MAHAMA MOURNS HUGO CHAVEZ

Publised on March 7, 2013

President John Dramani Mahama has joined millions of people around the world to express shock and sadness at the death of Commandante Hugo Chavez, President of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.

President John Dramani Mahama

In a message personally signed by President Mahama, he described the death of Chavez as “painful”.

Comrade Chavez has ruled Venezuela for 14 years during which he successfully reduced poverty by as much 70 percent.

He was a strident advocate of Socialism and firmly opposed the hegemonic policies of the United States of America.

Comrade Chavez also promoted better relations between the peoples of Latin America, Asia and Africa.

The full text of President Mahama’s message to Nicolas Maduro, Acting President of Venezuela is published unedited below.

Excellency,

I have learnt, with shock and sadness, the death of the President of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, President Hugo Chavéz, in Caracas yesterday 5th March 2013.

On behalf of the Government and People of Ghana and on my own behalf, I
extend deep condolences to the Government and People of Venezuela, especially the bereaved family on this painful loss.

The late President Hugo Chavéz will be remembered for dedicating himself to building a new society in Venezuela through progressive social and economic changes that took millions of Venezuelans out of poverty.

Please accept the assurances of my highest consideration.

JOHN DRAMANI MAHAMA
PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF GHANA
H.E.

EDITORIAL

HUGO CHAVEZ, MAN OF THE PEOPLE

The death of Comrade Hugo Chavez is a huge loss to the people of Venezuela and the world.

This was a man who stood up to the United States of America and opposed its hegemonic designs on the rest of the World.

Chavez believed that no nation had the right to impose its will on another and that all people have a right to choose their own destiny.

 Another thing which set him apart from other leaders was his conviction the poverty is not a natural condition and that it can be fought and eradicated.

Within the 14 years that he presided over the affairs of Venezuela, he reduced poverty by as much as 70 per cent.

 Hugo Chavez was also a great friend of Africa. 

He saw himself as partly Indian and partly African and put in considerable effort to improve relations between Latin America, Africa and Asia.

The world has lost another giant and we join his family, Venezuela and the world in mourning the departure of a truly great son.

Chavez dead, but his revolution goes on

By Yusuf Fernandez

President Hugo Chavez

 Thousands of saddened Venezuelans poured into the streets of Caracas crying, hugging each other and shouting slogans in support of President Hugo Chavez after learning of his death. “I feel such big pain I cannot even speak,” said Yamilina Barrios, a 39-year-old office worker, to the Associated Press. “He was the best thing the country had ... I adore him. Let´s hope the country calms down and we can continue the tasks he left us.”

Leaders of the continent also showed their sorrow. “We are devastated by the death of the brother Hugo Chavez,” Prensa Latina agency quoted Bolivian president Evo Morales as saying, while he was accompanied by several members of his cabinet. Chavez was “a caring brother, a fellow revolutionary, a Latin American who fought for his country, for the great homeland, as Simon Bolivar did. He gave his whole life for the liberation of the Venezuelan people, the people of Latin America and all anti-imperialist fighters in the world”.

Chavez dedicated his whole life to the cause of the oppressed and poor, the integration and unity of Latin America, the construction of a multipolar world and the fight against the imperialism. Hugo Chavez died due to the illness he had, which many suspect was inoculated to him by any of his enemies, starting by the US government.

He became notorious after a group of army officers and soldiers, led by him, tried to overthrow in 1992 the corrupt and criminal pro-US government of Venezuelan President Carlos Andres Perez, a social democratic politician who ordered a brutal and bloody crackdown on demonstrators that were protesting against IMF-austerity measures on February 27 1989. About 3,000 people were killed by troops in that episode known as “the Caracazo”.

Venezuela mourns Hugo Chavez

Chavez spent two years in a military prison. After being released, he led a Boliviarian movement that had two main goals: social justice for the impoverished majority of Venezuelans and independence from the US Empire and its financial tools. In 1998, he won his first presidential election and he would never lose one from then on.

The President changed the leadership of the oil national company, PDVSA, whose revenues had benefited only a small national oligarchy and US corporations up to then. At the same time, Chavez funded various social assistance programs for the poor. These programs have improved literacy levels, health care, housing and income levels for Venezuela´s majority.
During Chavez´s years in office, poverty has been cut a half and extreme poverty by 70%. Millions of Venezuelans have had access to health care for the first time, and college enrollment doubled, with free tuition for many students. Inequality was also considerably reduced. By contrast, the two decades that preceded Chavez, Venezuela was one of the worst economic failures in Latin America, with real income per person actually falling by 14% from 1980-1998.

Chavez was the main promoter of the process for the integration of Latin America. It would lead to the creation of some Latin American blocs, such as ALBA, UNASUR or CELAC, which reduced US-dominated OAS to irrelevance. US plans to control Latin American economies through a continental free trade agreement also failed due to the opposition of Venezuela and some other countries.

