|
Send to a friend
Printer Friendly PDF Format
Subscribe to FFF Email Update
Subscribe to Freedom Daily
An Anti-Democracy Foreign Policy: Guatemala
by
Jacob G. Hornberger,
February 11, 2005
Unfortunately, the CIA success in Iran, which
produced the CIAs ouster of Irans democratically elected prime
minister, bred a CIA success in another
part of the world, Latin America. One year after the 1953
coup in Iran, the CIA did it again, this time in
Guatemala, where U.S. officials feared the communist threat even more than they did in Iran.
This time, the target was the democratically elected
president of Guatemala, Jacobo Arbenz, a self-avowed
socialist whose domestic policies were in fact modeled
after the socialist New Deal policies of U.S. President
Franklin Roosevelt.
Arbenzs socialist mindset had driven him to adopt
an agrarian reform plan, a type of
land-distribution scheme that unfortunately is all too common
in Latin America. The plan entailed the confiscation of a portion of
land owned by a major U.S.
corporation operating in Guatemala at that time, United
Fruit, and its redistribution to Guatemalan peasants.
While the plan was an almost perfect embodiment of the
socialist concept of taking property from the
rich to give to the poor, in actuality it was no
different in principle from the wealth-redistribution
revolution that FDRs welfare-state concept brought
to America, whereby the primary purpose of the federal
government became taxing the income of the rich in order
to redistribute the money to the needy (or, in reality, to the politically privileged).
So Arbenz had two strikes against him already as far as
the CIA was concerned his belief in socialism and
his confrontation with a major U.S. corporation that had
strong allies in the U.S. Congress. His third strike
knocked him out his unwillingness to obey U.S.
government orders to rid his government of self-avowed
communists.
Consequently, flush with the success of its
coup in Iran the year before, in 1954 the CIA secretly organized and engineered
a military coup in Guatemala that ousted the
democratically elected Arbenz from power. Schlesinger and Kinzer write:
The United States organized, financed, and equipped the invasion forces. U.S. personnel flew the rebel aircraft and filled the airways with bogus transmissions suggesting a much larger force had invaded. Unrelenting U.S. diplomatic and political pressure encouraged treason and demoralized supporters. CIA assets in the officer corps and the administration worked actively to undermine President Arbenz's authority and block efforts to move against the rebels.
Unaware that the CIA was orchestrating the military coup against him, throughout the crisis Arbenz turned to the U.S. government for help, innocently placing his faith in a government that was purportedly committed to advancing democracy. On Sunday, June 27, 1954, democratically elected President Jacobo Arbenz was ousted from office and fled Guatemala. The CIA replaced him with an unelected Guatemalan military dictator, Col. Carlos Castillo Armas, whom the CIA designated the Liberator of the Guatemalan people.
Canceling the presidential election scheduled for 1955 and continuing emergency suspension of civil liberties, including freedom of the press, Castillo Armas retained the unwavering support of the U.S. government. A year after taking office, he visited Washington, where he was warmly greeted by Vice President Richard Nixon and, not surprisingly given that he was a military man, was accorded the privilege of reviewing a U.S. military honor guard with Nixon at his side. Nixon visted Guatemala in 1955, declaring that this is the first instance in history were a Communist government has been replaced by a free one.
The CIA's new free regime lasted for three years. Plagued by corruption, chaos, dissent, and violence, the Castillo Armas regime came to a violent end in 1957, when the CIAs Liberator was assassinated by one of his guards, who supposedly committed suicide immediately after killing the president.
Castillo Armas was then followed by a succession of U.S.-approved
Guatemalan military regimes, regimes whose
military men, over the years, would be trained in torture, assassination, and counter-insurgency techniques at the Pentagons infamous School of the Americas. The CIA-induced Guatemalan coup
and the four decades of brutal, torturous,
U.S.-government-supported military rule that came with it
precipitated a civil war in Guatemala that would last some 40 years
and ultimately take the lives of more than 200,000
Guatemalan people.
In their book Bitter
Fruit: The Story of the American Coup in
Guatemala, Stephen Schlesinger and Stephen Kinzer
write,
The [Historical Clarification Commission], which was
headed by a German lawyer, Christian Tomuschat, estimated
that the conflict had caused more than 200,000 deaths,
and blamed the military for 93 percent of them. In a
speech presenting the report, Mr. Tomuschat said that
while he and his fellow commissioners knew when they
began their work more or less what had happened during
the conflict, no one of us could have imagined the
dimensions of this tragedy, not even the Guatemalan
commissioners who had lived through the experience
directly.
