個人資料
正文

印度記者 維賈伊·普拉薩德

(2022-04-22 14:48:03) 下一個
Dec 27, 2021, People are fed up with West’s ‘lectures’ as it claims to be the best judge of everything: Indian scholar  -- https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202112/1243519.shtml
YouTube:  印度三哥批北約隻會講屁話 阿納布諷拜登就是隻井底蛙 20220423
 

維賈伊·普拉薩德  三大洲社會研究所 執行董事,印度記者、評論家https://blog.wenxuecity.com/myblog/72696/202204/21732.html

General overview of Tricontinental Institute for Social Research https://thetricontinental.org/general-overview/

Facebook: Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research
https://business.facebook.com/thetricontinental/

We produce forward-thinking research in conjunction with movements across the Global South. 
http://www.thetricontinental.org/

celina@thetricontinental.org

Work

Tricontinental proposes to be a fulcrum between political movements and academic production. We would like to cultivate closer ties between the agendas of political movements and intellectuals, and to stimulate debate in both the movements and in intellectual circles around issues of great importance for our times. To produce useful research and to stimulate important debates, we will produce materials that we hope will contribute to ongoing discussions and build a network of left-leaning intellectuals.

To read an interview with Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research Director Vijay Prashad and Red Pepper Magazine about our work, click here

About  VIJAY PRASHAD

Vijay Prashad is the author or editor of about thirty books, including The Darker Nations: A Biography of the Short-Lived Third World, and Washington Bullets. He is the Executive Director of Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research, Chief Correspondent for Globetrotter, and Editor at LeftWord Books.

Articles of Vijay Prasad, director of Tricontinental Institute for Social Research

https://www.guancha.cn/VijayPrashad

 維賈伊·普拉薩德

為何歐美隻關心烏克蘭人,卻對亞非人民的痛苦視而不見?

在所有給這個脆弱星球帶來創傷的戰爭中,烏克蘭戰爭隻是其中一場。發生在非洲和亞洲的戰爭似乎連綿不絕,而對發生在亞非的某些戰爭,全世界的媒體卻對其置若罔聞,社交平台上雖帖子無數可也對其鮮有評論。[全文]

7802022-03-14 08:22:13

不是中國也不是社會主義,美國害怕的是別的東西

我們的態度必須是,我們對西方正在發生的事情很感興趣,但我們不能中了西方的毒,不能陶醉於西方。我們想要展望世界,向所有國家學習。對祖國的熱愛並不意味著對別國的仇恨。你可以既愛國又不排外,但你愛的都是哪些國家呢?你必須打破自己對美國的迷戀。[全文]

4068233272022-01-26 07:50:39

印度學者當麵嘲諷西方國家:這像話嗎?

你們隻會居高臨下,因為對你們來說,殖民主義不是已經被打敗的“過去式”,對你們來說,殖民主義是永恒的。這種永恒的殖民主義通過兩種方式進行,一種是永恒的殖民心態。你想對我們說教,你想告訴我們,我們才是一切問題的根源,因為你們永遠不會接受錯誤,你們才是最應該負責的人。[全文]

1959391862021-12-23 07:50:24
 

農民落入了農業科技企業、科技巨頭的手中,這些企業不會致力於解救氣候災難,而是會優先考慮大肆斂財,同時給自己的行為披上環保的外衣。這種對利益的渴求不會終止全球饑餓問題,也不會終結氣候災難。[全文]

61096332021-11-25 07:42:31
 

醫用氧氣不足,而執政的印度人民黨(BJP)卻沒有兌現承諾,擴大產能。印度政府一直在出口氧氣,甚至在國內儲備明顯瀕臨枯竭的情況下也沒有停止(印度還出口了珍貴的雷姆德西韋注射液)。[全文]

2838232182021-05-03 08:40:52
 
 

拉美與歐洲將是決定世界上支持冷戰和反對冷戰的力量之間鬥爭結果的主戰場——在世界大多數地區,支持和反對的力量勝負已定。在這種情況下,中國對拉美發展大勢高度關注非常重要。厄瓜多爾4月11日的總統選舉,將是下一輪重要且“曠日持久”的鬥爭的前哨。[全文]

191210962021-04-10 08:22:58
 

世界上大多數國家都麵臨一個選擇:是選擇中國提出的雙贏模式,還是美國主張的臣服於美國,與它一同反華的經濟毀滅性道路?美國一直將拉美視為自己的“後院”,然而越來越多的國家在尋求國家獨立,少數國家在尋求社會主義發展道路。[全文]

2936841032020-12-07 07:25:03
 
 
當前世界的生產社會化的發展已經超出了民族國家的規模,但還沒有形成一個扁平化的世界經濟體。因此,當前的進程是形成一個“大陸規模”——比現存的民族國家大,但沒有以統一的方式涵蓋全球經濟。RCEP的簽署印證了馬克思主義政治經濟學最基本的道理,最終將惠及整個世界。[全文]
2020-11-24 07:26:48
 

正是為了阻止中國的技術進步,美國動用了各種手段,既施加外交壓力又施加軍事壓力,但這些手段似乎都沒有奏效。目前,中國的態度很堅決。它不願意讓步自毀其技術成果。[全文]

2020-09-01 07:31:50

印度學者維賈伊·普拉薩德當麵嘲諷西方國家:這像話嗎? 

https://www.sohu.com/a/510843952_115479

【視頻/維賈伊·普拉薩德】, 2021-12-23 08:17

首先,我想說感謝“強迫”我來到格拉斯哥,格拉斯哥是英國第二重要的城市,每當我走在格拉斯哥這種城市的街道上時,那些漂亮的建築和街道,這是一個美麗的城市。

1919年,格拉斯哥經曆了“紅色克萊德賽德”(Red Clydeside)工人運動——一場試圖在蘇格蘭建立蘇維埃政權的起義(左派號召罷工反戰)。當然,這場運動失敗了(組織者沒有尋求革命,結果被捕和被鎮壓)。當我看到格拉斯哥這樣的城市時,我還會想到這些城市的另一麵。

瓦爾特·本雅明曾說過,“文明的豐碑就是野蠻暴力的實錄”,我想到孟加拉的饑荒,而孟加拉的工人,通過格拉斯哥港口將貨物送往敦提(英國蘇格蘭東部港口城市)。我想到非洲的人們被奴役,從加納運到“新大陸”,所有這些獲得的利益,都被吸進倫敦和格拉斯哥等城市。

在1765年至1938年之間,英國從印度偷了45萬億英鎊,當英國人離開印度的時候,我們沒有獲得報酬。當我們把英國人趕出去時,我們的識字率隻有13%,幾百年所謂的“文明”也不過如此。

