Barbados, Guyana, Jamaica, and Trinidad & Tobago — ended the isolation of Cuba from the rest of the world, December 8, 1972 – Caricom-Cuba Day

Ines Fors Fernandez, Sunday, December 17, 2017


On December 8, 1972, four brave and independent Caribbean nations — Barbados, Guyana, Jamaica, and Trinidad & Tobago — ended the isolation of Cuba from the rest of the world by establishing diplomatic relations with the Greater of the Antilles. Thanks to this act of bravery from four small in size but great in value countries, Cuba was not alone anymore.

As stated by then president of the Republic of Cuba, Fidel Castro Ruz, during the first Cuba-Caricom Summit held in Havana on December 8, 2002, “This unquestionably brave political decision, adopted by small and newly independent countries in a climate of hostility and enormous pressures, was a fundamental step toward breaking the diplomatic and trade blockade on Cuba in the region, and a breach in the isolation imposed on Cuba through the OAS [Organization of American States].”

This year on December 8, Cuba and Jamaica proudly celebrated the 45th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations aimed at strengthening the already excellent ties between both governments and peoples. Links between Cuba and Jamaica can be recalled since our struggles for Independence, as an important number of our distinguished compatriots like our National Hero Jose Marti, General Maximo Gomez and General Antonio Maceo found asylum and support in Jamaica and worked from here for the definitive freedom of Cuba. That’s why the name of Jamaica is frequently mentioned in our history books, and from an early age our children develop sentiments of friendship and gratitude to this sister Caribbean nation.

Cuba and Jamaica have much in common: We have the same geography, share the same roots, have waged similar struggles, and currently face common challenges. During these 45 years of intense relations much has been done for the benefit of both peoples. Diplomatic and political ties have strengthened through the permanent dialogue, different exchanges and countless visits by both Cuban and Jamaican heads of state and government officials. Concrete positive results have been achieved as part of the efforts to increase the ties of friendship and solidarity.

The Cuban Government and party, interpreting the sentiments of our people, has always been at the disposition to assist the Government of Jamaica in the noble task to increase the quality of life of its people. Of course, one cannot talk about bilateral collaboration without mentioning the fundamental contribution by former Prime Minister Michael Manley and Fidel Castro Ruz, as well as other honourable prime ministers, legislators and ministers.

There have been diverse spheres in which both governments and peoples have cooperated during these 45 years. Up to the present, Cuba and Jamaica have signed 14 collaboration agreements in different areas like health, education, construction, and for the economic and scientific-technical cooperation.

To Cuba, a Third-World country with limited resources, cooperation is not about to give what it has left, but to share what it has with those nations in need. Our Cuban collaborators came to Jamaica guided by this principle, and their selfless work is widely paid back with the brotherly love of the Jamaican people.

The hundreds of Cuban doctors, nurses and teachers that have worked and continue to work in Jamaica can be found in both urban and remote rural communities. Collaboration in the health sphere started in 1976 with 14 doctors who were placed at the Savanna-la-Mar Hospital, Westmoreland.

In 1991, the bilateral cooperation in the field was relaunched. Under the agreement between the Ministry of Health of Jamaica and the Ministry of Public Health of Cuba, more than 1,300 Cuban health professionals have worked in all regions of Jamaica.

On different occasions, Cuban health specialists and researchers have assisted Jamaica in different campaigns: In 2006-2007, five Cuban investigators joined the fight against malaria in Jamaica; in 2014, two Cuban lecturers from the Institute of Tropical Diseases travelled to this country to train Jamaican health care personnel in the fight against Ebola. In the same year, Cuban professionals supported Jamaicans in the strategy to treat and end the chikungunya virus.

Thousands of Jamaicans have also benefited from Operation Miracle, a noble campaign to treat all those persons from the region affected with curable eye diseases. From 2005 to 2010, Jamaica was among the countries that sent patients to receive eye surgeries in Cuba. During this period, 5,906 Jamaicans travelled to Cuba and 4,698 of them received surgeries to restore their eyesight.

