THE PROOF
IS IN THE DOCUMENTS: THE CIA WAS INVOLVED IN THE COUP AGAINST VENEZUELAN
PRESIDENT CHAVEZ
By Eva Golinger
On April 12, 2002,
White House spokesperson Ari Fleischer stated:
“Let me
share with you the administration's thoughts about what's taking place
in Venezuela. It remains a somewhat fluid situation. But yesterday's
events in Venezuela resulted in a change in the government and the assumption
of a transitional authority until new elections can be held.
The details still are unclear. We know that the action encouraged by
the Chavez government provoked this crisis. According to the best information
available, the Chavez government suppressed peaceful demonstrations.
Government supporters, on orders from the Chavez government, fired on
unarmed, peaceful protestors, resulting in 10 killed and 100 wounded.
The Venezuelan military and the police refused to fire on the peaceful
demonstrators and refused to support the government's role in such human
rights violations. The government also tried to prevent independent
news media from reporting on these events.
The results of these events are now that President Chavez has resigned
the presidency. Before resigning, he dismissed the vice president and
the cabinet, and a transitional civilian government has been installed.
This government has promised early elections.
The United States will continue to monitor events. That is what took
place, and the Venezuelan people expressed their right to peaceful protest.
It was a very large protest that turned out. And the protest was met
with violence.”
On that same day, U.S. Department of State spokesperson Philip T. Reeker,
claimed:
“In recent days, we expressed our hopes that all parties in Venezuela,
but especially the Chavez administration, would act with restraint and
show full respect for the peaceful expression of political opinion.
We are saddened at the loss of life. We wish to express our solidarity
with the Venezuelan people and look forward to working with all democratic
forces in Venezuela to ensure the full exercise of democratic rights.
The Venezuelan military commendably refused to fire on peaceful demonstrators,
and the media valiantly kept the Venezuelan public informed.
Yesterday's events in Venezuela resulted in a transitional government
until new elections can be held. Though details are still unclear, undemocratic
actions committed or encouraged by the Chavez administration provoked
yesterday's crisis in Venezuela. According to the best information available,
at this time: Yesterday, hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans gathered
peacefully to seek redress of their grievances. The Chavez Government
attempted to suppress peaceful demonstrations. Chavez supporters, on
orders, fired on unarmed, peaceful protestors, resulting in more than
100 wounded or killed. Venezuelan military and police refused orders
to fire on peaceful demonstrators and refused to support the government's
role in such human rights violations. The government prevented five
independent television stations from reporting on events. The results
of these provocations are: Chavez resigned the presidency. Before resigning,
he dismissed the Vice President and the Cabinet. A transition civilian
government has promised early elections.
We have every expectation that this situation will be resolved peacefully
and democratically by the Venezuelan people in accord with the principles
of the Inter-American Democratic Charter. The essential elements of
democracy, which have been weakened in recent months, must be restored
fully. We will be consulting with our hemispheric partners, within the
framework of the Inter-American Democratic Charter, to assist Venezuela.”
Why do I re-cite these statements here? These statements from the highest
levels of the U.S. Government show the prepared version of the events
that took place during the April 11-12 coup d’etat against Venezuelan
President Chávez. Moreover, these revealing statements now prove,
in light of documents recently obtained from the Central Intelligence
Agency (CIA) under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), that this
prepared version of events was knowingly false and made with the intention
of deceiving the international community in order to justify a violent
overthrow of a democratic government.
The White House and the State Department both claimed that the Chávez
government had provoked violence and actions that resulted in the President’s
alleged resignation. They also asserted that the Chávez government
had fired on unarmed, peaceful protesters and that the Venezuelan military
and police had refused orders to “support the government’s
role in human rights violations”. The U.S. Government referred
to the protests and actions of that day as though they were spontaneous,
unplanned events. The U.S. Government has also continued to deny to
this day any involvement whatsoever in the April 2002 coup d’etat.
