World War III Report, #9

Bill Weinberg

Nov. 24, 2001

THE AFGHANISTAN FRONT

LIBERATION OR IMPERIALIST CARVE-UP?

A bloody stalemate has developed since the Taliban's retreat from the
Afghan capital of Kabul last week. Afghanistan is now divided between
three unstable forces: the increasingly faction-ridden Northern
Alliance, the Pashtun warlords who have risen against the Taliban in
the south, and the Taliban, now with control of less than a quarter of
the country. The US is deploying more elite units to try to tip the
balance against the Taliban. Reported the New York Times Nov. 24: "With
Taliban troops establishing strong pockets of resistance across a wide
swath of Afghanistan, the United States is using two bases in Pakistan
to send several hundred Special Operations forces in an attempt to kill
Taliban troops and capture Osama bin Laden."

In addition to besieged Kunduz in the northeast and the area around
Kandahar in the south, the Taliban have positions just south of Kabul,
and two locations near Jalalabad, just 40 miles from the Pakistan
border. Many of the Taliban troops are volunteers from Pakistan, the
Arab countries and elsewhere in the Islamic world. The Arab fighters
were denied requests for a safe corridor to flee to Pakistan, but the
New York Times reported Nov. 24 that Pakistani planes are being flown
into Kunduz to evacuate Pakistani Taliban fighters. Pakistan, until
recently backing the Taliban, is an important US ally and staging
ground for the war--while the Arab volunteers may have ties to Osama
bin Laden, believed to be hiding in Taliban-controlled territory.

A deal brokered in Northern Alliance-held Mazar-i-Sharif would allow
Afghan Taliban fighters to flee Kunduz while Arab volunteers would be
held in camps "until the alliance and the US-led coalition could decide
what to do with them." But the deal has yet to be finalized, US bombs
continue to fall around Kunduz, and panicked refugees are fleeing the
city for Northern Alliance lines. They said they were fleeing both the
bombardment and Taliban abuses of the civil population. (Newsday, Nov.
23)

The Northern Alliance have been committing their own abuses, with their
troops looting in Pashtun villages, stealing cars and other valuables
at gunpoint, menacing and roughing up civilian families (Newsday, Nov
20). While refugees from Taliban-held territory report the Taliban
commanders are killing fighters they fear will defect, Red Cross
workers have found evidence of summary execution of Arab Taliban
fighters on a battlefield site outside Kabul. At least 30 were shot in
head, several at close-range--presumably by Northern Alliance troops
(New York Times, Nov. 19). Thousands of Afghan refugees, mostly
Pashtuns, are continuing to stream across the border into Pakistan
daily, and the UN says it expects to see more (BBC, Nov. 19).

When several hundred women, emboldened by the fall of the Taliban, held
a public protest demanding women's rights in Kabul Nov. 20, it was
quickly broken up when Northern Alliance troops said they could not
"assure their safety." (New York Times, Nov. 21)

The Northern Alliance also appears poised at the brink of collapsing
into ethnic warfare. The western city of Herat is contested by Tajik
warlord Ismail Khan and Shiite Hazara warlord Moosa Rezai (New York
Times, Nov. 20). Hazara forces advanced on Kabul early in the week, but
were stopped outside city by Jamiat-i-Islami troops loyal to Northern
Alliance President Burhanuddin Rabbani, an ethnic Tajik (Newsday, Nov.
19).

Many of the Pashtun warlords who have seized power in Afghanistan's
southeast are former Taliban loyalists, such as Haji Abdul Qadir, who
controls much of Jalalabad (New York Times, Nov. 19). These Pashtun
factions are being aided by Pakistan, while Russia and Iran are
stepping up aid to the Northern Alliance. Old Soviet tanks, helicopters
and AK-47s are being supplied in a multi-million dollar arms deal
between Russia and the Northern Alliance, the UK Guardian reported Oct.
23. The arms deal is estimated to be worth between $40-$70 million.
News of the arms deal has fueled speculation that Russia covertly
encouraged the Northern Alliance to take Kabul--in defiance of
entreaties from the US to hold back until a new coalition government
could be organized (Pacifica Network News, Nov. 19). The Northern
Alliance effectively barred British plans to deploy over 4,000 troops
to Afghanistan to oversee the transition to a coalition
government--with the US applying pressure on London to back down to
avoid antagonizing the Northern Alliance (New York Times, Nov. 20).