與此同時,我們的風景被摧毀,煤炭被強加在印度身上,是你們把煤炭強加在我們身上,讓我們變得如此依賴煤炭,然後你們拍拍屁股走人。而現在你們竟敢居高臨下地對待我們,當我聽到英國首相約翰遜的講話、當我聽到美國總統拜登講話、更別說當我聽到法國總統馬克龍(提議誰排放最多,誰責任大)的講話時,我隻能想到你們是多麽的居高臨下。

400年前,你們居高臨下地對待我們;300年前,你們居高臨下地對待我們;200年前,你們居高臨下地對待我們;100年前,你們居高臨下地對待我們;直到今天,你們還在居高臨下地對待我們。

你們隻會居高臨下,因為對你們來說,殖民主義不是已經被打敗的“過去式”,對你們來說,殖民主義是永恒的。這種永恒的殖民主義通過兩種方式進行,一種是永恒的殖民心態。你想對我們說教,你想告訴我們,我們才是一切問題的根源,因為你們永遠不會接受錯誤,你們才是最應該負責的人。

1992年,你們在裏約的地球高峰會(Earth Summit)上簽署了“共同但有區別的責任”原則,你們喜歡說同舟共濟,但我們可沒有同舟共濟的情誼,美國人口隻有世界人口的4%至5%,卻消耗了世界四分之一的資源(絕大部分是稀有軍工資源),你們將製造業轉移給中國,然後說中國“碳汙染”。

1992年,裏約熱內盧舉行的地球高峰會上,155個國家簽署了《聯合國氣候變化框架公約》。來源:維基百科

而中國正在生產你們的水桶,中國正在生產你們的螺母和螺栓,中國正在生產你們的手機,試試在你們自己的國家生產,然後看著你們的碳排放量增加成什麽樣。你們太喜歡說教,因為你們有殖民心態、殖民結構和機構,你每次貸款給我們的錢,那還都是我們的錢!

國際貨幣基金組織每次來到我們的社會告訴我們:“這是我們給你的錢。”不!那明明是我們的錢,你把我們的錢以債務的形式放還給我們,還對我們的生活方式指手畫腳,這簡直離譜。

這不僅僅是殖民心態,而且還是殖民結構和機構,並且永無止境地、年複一年地自我複製。氣候正義運動(1999年發起,要求殖民國家正視曆史責任和生態債務)對這些問題的理解還不夠明確,氣候正義運動說:“我們擔心人類的未來。”什麽未來?非洲、亞洲、拉丁美洲的那些孩子們沒有未來可言,他們甚至沒有現在,他們擔心的不是未來,他們擔心的是現在,你們的口號卻是“我們擔心未來”。

這是西方中產階級的口號,你們必須擔心現在,全球有27億人吃不上飯,你卻告訴他們要減少消耗?這對於一個幾天沒吃上飯的孩子來說像話嗎?你們必須好好想想,否則這些氣候正義運動將在第三世界國家毫無立足之地。

稍後我將介紹國際人民大會(該組織力求推進跨國工人國際主義,反帝反殖民),一個深深紮根在全球南方國家,由200個政治組織組成的網絡,我們願意告訴你們所麵對的問題是什麽,但你們願意聽嗎?

專訪之前憤怒指責西方的印度學者維賈伊·普拉沙德:西方並不完美,無權說教

來源:環球時報作者:白雲怡;  2021-12-28

https://world.huanqiu.com/article/46A93WauHIN

【環球時報記者  白雲怡】在《聯合國氣候變化框架公約》第26次締約方大會(COP26)一段5分鍾的“憤怒宣言”中,印度馬克思主義學者維賈伊·普拉沙德痛斥西方“永恒的殖民心態和殖民結構”,在發展中國家引起強烈共鳴。這段大快人心的視頻,配上不同語言的字幕,在國內外社交媒體上被大量轉發。敢於當麵“硬剛”西方,說出發展中國家民眾內心真實不滿的維賈伊24日接受了《環球時報》記者專訪。他表示,發表“憤怒宣言”的導火索是由於幾名石油公司高管對莫桑比克天然氣田附近窮苦人民的無視。西方國家一直宣稱他們擁有人權和民主的全部答案,但現在,有太多人對西方主導的國際秩序感到失望。

維賈伊(右二)在COP26上發言。

“格拉斯哥街頭幾個石油公司高管的話,成了‘憤怒宣言’的導火索”

環球時報:你當時為什麽去格拉斯哥,並發表了那樣一篇“憤怒的宣言”?有沒有什麽幕後故事?

維賈伊:發表那番演講的早晨,我正在英國的格拉斯哥當地一個核酸檢測點排隊,幾名石油公司的高管排在我身後。其中一個人看到我戴著參加大會的媒體通行證,就問我:“你在這裏做什麽?”於是我對他們講述了一段我在莫桑比克的經曆。

我曾報道過一條新聞,內容涉及在莫桑比克的兩家石油公司,一家是法國的道達爾(Total),另一家是美國的埃克森美孚(Exxon Mobil)。他們在莫桑比克發現並開發了一個巨大的天然氣田。2017年,在莫桑比克最貧窮的省份——德爾加杜角省,人們發起了暴動。

參與暴動的人說:“我們太窮了,我們親眼看到了天然氣的開發,但我們沒有從中得到任何好處。”總之,當地人的不滿情緒很高。法國和美國的軍隊一度想過出手幹預莫桑比克的局麵,不過他們最終沒這麽做。後來,他們和盧旺達軍隊達成一項協議,盧旺達軍隊到莫桑比克鎮壓了暴動。(編者注:莫桑比克政府認為,這場暴動是由當地伊斯蘭極端主義者發起的。今年7月,盧旺達宣布應莫桑比克要求,將一支1000人的特遣隊部署至德爾加杜角省,協助應對當地叛亂。外交消息人士認為,這是多方妥協的結果。)對這件事,我一直非常難過。

我告訴那幾位石油公司高管,看到窮困的莫桑比克人生活在天然氣田的附近,卻連肚子都填不飽,這讓我很不安,我要在會議上說一說類似這樣的事情。然而,接下來他對我說的一番話,成為引發我那篇演講的直接“導火索”。

他對我說:“你說的都對,但沒有人會在乎。你沒有撒謊,你說的所有事情都是正確的,可是,誰也不會關心那些在德爾加杜角的人。”他的話讓我十分惱火。於是,當我返回會場後,輪到我發言時,我內心深處響起了一個聲音:“好吧,如果沒人關心,那我也不管了,我要把我真正想說的都說出來。”

環球時報:你的這段發言在中國的社交網絡上引發了很多討論,對此你有何感受?這段演講在其他國家的反響怎麽樣?

維賈伊:你們看到的視頻其實是我在格拉斯哥幾場發言中的一小段。事實上,它不僅在中國社交網絡上成了“爆款”,在印度、非洲、拉美和加勒比地區都被配上了字幕廣為傳播。

不久前,我去了委內瑞拉的一個公社,公社負責人是一名婦女,她突然走到我麵前說,“啊,你就是那個在氣候變化峰會上發言的家夥!”我當時的第一感覺是,“天啊,我活了54歲了,我的一生要被這短短5分鍾的視頻給定義了!”

