Selective Idealism/Selective Indignation: Double-Standards and Inconsistencies Persist in U.S. Foreign Policy

• The case against CISPES
• The case against the Department of Justice
• The ad hoc war on terror

A few days ago, Washington purged North Korea from its terroristlist after Pyongyang demolished a cooling tower at the Yongbyon nuclearplant, symbolizing an end to the countrys nuclear program and itsbeing out in the cold for a half century. Still, over seven years ofPresident Bushs War on Terror have passed, but the American publichas yet to see much consistency in this countrys anti-terroristpractices. Some would contend that the term war on terror has provento be an overused misnomer often employed to bolster arbitrary U.S.foreign policy initiatives. Recent events have exposed the continuingdisparity between the Bush administrations high-flying ideologicalrhetoric and the practical results of its day-to-day policies.

The Department of Justice routinely uses intimidation tactics, andthe pursuit of national security objectives to suppress a solidarityorganization not in line with current U.S. policy. Meanwhile, theself-identified bomber of a Cuban passenger jet was allowed to hold aMay fundraiser for his proudly violent cause in Miami where he livesas a free man. Clearly, the current administrations pursuit ofnational security through the war on terror has been selective, oftentolerating evil at the expense of justice. If the war on terror is tobe viewed as a just mission, and if other states are to join its causeto end such global violence, the White House must pursue clear goalswhich remain consistent with its proclaimed strategy.

Grassroots Organization Targeted for Conspiring with Foreign Agents

The Committee in Solidarity with People from El Salvador (CISPES) is aUS-based grassroots organization dedicated to promoting left-wingSalvadoran interests often neglected by U.S. mainstream media. InJanuary of this year, CISPES received a communication from theDepartment of Justice (DOJ) accusing CISPES of having illegal ties tothe Salvadoran political party, Farabundo Martí National LiberationFront (FMLN) an accusation which, if proven true, would give the DOJaccess to information regarding CISPES internal activities. The DOJcited the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) when it accused CISPESof sponsoring a public relations and fundraising campaign on behalf ofthe FMLN in the U.S. According to the terms and conditions of the FARA,which first came into effect in 1938, any person or group acting as anagent for foreign principals in a political or quasi-political capacitymust make periodic public disclosure of its relationship andtransactions with its foreign beneficiary.

In response, CISPES insists that is has no contractual relationshipwith the FMLN: CISPES solidarity with the FMLN began in 1980 andcontinues today. It is based on a shared vision of a more just world;there is no financial or contractual agreementWhat we have in commonis a commitment to building a cross border movement that will unite thepoor and working people of the U.S. and El Salvador in our struggle forsocial justice. On June 10, members of the Latin American SolidarityCoalition, an umbrella organization to which CISPES belongs, vehementlydenounced the DOJs actions, claiming that Washington uses intimidationto protect U.S. interests in Central America. This might not besurprising, given the recent internal investigation of the DOJ that hasdiscovered it to be in violation of federal law due to itspolitically biased hiring practices in favor of more right-leaningapplicants. While CISPES aligns itself with social goals similar tothose held by the FMLN, it maintains that registering with the FARA isunnecessary since no formal collaboration exists.

This investigation into CISPES activities, however, does not come asa shock to the organizations supporters or staff, as the FBIthoroughly vetted the organization in the 80s for opposing the ReaganAdministrations policies in Central America (NYT 1988). CISPESposition during the Salvadoran civil war during that period which wasstrongly anti-interventionist was unwelcome in Washington, whichpublicly opposed the FMLN and backed the countrys repressive militaryregime. The current DOJ petition is unpleasantly familiar, as theseries of FBI investigations beginning in 1981 was initiated on thesame grounds and line of thinking that CISPES must register with theFARA as an agent of the FMLN. The focus of the 1981 investigationquickly shifted from a FARA mandate to an anti-terrorist effort aimedat protecting national security, a move which Margaret Ratner of theCenter for Constitutional Rights (as quoted in The Public Eye)noted occurred even though no basis for such existed. This newdirection of the investigation allowed the FBI to justify the use ofwiretapping, informants and undercover agents to keep a close watch onCISPES. It is no wonder, then, that the solidarity organization hasdecided to resist a new investigation that may bring upon CISPES thesame invasive and unjustified and brusque surveillance methods, whichthe organization already has experienced.

Why CISPES?
The White House anticipates that a victory by the FMLN in El SalvadorsMarch 2009 elections would further embolden Venezuelas Chávez becauseof his close ties with the Salvadoran left. Such a victory would fuelthe politically leftward movement now sweeping parts of Latin America,as well as weaken the White Houses bid for increased regionalinfluence. El Salvadors government as well as its current rulingparty, the right-wing ARENA, is extremely close to the Bushadministration. For several decades it has adhered to a strict code ofneo-liberal reforms that follow a faithful Washington Consensusregimen. Reforms such as the proposed privatization of health care andwater resources have met strong opposition within the country.Furthermore, as Sha Grogan-Brown of CISPES told COHA, the failedpolicies in El Salvador such as dollarization of the currency and theCentral American Free Trade Agreement, which has not triggered thedesired job creation, have prompted calls for a step away from suchneo-liberal programs. An electoral victory by the FMLN could kindlewidespread interest in alternative trade policies such as ChávezsALBA initiative¹ which CISPES supports. Furthermore, CISPES unreservedly opposes theestablishment of the US-proposed International Law Enforcement Academyin El Salvador, and criticizes Washington for allegedly interferingwith elections in that country and elsewhere in Central America.