The US is encouraging the various anti-Taliban factions to attend a
meeting in Berlin next week to forge a new government. Invited are
Northern Alliance leaders, Pashtun warlords, loyalists of exiled king
Zhair Shah, and (perhaps) "Taliban moderates." The meeting is seen as a
step towards a loya jirga, or council of traditional chieftains such as
that which established the Afghan monarchy in 1747. But Rabbani is
still recognized by the UN as the president of Afghanistan, and may be
reluctant to share power now that he is back in Kabul (New York Times,
Nov. 21).

Conspicuously absent from the list of those invited to the Berlin
conference is the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan
(RAWA). The only pro-democracy dissident group which has consistently
opposed fundamentalist tyranny in Afghanistan, RAWA does not control
any armed factions and is therefore overlooked by the global
powerbrokers. RAWA's Nov. 13 statement on the fall of Kabul read: "The
retreat of the terrorist Taliban from Kabul is a positive development,
but entering of the rapist and looter Northern Alliance in the city is
nothing but dreadful and shocking news for about 2 million residents of
Kabul whose wounds of the years 1992-96 [when Rabbani's forces held
power] have not healed yet... RAWA has already documented heinous
crimes of the Northern Alliance... The UN should withdraw its
recognition to the so-called Islamic government headed by Rabbani and
help the establishment of a broad-based government based on democratic
values." The statement was picked up by no major news media.

CIVILIAN CASUALTIES MOUNT; PENTAGON WANTS MORE

Despite the Pentagon's usual propaganda about "smart bombs," UN
investigators document a "broad pattern of erroneous bombing" and at
least 30 civilian deaths in Kabul. Said Ross Chamberlain, coordinator
for the UN mine-clearing program in Afghanistan, now examining bombed
sites in Kabul: "The Pentagon likes to show the impressive videos" of
US jets launching bombs that neatly destroy their targets without
killing the neighbors. But such clean strikes are the exception, not
the rule. "There's really no such thing as precision bombing.... We are
finding more cases of errant targeting than accurate targeting, more
misses than hits." (Newsday, Nov. 25)

The New York Times reported Nov. 23 that three children were injured
and one teenager killed in Ghaleh Shafer village when they picked up an
unexploded bomb fragment dropped weeks earlier by a US plane. The local
hospital lacks electricity and basic sanitation.

Aerial bombardment of the Kandahar region continues. One resident told
Reuters he decided to flee when a bomb destroyed a neighbor's house,
killing an entire extended family of fourteen. "Only the father and a
little daughter survived." Another resident told BBC, "the bombing of
the last few days has been terrible. People are terrified. Many
ordinary people have been killed, as well as Taliban." (Newsday, Nov.
22)

The Qatar-based al-Jazeera cable TV network now places the total number
of civilians killed in the bombing at around 1,000 (Summary by media
watchdog Ali Abunimah, www.abunimah.org).

Meanwhile, the Pentagon dusted off the old
"one-hand-tied-behind-our-back" argument, portraying even token efforts
to spare civilians as an onerous restraint. Reported the Washington
Post Nov. 18: "As many as 10 times over the last six weeks, the Air
Force believed it had top Taliban and al-Qaeda members in its cross
hairs in Afghanistan but was unable to receive clearance to fire in
time to hit them, according to senior Air Force officials. The
officials said the problems stemmed from delays due to a cumbersome
approval process and intense disagreements with the US Central Command,
which oversees the war, over how much weight to give to concerns about
avoiding civilian casualties."

LATIN AMERICA

"ANTI-TERRORIST" CAMPAIGN FOR WESTERN HEMISPHERE

On the day of the 9-11 attacks, US Secretary of State Colin Powell was
scheduled to meet with Colombian President Andres Pastrana to discuss
US-Colombian anti-terrorist coordination. The previous day, the US
State Department finally added the United Colombian Self-Defense (AUC)
right-wing paramilitary network to the official list of "international
terrorist organizations," making financial support for the group
illegal in the US. Critics had protested that AUC was not on the list,
while Colombia's two leftist guerilla groups have been since it was
first drawn up under the 1996 Antiterrorism & Effective Death Penalty
Act. "I hope this will leave no doubt that the United States considers
terrorism to be unacceptable, regardless of the political or
ideological purpose," said Powell. Ironically, his Colombia trip would
be cut short by the terrorist attacks in the US. (New York Times, Sept.
11)