坦率地說,我(對這段視頻的廣泛傳播)感到特別振奮,原來有這麽多不同背景的人都關注著這樣一件我認為很重要的事情——(今天仍然存在的)殖民結構和殖民心態。

一個事物在網絡上成為爆款,往往不是因為我們說了什麽新奇的東西,而是因為我們說出了很多人心裏已經在想的事情。這件事給我的感覺是,已經有太多人對現在的國際秩序感到挫敗沮喪。我們想要改變。

“他們擁有一切問題的答案”的感覺讓許多人不爽很久了

環球時報:正如你所說,一段話在社交媒體上能“火”起來,往往是因為它擊中了很多人內心潛藏的情感。在你看來,人們對西方國家的憤怒因何而來?

維賈伊:我想,那是因為我們已經受夠了被來自華盛頓、倫敦、巴黎的領導人說教,告訴我們應該做什麽,不該做什麽。他們聲稱,他們做得比我們好,他們擁有人權和民主的所有答案,他們在所有事情上都是最好的裁判。這種態度特別讓人感到沮喪。

看看吧,美國才是世界上監禁率最高的國家。這一點每個人都知道,它被寫在幾乎所有的報告裏。那為什麽他們卻不停地向別的國家進行人權說教?沒有國家是完美的,讓我們直麵這一點。

事實上,我們都在努力變得更好,我們也必須改進很多現實情況。但是,西方的說教總給人一種“他們擁有一切問題的答案”的感覺,我覺得這是許多人感到不爽的原因,而且這種不爽已經很久了。

環球時報:你在大會發言中認為,對很多西方發達國家來說,殖民主義不是已經被打敗的“過去式”,對他們來說,殖民主義是永恒的。

這種永恒的殖民主義通過兩種方式進行,一種是永恒的殖民心態,一種是殖民結構和機構。為什麽你認為今天西方國家對發展中國家的態度和19世紀並無二致?

維賈伊:坦率地說,要西方國家擺脫殖民心態非常困難。這就好像男權思想一樣,過去幾百年中,在很多社會裏,男人很自然地認為自己天生比女人高貴,讓他們意識到男尊女卑是一個瘋狂的想法需要很長時間。

西方的殖民心態也是一樣。殖民主義距今已存在了五六百年,在過去的五百多年中,他們一直把我們視為低等人,可以隨便欺負我們,命令我們去做這做那。

比如在中國,曾經發生過鴉片戰爭,(英國人更習慣把叫它)英中戰爭。但是,中國的艦隊沒有跑到英國去挑起一場戰爭,中國人沒有去轟炸英格蘭,叫它英中戰爭是錯的。沒有什麽英中戰爭,隻有一場英國強加給中國的戰爭。

西方需要承認自己的殖民曆史。現在的他們對此仿佛失憶了一般,法國、英國、美國,從來沒有人承認自己的過去。比如,英國說對在香港發生的事情感到非常不安,但麻煩請記住:在香港處於英國殖民統治的時候,那裏完全沒有民主。他們為什麽不承認這一點?最後一任港督彭定康在香港時,香港人有什麽民主?現在他們居然對中國人說教,這實在太有趣了。他們甚至意識不到自己的曆史。

在印度也是一樣。英國人直接統治了印度兩百年,完全沒有什麽民主。當英國人離開印度時,隻有13%的印度人識字。所以,不要對我們的政府說教。

總之,西方對我們的態度,就好像我們還是小孩,他們必須扇我們的耳光,告訴我們要規規矩矩的。這是一個長期的事情,不是一個能短期解決的問題。

“想知道在印度做一個馬克思主義者是一種怎樣的體驗?問問印度農民吧”

環球時報:你是一個研究馬克思主義和社會主義的學者。能否告訴我們,在印度做一個馬克思主義者是一種怎樣的體驗?

維賈伊:印度有很長的馬克思主義傳統,印度的共產黨建立於1920年。印度今天還有幾個不同的共產主義政黨,其中最大的是印共(馬派),有100多萬名黨員。

我從很小的時候就已經開始閱讀馬克思的著作。你可以看到,我的書架上有很多有關社會主義的書,許多是我從蘇聯買來的。1981年我還是個小男孩時,我在加爾各答買了三卷《資本論》。很多和我同時代的青年也都閱讀過馬克思主義的書籍。

然而,後來我們經曆了蘇聯的解體,這一事件讓我們有那麽一段時間感覺自己被擊敗了。從此以後,做一個馬克思主義者要麵臨很多壓力。

現在,在印度做一個社會主義者並不是一件容易的事,因為印度政府傾向於用宗教的視角來處理政治問題。我對此十分不讚同。

與此同時,今年數百萬印度農民在全國舉行示威,反對政府強加給他們的農業改革法案,這些法案會讓農民(失去土地)變成Uber司機。(編者注:印度農業改革將允許大型私有企業進入農產品銷售市場,並允許商家囤積食品,被印度農民視為違背農民利益,引發強烈不滿。)

很難想象,在新冠疫情肆虐的這一年,我們竟然經曆了世界上最大、最有力量的群眾運動之一,而且最終政府撤回了這些法案,也就是說農民取得了勝利。他們展現的正是馬克思主義的活力。想知道在印度做一個馬克思主義者是什麽感覺?那就去問一問印度的農民吧。

環球時報:你認為今天的印度需要社會主義嗎?

維賈伊:作為普通人,我們最想要的是什麽?我想生活在這樣一個社會:人們沒有饑餓,也不是文盲,每個人都有地方可以居住,可以接受更好的教育,有電、有互聯網和其他便利的設施。然而,直到今天,上千萬甚至上億的印度人還沒法過上這樣的生活。

如果資本主義可以為他們提供這樣的生活,我會變成一個資本主義者,但資本主義做不到這一點。隻有社會主義才可以讓每個人都不再挨餓。

事實上,我們已經在“中國實驗”中看到它實現了——我現在經常使用“中國實驗”這個詞,因為你們在嚐試很多不同的東西。我非常欣賞這一點。

今年,當我讀到中國消除絕對貧困的消息時,真的很開心,因為這意味著農民終於可以吃上飽飯了。我覺得嚐試消除絕對貧困的行動也許是在很長一段時間內這個世界上發生的最重要的事情,因為它向印度這樣的國家證明,哪怕是窮一點的國家也可以做到這些事。

我不是中國人,但是我為中國政府所做的事情而感到驕傲。這正是國際主義的意義所在,印度需要社會主義。在印度搞社會主義容易嗎?不容易。在美國搞社會主義容易嗎?不容易。它將非常困難,但值得我們為之努力。

環球時報:感謝你對中國的讚賞。不過,我們也看到,最近兩年來中印因邊界問題關係非常緊張。還有一些印度政治人物和學者更視中國為“敵人”,主張聯合華盛頓製衡中國。你怎麽看這種觀點和當下的中印關係?

