Wayne Madsen
Strategic Culture Foundation
4 March 2018
Strategic Culture Foundation
4 March 2018
In
a shocking display of relative independence from the post-Operation
Mockingbird control of the media by the Central Intelligence Agency,
a recent article in The New York Times broke with current
conventional pack journalism and covered the long history of CIA
meddling in foreign elections. A February 17, 2018, article, titled,
"Russia Isn’t the Only One Meddling in Elections. We Do It, Too,"
authored by Scott Shane – who covered the perestroika and glasnost for The Baltimore Sun in
Moscow from 1988 to 1991 during the final few years of the Soviet Union
– reported the US has interfered in foreign elections for decades.
However, a couple of old US intelligence hands were quoted in the
article as saying the US meddling was for altruistic purposes. The CIA
veterans charged that Russia interferes in foreign elections for purely
malevolent purposes. The belief that American interference in global
elections was to promote liberal democracy could not be further from the
truth.
The
CIA never meddled in foreign elections for purposes of extending
democratic traditions to other nations. The chief purpose was to
disenfranchise leftist and progressive voters and political parties,
ensure the veneer of “democracy” in totalitarian countries, and protect
the interests of the US military bases and US multinational
corporations.
In
double-talk that is reminiscent of the Cold War years, the CIA
considers its election interference to fall under the category of
"influence operations," while the same agency accuses Russia of
"election meddling." In truth, there is no difference between the two
categories. Election interference represents intelligence service
“tradecraft” and it has been practiced by many intelligence agencies,
including those of Israel, France, Britain, China, India, and others.
On
the rare occasions when the CIA's efforts to rig an election failed –
as they did in Guatemala in 1950 and Chile in 1970 – the agency simply
organized bloody military coups to replace with military juntas the
democratically-elected presidents who defeated CIA-supported candidates
at the polls.
In
1954, the CIA’s Operation PBSUCCESS overthrew the Guatemalan government
of President Jacobo Arbenz, who was elected in 1950 on a platform of
agrarian reform that would improve the lives of Guatemala’s peasants,
many of whom suffered under the indentured servitude of the US-owned
United Fruit Company. United Fruit maintained industrial-level
plantations across the country. Working with the CIA, United Fruit did
its best to ensure defeat for Arbenz in the 1950 election. When that
tactic failed, United Fruit, the CIA, and US Secretary of State John
Foster Dulles devised a plan to overthrow Arbenz in a military coup.
Guatemala became a stereotypical American-influenced “banana republic.”
The
Chilean junta that replaced Socialist President Salvador Allende, who
was elected in 1970 despite massive CIA interference, transformed Chile
into a testbed for the vulture capitalism devised by the “Chicago Boys” –
a group of Chilean economists who studied under the neo-conservative
economist Milton Friedman at the University of Chicago. Friedman called
the massive free market laissez-faire policies instituted by the regime
of General Augusto Pinochet the “Miracle of Chile.” The economic
policies, which a US Senate Intelligence Committee investigation
concluded were crafted with the help of the CIA, saw the elimination of
trade tariffs, the mass sell-off of state-owned enterprises, cutting of
taxes, privatization of the state-run pension system, and de-regulation
of industry.
In
1990, CIA election meddling in Nicaragua ensured a win for the
opposition over the ruling Sandinista-led government. This type of
meddling was repeated in the 2000 Serbian election, which saw President
Slobodan Milosevic ejected from power. The ouster of Milosevic saw the
first demonstrated cooperation in election meddling between the CIA and
international hedfe fund tycoon George Soros’s Open Society Institute
cadres. In 2009, the CIA attempted to defeat Afghan President Hamid
Karzai for re-election. Although Karzai was re-elected, he bitterly
complained about the CIA's interference in the election.
MS-NBC
constantly features as a contributing expert on Russia the former US
ambassador to Moscow, Michael McFaul. However, McFaul never mentions how
he funneled CIA cash – some $6.8 million in total – via the National
Endowment for Democracy (NED) and its two branches, the International
Republican Institute of the Republican Party and the National Democratic
Institute of the Democratic Party, to Russian opposition leaders like
Aleksei Navalny. Nor does the US media mention that the CIA and State
Department funneled some $5 billion into Ukraine in order to bring about
a pro-US government in that country.
McFaul
hosted Russian opposition party meetings at the US embassy and ignored
warnings that Navalny's coalition included several neo-Nazi
nationalists, who oppose immigrants hailing from south of the Russian
border. Although he has been called by some Western journalists the
"Russian Erin Brokovich" (an American environmental activist), Navalny
is more like the "Russian David Duke." Duke is the former leader of the
American racist group, the Ku Klux Klan.
