How to create a confrontation between two nations
Tying
the loose ends
By
Eduardo Dimas
The
news that Exxon-Mobil, one of the world’s largest oil companies, had
sued Petróleos de Venezuela S.A. (PDVSA) in a New York court
before the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes
(ICSID) has been closely covered by the international media.
Exxon-Mobil
"arranged" for the New York court to order the freezing of
about $300 million of PDVSA’s funds in the United States. According
to other information, there is a possibility that it will order the
seizure of about $12 billion in PDVSA assets.
For
its part, PDVSA announced the suspension of the delivery of 40,000
barrels of oil a day to Exxon-Mobil. The ICSID has not ruled on the
matter, but we should remember that only in a very few occasions has
it issued a ruling that favors a Third World government.
The
ICSID is an instrument of the big transnationals and the visible
portion of the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI), a
monstrosity that the centers of world economic power tried to create
in secret to render sacred and untouchable the investments of the big
corporations in underdeveloped countries.
As
is known, Exxon-Mobil’s lawsuit claims as its "justification"
the Venezuelan government’s decision to nationalize some of the
concessions held by oil transnationals …
Tying
the loose ends
By
Eduardo Dimas Read Spanish Version
The
news that Exxon-Mobil, one of the world’s largest oil companies, had
sued Petróleos de Venezuela S.A. (PDVSA) in a New York court
before the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes
(ICSID) has been closely covered by the international media.
Exxon-Mobil
"arranged" for the New York court to order the freezing of
about $300 million of PDVSA’s funds in the United States. According
to other information, there is a possibility that it will order the
seizure of about $12 billion in PDVSA assets.
For
its part, PDVSA announced the suspension of the delivery of 40,000
barrels of oil a day to Exxon-Mobil. The ICSID has not ruled on the
matter, but we should remember that only in a very few occasions has
it issued a ruling that favors a Third World government.
The
ICSID is an instrument of the big transnationals and the visible
portion of the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI), a
monstrosity that the centers of world economic power tried to create
in secret to render sacred and untouchable the investments of the big
corporations in underdeveloped countries.
As
is known, Exxon-Mobil’s lawsuit claims as its "justification"
the Venezuelan government’s decision to nationalize some of the
concessions held by oil transnationals in the Orinoco Basin, so the
Venezuelan state may hold a majority of the shares. That is the right
of any independent state. The United States government itself has
exercised it on several occasions recently.
Exxon-Mobil
refused to accept indemnification on the basis of value in its
accounting books and demanded a larger sum of money. At the end,
there was no agreement. Other oil transnationals accepted and are
being paid by the Venezuelan state.
As
expected, the U.S. State Department announced its support for the
Exxon-Mobil lawsuit. We should remember that one of the large oil
tankers owned by the company was named after Condoleezza Rice. A
gesture of recognition? A community of interests?
But
that’s a secondary issue. In reality, support from the State
Department is part of the White House’s plans to destabilize and
destroy the Bolivarian Revolution headed by President Hugo Chávez.
To prove this, I will ask you to tie some not-so-loose ends.
In
his last "Hello, President" for January, Chávez
said: "I alert the world about the following. The U.S. empire is
creating the conditions to generate an armed conflict between
Colombia and Venezuela." The Venezuelan leader was not talking
just to talk. The preparations for a conflict between the two
countries are very evident.
First,
the chief of the U.S. armed forces’ Southern Command, visited
Colombia. That same week, on Jan. 19, 2008 in Bogotá, Drug
Enforcement Administration chief John P. Walters accused Chávez
of having become "a great facilitator of cocaine trafficking to
Europe and other parts of the hemisphere."
In
other words, according to Mr. Walters, the Venezuelan government is
part of the traffic in drugs, even though the United Nations and
other international organizations say exactly the opposite.
On
Jan. 24, 2008, Colombia’s Minister of Defense, Juan Manuel Santos,
declared that at least three chiefs of the Revolutionary Armed Forces
of Colombia (FARC) live in Venezuela. He gave no details.
At
the same time, Colombia’s Vice President, Francisco Santos, accused
the mayor of Maracaibo, Gian Carlo Di Martino, of furnishing weapons
to the Colombian guerrillas, specifically the National Liberation
Army (ELN), on the basis of a video that appears to be false.