On July 28, 2009, an ophthalmology centre was established in Kingston and the first Cuban Brigade arrived on January 10, 2010. Up to the present, the Operation Miracle Brigade has carried out 113,404 consultations, and 16,361 patients have received surgeries, 6,305 of them from cataracts.

At present, 194 Cuban health collaborators work in Jamaica under the Agreement for Technical Cooperation and Operation Miracle. As well as Cuban teachers, they permanently feel the sentiments of sincere gratitude from the Jamaican people and this constitutes their main engine to continue contributing to the Government’s efforts to enhance the quality of health care services in Jamaica.

Under the scholarship programme of the Government of the Republic of Cuba, 118 Jamaican students have graduated from medical sciences specialities, mostly as medical doctors. Each year, a group of Jamaican students are granted these scholarships targeted at those youth who do not have the financial resources to pay for their studies. This year, eight students were awarded this possibility. There were also eight in 2016 and seven in 2015.

Overall, and up to 2016, 640 Jamaicans have graduated in Cuba in different areas — 296 in health care specialisations; 205 in tertiary education; 77 in sports education and 14 as teachers.

Just this year, cooperation in education is celebrating its 20th anniversary. During Congress Pedagogy 1997, held in Havana, first steps were taken and a letter of intent was signed between the ministers of education of both countries. The document set the foundation for the establishment of collaboration in the field. The first Cuban teachers arrived in Jamaica in 1998 to work at primary and secondary-level educational institutions.

In 2000, an agreement was signed with the HEART Trust to have Cuban lecturers in technical centres and to also send Jamaican students to be trained in technical specialities in Cuba.

During these fruitful years, 300 Cuban teachers have worked in all regions of Jamaica, in 29 primary schools, 17 secondary schools and three universities, teaching mainly Spanish but other subjects too. Currently there are 59 Cuban teachers working with the same enthusiasm and dedication of the first day.

Both the governments of Jamaica and Cuba currently undergo efforts to take the economic-commercial relations to the same level as the political-diplomatic ties. Concrete results have been achieved with specific accords and ongoing negotiations between Cuban and Jamaican enterprises that will lead to an increase of trade exchanges benefiting the two economies.

The future ahead is one of strong bilateral/multilateral efforts and advancement as new challenges and projects are settled like the development of trade and commerce, the improvement of sea and air connectivity, the strengthening of our capacity to reduce disaster risks, the promotion of energy integration and sustainable tourism, as well as the cooperation on multi-destination tourism, among others.

Furthermore, Cuba and Jamaica will continue advancing in the project for the creation of the Regional School of Arts of the Caribbean — a noble idea proposed during the V Caricom-Cuba Summit aiming to create an arts educational centre in Jamaica at which talented Caribbean youth can have access to a high level of free artistic training.

The different struggles endured by Cuba during the years of the revolution have received the valiant and permanent defence of the Jamaican people. In our long battle to end the economic, commercial and financial blockade imposed by the United States against the people of Cuba for almost 60 years, Jamaica’s solidarity has been key at regional and multilateral fora. The Cuban people deeply treasure the fact that the Parliament of Jamaica has adopted resolutions against this cruel policy for nine consecutive years.

The Cuban people shall never forget the heartfelt mobilisation of the Jamaican people during the sad hours that followed the demise of the historical Leader of the Cuban Revolution Fidel Castro, and the participation of a high-level delegation led by Prime Minister Andrew Holness at the State funeral, or the sincere sentiments of condolence extended by close friends of Cuba and Fidel, like former prime ministers P J Patterson and Portia Simpson Miller.

Much has been done during these decades of fruitful relations, and certainly much is left to be done to further strengthen these ties. Cuba commits to continue working with the Government of Jamaica and to keep on supporting its people in the various areas it currently does.

Cuba will also remain confident of the steadfast friendship and solidarity of the Jamaican Government and beloved people. The sympathy of the Jamaican people for Cuba can be felt by us all in this land and it’s among our most treasured possessions.

We can continue repeating the words of appreciation expressed by Fidel Castro during his visit to Jamaica to attend the funeral of former Prime Minister Michael Manley, in 1998: “Our eternal gratitude for your support; our deepest thanks for the lessons we have learned here in Jamaica.”