However, there is a vast amount of evidence that has surfaced since
the coup demonstrating that the events on April 11, 2002 were entirely
premeditated by a sector of the opposition intent on overthrowing the
Chávez government. Furthermore, my own investigations have provided
a plethora of evidence proving the U.S. involvement in the coup on various
levels. Most revealing on the Venezuelan front was a news program on
Saturday morning, April 12, 2002, “24 Horas” with host Napoleon
Bravo. On that program, Bravo interviewed Vice-Admiral Carlos Molina
Tamayo, a professed coup leader, and Victor Manuel Garcia, Director
of the polling company CIFRA who claimed to have represented the “civil
society” during the coup. Both Molina Tamayo and Garcia gave a
jaw-dropping, detailed account of the events leading up to the coup
and those key Venezuelans involved, including crediting the private
televisions stations for their complicity and aide. Their testimony,
along with Chacao municipal mayor Leopoldo Lopez of the Primero Justicia
political party and Napoleon Bravo’s own admissions of complicity
in the coup, provided plenty of proof that the overthrow of Chávez
was a premeditated event.
Later, an extraordinary and award-winning documentary by filmmaker Angel
Palacios, “Puente Llaguno: Claves de un Masacre”, revealed
how the Venezuelan private media had manipulated and distorted the events
that unfolded on April 11, 2002 in the opposition march, which resulted
in widespread violence and death. The documentary also provided sufficient
proof that snipers unrelated to the Chávez government had provoked
the violence in the opposition march that justified the forced removal
of Chávez from office. Furthermore, the documentary succeeded
in proving that a well-planned military-civilian coup d’etat had
taken place that day and that those involved were connected to the highest
levels of the U.S. government.
But the evidence of actual U.S. involvement in the coup itself remained
scarce up until recently. On www.venezuelafoia.info, I have posted hundreds
of documents that evidence the intricate financing scheme the U.S. government
has been carrying out in Venezuela since 2001, that includes financing
well over twenty million dollars to opposition sectors. The funding
of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a quasi-governmental
entity in the U.S. financed entirely by Congress and established by
congressional legislation in 1983, has provided more than three million
dollars since late 2001 to opposition groups, many of which were key
participants in the April 2002 coup. And in June 2002, the U.S. Agency
for International Development (USAID), set up an Office of Transition
Initiatives (OTI) in the U.S. Embassy in Caracas, allegedly for the
purposing of helping Venezuela to resolve its political crisis. The
OTI in Caracas has counted on more than fifteen million dollars in funding
from Congress since June 2002 and has recently requested five million
more for 2005, despite the fact that it was only supposed to be a two-year
endeavor. All evidence obtained to date shows that the OTI has primarily
funded opposition groups and projects in Venezuela, particularly those
that were focused on the August 15, 2004 recall referendum against President
Chávez.
I have written other articles explaining the intervention model applied
through NED and USAID in Venezuela. This method of intervention is very
sophisticated and complex, as it penetrates civil society and social
organizations in a very subtle way and is often either undetectable
or flimsily justified by the concept of “promoting democracy”,
which is what the NED claims to do around the world, despite evidence
to the contrary. The mere fact in Venezuela that the NED has financed
exclusively anti-Chávez groups and those very same organizations
that were involved in the April 2002 coup shows that “democracy”
is far from the NED’s intention.
But the CIA intervention in Venezuela is of the crudest, simplest kind.
Top secret documents recently obtained and posted on www.venezuelafoia.info
show that in the weeks prior to the April 2002 coup against President
Chávez, the CIA had full knowledge of the events to occur and,
in fact, even had the detailed plans in their possession. An April 6,
2002 top secret intelligence brief headlining “Venezuela: Conditions
Ripening for Coup Attempt”, states, “Dissident military
factions, including some disgruntled senior officers and a group of
radical junior officers, are stepping up efforts to organize a coup
against President Chávez, possible as early as this month, [CENSORED].
