The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
There was no need for paranoia by the CIA, because Allende's foreign policy and domestic policy already publicly announced socialism and supporting policies of land confiscations and redistribution of anything over 80 hectares and similar initiatives, and he came to power in a a election on making a hard shift toward socialism and affinity toward Cuba and the USSR, not hiding it all.
The reason the CIA got involved in overthrowing Allende had nothing to do with falsely making Allende out to be an extreme socialist leader of a potentially new wave of anti-US governments in Latin America. Allende was openly exactly that kind of leader and had openly campaigned on that platform, similar to the leaders of Ecuador, Venezuela, and Bolivia today. That's why such evidence does not support an argument that US intelligence agencies do not know how to do effective counterintelligence work.
Similarly with Trump today, he actively campaigned and won an election where he argued for supporting Russia in Ukraine and Syria instead of opposing, and his affinity with Russia has been public knowledge. The only additional information intelligence agencies have brought to bear is that Russia has expended effort to influence the election, on his behalf.
Whether Trump knew this and coordinated with Russia on this or not is immaterial, as is whether Russia could extort him to control like a low-level agent or not. What we do know from all that has been publicly acknowledged so far is that the Russians helped put Trump in the White House, so that must serve their interests.
This means, getting back to the argument of Luis's post, that we cannot use historical interpretations of national interests to explain what the US is doing anymore. We must include Russian interests in that analysis, and while supporting the EU and its development has always been an explicit part of US foreign, economic, and security policy since WWII, the fact that it has always been contrary to Russian interests have much more to do with the US putting anti-EU diplomat as its envoy, not historical US interests.
by fjallstrom - Dec 12 67 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Dec 11 9 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Dec 13 19 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Dec 8 51 comments
by Oui - Dec 9 67 comments
by Oui - Dec 4 71 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Nov 27 72 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Dec 1 4 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Dec 1319 comments
by Oui - Dec 133 comments
by fjallstrom - Dec 1267 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Dec 119 comments
by Oui - Dec 967 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Dec 851 comments
by Oui - Dec 471 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Dec 14 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Nov 2772 comments
by gmoke - Nov 26
by Frank Schnittger - Nov 2337 comments
by Oui - Nov 212 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Nov 2072 comments
by Oui - Nov 1510 comments
by ATinNM - Nov 135 comments
by Oui - Nov 134 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Nov 10115 comments
by Oui - Oct 2916 comments