Tag Archives: #Mexico

The Shield of the Americas: a summit of nations on their knees

by Jim Hodgson

Leaders of a dozen Latin American and Caribbean nations spent a few hours last week with President Donald Trump at one of his golf courses near Miami. This was the launch of the “Shield of the Americas,” a bloc of right-wing governments that have pledged to join Trump’s war against so-called “narco-terrorism.”

The spectacle recalled for me a 1992 film, El Viaje (The Journey), by Argentinian director Fernando “Pino” Solanas. It won prizes at film festivals in Cannes and Havana, and I saw it in Toronto.

El Viaje satirizes the way Latin American governments in the 1980s and 90s knelt before the rich countries for the sake of debt forgiveness, implementing austerity programs that harmed their own people. One scene (above right) shows a meeting of the Organización de Países Arrodillados (the Organization of Countries on their Knees). You can see a clip on Facebook.

In Miami, the leaders plainly knew that their face time with Trump was squeezed out from his preoccupation with his ill-conceived and unpopular war on Iran. They even applauded his insults: “I’m not learning your damn language,” said Trump. “I don’t have time.”

Beyond the farce, however, there is harsh reality to be faced. 

Trump called for an “anti-cartel coalition” that would use military might to “eradicate” drug cartels. A day earlier, his “war secretary,” Pete Hegseth, warned representatives from 16 countries in the region that if they didn’t adopt more aggressive strategies against drug cartels, the Trump regime would do it for them. Hegseth urged the countries to remain “Christian nations, under God, proud of our shared heritage with strong borders,” and not to be led astray by “radical narco-communism, anarcho-tyranny… and uncontrolled mass migration.”

Since his return to power 14 months ago:

Trump’s threat at the summit to “take care of” Cuba drew an immediate response from Havana. President Miguel Díaz-Canel wrote on X:

“The little reactionary and neocolonial summit in Florida, convened by the United States and attended by right-wing governments from the region, commit themselves to accept lethal use of U.S. military force to resolve internal problems of order and tranquility in their countries.”

Díaz-Canel said the summit was an attack on the 2014 proclamation of Latin America and the Caribbean as a Zone of Peace, a declaration signed in Havana (photo above by René Pérez Massola.) The summit, he added, also attacked “aspirations for regional integration” and was “a sign of their willingness to subordinate themselves to the interests of the powerful nation to the north.”

Cuba’s foreign minister, Bruno Rodríguez, said the Miami summit was “a clear and dangerous setback in the long and difficult process of independence for the peoples of Latin America and the Caribbean.”

In his speech, Trump said that Mexico was the “epicentre” of drug-trafficking. The cartels, he said, “are getting worse and taking over the country. The cartels are running Mexico. We can’t have that. Too close to us, too close to you.”

Hours later, President Claudia Sheinbaum, pleaded for “cabeza fría” (cool heads) as Mexico determines its next moves – all (like Canada) under the pressure of new free trade talks with the United States.

A few days before the summit, Costa Rica’s president-elect, Laura Fernández, called Mexico “a reference point for where we do not want to go” regarding violence, organized crime and drug-trafficking. She was the minister of national planning and economic policy under the out-going president, Rodrigo Chaves. Chaves attended the Sheild summit, not Fernández, but her comment got attention in Mexico.

In an editorial, the daily newspaper La Jornada said that if Fernández wants to avoid the suffering experienced in Mexico over the past two decades, she should bear in mind that the crisis of insecurity was launched by a politician of the same ultra-right current that she represents. After his election in 2006, President Felipe Calderón began Mexico’s war on drugs by:

“opening the country to U.S. spy agencies, subordinating national interests to those of Washington, ignoring the social and economic roots of the crime phenomenon, and declaring a war against his own citizens. The violence of the state became a criterion for measuring success. The lessons of the Calderón years are important to for the other governments (and the governed) that still see or pretend to see the White House ‘war on drugs’ as an offensive against criminal structures and not the mechanism of imperial domination that it is.”

Trump says U.S. is ‘starting to talk with Cuba’ even as he tries to block oil imports

by Jim Hodgson

In the face of U.S. President Donald Trump’s threats to impose new tariffs on any nation that exports oil to Cuba, we all need to stand firm. Here are two ways to send messages to Canadian leaders.

First, the Take Action proposed by Canadian churches, trade unions and NGOs. Yes: it pre-dates the current crisis, but its message is vital. Canada cannot be silent.

Second, the Canadian Network on Cuba has an on-line petition to Canadian parliamentarians. It too pre-dates the immediate crisis, but is still an important means to communicate.

Of course you can write your own letters to leaders in whichever country you live.

Take heart from increasingly strong messages from Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum.

Today, she denied Trump’s claim a night earlier that they had talked about Cuba, much less that he had asked her to stop sending Mexican oil to Cuba and that she would comply.

La Jornada

The only such conversation, she said while travelling in Sonora state, had been between her foreign affairs secretary, Juan Ramón de la Fuente, and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Sheinbaum has said several times this week that her country will continue to send humanitarian aid including oil to Cuba. Various sources report that Cuba has only enough oil to satisfy needs for another 15 to 20 days.

For his part, de la Fuente told Mexican legislators today that Mexico considers it “unacceptable that there not be humanitarian aid where it is needed, when some country in the world requires it.”

Saturday night, while travelling from Washington DC to his home in Florida, Trump said the United States was beginning to talk with Cuban leaders. (There is no confirmation as of Sunday evening from Cuba that such talks have begun.)

In comments to reports on Air Force One, he added: “It doesn’t have to be a humanitarian crisis. I think they probably would come to us and want to make a deal,” Trump said Saturday. “So Cuba would be free again.”