Declassified
CIA files are replete with examples of agency interference in foreign
elections, including state elections in India and West Germany and
provincial elections in Australia, Canada, and Japan. In the 1950s, the
CIA provided massive support to the West German Christian Democrats,
which were led by Chancellor Konrad Adenauer. The CIA also did its best
to suppress supprt for the West German Social Democrats and the
far-right nationalist German Party in Berlin, Hesse, and Bavaria.
In
1967, Indian Foreign Minister M. C. Chagla charged that the CIA
"meddled" in India's election, mainly through financial donations to
parties in opposition to the ruling Indian Congress party. The CIA
particularly targeted Communist parties in West Bengal and Kerala
states.
Former Canadian Prime Minister John Diefenbaker of the Conservative Party charged in 1967 that CIA funds were used to bolster the Liberal Party, which contributed to Diefenbaker's electoral losses in two general elections held between May 1962 and June 1963. Diefenbaker's successor, Prime Minister Lester Pearson of the Liberal Party, discovered that the CIA funneled cash to the pro-Liberal Canadian Union of Students in 1965 and 1966.
Former Canadian Prime Minister John Diefenbaker of the Conservative Party charged in 1967 that CIA funds were used to bolster the Liberal Party, which contributed to Diefenbaker's electoral losses in two general elections held between May 1962 and June 1963. Diefenbaker's successor, Prime Minister Lester Pearson of the Liberal Party, discovered that the CIA funneled cash to the pro-Liberal Canadian Union of Students in 1965 and 1966.
The
CIA did everything possible to defeat for re-election the New Zealand
Labor Party government of Prime Minister David Lange. The CIA provided
propaganda support to the opposition National Party, which was opposed
to Lange’s policy of denying entry to New Zealand waters of US
nuclear-armed and nuclear-powered warships. The CIA ensured that
pro-American media in New Zealand harped on about New Zealand
record-high 6 percent unemployment, the nation’s foreign debt being half
of its gross domestic product, and $1 billion budget deficit. The CIA
also attempted to suppress traditional Maori support for Labor in the
August 15, 1987 election, a cynical use of race-based politics to alter
an election outcome.
Between
1965 and 1967, the CIA station in Brazil, working in conjunction with
the AFL/CIO union in the United States and its international arm, the
American Institute of Free Labor Development (AIFLD), were discovered to
be interfering in union elections in Brazil. The Sao Paulo office of
the AIFLD, which was nothing more than a CIA front, made cash payments
to Brazilian officials to corrupt union elections in the Brazilian
petroleum sector. An itemized list of CIA bribes to Brazilian officials
was discovered by a Sao Paulo union official: “Bonus to Jose Abud for
collaboration – $156.25; Special payment to Dt. Jorge M. Filho of Labor
Ministry – $875.00; Trip for Mr. Glaimbore Guimasaes, our informer at
Fegundes St. – $56.25; Photocopies of books and documents of Petroleum
Federation – $100.00; Assistance to Guedes and Eufrasio to defeat Luis
Furtado of the Suzano Union – $140.64.”
Prior
to the September 4, 1964 Chilean presidential election, the leftist
Popular Action Front opposition discovered that US chargé d’affaires
Joseph Jova was assisting the Christian Democratic Party candidate.
Christian Democrat Eduardo Frei Montalva, with the CIA’s help, defeated
Allende.
A
CIA memo dated October 3, 1955, describes CIA support for the
pro-Western. Masjumi Party in the Indonesian election, the nation’s
first since independence. CIA director Allen Dulles appeared to be
hopeful about the chances of a Masjumi victory due to Indonesia’s “large
percentage of illiterates.” In the 1984 El Salvador presidential
election, the CIA supported Christian Democrat Jose Napoleon Duarte over
the more extreme-right winger, Roberto d’Aubisson. Republican US
Senator Jesse Helms of North Carolina charged that the CIA “meddled” in
the election on behalf of Duarte. It was even discovered that the
“invisible ink” used on the fingers of those who had voted was supplied
from the CIA.
If
the United States truly wants to halt foreign interference in
elections, it must be the first to advocate and adhere to such a policy.
Just as with the nuclear test-ban treaty, the convention to abolish
biological and chemical weapons, and the treaty to prohibit weapons in
outer space, the United States should call for an international treaty
to ban election interference in all of its forms – the use of
cyber-attacks, propaganda, social media manipulation, and funding of
foreign political parties. Without such a commitment, US protestations
about election meddling will continue to be a case of “do as I say, not
as I do.”
Comments
Post a Comment