Ines Fors Fernandez is Ambassador of the Republic of Cuba to Jamaica.


Treachery! – Award of Excellence to PM of Dominican Republic

Governor General Sir Patrick Allen (left) confers President of the Dominican Republic Danilo Medina Sánchez with the Order of Excellence during a State luncheon at King’s House recently. (Photos: JIS) 

In support of David Commissong’s letter in the Jamaica Observer of December 7, 2017, titled ‘J’cans should protest honour given to Dom Rep president’, I wish to state that I do a radio programme entitled Bitter Sugar, which takes its name from the book Bitter Sugar written by Maurice Lemoine, a French journalist.

A summary reads: “The book is dedicated to the memory of Millien Beaubrun, Haitian cane cutter, murdered on 7th July 1980, shot in the back with 15 bullets of an M-1 rifle, at the Palmajero Military post on the Catarey sugar factory property in the Dominican Republic. His crime was unpardonable. He had refused to continue to work without pay. He said no to slavery.”

Millien Beaubrun is one of the millions of our Haitian brothers and sisters who have been murdered in the Dominican Republic on the cane plantations.

Did Prime Minister Andrew Holness, or his advisors, have knowledge of these facts before they gave honour to the president of the Dominican Republic who visited the island recently?

Holness, history will never forget such treachery!

Miguel Lorne

Monica Bernard Building

75 East Street



Last Sunday December 10, 2017, the people of Venezuela spoke, as over 9 million voters (0ver 47% of registered voters) cast their ballots to elect the mayors in 335 municipalities in all the national territory.

Congratulations Venezuela, on an exemplary democratic exercise where 3 elections were held over a period of 6 months with the highest level of international election scrutiny, confirming the position of former United States president Jimmy Carter that, ‘Venezuela has one of the fairest elections in the world.

A position which was further underlined by the more than 50 representatives from the Council of Electoral Experts of Latin America(CEELA) who gave their seal of approval to the National Electoral Council(CNE) final count of 308 seats for the ruling PSUV, 26 for the opposition parties and 1 for an independent party.

The people of Venezuela have spoken in no uncertain terms of their support for dialogue and peace as the foundation on which they will build the kind of society where the fruits of their labour are enjoyed by all, and not only by  the  local oligarchs and its foreign masters.

Lets  honour the legacies of Bolivar,  Marti , Chavez and Fidel as we stand in solidarity with our Bolivarian brothers and sisters against  US imperialism and their local minions, and  their efforts to thwart the progress of our sister country’s  path  for economic independence, a better life for its people and regional cooperation based on peace, solidarity and internationalism.


Jamaica Peace COUNCIL

Jamaica Cuba Friendship Association

Friends in Solidarity with Venezuela

Jamaica LANDS

Friends of Cuba



Chavismo Triumphant in Municipal Elections: 15 Key Factors – Mision Verdad

In its first bulletin, the National Electoral Council (CNE) announced the participation of 9,139,564 voters, 47.32 percent of those registered in the electoral roll. Although the results of several municipalities in the country had not been defined at the time of the announcement, 97.02 percent of the tally sheets had been processed and awarded more than 300 of the 335 municipalities to Chavismo in this electoral event.

Another relevant fact: Chavismo also won the governorship of Zulia, the demographically most important state in the country whose election for Governor had to be repeated.

In a first analysis of these results it is appropriate to analyze a set of factors:

1. Triumphant run for Chavismo

From the end of July of this year until December 10, in only 140 days, there have been three electoral processes in Venezuela: the election to the National Constituent Assembly, elections of governors and the latter municipal elections. In these three processes, Chavismo has remoralized and re-empowered its electoral mobilizing capacity with clear victories. This is not a minor fact, understanding that the anti-Chavez narrative inside and outside Venezuela consistently accused chavismo of not wanting to measure themselves electorally.

In fact, Chavismo increased its vote considerably in these elections: 945,746 more votes compared to regional elections this year. The opposite happened with the opposition, which fell sharply by 2,103,575 in total votes at national level, which refutes the weak argument of anti-Chavismo about abstentionism on both side, which the private corporate media said was the main factor in these elections.