維賈伊:印中現在是“沒必要的緊張關係”。我不認為邊界爭議很重要,別忘了,就在十多年前,中國和俄羅斯還存在邊界爭議。邊界問題是可以解決的,重要的是潛在的政治問題,這才是關鍵。

當下,印度的精英階層對和美國結盟更感興趣,但這實際上對印度民眾沒有好處。印度應該做的是融入到“亞洲世紀”裏。我們為什麽要把“一帶一路”想象成一個“中國計劃”呢?我們應當把它視為一個亞洲的計劃。印度應該積極地參與到對基礎設施的投資中。

一些印度的精英階層認為,通往自由的道路必須從華盛頓經過。但我希望印度的治國精英們能夠對商業和人類自由都抱以更開放的思想,印度是一個偉大的國家,我們沒必要向任何一方“選邊站”。

 
People are fed up with West’s ‘lectures’ as it claims to be the best judge of everything: Indian scholar
Fierce critic
 
By Bai Yunyi  Dec 27, 2021 09:39 PM 
Protesters gather in the JPMorgan Chase Glasgow Headquarters in Glasgow demanding that the bank stops all financing of fossil fuels on November 10, 2021, during the COP26 UN Climate Change Conference.Photo: AFP
 
Editor's Note:
During the 26th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP26) held between October 31 and November 12 in Glasgow, the UK, a short video clip of Indian Marxist scholar Vijay Prashad's speech went viral. In the video, Prashad accused Western countries of robbing the wealth and resources of developing countries through means such as colonialism and encouraging a reliance on fossil fuels among developing nations. After their journey to becoming fully developed nations, Western countries have doubled back to place the culpability of current pollution crises onto developing countries.
 
Vijay Prashard Photo:Global Times

Vijay Prashad Photo:Global Times

What made Prashad deliver such a speech in Glasgow? What is the essence of Western countries' behavior in his eyes? Why did he say India needs socialism today? And what is his understanding of China and India's relationship? Recently, the Global Times (GT) reporter Bai Yunyi conversed with Prashad (Prashad)  to learn more about his experience and thoughts on such issues.

What really matters

GT: What made you go to Glasgow and deliver that speech at the COP26 conference? Could you share more behind-the-scenes details with us? 

Prashad: I had reported a story in Mozambique about oil companies. One is a French company, Total; while the other is an US company, Exxon Mobil. They have found the biggest offshore oilfield and a natural gas field in Mozambique, Africa.

People who lived just off the field in Cabo Delgado, which is the poorest province in Mozambique, started an uprising in 2017. They insisted that, "we are so poor. We can see this natural gas development. We are getting no benefit." They were upset. The French and American armies were to intervene. They didn't, but struck a deal with the Rwandan army which went in and crushed the uprising. I was very sad about this.

So that morning in Glasgow, I was in the queue to get a PCR test. There were some oil company executives behind me. One of them saw my press pass. He said, "What are you doing here?" So I told him the Mozambican story. 

I said that I have seen poor people in the shadow of a natural gas field who will not even be able to eat. This upset me, so I had to come and talk about things of that nature. 

But he said something to me that triggered that speech. He said, "You are right. But nobody cares. You're not lying. You're not wrong. Everything you say is correct, but nobody cares. They don't care about those people in Cabo Delgado."

That got me a little annoyed. And I have to tell you honestly, when I went back into the session, and they gave me my turn to speak, I thought, "I'm going to just say what I believe."

GT: Your speech at the COP26 went viral on Chinese social media. Did you receive any feedback from your Chinese counterparts? All things considered, how do you feel about the speech in hindsight?

Prashad: The truth is that this little segment you see is from a number of speeches that I made in Glasgow, which have gone viral everywhere including in India, on the African continent, in the Caribbean, and in Latin America with the use of subtitles.  

I went into a community in Venezuela. And a woman who is the leader of the community said to me, "You're the climate change guy." I thought "Goodness, I'm 54 years old. I've done a lot of things in my life, and I'm going to be defined by this five-minute clip." 

It's very exciting, to be honest, that so many different kinds of people are engaging with what I think is really important - the colonial structures and a neo-colonial mentality.

It's not that I said something new, but that it was a matter of what people are already thinking. And it leads me to feel that lots of people are frustrated with the current world order. And we want something different.


Arrogant 'lecturers'
 
A view of Luanda, capital of Angola, which is considered one of the African?continent's oldest colonial cities. Photo:IC

A woman carries her child on her back while selling goods on the street in Luanda, capital of Angola, on October 19, 2021. Luanda is considered one of the oldest colonial cities on the African continent.  Photo:IC

GT: As you said, a segment went viral on social media because it was a matter of what people are already thinking. What do you think the reason for the anger toward the West is? Why do so many people feel frustrated by the current world order? 

Prashad: I think that [is because] we are fed up with being told what to do by leaders from Washington, London, and Paris, who claim to be in a way better than we are. They claim they are the best judges of everything and have all the answers to human rights and democracy. Their attitude is very frustrating to people.

Consider this: The US has the highest per capita incarceration rate in the world. Why do they still keep lecturing everybody else about human rights?

We're all struggling to make better things happen. But they "lecture" us as if they have all the answers, and I think [that's why people] have been frustrated for such a long time.

GT: You also talked about the "permanent colonial mentality" of West in your speech. Where do you think their colonial mentality comes from? Why do you think Westerners' attitudes toward developing countries today are still the same as they were in the 19th century? 

Prashad: Let's be frank. It's very difficult to get rid of the West's colonial mentality. It's like patriarchal mentality: Over the centuries and in many societies, men have thought they are superior to women. It has taken a long time to teach men that believing that women are inferior to men is a crazy idea. Similarly, it is going to take a long time to transform Westerners' colonial mindset, which has been there for five or six hundred years. For over 500 years, they thought that we are lesser people. They therefore think they can go and bully us, telling us what to do.

In China there was the Opium Wars in the 19th century, which the British tend to call "Anglo-Chinese Wars." However, the Chinese ships didn't go and start a war in England, and the Chinese did not bombard England. They were the wars that the British imposed upon China. These were no "Anglo-Chinese" wars but British wars. 

I always get annoyed when Westerners say "the Vietnam war." There was no "Vietnam war" but a US war imposed upon Vietnam. There's no Iraq war but another US war imposed upon Iraq. It's very hard to get this attitude out of their heads. 

The West needs to recognize the history of colonialism. But they seemed to have amnesia about this - France, the UK, and the US - nobody ever accepts their past. The British, for instance, are currently very upset about what's happening in Hong Kong. But remember, the British held Hong Kong as a colony. There was no democracy there under British rule. Why don't they recognize that? When Chris Patten was the last governor of Hong Kong as a British colony, what democracy was there for Hong Kong people? And yet they are busy lecturing the Chinese, which sounds very interesting to me. They don't even possess self-awareness about their own history. 