Chavez, the peoples President

 Following Chavez´s revolution, Latin America has elected in recent years a group of leaders -Evo Morales in Bolivia, Rafael Correa in Ecuador and Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua- who are deeply involved in the fight for social justice in their societies and political independence for 

countries and the continent on the whole. Other leaders who followed that trend -Manuel Zelaya in Honduras and Fernando de Lugo in Paraguay- were illegally toppled by US-supported right-wing coups.

In the international field, Chavez was an active promoter of a multipolar world. In order to liberate his country from an imperialist control, Venezuela established solid links with Russia, China, Iran, Syria and other countries. He supported the fight of the Palestinian people against the Zionist occupation.

Due to all these policies, Chavez earned the implacable hatred and hostility of Washington. In April 2002, the CIA backed a military coup to overthrow him. A group of right-wing leaders and generals arrested and imprison him and took over the power, in a move widely welcomed by the US and some European governments and media. However, he was saved and restored to power two days later by the rapid action of loyal military officers and soldiers and a huge popular uprising.

Even after the failure of the coup, the right-wing sectors, which dominated some private media outlets, especially channels as Venevision, Univision and Globovision, continued their permanent campaign against Chavez and his government. All kind of dirty games, including a politicized general strike, were put in place in order to overthrow him. However, all these plans failed due to the high political awareness of the Venezuelan people.

For its part, Washington used its agencies, including the CIA, to fund the political opposition and the oligarchy. According to the site venezuelanalysis.com, Capriles and the Venezuelan opposition received 20 million dollars from US organizations, such as USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy.

Media campaign was also as a weapon of preference against the Venezuelan government. Despite Chavez´s repeated electoral victories, successive US administrations and corporate media presented his rule as illegitimate and dictatorial. The US Embassy in Caracas became a hub of anti-Chavez activities, as it shows the recent expulsion of the US Air Force attaché, Col. David Delmonaco, and his deputy, who allegedly tried to recruit Venezuelan army officers for “destabilizing projects.”

In this context, the statement by US President, Barack Obama, which claims that Washington wants to normalize its relations with Caracas, is hypocritically insincere. Actually, the US is just attempting to look for new mechanisms to recover its control over Venezuela and change its economic, social and foreign policy.

Commandante Hugo Chavez will live forever

The death of President Chavez will force the country to conduct another presidential election within 30 days. The candidate and new leader of the Bolivarian movement, Vice-President Nicolas Maduro, will be the candidate who will confront Henrique Capriles, the right-wing governor of Miranda state, who was comfortably defeated by Chavez in a presidential election held last October.

Although Washington and its Venezuelan allies hope that the death of Chavez may help them put an end to the Bolivarian revolution in Venezuela and Latin America, there are many reasons to think otherwise. The people of Venezuela are aware of the achievements and progress that has obtained at this late stage and is not willing to renounce them. On the other hand, the early, and still not clarified death of Chavez, will reinforce his figure, turning it into a symbol of a policy for the oppressed, for the independence and integration of Latin America and for a world free from imperialism.

“Oligarchies are surely celebrating when the peoples that fight for their freedom and dignity and work for equality are suffering. But it does not matter, the only thing that matters is that we are united, we fight for liberation. A lot of strength, a lot of unity. The best tribute to Chavez is unity. Unity to fight, to work for the equality of all peoples of the world,” Morales said. 

Chavez: Another CIA assassination victim

Hugo Chavez died of cancer on March 5, 2013

By Dr. Kevin Barrett

We know that the bankers who own the US government routinely try to kill any Latin American leader who refuses to be their puppet. We know that they have mounted thousands of assassination attempts against Latin American leaders, including more than 600 against Castro alone. We know that they have been experimenting with cancer viruses, and killing people with cancer, since the 1960s.

So if you think Hugo Chavez died a natural death, I am afraid that you are terminally naïve.”

The Venezuelan president himself, before he died yesterday, wondered aloud whether the US government - or the banksters who own it - gave him, and its other leading Latin American enemies, cancer.

A little over a year ago, Chavez went on Venezuelan national radio and said: “I don’t know but… it is very odd that we have seen Lugo affected by cancer, Dilma when she was a candidate, me, going into an election year, not long ago Lula and now Cristina… It is very hard to explain, even with the law of probabilities, what has been happening to some leaders in Latin America. It’s at the very least strange, very strange.”

Strange indeed… so strange that if you think Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, Paraguayan Fernando Lugo, and former Brazilian leader Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva - Latin America’s top anti-US empire leaders - all just happened to contract cancer around the same time by sheer chance, you must be some kind of crazy coincidence theorist.

Am I 100% certain that the CIA killed Hugo Chavez? Absolutely not.

It could have been non-governmental assassins working for the bankers.

But any way you slice it, the masters of the US empire are undoubtedly responsible for giving Chavez and other Latin American leaders cancer. How do we know that? Just examine the Empire’s track record. 

Comrade Fidel Castro escaped many us Assassination attempts

Fidel Castro’s bodyguard, Fabian Escalante, estimates that the CIA attempted to kill the Cuban president an astonishing 638 times. The CIA’s methods included exploding cigars, biological warfare agents painted on Castro’s diving suit, deadly pills, toxic bacteria in coffee, an exploding speaker’s podium, snipers, poison-wielding female friends, and explosive underwater sea shells.