The mediocre media also repeats the myth that Chavismo did not have opponents in these municipal elections. Another fallacious argument, since multiple opposition candidates ran. This is how Chavismo finished with 3,767,827 votes more than the anti-Chavez aspirants to mayorships, a comparative figure that exceeds the votes obtained by the revolutionary forces in the municipal elections of 2013, the governor elections in 2012, and all of the election won by Chavismo since the presidential elections of 2012.

Other important data:

  • Chavismo obtained 6,517,605 votes in total (70 percent), the opposition 2,749,778 votes in total (29 percent).
  • The Bolivarian Revolution won 308 mayoralties (92 percent), while the opposition won 25 (7 percent) and only two for other parties (1 percent).
  • More than 72 political parties received votes. Jorge Rodriguez, head of the Zamora 200 Campaign Command, at a press conference said this confirms that the opposition participated in the process.

2. Political peace and votes

The aspirations of those looking to push Venezuela into a civilian confrontation sponsored by anti-chavism was dismantled in these elections. The power of the vote as a political weapon has managed to contravene the imposition of violence that destabilized Venezuela during 2017. On this particular aspect, President Nicolas Maduro has focused tiressly on seeking electoral ways to prevent the naked violence that has deteriorated the political and social fabric of the country.

3. The electoral readiness of Chavismo

Chavismo once again put to the test their abilities as conveners and electoral mobilizers, establishing their force as an undisputed, very difficult to defeat kind of political force, even in times of economic and social adversity. This implies that the political capital of Chavismo has not been eroded. This result infers, in addition, that the Chavista identity has been reaffirmed as well as the increasingly efficient use of its mobilization structures. It is also noticeable according to the electoral behavior from important social strata, that in Venezuela the economic context does not have a directly proportional impact on the political, although it does condition the climate of a secondary election like the municipal ones.

4. Some statistics are reset again

The Venezuelan opposition and in particular Julio Borges and other anti-Chavez leaders have insisted, even up to the month of November, that the rejection of Chavismo is equal to or greater than 80 percent of the population. The figures of electoral participation and the results that place Chavismo as a loose political majority leave these affirmations without a mathematical basis, a fundamental basis for the propaganda of international media and the sanctions of foreign governments.

5. Did abstention win?

Certainly the participation of 47.32 percent of the electoral registry leaves, as has seldom happened in times of chavismo, an abstention higher than 50 percent. This will be an element used by the anti-chavista narrative to delegitimize the results and the vitality of the Venezuelan political system. The most negative electoral precedent was in the parliamentary elections of 2005, when anti-Chavismo withdrew and participation was 23 percent. These municipal elections were atypical in the sense that they were not held in conjunction with the governor elections, which also weakened the convening power of the participating organizations. The last regional elections with the low participation were the regional elections of 2012 with 52.85 percent. For the Venezuelan electoral standards, in these elections the participation was relatively low, but higher than the standards for elections in other Latin American countries whose “healthy democracies” do not receive pressures and sanctions from the big centers of global power. The most emblematic case comes from Chile, where mid-November presidential, parliamentary and regional elections were held and abstention was almost 55 percent.

6. The capitals

Chavismo won at least 20 of the 24 state capitals in the country, including the Capital District, Caracas. It won municipalities among the most densely populated in the country (Maracaibo, Barquisimeto, Puerto Ordaz, Valencia, Sucre, among others) and stands in emblematic cities of different states, deepening its political reach in territories that had not seen Chavista victories in municipalities for years.

7. Polarization persists

Chavismo and the opposition political parties remain the two solid pillars of the electoral arena in Venezuela. The electoral results diluted all political aspirations of independent opposition candidacies and others who called themselves Chavistas but ran in parallel. In the case of this second group, they did not significantly diminish the support of the Chavista base to the PSUV and dissident Chavismo showed itself to be a phenomenon with digital presence (in digital media and networks) rather than as a real political force and mobilizer. The most significant case was the victory of Erika Farías in Libertador with 66.17 percent of the votes (491,328), which cleared the doubts about whether the candidacy of Eduardo Saman could contest for a good part of the electoral mass of Chavista Caracas outside the PSUV.

