and
help erode the US’s unchallengeable position it’s held
up to now. 

Hugo Chavez and Evo Morales want no part of it, and
the US won’t tolerate that attitude.  Clearly a
confrontation is ahead on what timetable and by what
means we won’t know until it unfolds.  But it surely
will, and commentators on this web site and other
progressive ones will be monitoring all the signs and
events and reporting them as they unfold.  Stay tuned.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  Also visit his blog
site at sjlendman.blogspot.com