US infiltrates "civil society" to overthrow governments

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
Apr 25, 2002
15,044
157
0
#1
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4332.htm
Former CIA agent tells: How US infiltrates "civil society" to overthrow
governments
BY PHILIP AGEE

08/03/03: Condemnation of Cuba was immediate, strong and practically global
following the imprisonment of 75 political dissidentsand the execution of
three ferry hijackers. Prominent among the critics were past friends of Cuba
of recognised international stature.

As I read the hundreds of denunciations that came through my mail, it was
easy to see how enemies of the revolution had seized on those issues to
condemn Cuba for violations of human rights. They had a field day.

Deliberate or careless confusion between the political dissidents and the
hijackers, two entirely unrelated matters, was also easy because the events
happened at the same time. A Vatican publication went so far as to describe
the hijackers as dissidents when in fact they were terrorists. But others of
good faith toward Cuba also jumped on the bandwagon of condemnation treating
the two issues as one.

With respect to the imprisonment of 75 civil society activists, the main
victim has been history, for these people were central to US government
efforts to overthrow the Cuban government and destroy the work of the
revolution.

Indeed, regime change, as overthrowing governments has come to be known, has
been the continuing US goal in Cuba since the earliest days of the
revolutionary government. Programs to achieve this goal have included
propaganda to denigrate the revolution, diplomatic and commercial isolation,
trade embargo, terrorism and military support to counter-revolutionaries,
the Bay of Pigs invasion, assassination plots against Fidel Castro and other
Cuban leaders, biological and chemical warfare, and, more recently, efforts
to foment an internal political opposition masquerading as an independent
civil society.

The administration of US President Ronald Reagan in the early 1980s decided
that more than terrorist operations were needed to impose regime change in
Cuba. Terrorism hadn't worked, nor had the Bay of Pigs invasion, nor had
Cuba's diplomatic isolation, nor had the economic embargo. Now Cuba would be
included in a new world-wide program to finance and develop non-governmental
and voluntary organisations, what was to become known as civil society,
within the context of US global neoliberal policies.
Coups

The CIA and the Agency for International Development (AID) would have key
roles in this program as well as a new organisation christened in 1983 the
National Endowment for Democracy (NED).

Actually, the new program was not really new. Since its founding in 1947,
the CIA had been deeply involved in secretly funding and manipulating
foreign non-governmental voluntary organisations.

These vast operations circled the globe and targeted political parties,
trade unions and business associations, youth and student organisations,
women's groups, civic organisations, religious communities, professional,
intellectual and cultural societies, and the public information media. The
network functioned at local, national, regional and global levels.

Over the years, the CIA exerted phenomenal influence behind the scenes in
country after country, using these powerful elements of civil society to
penetrate, divide, weaken and destroy organisations on the left, and indeed
to impose regime change by toppling governments.

Such was the case, among many others, in Guyana, where in 1964, culminating
10 years of efforts, the Cheddi Jagan government was overthrown through
strikes, terrorism, violence and arson perpetrated by CIA agents in the
trade unions.

About the same time, while I was a CIA agent assigned to Ecuador, our agents
in civil society, through mass demonstrations and civil unrest, provoked two
military coups in three years against elected, civilian governments.

Anyone who has watched the opposition to President Hugo Chavez's government
in Venezuela develop can be certain that the CIA, AID and the NED are
coordinating the destabilisation and were behind the failed coup in April
2002 as well as the failed civic strikeof last December-January.

The Cuban American National Foundation was, predictably, one of the first
beneficiaries of NED funding. From 1983 to 1988, CANF received US$390,000
for anti-Castro activities.
NED

The NED is supposedly a private, non-government, non-profit foundation, but
it receives a yearly appropriation from the US Congress. The money is
channelled through four core foundations. These are the National Democratic
Institute for International Affairs (linked to the Democratic Party); the
International Republican Institute (Republican Party); the American Center
for International Labor Solidarity; and the Center for International Private
Enterprise (US Chamber of Commerce).