8. Management in the current context

A mobilizing element of Chavismo in these elections has been the response capacity of the central government within the framework of the current economic situation. Despite not being able to fully control the escalation of prices of basic staples, the political and economic management of the government focused on protecting the population through the CLAPs and the Carnet de la Patria, focusing on social programs and serving the population that faces a daily battle with speculation. This undoubtedly was a mobilizing factor of the Chavista vote.

9. Chavismo did defeat the opposition

Prior to these elections, three of the 24 parties that make up the Venezuelan opposition decided not participate in the municipal election: Democratic Action, Justice First and Popular Will, organizations that call themselves the most important within the opposition. With this they tried to create the perception that Chavismo was going uncontested in these elections. However, the vast majority of their local leaders were placed on the ballots for other parties and did not camouflage their participation in this contest, improvising alliances with other organizations and also counting on the logistical and financial resources of their parties, who in theory were not participating. The result of such a fatal strategy was an ambiguous presentation to the electorate of the opposition standard-bearers.

10. Division in anti-Chavismo

The lack of political cohesion of the opposition is being felt, to the point of maximizing its tactical dismemberment. In these municipal elections, the divisions of the opposition vote among several anti-Chavez candidates competing for the same municipality were evident. The phenomenon of fragmentation was national and this dramatically minimized their chances. The internal struggle in anti-Chavismo due to the personal aspirations of its leaders made it impossible for them to put forward unified single candidacies in many of the municipalities, thereby sacrificing the aspirations of their own followers of winning or maintaining municipalities for the opposition.

11. The abstention factor

Anti-Chavismo continues to grapple with the dramatic effects of its violent escalation earlier this year, which fragmented the opposition across the board from its leaders to its followers. Many of these have separated from the Democratic Unity Table (MUD) because of the violence of 2017, now seeing this organization as politically inconvenient, however many supporters of this coalition have withdrawn support for its leaders once they stopped their destabilizing acts to dialogue with the Chavismo in “search of electoral guarantees.” For this second group, radicalized by triumphalist expectations created, the MUD was “domesticated” by Chavismo and they are now assumed to be “traitors.” Opposition abstention increased the chances for Chavismo in many municipalities.

12. The local management factor

Many municipalities in the hands of the MUD have passed into the hands of Chavismo, which is also explained by the exhaustion of the coalition as a vehicle for local management. The emblematic case is the Sucre municipality in Miranda state. The political malpractice of opposition mayors, who declared themselves “without resources” and have allowed their municipalities to collapse so as to blame the central government, had the outcome of the “abstention punishment” of the anti-Chavista electoral base. MUD in smaller communities is not a real reference for “change” and improvement of the basic life conditions of the population.

13. The inertia of electoral depression

Anti-Chavismo looks demoralized, politically disarticulated and clearly demobilized. A general sense of uneasiness, which became more pronounced after the regional elections in October, weighed on them during the municipal elections. Opposition people don’t feel driven by their leaders and are generally characterized by political apathy.

14. The year 2017 ends

President Maduro has been presented as the main Chavista contender for presidential elections next year. Ending 2017 as the leading political strategist, overcoming unprecedented challenges and against all odds. He also consolidated a broad social base that has been remoralized, reorganized and mobilized, after Chavismo was insistently singled out as a political force on the verge of disappearance. Put another way: there are few references that can be said to have made such a political turnaround in the recent history of the country, and Maduro has achieved it.

15. Presidential Elections

The call for presidential elections will be determined by the National Constituent Assembly and the dialogues that Chavismo is holding with the opposition in the Dominican Republic. Anti-Chavismo has not consolidated a visible leadership that brings together its political forces with a view to next year, and in fact, the mere fact that this stage of dialogue has begun has deepened its internal divisions.