In May, the State Department had taken the preliminary move of adding
the AUC to the secondary list of "other terrorist organizations" list,
which carries no sanctions. In contrast, Colombia's leftist rebel
groups, the Colombian Revolutionary Armed Forces (FARC) and National
Liberation Army (ELN), were on the primary "foreign terrorist
organizations" list, which carries full legal sanctions-including visa
bans for members and restrictions on money movements. Human rights
groups, who have documented AUC responsibility in countless massacres
of civilians in Colombia, had long protested the double standard. (AP,
May 1)

The move was necessary propaganda for the shift to an "anti-terrorist"
stance in Colombia and South America generally. The $1.5 billion Plan
Colombia aid package approved last year is ostensibly for
anti-narcotics enforcement, even though it is being used to fight the
guerillas. Ironically, several Colombian army units receiving US
military aid actively collaborate with the AUC, sharing arms and
intelligence and coordinating in anti-guerilla campaigns. (Colombia
Support Network press release, April 2001, www.colombiasupport.net)

On Oct 15 the AP quoted the State Department's top anti-terrorism
official saying the US is prepared to use military force to fight
terrorism in the Western Hemisphere. "Our strategy in this hemisphere
is similar to our strategy around the world, and it involves the use of
all the elements of our national power as well as the elements of the
national power of all the countries in our region," said Francis X.
Taylor, head of State's Office of Counter-terrorism.

Taylor spoke with reporters at the headquarters of the Organization of
American States after addressing a closed-door meeting of the group's
Inter-American Committee Against Terrorism. Of the 28 terrorist groups
identified by the State Department, four are based in the Western
Hemisphere--the FARC, ELN, AUC and Peru's Sendero Luminoso. But Taylor
stressed the region's importance in fighting terrorism, citing the long
borders with Canada and Mexico which are permeable to terrorists. The
"Triple Border" region where Paraguay, Argentina and Brazil meet is
also a focal point for Islamic extremists, according to State.

Taylor declined to provide details, but said the State Department is
developing a counter-terrorist strategy for Colombia and other Andean
nations. This regional strategy--like the global one--will be based on
law enforcement cooperation, intelligence exchanges, blocks on
terrorist financing and "where appropriate--as we are doing in
Afghanistan--the use of military power."

Taylor recently told Capitol Hill the Andean counter-terrorist strategy
would complement last year's $1.3 billion package and an $882 million
follow-up package that Congress is now considering.

Asked if the same distinction would be made between fighting terrorists
and fighting guerrillas, Taylor said the three Colombian groups "get
the same treatment as any other terrorist group in terms of our
interest in going after them and ceasing their terrorist activities."

On Oct. 16, AP reported Congressional reaction to the policy shift.
Said Rep. Cass Ballenger (R-NC), House International Relations Western
Hemisphere subcommittee chair: "It's very difficult to separate the
counter-drug effort when the rebels or the insurgents are the ones that
are living off the income from the drugs. How do you separate the two?"
Rep. William Delahunt (D-MA) said separating counter-terrorism from
counter-insurgency "would be a very difficult and delicate distinction
to make."

Since Vietnam, "counterinsurgency" is still an unpopular word on
Capitol Hill, which is why Plan Colombia was sold as a
counter-narcotics effort. The new "counter-terrorist" stance may
provide a more useful euphemism. Taylor told Congressional leaders FARC
is "the most dangerous international terrorist group based in this
hemisphere."

Colombian military commanders, recipients of multi-billion US largesse,
quickly got hip to the new lingo. Reported the New York Times Oct. 5:
"Army officials, who usually refer to the rebel force as
'narco-guerillas' or bandits, have made sure to refer to the rebels as
terrorists."

Apparently unintimidated by being added to the terrorist list, the AUC
went on a murderous rampage across Colombia in October. In the southern
village of Buga, AUC troops pulled unarmed people off buses and out of
their homes Oct. 10, killing at least 24 they accused of aiding the
guerillas. The massacre was one of several attacks around the country
that week. The wave of bloodshed claimed at least 49 lives, including
the mayor of one town. Twelve other people are missing and feared dead.
(New York Times Oct. 12)

