Turambar
Member
Back in the old days the US policy was to pull as many strings as possible to make things go the way the status quo wanted. The best example seems to be Latin America. Lately, since the end of the cold war, it seems this approach has been mostly abandoned (at least in Latin America) in favour of traditional diplomacy.
While I believe part of the blame lies with the US political elite of the time, we often forget that the ones carrying the actions were members of the military of the affected country or of the local elite. True, the US provided support in terms of intelligence and sometimes even weapons, but the one pulling the triggers were almost always locals. And almost always, the US was surprised at the savagery with which the local elites acted. I remember back in the early 1980s the US provided counter-insurgency training to the armed forces of El Salvador, but once they saw that instead of looking for the guerrilla fighters as intended the local military were instead razing entire villages to the ground and killing innocent women and children, they backtracked and even denied involvement. Look, I am not naive to believe that the US was not involved in many if not most of the region's coupe d'etats and civil wars, but I think that we should cut the US some slack and also blame the local elites for using the force in such a brutal way against their own people. The US probably never intended things to go as far as they did most of the time, probably they thought that the local elites would act in a more predictable, less brutal way. Some examples:
- In El Salvador, there was a famous paramilitary leader called Roberto DAbuisson, a former military commander of french ancestry who was trained in counter insurgency. However, he literally went nuts with power and started organising mass killings and torture. He was eventually called "blowtorch Bob" because the story goes that he loved to torture victims with fire. The Reagan administration was so appalled by this mini Frankenstein they had created that there are rumours that the US intervened in 1984 to make sure a centre left government won the elections because this Mr. D'Abuisson was likely going to become a right wing Pol Pot and start a genocide.
- In Guatemala, also in the 1980s, during the military rule things got so out of control that they set fire to the Spanish embassy because some left wing leaders had taken refuge there. Many people died and the Spanish ambassador had to be moved to the residence of the US Ambassador, where he was protected by the US marines stationed there. Most of the nations back then cut diplomatic ties with Guatemala, and the US stopped all military aid to the country. However, the Guatemalan elite was able to get weapons and training from other nations such as Israel and apartheid South Africa. The training they received was even more brutal than what they were getting through US channels and there were numerous massacres perpetrated, particularly against the native ethnic population.
So as you can see it is not only the USA's fault that the region is so fucked up. The problem dates back to colonial times and the creation of local elites that are ethnically and culturally different from most of the native population. The US was just an available strong ally, and the "red paranoia" of the cold war helped the local elites convince the US politicians to lend a hand. Had the US refused, they would have just found another country willing to facilitate their repressive regimes.
While I believe part of the blame lies with the US political elite of the time, we often forget that the ones carrying the actions were members of the military of the affected country or of the local elite. True, the US provided support in terms of intelligence and sometimes even weapons, but the one pulling the triggers were almost always locals. And almost always, the US was surprised at the savagery with which the local elites acted. I remember back in the early 1980s the US provided counter-insurgency training to the armed forces of El Salvador, but once they saw that instead of looking for the guerrilla fighters as intended the local military were instead razing entire villages to the ground and killing innocent women and children, they backtracked and even denied involvement. Look, I am not naive to believe that the US was not involved in many if not most of the region's coupe d'etats and civil wars, but I think that we should cut the US some slack and also blame the local elites for using the force in such a brutal way against their own people. The US probably never intended things to go as far as they did most of the time, probably they thought that the local elites would act in a more predictable, less brutal way. Some examples:
- In El Salvador, there was a famous paramilitary leader called Roberto DAbuisson, a former military commander of french ancestry who was trained in counter insurgency. However, he literally went nuts with power and started organising mass killings and torture. He was eventually called "blowtorch Bob" because the story goes that he loved to torture victims with fire. The Reagan administration was so appalled by this mini Frankenstein they had created that there are rumours that the US intervened in 1984 to make sure a centre left government won the elections because this Mr. D'Abuisson was likely going to become a right wing Pol Pot and start a genocide.
- In Guatemala, also in the 1980s, during the military rule things got so out of control that they set fire to the Spanish embassy because some left wing leaders had taken refuge there. Many people died and the Spanish ambassador had to be moved to the residence of the US Ambassador, where he was protected by the US marines stationed there. Most of the nations back then cut diplomatic ties with Guatemala, and the US stopped all military aid to the country. However, the Guatemalan elite was able to get weapons and training from other nations such as Israel and apartheid South Africa. The training they received was even more brutal than what they were getting through US channels and there were numerous massacres perpetrated, particularly against the native ethnic population.
So as you can see it is not only the USA's fault that the region is so fucked up. The problem dates back to colonial times and the creation of local elites that are ethnically and culturally different from most of the native population. The US was just an available strong ally, and the "red paranoia" of the cold war helped the local elites convince the US politicians to lend a hand. Had the US refused, they would have just found another country willing to facilitate their repressive regimes.