The CIA’s assassination attempts against Castro were like a Tom and Jerry cartoon, with the CIA as the murderously inept cat, and the Cuban president as a clever and very lucky mouse. Some might even argue that Castro’s survival, in the face of 638 assassination attempts by the world’s greatest power, is evidence that El Presidente’s communist atheism was incorrect, and that God, or at least a guardian angel, must have been watching over “Infidel Castro” all along.

Theology aside, the CIA’s endless attempts on Castro’s life provide ample evidence that US authorities will stop at nothing in their efforts to murder their Latin American enemies. 

John Perkins, in his bestselling book Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, supplies more evidence that the bankers that own the US government routinely murder heads of state, using private assassins as well as CIA killers.

Perkins, during his career as an “economic hit man,” gained first-hand knowledge about how the big international bankers maintain their empire in Latin America and elsewhere. Perkins’ job was to visit leaders of foreign countries and convince them to accept loans that could never be paid back. Why? The bankers want to force these nations into debt slavery. When the country goes bankrupt, the bankers seize the nation’s natural resources and establish complete control over its government and economy.

Newly Appointed CIA Boss John Brennen

 Perkins would meet with a targeted nation’s leader and say: “I have a fist-full of hundred dollar bills in one hand, and a bullet in the other. Which do you want?” If the leader accepted the loans, thereby enslaving his country, he got the payoff. If he angrily chased Perkins out of his office, the bankers would call in the “asteroids” to assassinate the uncooperative head of state.

The “asteroids” are the world’s most expensive and accomplished professional killers. They work on contract - sometimes to the CIA, sometimes to the bankers, and sometimes to wealthy private individuals. And though their specialty is causing plane crashes, they are capable of killing people, including heads of state, in any number of ways.

This isn’t just speculation. John Perkins actually knows some of these CIA-linked professional killers personally. And he has testified about their murders of Latin American leaders. Confessions of an Economic Hit Man is dedicated to Perkins’ murdered friends Gen. Torrijos of Panama and President Jaime Roldos of Ecuador. Both were killed by CIA-linked “asteroids” in engineered plane crashes.

Do CIA-linked killers sometimes induce cancer in their victims? Apparently they do. One notable victim: Jack Ruby (née Jack Rubenstein), a mobster who was himself a professional killer, and whose last hit was the choreographed murder of JFK-assassination patsy Lee Harvey Oswald in the basement of the Dallas Police Department. Ruby begged to be taken to Washington to tell the real story of the JFK murder, but instead died in prison, of a sudden and mysterious cancer, before he could reveal what he knew.

CIA Badge

Have the CIA-bankster “asteroids” ever tried to kill Latin American leaders with cancer? The answer is an unequivocal “yes.”

Edward Haslam’s book Dr. Mary’s Monkey proves what JFK assassination prosecutor Jim Garrison had earlier alleged: Child-molesting CIA agent David Ferrie, one of President Kennedy’s killers, had experimented extensively with cancer-causing viruses for the CIA in his huge home laboratory. The purpose: To give Fidel Castro and other Latin American leaders cancer. (Ferrie himself was killed by the CIA shortly before he was scheduled to testify in court about his role in the JFK assassination.)

To summarize: We know that the bankers who own the US government routinely try to kill any Latin American leader who refuses to be their puppet. We know that they have mounted thousands of assassination attempts against Latin American leaders, including more than 600 against Castro alone. We know that they have been experimenting with cancer viruses, and killing people with cancer, since the 1960s.

So if you think Hugo Chavez died a natural death, I am afraid that you are terminally naïve. 

US plotting Venezuela’s Conquest

 

By Tony Cartalucci

Late President Hugo Chavez

 US corporate-financier funded think-tank, the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), declared in its "post-Chávez checklist for US policymakers," that the US must move quickly to reorganize Venezuela according to US interests. Upon its checklist were "key demands":

-The ouster of narco-kingpins who now hold senior posts in government

-The respect for a constitutional succession

-The adoption of meaningful electoral reforms to ensure a fair campaign environment and a transparent vote count in expected presidential elections

-The dismantling of Iranian and Hezbollah networks in Venezuela

In reality, AEI is talking about dismantling entirely the obstacles that have prevented the US and the corporate-financier interests that direct it, from installing a client regime and extracting entirely Venezuela's wealth while obstructing, even dismantling the progress and geopolitical influence achieved by the late President Hugo Chavez throughout South America and beyond.

The AEI "checklist" continues by stating:

Now is the time for US diplomats to begin a quiet dialogue with key regional powers to explain the high cost of Chávez’s criminal regime, including the impact of chavista complicity with narcotraffickers who sow mayhem in Colombia, Central America, and Mexico. Perhaps then we can convince regional leaders to show solidarity with Venezuelan democrats who want to restore a commitment to the rule of law and to rebuild an economy that can be an engine for growth in South America.