MEXICO ANTI-TERROR ALERT

Mexican President Vicente Fox has lined up eagerly in the
anti-terrorist campaign, telling reporters Mexico is prepared to go
"all the way" to help the US hunt down those responsible for 9-11
attacks (Reuters, Sept. 29). The attorney general's office announced it
is reviewing Mexico's laws and treaty obligations to streamline
hemispheric anti-terrorust coordination, and is considering major new
anti-terrorist legislation (Reforma, Oct 24). Fox's conservative
National Action Party (PAN) is proposing an anti-terrorist clause in
pending trade agreements with the US, mandating military and law
enforcement aid and cooperation (Milenio, Oct 16). Fox also linked the
anti-terrorist campaign to expansion of Free Trade, telling reporters:
"We must watch over the entry borders of NAFTA. What we must do is wage
a full-fledged battle against terrorism in all the territory of NAFTA."
(AP, Oct. 16)

Politicians and rights advocates are debating what this means for
Mexico's nascent guerilla movement, which has emerged in the country's
impoverished south since the 1994 revolt by the Zapatista National
Liberation Army (EZLN) in Chiapas. While the EZLN has been engaged in
an unsteady peace dialogue with the government, smaller but more
hardline groups maintain a low-level campaign of harassment against the
government in Oaxaca and Guerrero.

Fox warned the "small guerrilla groups appearing once in a while" in
Mexico of his will to "surround them and throw the gauntlet to them."
But--perhaps embracing a divide-and-conquer strategy--he explicitly
excluded the EZLN. Fox even claimed he was open to revising the San
Andres Accords, the package of constitutional amendments on autonomy
for Mexico's Indians which were the EZLN's one precondition for laying
down arms, but which were gutted by conservative lawmakers before they
were passed, causing the rebels to break off the peace dialogue. The
gutting of the accords was protested by Indian groups across Mexico,
many of whom pledged civil disobedience to pressure congress to reverse
the changes. "There is a certain dissatisfaction of some groups in
Mexico, and therefore perhaps we still have to give a last review to
this subject, to make it satisfactory for all," Fox told reporters. (La
Jornada, Oct 16)

The UN representative in Mexico, Angel Escudero de Paz, warned that
practically all Mexican guerilla groups--again with the exception of
the EZLN--are in danger of being classified as "terrorist" by the
international community. "It still isn't determined at what point
irregular forces are considered terrorists," said Escudero. "There is a
very thin line between guerrillas and terrorists." (Milenio, Oct 5)

But others were quick to make a distinction. Said Emilio Ulloa Perez, a
federal deputy with the left-opposition Party of the Democratic
Revolution (PRD) and a member of the congressional negotiating team for
the peace dialogue with the EZLN: "We can't put the guerrillas in the
same category as groups in the Middle East, or the Balkans or the
terrorist responsible for the Oklahama bombing in the United States. In
Mexico, we don't have guerrillas who put bombs in restaurants." Jorge
Luis Sierra, director of Quehacer Politico, a Mexico-City based
political magazine, said intense pressure to crack down on "terrorism"
is coming not from the UN, but directly from the US. "Mexico has always
lacked independence in setting its security policy. The policy followed
by the United States has always determined that of Mexico." He warned
that a tilt to the hardline could backfire, resulting in more guerilla
activity. "If you study the last 30 years, every armed group in Mexico
rose up after finding the doors to dialogue closed." But Carlos
Raymundo Toledo, a federal PAN deputy, insisted the Fox administration
should be more "combative" against the new guerrilla groups. "In light
of the events, everything has to be reviewed. There needs to be a
toughening of policy. We should be more aggressive in designating
resources to fight these groups." (Mexico City News, Oct. 6)

Former President Ernesto Zedillo's administration frequently used the
term "terrorist" to refer to the Popular Revolutionary Army (EPR), a
guerrilla group that rose to arms in the state of Guerrero in 1996. On
Oct. 13, the magazine ProcesoSur cited a "confidential document" of an
unnamed Mexican intelligence service linking the EPR to both Colombia's
FARC and the Irish Republican Army (IRA).