In closing

The challenges of anti-Chavismo are still consolidating a solid leadership and unity, reaching higher levels of tactical and strategic cohesion and, on the other hand, establishing itself as a real alternative force, with a single project. As a political group they have not achieved any of this in 18 years, since they have appeared briefly and intermittently “united”, but now he will have to consolidate everything in just months. Its only real strength is a social base with great discontent for the economic situation.

For Chavismo, the challenges point to the need to restore economic governance, make social protection mechanisms more efficient, relaunch and reinforce the relationship between the leadership of Chavismo and its bases, and on the other hand, to promote the Chavista identity to further remodel its political fabric, which looks revived and organized with the recent electoral victories.

Congratulations To The Victorious PSUV of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela!


Congratulations To The PSUV !

To all the comrades, all the militants, all the foot soldiers and generals of the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) we say – well done, well done, well done!

As far as we – your brothers and sisters of the islands of the Caribbean are concerned – you deserve nothing but praise and congratulations for rising to the challenge of facing down the merciless and unprincipled hordes of imperialism and oligarchy, defending the homeland, and earning the support and confidence of the broad masses of the Venezuelan people.

What wonderful news it was when we learnt that the PSUV and its allies had won 308 of the 335 municipalities; 23 of 24 state capitals; and the governorship of the state of Zulia!

What a resounding victory for Socialism, for Internationalism, for humanity itself! What a victory for President Maduro. And what a victory for us as well – those of us in the progressive forces of the Caribbean who have kept the faith and struggled with and for the great Bolivarian Revolution of “our America”. Those of us who are aware that the Bolivarian Revolution is our Revolution as well.

Surely the great and eternal Commander Hugo Chavez must be smiling today!

And yes, we know that it would be wise for all of us to remain aware that this is only one accomplishment in a massive and difficult mission that lies ahead. Indeed, we are only too well aware that many are the enemies and the challenges that President Maduro and his fellow Bolivarian revolutionaries will have to face in the weeks and months ahead. But even while we keep a watchful and wary eye on the future, surely this is a time for celebration.

And so, we summon our great Caribbean poet– Martin Carter– to address the following immortal words to President Maduro and our PSUV brothers and sisters:-


“Comrades the world is loud with songs of freedom
Mankind is breeding heroes every day
On high the scarlet banner flies aloft
Below the earth re-echoes liberty!”


Warm regards,

Clement Payne Movement


Caribbean Peace Movement

Venezuela Election: Socialists Win Zulia Governorship, Nearly Sweep State Capitals


The PSUV and allies took 308 of the 335 municipalities up for grabs in Sunday’s election.

Candidates for Venezuela’s Socialist Party took 23 of 24 state capitals as well as the governorship for the state of Zulia, election authorities announced, as they released partial results in Sunday’s municipal election.

“These elections were accompanied by 9,139,564 voters,” announced Sandra Oblitas, vice president of the National Electoral Council, or CNE, amounting to 47.32 percent voter turn out.

CNE officials presented partial results for the capitals of the 23 states as well as Caracas, with candidates for the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) taking all but the top mayor position in Tachira state.

Omar Prieto of the PSUV also won the governorship for the state of Zulia, leaving the PSUV in all but four of the country’s 23 states. The post in the key state was vacated after the opposition politician who won the Oct. 15 regional elections refused to be sworn in by the Constituent Assembly.

Overall, the PSUV and allies took 308 of the 335 municipalities up for grabs in Sunday’s election.





Trump Continues Obama’s Wars Against Democracy – Eric Zuesse, Global Research

U.S. President Trump’s bold support for the apartheid dictatorship of Israel against the nation’s non-Jews, fits into a larger picture of the supremacist nation that America itself has increasingly become. His immediate predecessor, Barack Obama, had repeatedly referred to the United States as being the only indispensable nation — that all others are “dispensable” — such as when President Obama addressed America’s future military leaders, at West Point, on 28 May 2014, by telling them:

The United States is and remains the one indispensable nation. That has been true for the century passed and it will be true for the century to come. … Russia’s aggression toward former Soviet states unnerves capitals in Europe, while China’s economic rise and military reach worries its neighbors. From Brazil to India, rising middle classes compete with us, and governments seek a greater say in global forums. … It will be your generation’s task to respond to this new world.