The British directly ruled India for at least 200 years, during which time there was no democracy. When the British left India, only 13 percent of the Indian population was literate. So now don't lecture us about our government.

The West's attitude toward us is that of infantilization. They feel they have to cajole us to make us behave. It's a long-term issue, and one that's going to take time to purge such attitudes from Western thinking.

India needs socialism

GT: You are a Marxism and socialism scholar. Can you tell us what it is like to be a Marxist in India?

Prashad:India has a very long communist tradition. There are several communist parties in India. The largest communist party is the Communist Party of India, which has more than 1 million members. Until recently, Marxism was one of the dominant forms of thought in India. Especially in the field of economics, Marxism held its own. 

I have been reading Marx's works since long ago. As you can see, I have many books on socialism on my shelves, many of which I bought from the Soviet Union. When I was a little boy in 1981, like many of my contemporaries, I bought three volumes of Capital in Calcutta. 

However, then we were faced with the collapse of the Soviet Union, an event that made us feel   defeated for a while, and since then, there has been a lot of pressure to be a Marxist. To be honest, things are not easy in India for socialism today, because the government has a certain sort of religious perspective, regarding politics. I'm not in favor of religion in politics.

However, this year, millions of farmers in India held protests against farm reform bills. In a way the farmers showed the vitality of Marxism because this was authentic class struggle.
 
Indian activists and farmers try to stop a train at a railway station in Kolkata to protest against the central government's agricultural reforms on September 27, 2021. Photo: AFP

Indian activists and farmers try to stop a train at a railway station in Kolkata to protest against the central government's agricultural reforms on September 27, 2021. Photo: AFP

It has been a very powerful year amid the COVID-19 pandemic. We had one of the world's largest mass movements in which the government had to repeal its laws. That means the farmers won. If you want to know what it feels like to be a Marxist in India, ask the people who has walked among the farmers.

GT:Do you think today's India needs socialism?

Prashad: What do we want as ordinary people? I want to live in a society where people are not hungry or illiterate, where people have shelter and access to high quality education, and access to the internet and electricity. But today, hundreds of millions of Indians don't have these things. If capitalism can provide them such living conditions, I would become a capitalist, but capitalism cannot do it. Only socialism can lift everybody up from the brink of starvation. We see that it has actually been done in the "Chinese experiment"— I use the term "Chinese experiment" a lot because innovative Chinese people are constantly trying different things. I really appreciate that. 

I think that China's attempt to eradicate poverty is probably the most important thing that's happened in a long time in the world, because it showed countries like India it can be done in a poor country.

I'm not Chinese, but I am proud of what the Chinese government has done. I think socialism is necessary in India. Is it easy to make socialism in India? No. Is it easy to make socialism in the US? No. It's going to be very difficult, but it worth the struggle.

GT: Some Indian politicians and scholars see China as a big threat. They think India should stand with the US to confront China because of current border tensions between China and India. What is your view on this perspective?

Prashad: I don't think the current border tensions are important. China had a border dispute with the USSR that was only resolved 10 years ago. And today, Russia and China have one of the closest global relationships. Border disputes can be solved. It's the underlying political problems that are important.

Right now, the Indian elites are more interested in an alliance with the US. This is actually bad for the people of India, because India needs to get involved in the "Asian era." 

Why should we imagine the Belt and Road initiative (BRI) as being solely a Chinese project? We have to imagine BRI as being an Asian project. India needs to also be involved in this investment in infrastructure and so on. 

The elites, however, feel that the road to freedom comes through Washington. I think India needs to have a non-aligned foreign policy. India should take a neutral position. India is a great country and doesn't have to be in anybody's camp. Indian ruling elites should have a more open-minded attitude toward business, commerce, and human freedom.

Book:

Washington Bullets

https://mayday.leftword.com/catalog/product/view/id/21820

LeftWord Books, New Delhi, 2020

“Like his hero Eduardo Galeano, Vijay Prashad makes the telling of the truth lovable; not an easy trick to pull off, he does it effortlessly.” — Roger Waters, Pink Floyd

“This book brings to mind the infinite instances in which Washington Bullets have shattered hope.” — Evo Morales Ayma, former President of Bolivia

Washington Bullets is written in the best traditions of Marxist journalism and history-writing. It is a book of fluent and readable stories, full of detail about US imperialism, but never letting the minutiae obscure the larger political point. It is a book that could easily have been a song of despair – a lament of lost causes; it is, after all, a roll call of butchers and assassins; of plots against people’s movements and governments; of the assassinations of socialists, Marxists, communists all over the Third World by the country where liberty is a statue.

Despite all this, Washington Bullets is a book about possibilities, about hope, about genuine heroes. One such is Thomas Sankara of Burkina Faso – also assassinated – who said: ‘You cannot carry out fundamental change without a certain amount of madness. In this case, it comes from nonconformity, the courage to turn your back on the old formulas, the courage to invent the future. It took the madmen of yesterday for us to be able to act with extreme clarity today. I want to be one of those madmen. We must dare to invent the future.’

Washington Bullets is a book infused with this madness, the madness that dares to invent the future.

Contents
Preface by Evo Morales Ayma 9
Files 13
‘Bring Down More US Aircraft’ 17
Part 1
Divine Right 23
Preponderant Power 24
Trusteeship 26
‘International Law Has to
Treat Natives as Uncivilized’ 28
‘Savage Tribes Do Not Conform
to the Codes of Civilized Warfare’ 31
Natives and the Universal 34
UN Charter 36
‘I am for America’ 39
Solidarity with the United States
against Communism 42
‘No Communist in Gov. or Else’ 45
‘Nothing Can Be Allowed’ 48
Third World Project 51
Expose the US ‘Unnecessarily’ 53
Part 2
Manual for Regime Change 65
Production of Amnesia 90
‘Be a Patriot, Kill a Priest’ 93
8
Contents
The Answer to Communism
Lay in the Hope of Muslim Revival 96
‘I Strongly Urge You to Make This a Turning Point’ 100
‘The Sheet is Too Short’ 106
The Debt of Blood 109
All the Cameras Have Left For the Next War 111
Part 3
‘Our Strategy Must Now Refocus’ 115
‘Rising Powers Create Instability
in the International State System’ 119
‘Pave the Whole Country’ 122
Banks Not Tanks 125
First Amongst Equals 128
Only One Member of the Permanent
Security Council – the United States 130
Republic of NGOs 132
Maximum Pressure 135
Accelerate the Chaos 140
Sanctions are a Crime 142
Law as a Weapon of War 146
Dynamite in the Streets 148
We Believe in People and Life 152
Sources 155
Acknowledgements 161
9

Preface

This is a book about bullets, says the author. Bullets that assassinated democratic processes, that assassinated revolutions, and that assassinated hope.