There were other voices concerned about the conflating of "terrorists"
and "guerillas." Breaking from the US line, European Union ambassador
to Mexico Manuel Lopez demanded a clear distinction between guerrilla
activity and terrorism throughout Latin America "to avoid dangerous
confusion." (Milenio, Oct. 16)

ZAPATISTAS NOT "TERRORISTS"

Chiapas Gov. Pablo Salazar rejected any implication that the EZLN are
terrorists, noting that their struggle was recognized as legitimate by
Mexico's congress, which passed a law in 1995 setting conditions for
the peace dialogue: "They are not terrorists, and not just by my
definition. The Congress of the Union and all the political parties
that wrote up the Dialogue Law...signified in this law that the
Zapatistas are a social struggle group." (Reforma, Oct 4)

A group of Mexican federal legislators, many involved in the Chiapas
peace dialogue, went further, issuing a statement that none of the
country's armed rebel groups are "terrorists." (Proceso, Oct 5)

But the government also used the new "terrorist" threat to pressure the
EZLN to return to the negotiating table--despite government
intransigence on the peace accords. Fox's peace commissioner for
Chiapas, Luis Alvarez, said "it is imperative that the Zapatista
National Liberation Army agrees to resume the dialogue as soon as
possible" because of "the risk that other movements will opt for the
path of terrorism." (Proceso, Oct 2)

Reports in the Mexican press that the US Drug Enforcement
Administration (DEA) had referred to the EZLN as terrorists were false.
The DEA report, "The Mexican Heroin Trade," actually exculpated
Mexico's guerilla groups: "With the exception of Mexico, insurgent
groups are involved heavily in the cultivation of opium in growing
regions worldwide. Proceeds from the sale of opium have been used to
fund insurgent activities in Colombia, Afghanistan, and Myanmar
(formerly Burma). However, it does not appear that the Zapatista
National Liberation Army (EZLN) or the Popular Revolutionary Army (EPR)
are involved in narcotics trafficking to sustain their activities."
(www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/intel/20014/20014.html)

MEXICAN GUERILLAS RESPOND

An EPR communique on the new anti-terrorist stance claimed the Mexican
government is working with US and Israeli intelligence to destroy the
guerilla movement (Reforma, Oct. 17). A second EPR communique addressed
the US bombardment of Afghanistan, saying it "constitutes a brutal
offensive against humanity and in particular against the poor peoples
who oppose the designs of monopoly capitalism and its economic,
political and military subjugation."

Contacted by telephone in her cell at Mexico City's top-security
Nezahualcoyotl prison, Gloria Arenas--the accused "Coronel Aurora" of
the Revolutionary Army of the Insurgent People (ERPI), another
Guerrero-based guerilla faction--denied that guerilla movements commit
acts of terrorism or attacks on the civilian population. "I hope,
desire, believe possible, and I am sure that the ERPI organization will
not resort to these types of attacks against civilian victims; we hope
it will be this way, as a measure of maturity in the face of the
hardline messages from the government..." She also warned that Fox's
new hardline stance could backfire: "Vicente Fox declares that he wants
to avoid armed organizations in Mexico resorting to violence, but I
don't know how he's going to do this given the economic situation and
the indigenous law which does not comply with the San Andres Accords."
(Milenio, Oct 13)

On Oct. 13, ProcesoSur quoted an unnamed Mexican government report
claiming ERPI adherents were trained in Mexico by "persons involved
with the Sendero Luminoso organization." The information was said to
have been confirmed by the Peruvian government. ProcesoSur also claimed
anti-terrorist vigilance on Mexico's Gulf Coast had been increased, and
an unspecified number of Iraqis were detained by authorities in the
Yucatan.

The EZLN, which broke off dialogue with the government when congress
passed the gutted San Andres Accords in May, has maintained its silence
throughout the post-9-11 events.

RIGHTS ATTORNEY SLAIN; ECO-ACTIVISTS FREED

One of Mexico's most prominent human rights lawyers was found shot to
death in her office Oct. 21. Digna Ochoa, 37, was a longtime advocate
at the Jesuit-run Miguel Agustin Pro-Juarez Human Rights Center, and
most widely recognized for defending two peasants, Rodolfo Montiel and
Teodoro Cabrera, who had been protesting logging operations in
Guerrero's mountains were imprisoned in May 1999 on dubious gun and
drug charges. Ochoa, winner of Amnesty International's Enduring Spirit
Award, had been menaced by death threats for years, often in notes
pasted together from newspaper cut-outs that appeared under her door.
In August 1999, she was kidnapped and beaten by unknown masked men for
five hours. Two months later, she was tied, blindfolded and tortured in
her home for nine hours. No arrests were made in the attacks. (New York
Times, Oct. 21; Reforma, Oct 28)

Suspicion immediately fell on the Mexican army. Ochoa said she believed
the men who tortured and interrogated her in the 1999 attacks were from
military intelligence, based on their questions about the human rights
center's links to guerilla groups, and how much they knew about the
center (Milenio, Nov 1). Her brother Jesus Ochoa told reporters she had
said that if anything ever happened to her, "members of the Army will
be responsible." (Proceso Oct. 29 )