According to its web site, the NED also gives money directly to groups
abroad who are working for human rights, independent media, the rule of law,
and a wide range of civil society initiatives.

The NED's NGO status provides the fiction that recipients of NED money are
getting privaterather than US government money. This is important because so
many countries, including both the US and Cuba, have laws relating to their
citizens being paid to carry out activities for foreign governments.

The US requires an individual or organisation subject to foreign controlto
register with the attorney general and to file detailed activities reports,
including finances, every six months.

Cuba has its own laws criminalising actions intended to jeopardise its
sovereignty or territorial integrity as well as actions supporting the goals
of the anti-Cuba US Helms-Burton Act of 1996, such as collecting information
to support the US embargo or to subvert the government, or for disseminating
US government information to undermine the Cuban government.

Efforts to develop an opposition civil society in Cuba had already begun in
1985 with the early NED grants to CANF. These efforts received a significant
boost with passage in 1992 of the Cuban Democracy Act, better known as the
Torricelli Act, which promoted support, through US NGOs, of individuals and
organisations committed to non-violent democratic change in Cuba.

A still greater intensification came with passage in 1996 of the Cuban
Liberty and Solidarity Act, better known as the Helms-Burton Act.

As a result of these laws, the NED, AID and the CIA (the latter not
mentioned publicly but undoubtedly included) intensified their coordinated
programs targeted at Cuban civil society.
CIA

One may wonder why the CIA would be needed in these programs. There were
several reasons. One reason from the beginning was the CIA's long experience
and huge stable of agents and contacts in the civil societies of countries
around the world. By joining with the CIA, the NED and AID would come on
board on-going operations whose funding they could take over while leaving
the secret day-to-day direction on the ground to CIA officers.
 
Apr 25, 2002
15,044
157
0
#2
In addition, someone had to monitor and report the effectiveness of the
local recipients' activities. NED would not have people in the field to do
this, nor would their core foundations in normal conditions. And since NED
money was ostensibly private, only the CIA had the people and techniques to
carry out discreet control in order to avoid compromising the civil society
recipients, especially if they were in opposition to their governments.

Finally, the CIA had ample funds of its own to pass quietly when conditions
required. In Cuba, participation by CIA officers under cover in the US
Interests Section would be particularly useful, since NED and AID funding
would go to US NGOs that would have to find covert ways, if possible, to get
equipment and cash to recipients inside Cuba. The CIA could help with this
quite well.

Evidence of the amount of money these agencies have been spending on their
Cuban projects is fragmentary. Nothing is publicly available about the CIA's
spending, but what is easily found about the other two is interesting. The
AID web site cites $12 million spent for Cuba programs during 1996-2001, but
for 2002 the budget jumped to $5 million plus unobligated funds of $3
million from 2001. AID's 2003 budget for Cuba is $6 million showing a
tripling of annual funds since the George Bush junta seized power. No
surprise given the number of Miami Cubans Bush has appointed to high office
in his administration.

From 1996 to 2001, AID disbursed the $12 million to 22 NGOs, all apparently
based in the US, mostly in Miami. By 2002, the number of front-line NGOs had
shrunk to 12 the University of Miami, Center for a Free Cuba, Pan-American
Development Foundation, Florida International University, Freedom House,
Grupo de Apoyo a la Disidencia, Cuba On-Line, CubaNet, National Policy
Association, Accion Democratica Cubana and Carta de Cuba.

In addition, the International Republican Institute received AID money for a
sub-grantee, the Directorio Revolucionario Democr tico Cubano, also based in
Miami.

These NGOs have a double purpose, one directed to their counterpart groups
in Cuba and one directed to the world, mainly through web sites. Whereas, on
the one hand, they channel funds and equipment into Cuba, on the other they
disseminate to the world the activities of the groups in Cuba. Cubanet in
Miami, for example, publishes the writings of the independent journalistsof
the Independent Press Association of Cuba, based in Havana, and channels
money to the writers.