The courageous Indian historian and journalist Vijay Prashad has put his all into explaining and providing a digestible and comprehensive way of understanding the sinister interest with which imperialism intervenes in countries that attempt to build their own destiny.

In the pages of this book, Prashad documents the participation of the United States in the assassination of social leaders in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, and in the massacres of the people, who have refused to subsidize the delirious business dealings of
multinational corporations with their poverty.

Prashad says that these Washington Bullets have a price: ‘The biggest price is paid by the people. For in these assassinations, these murders, this violence of intimidation, it is the people who lose their leaders in their localities. A peasant leader, a trade-union
leader, a leader of the poor.’ Prashad provides a thorough account of how the CIA
participated in the 1954 coup d’état against the democratically elected president of Guatemala, Jacobo Árbenz Guzmán. Árbenz had the intolerable audacity of opposing the interests of the United Fruit Company.

In Chile, Prashad shows us how the US government spent $8 million to finance strikes and protests against Allende.

What happened in Brazil when the parliamentary coup removed president Dilma Rousseff from office in August 2016 is an example of the perverse practice of ‘lawfare’, or the ‘use of law as a weapon of war’. The same method was used against former president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who suffered in prison for 580 days as a result of a trial in which the prosecutors did not provide concrete evidence – just ‘firm beliefs’.

Times have changed, and business is no longer carried out in the same way, but the underlying methods and responses of imperialism have remained largely unaltered.

Bolivians know this perverse politics well. Long before our fourteen years at the head of the Plurinational State of Bolivia, we have had to confront the operations, threats, and retaliation of the United States.

In 2008, I had to expel Philip Goldberg, the ambassador of the United States, who was conspiring with separatist leaders, giving them instructions and resources to divide Bolivia. In that moment, the US Department of State said that my claims were unfounded.

I don’t know what they would say now, when the participation of the US embassy in the coup that overthrew us at the end of 2019 is so clear. What will future researchers say who take up the work of reading the CIA documents that are classified today?

The Monroe Doctrine and the National Security Doctrine attempt to convert Latin America into the United States’s backyard and criminalize any type of organization that opposes its interest and that attempts to build an alternative political, economic, and social model.

Over the decades, the US has invented a series of pretexts andhas built a narrative to attempt to justify its criminal political and military interventions. First, there was the justification of the fight against communism, followed by the fight against drug trafficking, and, now, the fight against terrorism.

This book brings to mind the infinite instances in which Washington Bullets have shattered hope. Colonialism has always used the idea of progress in accordance with its own parameters and its own reality. This same colonialism – which puts our planet in a state of crisis today, devours natural resources, and concentrates wealth that is generated from devastation – says that our laws of vivir bien [‘living well’] are utopian. But if our dreams of equilibrium with Pachamama [‘Mother Earth’], of freedom,and of social justice are not yet a reality, or if they have been cut short, it is primarily because imperialism has set out to interfere in our political, cultural, and economic revolutions, which promote sovereignty, dignity, peace, and fraternity among all people.
If the salvation of humanity is far away, it is because Washington insists on using its bullets against the world’s people.

We write and read these lines and this text in a moment that is
extremely tense for our planet. A virus is quarantining the global
economy, and capitalism – with its voracious habits and its need
to concentrate wealth – is showing its limits.
It is likely that the world that will emerge from the convulsions
of 2020 will not be the one that the one that we used to know.
Every day, we are reminded of the duty to continue our struggle
against imperialism, against capitalism, and against colonialism.
We must work together towards a world in which greater respect
for the people and for Mother Earth is possible. In order to do this,
it is essential for states to intervene so that the needs of the masses
and the oppressed are put first. We have the conviction that we are
the masses. And that the masses, over time, will win.
Evo Morales Ayma Buenos Aires Former President of Bolivia April 2020

I make no secret of my opinion that at the present time the
barbarism of Western Europe has reached an incredibly high
level, being only surpassed – far surpassed, it is true – by the
barbarism of the United States.

– Aimé Césaire, Discourse on Colonialism, 1955
Books and documents that detail the tragedies afflicted upon the
people of the world surround me. There is a section of my library
that is on the United States government’s Central Intelligence
Agency (CIA) and its coups – from Iran in 1953 onward, every
few years, every few countries. The International Monetary Fund
(IMF) reports make up an entire bookshelf; these tell me about
the roadblocks placed before countries that try to find a way out
of their poverty and inequality. I have files and files of government
documents that had investigated old wars and new wars, bloodshed
that destabilized countries in the service of the powerful and the
rich. There are memoirs of diabolical leaders and advisors – the
complete works of Henry Kissinger – and there are the writings
and speeches of the people’s leaders. These words create a world.
They explain why there is so much suffering around us and why
that suffering leads not to struggle, but to resignation and hatred.
I reach above me and pull down a file on Guatemala. It is on
the CIA coup of 1954. Why did the US destroy that small country?
Because the landless movement and the Left fought to elect a democratic politician – Jacobo Árbenz – who decided to push through a moderate land reform agenda. Such a project threatened to undercut the land holding of the United Fruit Company, a US
conglomerate that strangled Guatemala. The CIA got to work. It
contacted retired Colonel Carlos Castillo Armas, it paid off brigade
commanders, created sabotage events, and then seized Árbenz in
the presidential palace and sent him to exile. Castillo Armas then
put Guatemala through a reign of terror. ‘If it is necessary to turn
the country into a cemetery in order to pacify it,’ he said later, ‘I
will not hesitate to do so.’ The CIA gave him lists of Communists,
people who were eager to lift their country out of poverty. They
were arrested, many executed. The CIA offered Castillo Armas
its benediction to kill; A Study of Assassination, the CIA’s killing
manual, was handed over to his butchers. The light of hope went
out in this small and vibrant country.

What other day-lit secrets of the past are sitting in my files and
books? What do these stories tell us?

That when the people and their representatives tried to forge
a just road forward, they were thwarted by their dominant classes,
egged on by the Western forces. That what was left was a landscape
of desolation. Humiliation of the older colonial past was now
refracted into the modern era. At no time were the people of the
Third World allowed to live in the same time as their contemporaries
in the West – they were forced into an earlier time, a time with less
opportunity and with less social dignity. Tall leaders of the Third
World felt the cold steel of execution – Patrice Lumumba in the
Congo (1961), Mehdi Ben Barka of Morocco (1965), Che Guevara
in Bolivia (1967), Thomas Sankara in Burkina Faso (1987), and so
many others, before, after, and in between. Entire countries – from
Vietnam to Venezuela – faced obliteration through asymmetrical
and hybrid wars.

This book is based on a vast amount of reading of US government documents, and documents from its allied governments and multilateral organizations, as well as the rich
secondary literature written by scholars around the world. It is a
book about the shadows; but it relies upon the literature of the
light.