Of course, by "Venezuelan democrats," AEI means Wall Street-backed proxies like Henrique Capriles Radonski and his Primero Justicia (Justice First) political front, two entities the Western media is already gearing up to support ahead of anticipated elections.

Primero Justicia (Justice First) was co-founded by Leopoldo Lopez and Julio Borges, who like Radonski, have been backed for nearly a decade by the US State Department. Primero Justicia and the network of foreign-funded NGOs that support it have been recipients of both direct and indirect foreign support for at least just as long.

All three co-founders are US educated - Radonski having attended New York's Columbia University (Spanish), Julio Borges attending Boston College and Oxford (Spanish), and Leopoldo Lopez who attended the Harvard Kennedy School of Government (KSG), of which he is considered an alumni of (and here).

US Black President, Barack Hussein Obama

The Harvard Kennedy School, which hosts the notorious Belfer Center, includes the following faculty and alumni of Lopez, co-founder of the current US-backed opposition in Venezuela:

John P. Holdren, Samantha Power, Lawrence Summers, Robert Zoellick, (all as faculty), as well as Ban Ki-Moon ('84), Paul Volcker ('51), Robert Kagan ('91), Bill O'Reilly ('96), Klaus Schwab ('67), and literally hundreds of senators, ambassadors, and administrators of Wall Street and London's current global spanning international order. Harvard's Kennedy School of Government (KSG) is clearly one of several universities that form the foundation of both creating corporate-financier driven globalist-international policy, as well as cultivating legions of administrators to execute it.

To understand fully the implications of Lopez' education it helps to understand the leadership and principles guiding Harvard's mission statements, best exemplified by KSG' Belfer Center, which to this day, lends its public support to Lopez and his Primero Justicia opposition party.

Named after Robert Belfer of the Belco Petroleum Corporation and later, director of the failed Enron Corporation, the Belfer Center describes itself as being "the hub of the Harvard Kennedy School's research, teaching, and training in international security affairs, environmental and resource issues, and science and technology policy." Robert Belfer still sits in as an International Council Member.

Belfer's director, Graham Allison provides an example of self-serving corporatism steering US policy. He was a founder of the Trilateral Commission, a director of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), a consultant to the RAND Corporation, Director of the Getty Oil Company, Natixis, Loomis Sayles, Hansberger, Taubman Centers, Inc., and Belco Oil and Gas, as well as a member of the advisory boards of Chase Bank, Chemical Bank, Hydro-Quebec, and the shady International Energy Corporation, all according to his official Belfer Center bio.

Other questionable personalities involved as Belfer alumnus are Goldman Sachs, CFR member, and former-World Bank president Robert Zoellick. Sitting on the board of directors is CFR member and former Goldman Sachs consultant, Ashton Carter. There is also former director of Citigroup and Raytheon, former Director of Central Intelligence and CFR member John Deutch, who required a pardon by Clinton to avoid prosecution over a breach of security while fumbling his duties at the CIA. Meanwhile, Nathaniel Rothschild of Atticus Capital and RIT Capital Partners, Paul Volcker of the Federal Reserve, and former DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff all serve as Belfer Center's "advisers."

Last but not least, there is John P. Holdren, also a Council on Foreign Relations member, science adviser to both President Clinton and President Obama, and co-author with Paul Ehrilich, of the now notorious "Ecoscience." When Holdren isn't brand-building for "Climate Disruption," he is dreaming of a Malthusian fueled totalitarian global government that forcibly sterilizes the world's population. He feared, erroneously, that overpopulation would be the end of humanity. He claimed in his hubris filled, fact deficient book, "The No Growth Society," that by the year 2040, the United States would have a dangerously unsustainable population of 280 million he called "much too many." The current US population is over 300 million, and despite reckless leadership and policies, it is still sustainable.

One could argue that Lopez' education is in his past, independent of his current political activities, however, the interests driving the agenda of the Belfer Center are demonstrably still backing his Primero Justicia party's bid for seizing power in Venezuela. Lopez, Radonski, and Borges are to this day still receiving substantial funding and support through NGO networks funded directly by the US State Department's National Endowment for Democracy, and is clearly favored by the Western press. Furthermore, the CFR, Heritage Foundation, and other corporate-financier driven think-tanks have all come out in support of Radonski and Primero Justicia, in their bid to "restore democracy" American-style in Venezuela. 

Victorious Hugo Chavez

With Chavez' passing, the names of these opposition figures will become mainstays of Western reporting ahead of anticipated elections the West is eager to have held - elections the West is well positioned to manipulate in favor of Lopez, Radonski, and Borges.

Whatever one may have thought about Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and his policies, he nationalized his nation's oil, forcing out foreign multinational corporations, diversified his exports to reduce dependency on Western markets (with US exports at a 9 year low), and had openly opposed corporate-financier neo-imperialism across the globe. He was an obstruction to Western hegemony - an obstruction that has provoked overt, depraved jubilation from his opponents upon his death.