Interestingly, AID claims on its web site that its grantees are not
authorised to use grant funds to provide cash assistance to any person or
organisation in Cuba. It's hard to believe that claim, but if it's true, all
those millions are only going to support the US-based NGO infrastructure, a
subsidised anti-Castro cottage industry of a sort, except for what can be
delivered in Cuba in kind computers, faxes, copy machines, cell phones,
radios, TVS and VCRs, books, magazines and the like.

On its web site, AID lists purposes for the money: solidarity with human
rights activists; dissemination of the work of independent journalists;
development of independent NGOs; promoting workers' rights; outreach to the
Cuban people; planning for future assistance to a transition government; and
evaluation of the program. Anyone who wants to see which NGOs are getting
how much can visit <http://www.usaid.gov/regions/lac/cu/upd-cub.htm>.

AID's claim that its grantees can't provide cash to Cubans in Cuba, makes
one wonder about the more than $100,000 in cash that Cuban investigators
found in the hands of the 75 mostly unemployed dissidentswho went on trial.
A clue may be found in the AID statement that US policy encourages US NGOs
and individuals to undertake humanitarian, informational and civil society-
building activities in Cuba with private funds. Could such private fundsbe
money from the NED?

Recall the fiction that the NED is a privatefoundation, an NGO. It has no
restrictions on its funds going for cash payments abroad, and it just
happens to fund some of the same NGOs as AID. Be assured that this is not
the result of rivalry or lack of coordination in Washington. The reason
probably is that NED funds can go for salaries and other personal
compensation to people on the ground in Cuba.

The Cuban organisations below the US NGOs in the command and money chain
number nearly 100 and have names [translated from Spanish] like Independent
Libraries of Cuba, All United, Society of Journalists Marquez Sterling,
Independent Press Association of Cuba, Assembly to Promote Civil Society and
the Human Rights Party of Cuba.

NED's web site is conveniently out of date, showing only its Cuba program
for 2001. But it is instructive. Its funds for Cuban activities in 2001
totalled only $765,000 if one is to believe what they say. The money they
gave to eight NGOs in 2001 averaged about $52,000, while a 9th NGO, the
International Republican Institute received $350,000 for the Directorio
Revolucionario Democratico Cubano for strengthening civil society and human
rightsin Cuba. In contrast, this NGO is to receive $2,174,462 in 2003 from
AID through the same IRI.

Why would the NED be granting the lower amounts and AID such huge amounts,
both channelled through IRI? The answer, apart from IRI's skim-off, probably
is that the NED money is destined for the pockets of people in Cuba while
the AID money supports the US NGO infrastructures.

Whatever the amount of money reaching Cuba may have been, everyone in Cuba
working in the various dissident projects knows of US government's
sponsorship, funding and of its purpose regime change.

Far from being independentjournalists, idealistichuman rights activists,
legitimateadvocates for change or Marian librarians from River City, every
one of the 75 dissidentsarrested and convicted was knowingly a participant
in US government operations to overthrow the government and install a US-
favoured political, economic and social order. They knew what they were
doing was illegal, they got caught and they are paying the price.

Anyone who thinks these people are prisoners of conscience, persecuted for
their ideas or speech, or victims of repression, simply fails to see them
properly as instruments of a US government that has declared revolutionary
Cuba its enemy.

They were not convicted for ideas but for their paid actions on behalf of a
foreign power that has waged a 44-year war of varying degrees of intensity
against this poor country.

To think that the dissidentswere creating an independent, free civil society
is absurd, for they were funded and controlled by a hostile foreign power
and to that degree, which was total, they were not free or independent in
the least.

The civil society they wished to create was not just your normal, garden
variety civil society of Harley freaks and Boxer breeders, but a political
opposition movement fomented openly by the US government. What government in
the world would be so self-destructive as to sit by and just watch this
happen?

The threat of war against Cuba from Bush and his coterie of crusaders, all
of them crazed after Iraq, is real. A military campaign against Cuba,
coinciding with the 2004 electoral campaign, may be the only way he can hope
to get himself elected for his second term.

[Abridged from Granma Internacional. Philip Agee was a CIA covert operations
officer from 1959 to 1969 and is the author of Inside the Company: A CIA
Diary. ]