*----------------------------------------------------------* | | | x x x x x x x xx xxx xxx xxx | | xx xx x xx xx xx x x x x x x Issue #3 | | x x x x x x x x xx x x x xx xxx | | x x x x x x x x x x x x 10/19/84 | | x x x x x x x xx x xxx xxx | | | |----------------------------------------------------------| | Newspaper of the Maoist Internationalist Movement | *----------------------------------------------------------* CIA ADMITS FOMENTING TERRORISM AND ORGANIZED CRIME AGAINST NICARAGUA On October 14th, U.S. intelligence officials admitted that the C.I.A. (Central Intelligence Agency) has provided a manual to anti-Sandinista, pro-U.S. rebels who are working to overthrow the government of Nicaragua. The Sandinista government came to power in a popular revolution in 1979 that swept away the U.S. backed Somoza family regime. The manual, called "Psychological Operations in Guerrilla War," advises the rebels to use "select terror" to "neutralize" vulnerable Sandinista officials. However, because of an executive order signed by Reagan at the end of 1981, the manual does not explicitly use the words "assassinate" or "kill"--merely "target" and "danger to other individuals in the area of the target." Furthermore, the manual says "if possible, professional criminals should be hired to carry out specific, selective 'jobs.'" One such job is "creating a 'martyr' for the cause." Other instructions involve the blowing up of public buildings, how to justify any murder politically and psychologically, how to whip up anti-Cuban, anti-Soviet sentiment while pretending to live amongst the people and how to blackmail anybody by threatening to make public that they were in meetings with the C.I.A. backed rebels. Thus, it is clear that the U.S. Government has admitted its criminal character. Why is the U.S. Government revealing itself so clearly? Why doesn't the C.I.A. operate in its usual secretive style? The press has publicized the CIA's "covert" war for some time. The contras (anti-Sandinista rebels) are known by all to have U.S. funding and U.S. military support. At the same time, the U.S. has admitted that the contras can never win against such a popular government. Also, the U.S. Senate condemned the U.S. mining of Nicaragua's harbors earlier this year. This made the front pages. All in all the U.S. counterrevolution against Nicaragua is quite open. The U.S. may be trying to influence the current negotiations in Central America between Salvadoran rebels and the Salvadoran regime. The U.S. is backing the Salvadoran regime and wants to make sure that Salvadoran rebels and the Sandinistas do not get too much out of the deal. By showing how "tough" the U.S. is, the U.S. expects to coerce the Central Americas for the desired result. By releasing such damning information about itself, the U.S. Government has shown how strong its hand is and how much it can get away with. At first, The New York Times did not deem the story worthy of the front page. The Detroit Free Press buried it as a sub-article. It is as though the U.S. Government were saying "don't expect any uproar in the U.S. about the terror we carry out in Central America." Days after the admission, however, Mondale was trying to take advantage of the issue and Reagan ordered an investigation. Democrat Thomas Downey took care not to blame the president and to praise Reagan's anti-terrorism campaign. Still, despite all these confusing moves it is clear that the U.S. Government underestimated the outrage of the people. It also remained to be seen in the confusion whether or not the basic issue of the CIA primer would be lost in sanctimonious drivel. That issue is that there is no correct way to overthrow a foreign government. There is no correct way to run an empire the way Downey and Mondale would have us believe--terrorist manual or not. Of course, the U.S. does have $4.2 billion invested in Central America and another $4.1 billion loaned to the Central American ruling classes. The U.S. does not want this threatened, especially since three dollars return to the U.S. for every dollar invested; however, investments in Central America do not require such open operations by the C.I.A. Nor did the invasion of Grenada have to occur because the Grenadians were such a threat to U.S. investments. No, the open activities of the U.S. Government can only be explained by the the decision of the Pentagon, the military industries and all the multinational corporations that the U.S. must "stand tall" and "overcome the Vietnam syndrome." We in the U.S. are being acclimated to fight a major war and "prevail." Precisely because little is at stake in Grenada in terms of investments, it made sense to strike there first as an example to the rest of Central America. Investments, resources and a disciplined wage-earning class, however, are exactly what is at stake in Brazil, Mexico, South Africa, Europe and Japan. Just as Grenada was a perfect training ground to oil the U.S. military and propaganda machine for war, Central America has been a place for U.S. muscle-flexing historically. However, while the U.S. may be willing to alienate the workers that are giving them so much profits out of Central America and the U.S. may be willing to damage its "ownings" in Central America just to make an example of the rebels, revolutionaries and pro-Soviet reformists of Nicaragua and El Salvador, there is one hitch. A U.S. invasion of Nicaragua or El Salvador would meet the armed guerrillas there. The U.S. would be the ready target of an anti-imperialist struggle. Ultimately, the U.S. Government would prefer to make a deal through negotiations. It hopes that the reformists in the leadership of the FDR of the Salvadoran rebels and of the Sandinistas in Nicaragua will give the U.S. a good enough deal and a dependable "backyard" in time of war with the Soviet Union. The U.S. is also open about its desire to take a chunk of the Soviet empire. The U.S. does not rely primarily on covert action to undermine the Soviets. However, the U.S. can not make an easy example out of the Soviets either. Ultimately, the anti-"communist" emphasis of the U.S. in its foreign policy is especially designed to prepare the U.S. for war against the Soviet bloc. Grenada and Nicaragua are perfect for this preparation because the U.S. can point to the relations of these countries to Cuba and the Soviet Union. Of course, the airfield on Grenada was not a military threat to the U.S.. To even refute the obvious lies of U.S. propaganda is almost to miss the point. The U.S. Government does not need to "win" an argument. It needs merely to paint itself as correcting Soviet perfidies and it succeeds in acclimating public opinion to war. The question about Grenada in 1983 and Nicaragua in 1984 is not whether or not "U.S. security" is really threatened by these countries. The question is whether or not the public buys into a war "to stand tall" with the capitalist minority which has a business interest in doing in their Soviet competitors and taking over Soviet turf. These same capitalists will try to confuse the issue. They will confuse people by getting the Senate to condemn the mining of Nicaragua's harbors. They will give the people Walter Mondale, who does not oppose the invasion of Grenada or a quarantine of Nicaragua. Mondale will oppose the war drive on the grounds that there is corruption in the Pentagon and the military corporations get hundreds of dollars from the Pentagon for a hammer. This is not the issue. The issue is whether militarism is in the interest of the people of this country and even more, the people of the world. It does no good to oppose only that part of the military which is corrupt. It does no good to support politicians who only oppose wars on the grounds that they have a better strategy. In the end, the capitalists have an interest in going to war with their Soviet counterparts. The hired laborers of these same capitalists, be they in the U.S., in Guatemalan Coca-Cola factories or in South African gold mines usually do not. If we keep this perspective in mind, we will have the support of the masses known as the international proletariat. If we explain the issues in the perspective of the international proletariat we can succeed in stopping WWIII. NOTES: New York Times, 10/15/84, 10/17/84. Detroit Free Press, 10/15/84. Jean-Paul Sartre, On Genocide. "Central America in Crisis." See MIM lit. list. _____________________________________________________________ THIS IS AN ELECTRONIC ISSUE OF MIM NOTES For the real thing, twelve to sixteen pages of tabloid newsprint, including revolutionary art and photos with professional lay-out, subscribe to MIM Notes now. Back- issues also available in original release for most issues. Subscriptions: Send US$12 for 12 issues of MIM Notes sent via US Mail MIM Distributors PO Box 3576 Ann Arbor, MI 48106-3576 USA Make checks out to "ABS" or send cash.