- John F Kennedy created the death squads of Central America Archived Message
Posted by Der
on June 28, 2023, 8:10 am, in reply to "Kennedy myth rising again?"
|
Chomsky: "One of the most significant legacies left by the [Kennedy] Administration was its 1962 decision to shift the mission of the Latin American military from “hemispheric defense” to “internal security,” while providing the means and training to ensure that the task would be properly performed. As described by Charles Maechling, who led counterinsurgency and internal defense planning from 1961 to 1966, that historic decision led to a change from toleration “of the rapacity and cruelty of the Latin American military” to “direct complicity” in “the methods of Heinrich Himmler’s extermination squads.” The aftermath is well known, including the establishment of the death squads of Central America; the meeting of Central American presidents in March 1963, chaired by JFK, was “the landmark event in the formation of the national security apparatus” in the region, Alan Nairn comments. These improved modes of repression were a central component of Kennedy’s Latin American policies, a companion to the Alliance for Progress, which required effective population control because of the dire impact of its development programs on much of the population. Related projects helped subvert democracy and bring on brutally repressive regimes in El Salvador, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, British Guiana, Chile, Brazil, and elsewhere. The export-promotion policies of the Alliance brought about comforting “economic miracles” in the technical sense. Unemployment increased from 18 to 25 million and agricultural production per person declined during the “decade of development.” The “economic miracles” turned into the crisis of the ’70s, setting the stage for vastly increased US-backed terror and forecasts of new “economic miracles” as the old policies are reinstated. Six military coups overthrew popular regimes during the Kennedy years, ten more later; in several cases, Kennedy Administration policies contributed materially to the outcome. In 1962-1963, Kennedy’s CIA initiated its (successful) program to subvert the 1964 election in Chile, because, as the NSC determined, “We are not prepared to risk a Socialist or FRAP [Allende] victory, for fear of nationalization of U.S. investments” and “probable Communist influence.” The role of the Kennedy Administration in bringing about the Brazilian military coup of 1964 was still more significant. Putting aside the catastrophic investor-oriented economic policies, there is no serious question that “Through its recognition policy, internal security initiatives, and military and economic aid programs, the [Kennedy] Administration demonstrably bolstered regimes and groups that were undemocratic, conservative, and frequently repressive. The short-term security that anti-communist elites could provide was purchased at the expense of long-term political and social democracy” (Stephen Rabe). Without proceeding any further, it is not easy to make a case that JFK represented some departure from the norm of business rule. Extracts from "Rethinking Camelot - JFK, The Vietnam War, and US Political Culture" (Noam Chomsky, South End Books, 1993, Haymarket Books, 2015) Chomsky also clearly shows that Kennedy wanted a "military victory" in Vietnam and was willing to do whatever it took to obtain that. The media have done an admirable job on Kennedy. And we collude in it, not least by forensically examining his assassination and helping to portray him as a victim. He was a monster. He got off light. |