And while many critics are quick to claim President Chavez' policies are a "failure," it would be helpful to remember that the US, on record, has arrayed its vast resources both overtly and covertly against the Venezuelan people over the years to ensure that any system outside the West's sphere of influence inevitably fails.

Dark days indeed lay ahead for Venezuela, with the AEI "checklist" foreshadowing an "uprising," stating:

As Venezuelan democrats wage that struggle against chavismo, regional leaders must make clear that Syria-style repression will never be tolerated in the Americas. We should defend the right of Venezuelans to struggle democratically to reclaim control of their country and its future. Only Washington can make clear to Chinese, Russian, Iranian, and Cuban leaders that, yes, the United States does mind if they try to sustain an undemocratic and hostile regime in Venezuela. Any attempt to suppress their self-determination with Chinese cash, Russian arms, Iranian terrorists, or Cuban thuggery will be met with a coordinated regional response.

US military contractors and Special Forces had been caught operating in and around Venezuela. Just as there were warning signs in Syria years before the 2011 conflict began, the US' intentions of provoking bloodshed and regime change in Venezuela stretch back as far as 2002. Just as Syria is now facing a Western-engineered proxy war, Venezuela will too, with the AEI already declaring US plans to wage a Syria-style proxy war in South America.

The AEI also reminds readers of the West's faux-human rights, "economic development," and "democracy promotion" racket Hugo Chavez had ejected from Venezuela and displaced across parts of South America, and the West's desire to reestablish it:

US development agencies should work with friends in the region to form a task force of private sector representatives, economists, and engineers to work with Venezuelans to identify the economic reforms, infrastructure investments, security assistance, and humanitarian aid that will be required to stabilize and rebuild that country. Of course, the expectation will be that all the costs of these activities will be borne by an oil sector restored to productivity and profitability.

Commandante Hugo Chavez Frias

Finally, we need to work with like-minded nations to reinvigorate regional organizations committed to democracy, human rights, anti-drug cooperation, and hemispheric solidarity, which have been neutered by Chávez’s destructive agenda.

As the US openly funds, arms, and backs al-Qaeda in Syria, conducts global renditions, operates an international archipelago of torture dungeons, and is only now wrapping up a decade of subjugation and mass murder in Iraq and Afghanistan that is still claiming lives and jeopardizing the future of millions to this day, it is difficult to discern just who the AEI's target audience is. It is most likely those who can read between the lines - the corporate-financier vultures waiting for the right moment to strip Venezuela to the bone.

The fate of Venezuela lies in its people's hands. Covert destabilization must be faced by the Venezuelan people, while the alternative media must do its best to unravel the lies already being spun ahead of long-planned operations in "post-Chavez Venezuela." For the rest of us, we must identify the corporate-financier interests driving this agenda, - interests we most likely patronize on a daily basis, and both boycott and permanently replace them to erode the unwarranted influence they have used, and will continue to use against the Venezuelan people, as well as people across the globe. 

DR. KWAME NKRUMAH AND PRESIDENT HUGO CHÁVEZ

A TALE OF TWO SPEECHES

ON QUESTIONS OF THE NATION AND UNITY

By

Lang T.K.A Nubuor

Chavez, The Peoples President

The Insight of February 6^th 2013 carries a message, dated January 27, 2013, from President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela addressed to the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) that met in Santiago de Chile toward the end of January, 2013. Phrases like ‘a nation of republics’, ‘the entire Great Nation’ and ‘the perpetuity of each of our nations’ as well as ‘Dear Heads of State and Government’ occur in the message. Such occurrences ring bells in the Pan-African ear with respect to Dr. Kwame Nkrumah’s speeches and writings between the 1950s and 1970s. Respectively, these phrases raise questions about the nation and the structure as well as the strategy for its unity. We address these questions here.

Just as Dr. Nkrumah speaks of ‘the African Nation’, so does President Hugo Chávez speak of ‘the Great Nation’ of Latin America and the Caribbean. Just as Dr. Nkrumah speaks of ‘the Union of African Republics’, so does President Chávez speak of ‘a nation of republics’ of Latin America and the Caribbean. Just as Dr. Nkrumah speaks of ‘the United States of Africa’, so does President Chávez speak of ‘the perpetuity of each of our nations’. Just as Dr. Nkrumah initially addresses ‘Heads of State and Government’, so does President Chávez address ‘Heads of State and Government’ now. And, just as Dr. Nkrumah initially supports the Organization of African Unity, after a compromise, so does President Chávez support the CELAC – all clubs of Heads of State.

The singular theme of the above is the apparent acceptance of the two generational leaders to hold each State in the union as an inviolable unit. There is an assumption by the two that there are inviolable unit States or Republics within a bigger whole – the Nation. And yet on their respective continents they talk about ‘nations’ that are living in a state of ‘perpetuity’ – that is in permanence. So that what are said to be ‘republics’ and ‘states’ are actually nations within a Super Nation. This is very clear in the Latin Caribbean Americas’ concept of the ‘Great Nation’. In Dr. Kwame Nkrumah’s May 23 1963 Addis Ababa speech this whole idea is captured in the phrase ‘Union of Independent African States’ in place of Great Nation.