‘Bring Down More US Aircraft’ Estados Unidos: el país donde
La libertad es una estatua.

United States: the country where Liberty is a statue.
– Nicanor Parra, Artefactos, 1972

What is the price of an assassin’s bullet? Some dollars here and there.
The cost of the bullet. The cost of a taxi ride, a hotel, an airplane,
the money paid to hire the assassin, his silence purchased through
a payment into a Swiss bank, the cost to him psychologically for
having taken the life of one, two, three, or four. But the biggest
price is not paid by the intelligence services. The biggest price is
paid by the people. For in these assassinations, these murders, this
violence of intimidation, it is the people who lose their leaders in
their localities. A peasant leader, a trade-union leader, a leader of
the poor. The assassinations become massacres, as people who are
in motion are cut down. Their confidence begins to falter. Those
who came from them, organized them, spoke from them, either
now dead or, if not dead, too scared to stand up, too isolated, too
rattled, their sense of strength, their sense of dignity, compromised
by this bullet or that. In Indonesia, the price of the bullet was in
the millions; in Guatemala, the tens of thousands. The death of
Lumumba damaged the social dynamic of the Congo, muzzling
its history. What did it cost to kill Chokri Belaïd (Tunisian, 1964–
2013) and Ruth First (South African, 1925–1982), what did it take to kill Amílcar Cabral (Bissau-Guinean and Cape Verdean,1924–1973) and Berta Cáceres (Honduran, 1971–2016)? What did it mean to suffocate history so as to preserve the order of the rich?

Each bullet fired struck down a Revolution and gave birth to our present barbarity. This is a book about bullets.

Many of these bullets are fired by people who have their own
parochial interests, their petty rivalries and their small-minded
gains. But more often than not, these have been Washington’s
bullets. These are bullets that have been shined by the bureaucrats
of the world order who wanted to contain the tidal wave that swept
from the October Revolution of 1917 and the many waves that
whipped around the world to form the anti-colonial movement.
The first wave crested in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
(USSR) and in Eastern Europe, and it was this wave that provoked
the Cold War and the East–West conflict; the other wave went
from Vietnam and China to Cuba, from Indonesia to Chile, and
this wave engendered the far more deadly North–South or West–
South conflict. It was clear to the United States, as the leader of
the West, that no muscular conflict would be possible along the
East–West axis, that once the USSR (1949) and China (1964)
tested their nuclear weapons no direct war would be possible.
The battlefield moved from along the Urals and the Caucasus into
Central and South America, into Africa, and into Asia – into, in
other words, the South. Here, in the South where raw materials are
in abundance, decolonization had become the main framework
by the 1940s. Washington’s bullets that pointed towards the USSR
remained unused, but its bullets were fired into the heart of the
South. It was in the battlefields of the South that Washington
pushed against Soviet influence and against the national liberation
projects, against hope and for profit. Liberty was not to be the
watchword of the new nations that broke away from formal
colonialism; liberty is the name of a statue in New York harbour.
Imperialism is powerful: it attempts to subordinate people to
maximize the theft of resources, labour, and wealth. Anyone who denies the absolute obscenity of imperialism needs to find another answer to the fact that the richest 22 men in the world have more wealth than all the women in Africa, or that the richest one per
cent have more than twice as much wealth as 6.9 billion people.
You would have to have an answer for the reason why we continue
to suffer from hunger, illiteracy, sickness, and indignities of
various kinds. You could not simply say that there are no resources
to solve these problems, given that tax havens hold at least $32
trillion – more than the total value of gold that has been brought
to the surface. It is easy to bomb a country; harder yet to solve
the pressing problems of its peoples. Imperialism’s only solution
to these problems is to intimidate people and to create dissension
amongst people.

But liberty cannot be so easily contained. That is why, despite
the odds, people continue to aspire for alternatives, continue to
organize themselves, continue to attempt to win a new world – all
this despite the possibility of failure. If you do not risk failure, you
cannot taste the fruit of victory.

On 2 September 1945, H? Chí Minh appeared before a massive
crowd in Hanoi. He had never before been to the capital, but he was
known by everyone there. ‘Countrymen,’ he asked, ‘can you hear
me? Do you understand what I am saying?’ A few weeks before,
in Tân Trào, the National Congress of People’s Representatives
laid out the agenda for the new Vietnam. At that meeting, H? Chí
Minh said, ‘The aim of the National Liberation Committee and all
the delegates is to win independence for our country – whatever
the cost – so that our children would have enough to eat, would
have enough to wear, and could go to school. That’s the primary
goal of our revolution.’ The people in Hanoi, and across Vietnam,
knew exactly what H? Chí Minh was saying; they could hear him,
and they could understand him. His slogan was food, clothes, and
education.

To feed, clothe, and educate one’s population requires
resources. Vietnam’s revolution meant that it would no longer allow its own social wealth to drain away to France and to the West. The Vietnamese government, led by H? Chí Minh, wanted to use that wealth to address the centuries-old deprivations of the
Vietnamese peasantry. But this is precisely what imperialism could
not tolerate. Vietnamese labour was not for its own advancement;
it was to provide surplus value for Western capitalists, in particular
for the French bourgeoisie. Vietnam’s own development could not
be the priority of the Vietnamese; it was Vietnam’s priority to see
to the aggrandizement of France and the rest of the imperialist
states. That is why the French – in cahoots with the Vietnamese
monarchy and its underlings – went to war against the Vietnamese
people. This French war against Vietnam would run from 1946
to 1954, and then the mantle of war-making would be taken up
by the United States of America till its defeat in 1975. During the
worst of the US bombing of the northern part of Vietnam, H? Chí
Minh went on a tour of air defences. He was already in his late 70s.
His comrades asked after his health. ‘Bring down more US aircraft,’
he said, ‘and I’ll be in the best of health.’
Washington’s bullets are sleek and dangerous. They intimidate
and they create loyalties out of fear. Their antidote is hope, the
kind of hope that came to us in 1964 as the Colombian civil war
opened a new phase, and the poet Jotamario Arbeláez (translated
by Nicolás Suescún) sang of another future –
a day after the war

if there is a war
if after the war there is a day
I will hold you in my arms
a day after the war
if there is a war
if after the war there is a day
if after the war I have arms
and I will make love to you with love

a day after the war
if there is a war
if after the war there is a day
if after the war there is love
and if there is what it takes to make love.