The level of detail in the reported plans – [CENSORED] targets
Chávez and 10 other senior officers for arrest…”
The document further states, “To provoke military action, the
plotters may try to exploit unrest stemming from opposition demonstrations
slated for later this month…”
So the CIA knew that a coup attempt would take place soon after April
6, 2002, and moreover, they knew the plan would include Chávez’s
arrest and an exploitation of violence in the opposition march. In other
words, they knew the plans before the coup occurred and surely they
knew the actors involved, many of whose names are probably in the censored
parts of the top-secret documents. One could assume that if the CIA
had the detailed plans in their possession in the weeks prior to the
coup it was because they were associating and conspiring with the coup
plotters. So, when Ari Fleischer and Philip Reeker made those statements
on April 12, 2002 on behalf of the U.S. Government, they did so with
full knowledge that a coup had taken place, Chávez had been arrested
and the violence in the opposition march, which they attributed to Chávez,
had actually been a premeditated part of the coup plot. The top secret
documents that prove this information show they were sent to the U.S.
Statement Department and the National Security Agency, which means frankly,
the White House knew what was happening all along.
Furthermore, the CIA documents make no mention of any attempts to have
Chávez forcibly resign from office. The CIA warnings indicated
as early as March 5, 2002 (which is the date of the earliest document
provided) that a coup was on the rise and even hinted that prospects
for a successful coup were limited. The CIA rightfully felt the opposition
was too disperse and divided to successfully overthrow Chávez.
But the concept that Chávez had “resigned” as the
White House and State Department “confirmed” on April 12,
2002 was merely a set-up, a false claim made with the intention of deceiving
the U.S. public and the international community. Remember that the U.S.
stood practically alone in the world in its endorsement of the coup-implemented
Carmona Government, which it later weakly condemned but only after the
coup came tumbling down and the U.S. realized it needed to save face
quickly.
A top secret CIA document from April 14, 2002 shows concern that Latin
American governments will view U.S. foreign policy as “hypocritical”
because of its sole endorsement of the Carmona coup government. The
CIA also seems surprised that the region of Latin America so quickly
rejected the coup in Venezuela and that the Carmona government “stunningly
collapsed”, which demonstrates a possible out-of-date view of
the hemisphere and a failure in intelligence gathering and analysis.
In fact, the CIA never imagined the coup would buckle because of support
for Chávez – their analysis all along showed possible failure
due to lack of opposition unity and hasty actions. This is a very important
point, because it demonstrates that although the CIA was involved in
the coup plotting and the collaborations with dissident military factions
and opposition leaders, it was fairly detached from the reality of Venezuelan
society.
The CIA’s intelligence failures in Venezuela were apparently repeated
during the oil industry strike later in 2002 and the guarimba destabilization
attempt, an old-school CIA tactic applied in Chile and Nicaragua. Both
of these harsh actions injured the Venezuelan economy and affected the
government’s international image, but failed in their goal to
oust President Chávez. The NED’s and USAID’s tens
of millions of dollars in financing to build and maintain the opposition
movement and finance the recall referendum campaign against President
Chávez also failed to achieve their mission. In fact, all of
these bungled attempts by the U.S. government and its marionette opposition
movement have served to strengthen Chávez’s support within
Venezuela and paint him as a strong and solid international leader.
Now that some of the top-secret documents have surfaced that show the
CIA’s complicity and involvement in the April 2002 coup, it leaves
one to wonder what is next on the agenda. In September 2001, shortly
after the attacks on the World Trade Center in New York, President Bush
unconditionally authorized former CIA Director George Tenet’s
“Worldwide Attack Matrix”, which targets leaders and prominent
figures in 80 countries around the world for assassination. The authorization
of the Worldwide Attack Matrix provided the CIA with a virtual carte
blanche to conduct political assassinations abroad, justified under
the “war against terrorism”. The “Attack Matrix”,
a top secret CIA document, authorizes an array of covert CIA anti-terror
actions that range from “routine propaganda to lethal covert action
in preparation for military attacks”. The plans give the CIA the
broadest and most lethal authority in history. Some analysts have indicated
that Venezuela is possibly included in the plans.
The recent assassination of Venezuelan Prosecutor Danilo Anderson, conducted
in a style reminiscent of CIA operations, could be setting the stage
for future political murders. History shows that when the CIA fails
to remove a target via non-lethal means, more desperate measures are
taken. Despite the fact that the Venezuelan government and its supporters
appear to have foiled the CIA numerous times already over the past few
years, vigilance, intelligence and increased security measures should
become a priority.top