In President Hugo Chávez’s message he does not mince words about this reality in the following words when he makes the issue of inviolability fairly clear thus: ‘The sacred purposes, the fraternal relations and the common interests that unite the republics of Latin America and the Caribbean, have in the CELAC a fundamental instrument not only to guarantee the stability of the governments that our people have given themselves, but also their sovereignty and, let us say with Jorge Luis Borges, the perpetuity of each of our nations’. That is, the stability and sovereignty of each government (State) are guaranteed. And what does the pronoun ‘our’ represent other than the ‘Heads of State and government’?

One criticism levelled against the Organization of African Unity (OAU) stems from the perception that it is a club of Heads of State to protect themselves in power. The scenario thus far painted of the Latin America Caribbean CELAC can immediately be seen in that light. There is not yet such an alteration of the structure of the State institution as would place power in the people’s own hands – a People’s Power set-up – even in their separate State entities. Similarly, Dr. Kwame Nkrumah’s quest for even a strong African Union to which the component States cede part of their sovereignty falls short of a revolutionary replacement of the existing State structures with a People’s State. A weak and toothless OAU is rather forced down his throat to guarantee the unviable and miserable existence of the component neo-colonies.

Hence even in 1963 Dr. Nkrumah does not advocate for the proposed African Union an instant dissolution of the neo-colonial States. He is forced to accept their retention in their present state in the manner that CELAC, by the words of President Chávez, appears to be doing now. Nevertheless, Dr. Nkrumah harbours no concept of the inviolability of an African State’s so-called sovereignty. In fact, in the Ghanaian constitution he ensures the insertion of a clause that assures the surrender of Ghana’s sovereignty for the purposes of the establishment of a Union Government of Africa. So that in the deepest recesses of his mind stands majestically the ultimate dissolution of all the neo-colonial States of Africa into not a nation of republics but a ‘People’s Republic of Africa’.

President Hugo Chávez does not hide similar intentions for Latin Caribbean Americas. Like Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, he lives with the vision of a single nation in pursuit of the two centuries old ambitions of Simon Bolivar. He is here better quoted than paraphrased: ‘Our common path has been long and difficult since we faced the Spanish Empire in the 19^th century. The fight for independence, the fight that continues today, was linked, indissolubly linked, to the thoughts and actions of our liberators, to the fight for unity, for the construction of a Great Nation based on the most solid foundation.’ This may not be clear yet as he appeals to Simon Bolivar on the idea of a single nation and then calls on Jose Marti of Cuba for support.

In his effort, he quotes Bolivar in these words: ‘There should be one single nation for the Americas, given that we have had perfect unity in everything’. He then brings in Jose Marti, a Bolivarian, to explain further that ‘we intentionally say people and not peoples so as not to think there is more than one from the Rio Grande to Patagonia. It should be one because it is one. The Americas, even when it does not want to, and brothers fight, will be together in the end of a colossal spiritual nation, they will love each other then’. Thus if in the deepest recesses of Dr. Nkrumah’s mind the ultimate is the dissolution of the States into a single State of a single African Nation, so does President Chávez project such an ultimate.

Currently, however, President Chávez explains the divisions in Latin Caribbean Americas as the cause of its underdevelopment rather than its underdevelopment being the cause of its divisions. He asserts that ‘Underdevelopment is the child of division, and that is exactly why it is imperative to resolve the question of a national Americas in the coming years. Today we meet all the objective and subjective conditions to do so.’ In African terms, before the publication of Neo-Colonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism, Dr. Nkrumah partially puts it this way: ‘No independent African state today by itself has a chance to follow an independent course of economic development, and many of us who have tried to do this have been almost ruined or have had to return to the fold of the former colonial rulers. This position will not change unless we have a unified policy working at the continental level.’

Regarding the obstacles in the path of unity in the Americas, President Chávez asserts that ‘the oligarchy closed the door to a historical project of unity …’ just as Dr. Nkrumah sees internal forces of counter revolution as the brake on the anti-imperialist unification project in Africa. Thus far the similarities between the thoughts and actions of Dr. Kwame Nkrumah and President Hugo Chávez cannot escape the observer. And this extends to their common passion for their individual unity projects. In this respect, they share great optimism in the ultimate triumph over imperialism and neo-colonialism. In fact, with President Chávez, he sees the objective and subjective conditions for unity having been met. Similarly, Dr. Nkrumah leaves nobody in doubt about his belief in the ripeness of the situation in 1963 for the creation of a Union of Independent African States.

Yes, optimism is the word. If there is a mood that is crystal clear in President Chávez’s message it is his optimism for the CELAC. In Africa, Pan-African students and activists could be surprised by it in the light of the OAU’s failure and its apparent similarity to the CELAC. In fact, he will be surprised to hear this; because for him ‘Everything we do for unity will not only be justified by history, it will also become the enlightened legacy we can leave to future generations. We will also be actively honouring the memory of our liberators. In CELAC, as Bolivar wanted, we have become one nation’. (Bold prints added.)