At the time of her death, Ochoa was assisting in the defense of another
notorious Mexican guerilla case--five students accused in a series of
attempted Mexico City bank bombings (AP Oct. 20). The five alleged
members of the Armed Revolutionary Forces of the People (FARP) were
arrested in August for setting off small bombs at branches of the Banco
Nacional de Mexico, or Banamex--now being purchased by Citigroup. The
suspects denied that they belonged to the FARP, which initially claimed
responsibility for putting the explosives at three bank branches the
night of Aug. 8. Three small explosives contained in tin cans detonated
and two more were defused. There were no reports of injuries or major
damage. (AP, Aug 23) The arrests sparked large protests by students at
the Mexican National Autonomous University (Proceso, Aug. 30).

One positive fallout from the Ochoa murder is that it probably resulted
in Fox's decision a few weeks later to order the release of Montiel and
Cabrera, the peasant ecologist leaders who blockaded logging roads in
Guerrero and were charged with growing marijuana to support guerilla
activities in the region. They were sentenced to seven and ten years in
prison respectively, despite protests from international human rights
groups who claimed they had not received a fair trial, and were adopted
as "prisoners of conscience" by Amnesty International. They had served
two years at the time of their release. Fox merely commuted their
sentence, and stopped short of calling them innocent (Sierra Club press
release, Nov. 8; New York Times, Nov 9). Said Montiel upon his
release: "He knows we are innocent, but he doesn't declare us innocent
because the army doesn't want him to." (Washington Post, Nov. 11)

MEXICO ANTI-WAR PROTESTS

Mexico has seen numerous protests against the bombing of Afghanistan.
The Zapatista National Liberation Front (FZLN), civil counterpart of
the armed group, and the Eureka human rights committee held an anti-war
march in front of US embassy Sept. 25, stating "we are all Arabs" and
accusing the US of "state terrorism" (La Jornada, Sept. 26). Opposition
to the impending war was a major theme in the massive Mexico City march
commemorating the Oct. 2 1968 Tlatelolco massacre, in which hundreds of
student protesters were gunned down by the Mexican army (Proceso, Oct.
2). On Oct. 24, 10,000 primary and high school students marched in the
Chiapas capital city of Tuxtla against the bombing and to commemorate
the 56th anniversary of founding of the UN (Milenio, Oct 24).

The newspaper La Reforma reported Oct. 12 that Portugese citizen
Alberto Alvarez Betancout was expelled from Mexico after being arrested
while pasting posters reading "Bush: wanted for terrorism" on walls in
the Chiapas city of San Cristobal de las Casas. However, as of an Oct.
24 letter he wrote to La Jornada, Alvarez was still being held at
Iztapalapa Immigration Detention Center. He also denied that he had
defaced any walls, but claimed to have been chatting with the folks
putting up the posters--who ran when police approached.

STUDENT KILLED IN COLOMBIA ANTI-WAR PROTEST

The Colombia Independent Media Center reports that Carlos Giovanni
Blanco, a medical student at Colombia National University, was shot
dead during an anti-war protest in Bogota Nov. 7. A group of students
were protesting the bombing of Afghanistan when police attacked the
demonstration. The Bogota police commander denies his forces are
responsible for the shooting, but a number of witnesses confirm the
shot came from police lines. Police occupied the campus for the whole
afternoon. By nightfall, many students were camping on the university
grounds and preparing for further protests. (colombia.indymedia.org)

"ZIONIST TERRORISTS" ATTACK MEXICO: NOT!

The Mexico City daily Cronica de Hoy provided fodder for Jew-hating
conspiracy theorists with an Oct. 12 report that two Israelis were
detained with pistols and a wide variety of grenades and explosives at
Mexico's congress building. Salvador Guersson Smeke, a retired Israeli
military official and nationalized Mexican, and Israeli national Sar
Ben Zvi were briefly detained while federal police investigated the
incident. The story was picked up, with some embellishment (Smecke
suddenly became a "Mossad agent"), in the following day's Pravda and
various anti-Semitic web sites which trumpeted claims that "Zionist
terrorists" intended to blow up the congress building as a provocation.
Too bad the conspiracy-mongers didn't read the less lurid account in
the more reputable El Universal. According to the Oct. 12 El Universal,
the two men were security guards in the employ of the company Private
Security Systems Development which was contracted by the Mexican
government, the tubes and wires in their suitcase were not bombs after
all, and their firearms were legally registered.