It is with profound sadness that the commission
learned of the extreme cruelty with which many of the
violations were committed, of the large number of girls
and boys who were victims of violent cruelty and murder,
and of the special brutality directed against women,
especially against Mayan women, who were tortured, raped
and murdered, Mr. Tomuschat said. State
security forces blindly pursued the anti-Communist
struggle without respect for any legal principles or the
most elemental ethical and religious values.
In 1999, President Clinton, visiting Guatemala, candidly
admitted, For the United States, it is important
that I state clearly that support for military forces and
intelligence units which engaged in violence and
widespread repression was wrong, and the United States
must not repeat that mistake.
What if the CIA had not intervened in the domestic
affairs of Guatemala? What if it hadnt violently
ousted its democratically elected president? What if it
had not installed a series of brutal U.S.-approved
military dictatorships in Guatemala? What if it had
simply stayed out of the natural democratic progression
in Guatemala, letting regularly scheduled national
elections to take place in 1955, one year after the coup?
Schlesinger and Kinzer write,
Had Arbenz served out his term, the opposition might well
have been strong enough to contest and even win the 1955
elections. Although a distinct minority, the conservative
opposition had both money and organized religion on its
side.... In short, the democratic option however
uncertain its results was still open to Guatemalan
conservatives in 1954. The U.S. intervention gave them an
opportunity to win by opting instead for the security of
authoritarian repression. In taking this path, they
condemned their country to four decades of unremitting
brutality and violence.
The CIAs easy success in Iran and
Guatemala then drove it to seek regime change in Cuba,
where President Fidel Castros steadfast refusal to
do the bidding of U.S. officials led not only to the Bay
of Pigs disaster but also to the U.S. governments
45-year obsession with ousting Castro
from power. (While Castro is an unelected communist dictator, it has never been a lack of democracy in Cuba that has driven the U.S. government's obsession with ousting him from power. Instead, the obsession is rooted in Castro's longtime, steadfast commitment to keeping Cuba independent of U.S. government control, unlike other Latin American regimes, both elected and unelected, which consider it an enormous honor and privilege to be well-paid vassals in the U.S. government's vast overseas empire.)
Then, in 1973, faced with the democratic election of
another self-avowed socialist in Latin America, Salvador
Allende, the CIA supported his violent military ouster
and the installation of a military strongman into power,
Gen. Augusto Pinochet. I wrote about Pinochets
U.S.-supported 17-year reign of murder, torture, and
terror in my recent article U.S. Regime Change, Torture, and Murder in
Chile.
In 1971, after drifting across Europe with his family and
then living for a time in Uruguay and Cuba, Jacobo Arbenz
died while residing in Mexico. A broken man by that time
(his 25-year-old daughter had committed suicide with a
revolver in 1965), the official cause of Arbenzs
death was that he had died of natural causes (he drowned
in his bathtub) but some people had doubts about that explanation.
In 1996, the long Guatemalan civil war, which had its
roots in the U.S. governments anti-democracy coup
in 1954, finally came to an end with the signing of a
peace accord. As Schlesinger and Kinzer put it in the Afterword to the 1999 edition of their book Bitter
Fruit, The longest war in Latin American history
had come to an end. But not without a high price,
not least of which included the lives of more than
200,000 people and the brutal torture of countless more
at the hands of U.S.-supported and Pentagon-trained military regimes.
A deep-seated culture of violence has taken root in
Guatemala. Military regimes, army units and police squads
have set an awful example, teaching entire generations
that terror and murder are appropriate ways to achieve
both political and personal ends. For their crimes they
have enjoyed nearly complete immunity, as the police and
judicial systems exist to serve the unjust ruling
order....
[With the signing of the 1996 peace accord] a long and bleak winter has
ended in the supposed land of eternal spring, and that is
a genuine cause for rejoicing. The terms of public debate
have shifted dramatically, with even many conservatives
openly accepting the need for change in terms that would
have been considered subversive only a few years ago. Now
begins the long task of rebuilding a shattered land, not
simply politically and economically but also morally. It
will take all the efforts of the long-suffering
Guatemalan people, and all the help the outside world can
give them, to consolidate the great victory they have won
and finally drive a stake through the heart of darkness
that terrorized them for so many years.
Since the 9/11 attacks, U.S. officials have consistently
maintained that foreigners hate us because of
our freedom and values. Rather than accepting
that official mantra, Americans would be better served by
studying the history of the U.S. governments
foreign policy, including its anti-democracy
successes in Iran, Guatemala, and Chile, to
get a grasp on why so many people around the world hate
the U.S. government and to appreciate why the only solution to America's woes lies in a dismantling of the interventionist empire that currently holds our nation in its grip and in a restoration of a non-interventionist republic that guided the founding of our nation.
Jacob G. Hornberger is founder and president of The
Future of Freedom Foundation. Send him email.
|