A book like this relies upon a wide range of sources, but more than
that, it relies upon a lifetime of activity and of reading. Listing all
the books and articles would surely make this book double its
current size. I have been involved – in one way or another – in
the left movement for decades, and in these decades have been
active in campaigns against the criminal behaviour of imperialism.
And I have been reading about this behaviour in pamphlets and
newspapers for these past many decades. There is no greater clarity
for a writer than being involved in the very process that they wish
to write about; distance is useful, surely, but distance can also
create a false sense of dispassion.
My first indelible memory of political activity comes from
the US intervention in Grenada in 1983. Here was a small island
nation in the Caribbean, with not even a population of 100,000,
that had been experimenting with its own form of socialism
through the New Jewel Movement. The United States government,
rather quickly, developed a narrative that it fed to the corporate
press, of Cuban involvement in the New Jewel Movement and in
the government of its leader Maurice Bishop. This was likely true,
but the point was not whether it was true; the point was to tar the
New Jewel Movement with the brush of communism and Cuban as
well as Soviet involvement. It is precisely what the US government
had done to all revolutionary struggles in Central America and
the Caribbean in this period, allowing the bogey of communism to justify their support for the most wretched right-wing – often genocidal – forces in the region. My first essay for a newspaper was written on the US intervention into Grenada (it was published
in my school’s alternative newspaper, The Circle).
The first draft of history, the truism goes, is the media; like
all truisms, it is only partly correct. In the case of imperialism, it
is downright misleading. The corporate media in the West – and
the media elsewhere that mirrors it – is not capable of writing
the first draft of history because it is a part of the story. It takes
dictation from the imperialist institutions, such as the CIA, and
produces narratives that have varying degrees of truth to them,
but which are almost always stories that are framed by what suits
Western interests, rather than by the facts on the ground. To read
the media about Grenada after the 1979 revolution was to take
stenography from the US government. In 1979, for instance, the
New York Times ran a story called ‘Radical Grenada Symbolizes
Political Shift in Caribbean’ (20 August). The story was anchored
by two paragraphs of quotations from John A. Bushnell, Deputy
Assistant Secretary of State of Inter-American Affairs in the US
government. Bushnell said that while the US government does
‘not believe that Cuba is following some master plan for expanding
its influence in the Caribbean’, nonetheless ‘there also appears to
be a drawing together of young radicals and radical movements
in the Caribbean, encouraged by the recent events in Grenada and
perhaps also by Cuba’. Cuba, he said, is a ‘patron of revolutionaries’
and it comes to ‘the aid of radical regimes’. There was no detailed
account of the plans of the Bishop government; no voices from
that government, nothing really about the Grenadian people’s
desperation for a different kind of future.
To get the point of view of the New Jewel Movement, its own
newspapers were invaluable, as were the speeches of Maurice
Bishop; Bishop spoke openly about the challenges in this small
island and offered an expansive vision of what would be possible
if the people found themselves truly to be in charge (these are collected in Maurice Bishop Speaks, New York, 1983). For a socialistaccount of the revolution, the first draft of history must be the records of the government (1979–83) and the words left behind
by its architects. These offer the revolution in its own words. But
a revolution – like the counter-revolution – is capable of being
blinded by its own rhetoric, which is why its critics from the left
are often invaluable guides to the revolutionary process. In the
days before the internet, it was hard to follow these debates, easy
to be swept away by the calumnies of the corporate media. But
there were always solidarity platforms – such as the Ecumenical
Program for Interamerican Communication and Action (EPICA)
and TransAfrica – that produced their own dossiers and bulletins;
these would be filled with newspaper clippings and documents
of all kinds, a hodgepodge of essential information that would
circulate among leftists who were in solidarity with experiments
such as the New Jewel Movement and who were outraged by
imperialism’s antics. Such collections are key to the archive of a
book such as Washington Bullets.

In 1983, the US invaded Grenada and swept aside the New Jewel Movement.
It was not until 2012 that the National Security Archive – a
not-for-profit investigative project in the United States – was able
to attain 226 documents, largely from the US State Department,
about Grenada. These documents allow a meticulous researcher
to piece together the story of how the US government conducted
a hybrid war against the Maurice Bishop government and how
it created the conditions for its invasion. A close read of these
documents shows how obsessed the US government was with the
potential for Cuban and Soviet involvement in Grenada, and how
this motivated every negative policy decision of the administration
of Ronald Reagan against the New Jewel Movement. The real first
draft of history is this secret trove of documents, which come to
light decades after the event. This book is written with these sorts
of documents in hand, State Department and CIA materials that 
158  Washington Bullets

are either available in the CIA’s own digital archive, or through the
National Security Archive, or else in the private papers of former
State Department and CIA officials as well as US presidents. It takes
a lot of effort to run down some of these papers, and even more
effort to learn to read them carefully. These documents cannot be
taken at face value because – as I have learned over the years in
talking to retired CIA and State Department officers – there is a
great deal of career-driven exaggeration. One has to sift through
the information with care and diligence.

Nothing is as valuable as hindsight, and often the best
hindsight comes in memoirs and in memories as well as in
academic work. Maurice Bishop was killed, and Milan Bish – the
key US ambassador – is now dead. But Wendy Grenade, who
teaches at the University of West Indies, Cave Hill (Barbados),
edited a book in 2015 called The Grenada Revolution: Reflections
and Lessons, which had an interview with Bernard Coard, who
was Bishop’s deputy and would have Bishop arrested (how Bishop
died remains a mystery); and two essays by participants in the
revolution – Brian Meeks and Patsy Lewis. A book such as edited
by Grenade presents an opportunity for participants to look back
and offer their own context for the revolution, and it allows other
contributors to assess the nature of the coup d’état against the New
Jewel Movement. The kind of book you have just read cannot
be written without reading the vast and important secondary
literature, often the best place to understand the contours of the
national liberation revolutions that provoke Washington’s bullets.
Nothing has been as useful to me in writing this book as the
conversations I have had with ex-CIA agents, people such as Chuck
Cogan, Rafael Quintero, and Tyler Drumheller. John Stockwell’s In
Search of Enemies (1978) is a book designed to clear the conscience
of a man who was disgusted by the work he had done. Stockwell
was in Grenada just before Bishop was killed; he went to Trinidad
and got the flu so was not present at the key moment when New
Jewel was destroyed. When the US invaded Grenada, Stockwell said that US President Ronald Reagan ‘likes controversy. It makes him look like what he thinks is a leader’. The US had exaggerated the Cuban presence in Grenada, Stockwell said, as a way to justify
the intervention. He knew this stuff from the inside out. Without
the input of people like Stockwell or Chuck Cogan, this sort of book
cannot be written. Before he died, Chuck met me several times
in Cambridge, Massachusetts, at a restaurant and would walk me
through his work in the Directorate of Operations in the key years
of 1979–84. I was then interested in the 1979 assassination of US
ambassador Adolph Dubs in Kabul; Chuck would say, ‘Don’t touch
that; it is too hot.’ But then he’d tell me another story, take me down
the road into another US-made disaster. This book is peppered
with insights I got from these men, who did nasty things, hated
talking about them, but were honest enough to say towards the
end of their lives that they had helped to make a mess of the world.

[ 打印 ]
閱讀 ()評論 (0)
評論
目前還沒有任何評論
登錄後才可評論.