Osagyefo Dr Kwame Nkrumah

He says additionally that ‘CELAC is the most important project of political, economic, social and cultural unity in our contemporary history. We all have the right to feel proud: the nation of republics, as the liberator Simon Bolivar called it, has begun to emerge as a beautiful and happy reality’. He then opines that ‘If we are a nation of republics, our sovereignty is that of the entire Great Nation, and we must enforce it’. He also adds the claim that ‘Today, we are an example of unity in diversity, of justice, welfare and happiness to the world’. Before this he proclaims that ‘While US and Europe … are committing collective suicide, we are weathering the storm …’ and with them cutting social and investment spending CELAC can maintain growth. For Africa, Dr. Nkrumah projects that scenario in terms of the immediate future – seeing the situation as riddled with difficulties yet to be overcome.

President Hugo Chávez, with a vision of the Great Nation’s light burning brightly at the Summit, hugs all in attendance and cries out ‘Long live the union of our peoples’ who, we might say, are not yet a people, not yet a nation but certainly ‘a spiritual nation’ living in the patriotic ambitions of great thinkers and doers. A few decades ago, Dr. Kwame Nkrumah could say about Africa: ‘We have already reached the stage where we must unite or sink into that condition which has made Latin America the unwilling and distressed prey of imperialism after one-and-a-half centuries of political independence.’

Well, Africa is not united yet. It is a definite prey of imperialism, refusing to hear Dr. Nkrumah telling it that ‘African unity is, above all, a political kingdom which can only be gained by political means. The social and economic development of Africa will come only within the political kingdom, not the other way round.’

Today, as we put finishing touches to this article, President Hugo Chávez lays still awaiting his commital to Mother Earth. May he rest in perfect peace with the assurance that he has made his faithful contribution to the ongoing Bolivarian Revolution and that the thousands he brings to consciousness of the emerging Great Nation shall surely continue from where he leaves us. Yes, us.

March 6, 2013

CIA tried to get rid of Chavez at all costs

The United States took steps backstage to help the Venezuelan opposition to win parliamentary elections of 2010 and presidential elections of 2012. Wikileaks published correspondence between the American company Stratfor and Serbian Canavas that developed a plan to destabilize the country with "democratic" methods.

The correspondence involving Stratfor was described by WikiLeaks as a "private version" of the CIA. Wikileaks also named among Stratfor's clients the Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. Marine Corps, as well as well-known American corporations such as Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and Raytheon. The "About Us" section of Stratfor site says that the company provides services in the area of "global intelligence" to solve business problems,  by using geopolitical situation analysis. The company was founded in 1996 by the author of the bestseller "America's Secret War", Dr. George Friedman and is headquartered in Austin, Texas. The company's staff speaks 29 languages ​​and has access to intelligence information.

Advertising its services, Stratfor says that, methodology analysis allows evaluating influential "world leaders" and, thus, predicting their actions and behavior. This shows that its work is far from business.

The second party to the correspondence is the Serbian Canavas (The Centre for Applied Non-Violent Action and Strategies). The "What We Do" section of its website explains that the center specialized in the development of recommendations, for "non-violent" overthrow of the government, based on the experience of the student movement "Otpor" against the regime of Slobodan Milosevic in 2000. Venezuelan News Agency (AVN) writes that Canavas with the support of the CIA and non-profit organizations USAID and NED have developed plans for the opposition in Ukraine, Georgia, Belarus, Bolivia, Zimbabwe, Iran, Lebanon, Azerbaijan and other countries.

Canvas has about 200 activities on its "menu" including organization of social unrest, political and economic instability; including strikes, peaceful demonstrations with the use of Internet, social networks, as well as traditional media. The center exports "students' revolts" and organizes seminars for activists in its headquarters in Belgrade. 

Chavez connected Latin America to Asia

Wikileaks published at least 73 documents and e-mail messages for the period from July 2004 to December 2011, which Stratfor employees sent from Caracas to Belgrade. The letters appear to be references to meetings or information from representatives of the Venezuelan opposition, such as the mayor of Caracas, Antonio Ledezma, the opposition candidate who lost to Chavez, Henrique Capriles, and the leader of the opposition party "People's Will" Leopoldo Lopez.

One of such telegrams is directly related to the presidential campaign of 2012. In this message, Stratfor asked Canavas to help "the revolution in Venezuela." The strategy is explained as follows: to unite the opposition, help conduct the campaign and encourage people to vote for it. The tactics would include first to seek political opponents willing to cooperate, then analyze the situation and develop an action plan, called the "mission."

However, most e-mails are dated with the first quarter of 2010 and refer to the September parliamentary elections in Venezuela. The correspondence is headed by an "expert" of Stratfor on Latin America, Karen Hooper, and describes the political situation in Venezuela. She writes about strengthening of cooperation with Russia in the energy sector and that the policy of the state of the oil industry is in the hands of the Minister Rafael Ramirez. She then lists the issues that could potentially be used in the campaign, including drought, introduction of rationed energy consumption, and suspending of the broadcasts of the opposition cable provider RCTV for non-compliance with the Basic Law on Mass Media.