For
his part, Di Martino denounced "the plot that reveals a plan by
the United States and the Colombian government to unleash a process
of destabilization on the Venezuelan border."
Almost
simultaneously, the Colombian intelligence services accused the
Venezuelan government of delivering weapons and munitions to the FARC
and the ELN. The U.S. State Department had formulated similar
accusations in the past. The message is obvious: the Venezuelan
government protects the drug traffickers and the "terrorists."
What’s
most interesting in all those accusations is that they are made
without presenting any proof. As it happened with Iraq and now with
Iran, it is a way to prepare national and international public
opinion, to discredit Hugo Chávez and to create a suitable
environment to start a war between two Latin American nations.
These
accusations are echoed by the main U.S. and European media and the
press throughout Latin America. They grandly forget the proven links
between the Central Intelligence Agency and drug trafficking. If this
is not a conspiracy by the highest levels of world and regional
oligarchy, it’s the closest thing to one, in my opinion.
Something
that has drawn the attention of observers is the fact that the famous
march of Feb. 4 against the FARC became, in some Colombian public
squares, an act of repudiation against Hugo Chávez and
Venezuela. The objective is obvious: to create an anti-Venezuelan,
anti-Chávez sentiment among Colombians that could justify any
action.
To
the above, add the internal campaign to destabilize the Bolivarian
Revolution. More than 150,000 tons of food were removed from
Venezuela through the border with Colombia. Meanwhile, the opposition
media promoted hoarding of foodstuffs to create an artificial
shortage and stir the population into anger. If that reminds you of
Salvador Allende’s Chile, you’re not far off the truth.
The
rumors about internal problems within the ranks of the Bolivarian
Revolution are numerous. One states that President Chávez is a
drug addict and needs to cure himself. Those rumors come regularly
from abroad, from the Empire’s think tanks, and are spread by its
allies in Venezuela and the rest of the world.
Apparently,
it’s a new version of Operation Pincers, intended to keep the
Constitutional referendum of Dec. 2 from succeeding. On one hand, an
internal crisis is created; on the other, an aggression inside
Venezuelan territory is prepared.
In
this sense, it is opportune to note the presence on the
Venezuela-Colombia border (2,200 kilometers long) of Colombian
paramilitary groups, linked to the Colombian military high command,
that act in coordination with Venezuelan land-holders. An unspecified
number of revolutionary, peasant and labor leaders have been murdered
in that region.
Those
groups could provoke an incident that might "justify" a
confrontation between the two countries. Needless to say, Colombia
would receive total support from the White House, which is interested
in quashing the Bolivarian Revolution, which today is the principal
force of the process of Latin American integration, the struggle
against neoliberalism and the true independence of Latin America.
In
recent days, Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega declared that he
hoped that the Colombian people would prevent a confrontation between
the two countries and defined Colombia as a country occupied by the
United States. The Venezuelan side should also do all it can to
prevent a confrontation.
That’s
because a war between the two countries would be a harsh blow for the
process of integration of Latin America. You don’t have to be a
fortune teller to realize that a chasm would split the regional
governments, because some would support Colombia and the United
States, others would back Venezuela.
In
the end, the big losers would be the Latin American people. I believe
that today, more than ever, common sense must prevail. Our people
must not play the game of the imperial and oligarchic interests. They
must not be tricked by provocations and must make it very clear that
the cost of a military adventure against Venezuela would be unpayable
from every standpoint.
Empires
are usually more dangerous in decadence than while in full power. In
the case of Venezuela, there is a dual situation that is not at all
convenient for the imperial interests. On one hand, Venezuela is a
great producer of crude oil. On the other, it heads the process of
integration, independence and social justice in Latin America.
Venezuela
is an obstacle to the Empire’s desire to control Latin America’s
wealth and markets. Therefore, the Empire will do everything possible
to eliminate that obstacle, no matter how much blood is spilled. Only
if the progressive peoples and governments of Latin America (which so
far have not taken a stand) join in common cause, can that awful
intent be prevented. I invite you to meditate.