CENTRAL AMERICA REMILITARIZED

Ten years after the region's guerilla wars and military dictatorships
came to an end, Central America's governments are beefing up military
spending and security measures in response to the supposed terrorist
threat. Since Sept. 11, Guatemala has sought increases for a
presidential security detail linked to human rights abuses, Honduras
has sought tens of millions of dollars more for its military, and El
Salvador's military has seized the country's air and sea ports, barring
entry to hundreds of civilian workers employed in baggage handling and
security.

The moves struck former Nicaraguan foreign minister Miguel D'Escoto as
ironic. D'Escoto served in the leftist Sandinista regime in the 1980s,
when the US backed a right-wing Nicaraguan rebel force known as the
contras who widely attacked civilian targets. "If the US likes you,
you're a freedom fighter," D'Escoto told the New York Times Oct. 20,
citing President Reagan's term for the contra rebels. "If they don't
like you, you're a terrorist."

US RECALLS VENEZUELA AMBASSADOR

The US called home its ambassador to Venezuela for "consultations"
after President Hugo Chavez condemned the bombing of Afghanistan as
"fighting terrorism with terrorism." The populist Chavez went on TV
holding up photographs of Afghan children recently killed in the
bombing and said their deaths had "no justification, just as the
attacks in New York did not either." He demanded an end to the
"slaughter of the innocents." (New York Times, Nov. 3)

Chavez was already in hot water when he told reporters on a European
tour that Venezuela sought to ensure the rights of the notorious
"Carlos the Jackal," the Venezuelan-born international terrorist now in
prison in France. When questioned, a Chavez government deputy foreign
minister said the government does not see Carlos as a "terrorist." (New
York Times, Oct. 13)

This stance is unlikely to be particularly helpful to the anti-war
opposition. Carlos, born Ilich Ramirez Sanchez, is believed responsible
for hostage-taking at the French embassy at The Hague in 1974 and at an
OPEC conference at Vienna in 1975 (in which three were killed), bombing
a Paris-Toulouse express train in 1982 (killing six), another bombing
in Paris in 1982 (killing a pregnant woman), bombings at the Marseille
railroad terminal in 1983 (killing five and wounding 50), and bombing a
French cultural center in West Berlin in 1983 (killing one and wounding
23). He was extradited from Sudan to France in 1994 (Newsday, Aug. 16,
1994). In 1997, he was sentenced to life for the 1975 killings of two
French intelligence agents who were investigating attacks on El Al
planes at the Paris airport (Newsday, Oct. 24, 1997).

PUERTO RICO: VIEQUES UNDER SIEGE & BOMBARDMENT

The 9-11 attacks have meant a setback for Puerto Rican activists
seeking demilitarization of the unincorporated US territory. The day
after the terrorist attacks, local organizations in the ongoing
campaign to halt the US Navy's bombing exercises on the island of
Vieques met in assembly and decided to declare a moratorium on civil
disobedience until they agree on a new course of action appropriate to
the new circumstances. "This is for our security," said Vieques
community leader Ismael Guadalupe. "They'll shoot first and ask
questions later. We don't want them to shoot a protester and then claim
they believed it was a terrorist." This is the first halt in the civil
disobedience protests in over two years. The campaign was sparked when
a civilian guard was accidentally killed in a Vieques bombing exercise
in April 1999. A majority of Puerto Rican voters have called for the
Navy's withdrawal, prompting President Bush to announce earlier this
year that the US would do so by May 2003. Activists now fear that the
Pentagon will use Washington's new war on terrorism to remain on
Vieques indefinitely. (Carmelo Ruiz-Marrero for IPS, Sept. 27)

But the self-imposed protest moratorium may soon be lifted--in spite of
the risks. Ismael Guadalupe's Committee for the Rescue and Development
of Vieques issued a press release Oct. 31 stating the anti-Navy groups
"are now preparing to block the next military exercises, which could
take place at the end of November." (Weekly News Update on the
Americas, Nov. 4, www.Americas.org)

Subscribe to WORLD WAR III REPORT

E-mail: ww3report-subscribe@topica.com

REPRINTING PERMISSIBLE WITH ATTRIBUTION

DONATIONS NEEDED!!!

billw@echonyc.com