In another message Hooper stated the forces to be used, e.g., church as well as students who are currently more reliable and popular in Venezuela than the opposition parties (reminiscent of the main "revolutionary" forces in Serbia). It also offers campaign slogans: “government accountability”, “decentralization of the police”, and also notes that all the necessary resources will be provided for the implementation of the plan.

Now let's see what events in Venezuela followed this correspondence. On January 28, 2010, students at several universities in the country were taken to the headquarters of the national electricity company Corpoelec with a petition demanding to end rationing of electricity and an increase of investment in the energy sector.

Different universities organized student strikes against the government's policy, including hunger strikes and all, mainly in the state of Merida, which is the mainstay of the opposition. Monsignor Osvaldo Azuahe, Assistant Bishop of Maracaibo,  at the conference of bishops, (CEV) urged Catholic youth "to lead the movement, which will send us on a path to build a new civilization." The main opposition newspaper El Universal, focused its criticism on the violation of freedom of speech, in connection with the closure of six cable channels including RCTV. Actions of police were criticized and called repressive, and secrecy and unaccountability of the Chavez government was discussed by everyone. 

On January 30, 2010, Amnesty International called on the Venezuelan government to guarantee the right to freedom of expression and assembly for all people.

Enrique Mendoza, a representative of the "Democratic Unity Roundtable" (MUD) boasted publicly in the press that his party had a plan that would lead to the victory in the election. However, the cheering stopped after the opposition lost. Stratfor said in its letter that "the plan to destabilize Venezuela" may not be fully implemented because of the lack of trust among different groups of the Venezuelan opposition. This is not true, because the opposition appeared consolidated and brought a single candidate to the presidential election. It is Stratfor experts were covering themselves in case of failure. The authority of Hugo Chavez among the people is so great that it cannot be trumped by any "democratic" means.

PROVIDING AFFORDABLE AND QUALITY HEALTH CARE….CUBA’S PACKAGE TO GHANA

By Dadzie Isaac Kweku 

 

 

President Raul Castro of Cuba

Today, Ghanaians benefit enormously from Cuba’s international medical aid especially in the rural communities. The Cuban Government has what is termed the Cuban Medical Brigade which is a set of medical practitioners who provide health services internationally.

In Ghana, the medical brigade comprises of 143 medical doctors spread in all the Teaching Hospitals, Regional and district health centers across the country. In the Northern region, they operate in places such as Salaga, Savelugu, Tamale, Yendi, Bimbila and Bole. They also provide services in Ejura, Mampong, Effidua and Nyinahin in the Ashanti region. In the Central region, the medical brigade has doctors in Twifo Praso, Cape Coast and Ankaful.  Kwahu Tafo, Asesewa, Begoro, Kibi, Akim Oda, Koforidua, Akwuapim Mampong and Somanya are areas in the Eastern region were they also extend their health services. They are also in the Upper West region in areas such as Nandom, Lawra, Nadowli and Wa. In the Western region, their health services are in Asafo whereas in the Volta region they are in places such as Kete Krachi, Nkwanta, Baika, Hohoe, Kpandu, Ho, Sogakope, Adidome, Agbozume, Keta and Aflao. The Brong Ahafo region has Cuban doctors and nurses providing health care. They can be found in Kwame Danso, Wenchi, Kenyasi No.1 and Sunyani. The medical brigade has 116 doctors in charge of physical therapy and rehabilitation, 15 are nursing graduates, 5 are dental surgeons and 6 are Technologists. The brigade is commanded by Dr. George Serrano.

In an interview with some of the doctors at the trade fair site where they are participating in an exhibition, they expressed delight for working in Ghana to help improve the health sector. Dr. Alina who elaborated on the nature of their  work in Africa stated that “Cuban practice in providing international aid has made them proud to represent their country in any part of the world.”

In the Cuban medical brigade’s annual report for 2012, the brigade attended to 1,142,878 patients and performed 4,402 cesarean section operations in order to help reduce maternal mortality. They conducted 8,816 surgical operations during the year and a total rehabilitation and physiotherapy treatments of 663, 522 was recorded. These are results which indicate how the people of Cuba demonstrate their commitment to global health care, especially in developing countries.

Ghana – Cuba relations has been very fruitful ever since the days of Ghana’s early independence under Dr. Kwame Nkrumah. These Bilateral relations have stretched from military training assistance, education and prominently medical aid. In addition to the important medical work that endears Cubans to Pan-Africanist are the heroic military victory at Cuto Carnaville in Angola where apartheid South African troops were defeated and made to surrender to Cuban soldiers. Secondly, the image of the legendary Fidel Castro as one of the leaders who carried the casket of the late Dr. Kwame Nkrumah during his funeral rites in Guinea will also be always remembered in Ghanaian history.