He predicted they would make some sort of deal with Cuba and said, “I think, you know, we’ll be kind.” (U.S. interventions since 1812 have not been known for their kindness.)

The comments follow more than six decades of U.S. sanctions aimed at inducing regime change in revolutionary Cuba, the kidnapping four weeks ago of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, and Trump’s threat to impose tariffs on any country that continued to sell oil to Cuba. 

On Wednesday night, Jan. 29, he declared a “national emergency” to protect “U.S. national security and foreign policy from the Cuban regime’s malign actions and policies.”

Granma photo: Ricardo López Hevia

Cuban leaders have condemned and denounced this new escalation of the “U.S. economic blockade.”

“Surrender will never be an option, and hard times like these must be faced with courage and bravery,” said President Miguel Díaz-Canel Saturday.

The Trump regime’s tactic of confiscating Venezuelan oil tankers has worsened a fuel and electricity crisis in Cuba. The Cuban people face rolling blackouts and struggle to cope without reliable fuel and electricity supplies.

U.S. approach to Venezuela is “imperial madness”

by Jim Hodgson

The claim by U.S. President Donald Trump that his forces attacked “a big facility” in Venezuela left me wondering if he was (again) flat-out lying, having another cognition meltdown, or maybe speaking some sort of truth.

In a radio interview Dec. 26, Trump said: “We just knocked out – I don’t know if you read or you saw – they have a big plant or big facility where they send the, you know, where the ships come from. Two nights ago, we knocked that out. So we hit them very hard.”

In Venezuela, officials reacted hesitantly. It turns out there was a fire earlier that day at a chemical warehouse run by a company called Primazol in Maracaibo, a major hub for the export of petroleum. But in Venezuela, the fire was treated as a minor event, and the company issued a statement rejecting “the versions circulating on social media,” stating that they “have no relation to the incident and it does not correspond to official or verified information.”

Headline and photo from TeleSur English site.

The Primazol plant is located five km from the sea, making it doubtful that there was any facility there from which boats carrying drugs could depart, much less a “dock,” as Trump claimed in a second set of comments at Mar-a-Lago Dec. 29. (“There was a major explosion in the dock area where they load the boats up with drugs.”)

Today’s New York Times morning newsletter quotes U.S. officials who may be trying to provide cover for their boss or offering a semi-truthful account:

A port strike

The C.I.A. [Central Intelligence Agency] conducted a drone strike on a port facility in Venezuela last week, people briefed on the operation said. The strike was on a dock where U.S. officials believe a Venezuelan gang was storing narcotics, and it did not kill anyone, they said. The strike is the first known American operation inside Venezuela.

This Times story offers new details on the strike, which President Trump has already discussed openly, despite the secrecy that typically surrounds C.I.A. operations. 

The Trump administration has focused on three goals — to limit Nicolás Maduro’s power, to use military force against drug cartels and to secure access to Venezuela’s vast oil reserves for U.S. companies.

“We’ve had 27 weeks of imperial madness”

Venezuelan Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello denounced the silence of the international community, particularly the United Nations (UN) and other multilateral organizations, regarding the months-long offensive waged against his country by the United States government.

“We’ve had 27 weeks of imperial madness… harassment, threats, attacks, persecution, theft, piracy, murder, and the world – I mean the world, that UN and its cronies – is silent; nobody says a word,” he stated during the activation of a new security program in Aragua state. 

He added that “imperialism, those who think they own the world,” not only intend to steal Venezuela’s natural resources, but “want to go further” and subjugate the Venezuelan people because “they don’t like dignified peoples who demand respect and respect themselves.”

Cabello, who highlighted the character of the Venezuelan people in the face of years of attacks of various kinds, offered assurance: “They are not going to ruin our Christmas or New Year, they cannot because of how many things we have endured, how many things they have tried against this people.”

On Monday afternoon, the U.S. Southern Command announced that it had struck another small boat in the eastern Pacific, killing two more men. The new strike means that the U.S. military has killed more than 100 individuals in an operation widely condemned as illegal.

Mexico’s president rejects interventions, call for greater UN leadership

Speaking at a news conference early on Dec. 30, President Claudia Sheinbaum said that the UN should play a more prominent role in these cases.

“What we have to say is that we do not agree with interventions, especially military ones. That is enshrined in our country’s constitution, and that is what we will continue to defend,” she said in response to a question about the case.

When asked if there should be a call in the region to support Venezuela, she replied, “Yes, and as we have said, the United Nations must take a more prominent role in these cases.”

Mexico and other countries backed Venezuela in a Dec. 23 meeting of the UN Security Council, but the United States used its veto power to block a Venezuelan resolution from even coming to a vote. 

Diverse parts of the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) are responding to the situations facing Venezuela in different ways. 

On Dec. 24, several UN experts (“special rapporteurs”) denounced the partial maritime blockade imposed by the United States on Venezuela as violating fundamental rules of international law. The same day, Venezuelan Foreign Minister Yván Gil welcomed the statement: “The truth about Venezuela is breaking through around the world.”

Meanwhile, the OHCHR has announced a new “fact-finding” mission to Venezuela that will include Alex Neve, former secretary general of Amnesty International Canada.

And Canada?

Silence from Ottawa regarding U.S. aggression towards Venezuela has been resounding – even in the face of reports that Canada helps the United States in those boat attacks. It’s clear that the government of Prime Minister Mark Carney is choosing its words carefully in the face of U.S. threats to Canada’s sovereignty.

But Canada should at least uphold the 2014 declaration by Latin America and Caribbean countries that their region is a “zone of peace,” support calls for UN leadership in peace-making, and reject the new U.S. National Security Strategy.