The Bush administration has hailed President Saca as a strong anddurable ally in fighting the war on terror. In 2006, El Salvadorsgovernment instated a harsh anti-terrorism law modeled after the USAPATRIOT Act which in effect allows lawful dissent to be easilyupgraded to terrorism charges. The absurdity of this anti-terrorismmeasure was clearly exhibited in the arrest of fourteen demonstratorsat a non-violent protest against water privatization in the city ofSuchitoto in July 2007. The dissenters were charged with terrorism, anindictment which was later dropped after seven months of detention dueto lack of evidence. One of the fourteen was gruesomely stabbed todeath a few days after he agreed to speak publicly about hisexperiences. If this is the type of war on terror that the Bushadministration welcomes, then it is not surprising that the DOJ wouldagain target CISPES and other likeminded groups who adamantly opposesuch misuses of power.

As in the 1980s, it seems the DOJ is attempting to stifle CISPEScontentions with U.S. foreign policy goals as well as theadministrations efforts to deflate any public support and mediaattention given to the FMLN in the U.S. or among CISPES Salvadoranaudience. However, it is once again unwarranted to invoke the FARA as alegitimate charge against CISPES for its trying to achieve these ends,since the organization has not violated any of the acts provisions.The White House may not agree with CISPES ideology, but it cannotinvoke the war on terror and the pursuit of national security tojustify its partisan goals for Central America.

Terrorist Finds Safety in Miami
In juxtaposition to the U.S. government efforts to target CISPES on thegrounds of national security, Washington allows Cuban-exile Luís PosadaCarriles, a known terrorist, to roam free on U.S. soil. On May 2,Posada was honored at an extravagant banquet in Miami by aCuban-American audience for his lifetime efforts to overthrow CubasFidel Castro. The lavish soiree would hardly suggest that Posada is aninternationally wanted terrorist in at least Cuba, Venezuela, andNicaragua. Posada also was responsible for several Havana hotelbombings in the late 1990s, and various coup and assassination attemptsagainst Castro and other Cuban officials. Most notoriously, Posada wasbehind the 1976 bombing of Cubana flight 455 en route from Caracas toHavana, in which 73 people died, including Cubas youth fencing team.

In 1976, the CIA, under then director George H. W. Bush, discoveredthat Posada and several of his compatriots were the masterminds behindthe bombing a discovery corroborated by evidence found in Posadasapartment as well as by the testimony of two of his accomplices. Hesubsequently was charged with terrorist activity by a Venezuelan court,but escaped in 1985 from a Caracas jail before he could be forced tostand trial. After travelling throughout Latin America, promotingviolence to further his hostile agenda for the region, Posada arrivedin the U.S., where he was later arrested in Texas in 2005 for enteringthe country illegally. He served a short sentence for violatingimmigration law and was subsequently released on appeal in May of 2007.Venezuela and Cuba continuously have petitioned Washington for hisextradition to stand trial on terrorism charges. However, he has beenallowed to stay in the U.S. based on its torpid claim that he would betortured and killed if made to return to any of the petitioningcountries. Peter Kornbluh, with the National Security Archive, citesPosadas safe haven in Miami as a direct challenge to the Bushadministrations terrorism policy[The evidence] leaves no doubt thatPosada has been one of the worlds most unremitting purveyors ofterrorist violence.

Why Not Posada?
Complicating the matter of Washingtons reluctance to extradite Posadais the fact that before the 1976 bombing, he aided the CIA in multiplecovert operations in Latin America. He also has been linked to OliverNorths illegal funding of the right-wing Contras in Nicaragua, whichfueled the US-backed civil war in that country throughout much of the1980s. Preceding this, Posada attended the notorious U.S. militarytraining academy, the School of the Americas now renamed the WesternHemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (based at Fort Benning,GA) which offered U.S. training to Latin American military officers.Some alumni later went on to commit major human rights violationsthroughout the region. Posada was later involved with the CIA in thefailed Bay of Pigs invasion, after which he stayed in close contactwith agency insiders up until the 1976 plane bombing. Therefore, asVenezuelan-American attorney Eva Golinger has described, If [the US]grants asylum to Posada Carriles, it negates its universal declarationof a war on terrorism that includes those who harbor or refugeterrorists. On the other hand, if Washington extradites Posada, itwill have turned its back on a former servant of the country, handinga victory to Venezuelas Chávez, and risk further implicating U.S.officials in past and current government-sanctioned illicit activities.

Faced with the aforementioned dilemma, Washington has turned toinaction, barely acknowledging Posadas presence in the U.S. During theMay fundraising event which Venezuelas ambassador in Washingtondescribed as outrageous and a mockery of justice Posada assuredhis audience that the current struggle against Fidel was almost over,pending the Cuban leaders death, but asked God to sharpen ourmachetes because difficult times are arriving. In this case, sadly,the administration opts to ignore its international responsibilities inorder to save face, thereby neglecting its mission to authenticallyfight global terrorism.

Abandoning Ideology
The war on terror is failing as it is invoked on an ad hoc basis torationalize certain U.S. government practices and is neglected at othertimes when it no longer benefits U.S. interests. The contradictions areblatant, as Luís Posada Carriles lionized by right-wing Cuba-America escapes adjudication by legal subterfuge, while the White Houserelentlessly hounds those who, like CISPES, vocalize the oftenneglected interests and perspectives of Latin America. Former DOJAssociate Attorney General, Joe D. Whitley, aptly noted, We must lookon terrorism as a universal evil, even if it is directed toward thosewith whom we have no political sympathy. If it is the policy of theUnited States to combat terrorism in all forms, then U.S. practicesmust reflect this credal belief with consistency and not with a yawningexemption offered to the likes of Posada, or as an unwarrantedhectoring of solidarity organizations like CISPES.

¹ The Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA) is aLatin American trade conglomerate created as an alternative to the FreeTrade Area of the Americas proposed by the US.

This analysis was prepared by COHA Research Associate Elizabeth Reavey
July 2nd, 2008
Word Count: 2200