He was telling the military that America’s economic competition, against the BRICS nations, is a key matter for America’s military, and not only for America’s private corporations; that U.S. taxpayers fund America’s military at least partially in order to impose the wills and extend the wealth of the stockholders in America’s corporations abroad; and that the countries against which America is in economic competition are “dispensable” but America “is and remains the one indispensable nation.” This, supposedly, also authorizes America’s weapons and troops to fight against countries whose “governments seek a greater say in global forums.” In other words: Stop the growing economies from growing faster than America’s. There is another name for the American Government’s supremacist ideology. This term is “fascism.”

The reality, not talked about in public (since America isn’t a democracy), is that the United States Government propagandizes against foreign governments and then perpetrates coups and/or military invasions against them, in order to impose the U.S. empire’s dictatorial stooges, and then to crush whatever democracy had existed there. This U.S. fascism didn’t happen only in Iran in 1953, Guatemala in 1954, and Chile in 1973, but it happens also today, long after the ‘anti-communist’ excuse for it had ended in 1991.

Examples will be cited here, and the silenced lessons will be drawn from them, about the actual nature of the post-1952 U.S. Government — the global fascist victory that has increasingly emerged after the immediate ashes of fascism’s global defeat in 1945. This far-right, imperialist or “neoconservative,” international ideology has risen like a phoenix from those physical ashes of World War II, and has increasingly won — led by the U.S. Government — against the shrinking democratic world, and now seriously threatens to bring World War III to finish it, against the now non-communist lone nation of Russia, after the U.S. and its so-called ‘capitalist’ (but actually and increasingly fascist) NATO military alliance had won the ideological Cold War, and the communist Soviet Union broke up and ended its Warsaw Pact military alliance in 1991, while the U.S. secretly continued its side of the Cold War and has already brought into its anti-Russian NATO alliance virtually all of the Warsaw Pact nations, and all nations except Russia from the former Soviet Union.

The grim global reality is that the U.S. Government has become the world’s leading fascist nation. (And people around the world — outside the U.S. — already know it.)

When U.S. President Barack Obama came into office in 2009, one of the first international problems he had to deal with was a Honduran coup (probably — but not provably — pre-approved by the U.S. White House) that occurred on 28 June 2009, overthrowing the democratically elected progressive President of Honduras and replacing him with a junta who were selected by that country’s dozen aristocrats (or “oligarchs”), who practically own the country. On 16 October 2013, I headlined “Hillary Clinton’s Two Foreign-Policy Catastrophes”, and the main “catastrophe” detailed there was her having assisted those oligarchs (Honduras’s aristocratic families) to keep their new dictatorship in power despite the U.S. Ambassador’s cable to Clinton, from Honduras’s capital, informing her that there would be no legal way to do it. She ignored his comment, persisted at propping up the imposed regime; and Obama remained publicly silent and followed-through by his actions with his Secretary of State’s position, which position was to keep the oligarchs in power despite the opposition not only of the Honduran public but of almost every government in the world against the newly installed Honduran dictatorship — and the U.S. regime kept the coup-regime in power and thus forced the end of Honduras’s brief democracy — and promptly, and for years afterward, Honduras’s murder-rate and drug-trafficking soared.

Then, in February 2014, Obama himself perpetrated a very bloody coup in Ukraine overthrowing the democratically elected Government there and replacing it with a racist-fascist anti-Russian regime that promptly began a years-long ethnic-cleansing program to eliminate the people in the regions of Ukraine that had voted the most heavily — ranging from 75% to over 90% — for the President and legislature whom Obama had overthrown. (Getting rid of these Ukrainian voters was necessary to Obama because if they still lived in Ukraine, then the Obama-installed Ukrainian regime would quickly be elected out of office, and his coup-regime on Russia’s doorstep would end.)

