Continuity

You've probably seen this by now:

The top American commander in the Middle East has ordered a broad expansion of clandestine military activity in an effort to disrupt militant groups or counter threats in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Somalia and other countries in the region, according to defense officials and military documents.

But I thought I'd point out the parts that struck me the most.  First:

Officials said the order also permits reconnaissance that could pave the way for possible military strikes in Iran if tensions over its nuclear ambitions escalate.

Yes, it's been clear from the moment Obama took office that the purpose was to "pave the way" for military strikes against Iran—a goal Bush was forced to set aside (thanks to the level of opposition he'd created through his other two wars) but which Obama is determined to carry through on.  Second:

While the Bush administration had approved some clandestine military activities far from designated war zones, the new order is intended to make such efforts more systematic and long term, officials said.

True, but it's not saying much, since the main point of the Obama administration has been to make Bush's efforts more systematic and long term in general.  And finally:

The Times, responding to concerns about troop safety raised by an official at United States Central Command, the military headquarters run by General Petraeus, withheld some details about how troops could be deployed in certain countries.

I always appreciate it when major media outlets do us the favor of reminding us exactly who ultimately determines what they tell us.  As Katharine Graham said in a speech to the CIA in 1988:

We live in a dirty and dangerous world. There are some things the general public does not need to know and shouldn't. I believe democracy flourishes when the government can take legitimate steps to keep its secrets and when the press can decide whether to print what it knows.

Ah, so much continuity in this country.  Reassuring, isn't it?

Comments

[Walter Wit Man]

"While the Bush administration had approved some clandestine military activities far from designated war zones, the new order is intended to make such efforts more systematic and long term, officials said . . . . In 2004, one of the first groups sent overseas was pulled out of Paraguay after killing a pistol-waving robber who had attacked them as they stepped out of a taxi."

Paraguay does seem far from any designated war zone.

[Jack Crow]

Paraguay is Company country. It's a good place to get stuff and keep money for the 10 year US black op war in Colombia.

[Catherine]

"I believe democracy flourishes when the government can take legitimate steps to keep its secrets and when the press can decide whether to print what it knows."

This is from the Onion, right?

[John Caruso]

Good catch, Walter--I missed that one.

[Donald Johnson]

I wonder if Jack's theory is right. What are they doing in Paraguay?

[John Caruso]

Hard to say exactly, but although Paraguay's a long way from Colombia it shares a border with Bolivia, so I'd suspect that's got something to do with it. This is worth reading (along those lines).

[Jack Crow]

Sorry, folks - that was an oblique reference to Condor. Paraguay was a staging area, and long alleged as the home of the CIA, for its part of Operation Condor.

Paraguay under Stroessner was very "America friendly," and the CIA and other alphabet soup agencies used it as safe haven for South American operations, building on contacts made during the Nazi relocation period.

I suspect that, unlike other more volatile nations in the Cone, and northward in Central America, Paraguay would suit the needs of blackbaggers nicely. Stable as hell. Already friendly to the CIA. Offshore banking haven (despite formal illegality). And this: http://www.financialtaskforce.org/2009/06/15/the-tri-border-area-a-profile-of-the-largest-illicit-economy-in-the-western-hemisphere/

Just the kind of place for the CIA to run its black ops support of Colombian death squads.

[Jack Crow]

Post script: despite official US condemnation of "terrorism," this is precisely the sort of environment upon which the black bag community depends. SecState may condemn it, but the CIA positively revels in it (if history is any guide).

[John Caruso]

Definitely agreed that that's why the US would be in Paraguay generally, but I'm curious what the specific "clandestine military activities" would have been in that instance.

[Expat]

Don't forget the folks looking after the Bush family Hacienda with all that aquifer.

[Jack Crow]

John,

I honestly don't know. I think a while back (2006-2007?), the US was trying to drum up support for anti-Hizbollah efforts, in Paraguay.

I think the storyline was something like, "Hizbollah growing presence in Paraguay."

Seems like as good an excuse as any, especially with such temporal proximity to the then recent Israeli invasion of Southern Lebanon.

Respect,

Jack

[Walter Wit Man]

It's also possible it was related to Morales' victory in Bolivia in 2005 and the violence in Bolivia around that time. Of course, the U.S. also appears to have been directly involved in actions in Venezuela.

But I think the more important factor is that around this time the Democrats were pushing back ever so slightly against "Bush's" global war against terrorism and socialism. Sy Hersh's reporting about the ~$400 million spent clandestinely in Iran, noted that the Democrats were uncomfortable with the assassination and murder that accompanied the efforts. So the Paraguay incident was probably a PR nightmare for the military.

But never fear. Even though Obama and the Dems made noises about the changing the phrase "Global War on Terror", and pretended to be concerned about abuses, the military brass quickly gave Obama a taste of blood when they let him give the heroic order to sniper assassinate the Somalia pirates and then made the case for an even more expansive use of military force around the World.

The Democrats changed the rhetoric but have expanded the neocon war machine and have truly made this a Global War on Terror--or at least that's what we are told via selective leaks in the NY Times.

[Manny]

Walter,
Let's juxtapose your NYT quote with this one from an article in The Nation (http://www.thenation.com/print/article/secret-us-war-pakistan):

Wilkerson said the JSOC teams caused diplomatic problems for the United States across the globe. "When these teams started hitting capital cities and other places all around the world, [Rumsfeld] didn't tell the State Department either. The only way we found out about it is our ambassadors started to call us and say, 'Who the hell are these six-foot-four white males with eighteen-inch biceps walking around our capital cities?' So we discovered this, we discovered one in South America, for example, because he actually murdered a taxi driver, and we had to get him out of there real quick. We rendered him--we rendered him home."

Hmm, sounds suspiciously familiar...