Donald Trump constantly criticizes both Obama and Clinton for many things, but as the U.S. President he continues their most evil policies, and he sometimes imposes far-right policies that are even worse. One of the instances of this is Honduras, where Trump continues Obama’s policies, even in the face of its now especially clear recent repudiation by Hondurans at the election-polls: the Trump regime had actually trained the Honduran regime on how to rig the vote-count in preparation for the latest Honduran national election, which occurred on November 26th. However, since that election, the many public demonstrations against the official outcome, by courageous Honduran democrats and sometimes in the face of police bullets, are making unexpectedly embarrassing the U.S. dictator’s support of the Honduran regime’s crackdowns against the Honduran public.

Regarding the Ukrainian regime that Obama had imposed, candidate Trump was anti-Obama, and on 1 August 2016 in Harrisonburg PA he said, about Crimea, “You want to have World War III to get it back?” (He assumed that ‘we’ had ‘had’ Crimea, but his pro-imperialist audience went along with that aggressive nationalistic and obviously false assumption.) However, on 2 February 2017, President Trump’s official policy regarding this matter turned out to be the exactly the same policy as Obama’s, when CNN headlined “UN Ambassador Haley hits Russia hard on Ukraine” and reported: 

The US ambassador to the United Nations offered a strong condemnation of Russia in her first appearance at the UN Security Council on Thursday, calling on Moscow to de-escalate violence in eastern Ukraine and saying that US sanctions against Moscow would remain in place until it withdraws from Crimea.

“The United States continues to condemn and call for an immediate end to the Russian occupation of Crimea,” said Nikki Haley, President Donald Trump’s envoy to the world body. “Crimea is a part of Ukraine. Our Crimea-related sanctions will remain in place until Russia returns control over the peninsula to Ukraine.”

In other words: Trump’s policy is that only if Russia repudiates and rejects the 90%+ desire of the residents of Crimea to be Russians and not to be expelled from Crimea or else killed by the rabidly anti-Russian Obama-imposed Ukrainian dictatorship, will Trump even so much as consider ending the U.S. economic and other sanctions against Russia. This is Obama’s policy, and Trump’s policy. And NATO’s pouring U.S. and other hostile troops and weapons near and even onto Russia’s borders is likewise ‘justified’ by this position.

Trump likewise continues Obama’s policy against Syria, which is a nation that has long been a crucial ally of Russia, though not on Russia’s border as Ukraine is. Obama came into office with a secret plan to conquer Syria, and it was fully operational by 2012, when some dissidents within the U.S. intelligence community privately objected up the chain-of-command, against Obama’s then-increasing reliance upon Al Qaeda in Syria for providing the training and leadership of the U.S.-and-Saudi-selected-and-funded ’moderate rebels’ who were America’s “boots on the ground” to bring down Syria’s Government, which was and remains led by Bashar al-Assad.

However, just as Victor Yanukovych had won the Presidency of Ukraine in 2010 on the promise of keeping Ukraine as a free and independent sovereign nation answerable only to Ukrainian citizens, Assad won Syria’s first-ever democratic election in 2014 by promising to keep Syria as a free sovereign nation answerable only to Syrian citizens — but as one that’s allied with both Russia and Iran, against the U.S. and its pro-jihadist allies. In repeated Western-sponsored polling of Syrians, even during the U.S.-Saudi-UAE-and-allied invasion of Syria by tens of thousands of imported foreign jihadists who demand Sharia law for Syrians, every poll shows that well over 50% of Syrian citizens want Assad to continue leading the country. But America’s dictators have different ideas.

As regards Ukraine, the U.S. stooge-regime is trying to outlaw the teaching and speaking of the Russian language there, and to encourage the takeover, by force, of orthodox churches (considered “pro-Russian”), by Catholic and Protestant ones there.

As regards Syria, the Trump Administration has repeatedly indicated its intention never to end the U.S. military occupation of Syria, though this would (if the U.S. military occupation of Syria were to become permanent like in Afghanistan and Iraq) entail a war, in Syria, between Syria’s invited defender Russia, versus Syria’s uninvited enemy the United States occupiers there, which would quickly escalate into a nuclear war between the U.S. and Russia — WW III. The U.S. regime expects to ‘win’ such a war.

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

This article was originally published by Strategic Culture Foundation.

Featured image is from SCF.