Christian Parenti on Iraq

I just found this video of Christian Parenti, the subject of a profile piece I am writing for college, talking about the US failure in Iraq.

The most interesting bit is towards the end where he talks about the mind-boggling corruption and incompetence that characterise the invasion, and the impossible mission of defeating a well-armed and well-organised ex-Baathist army resistance. He proposes a pan-regional summit where hostilities are put on hold, where the US recognises its failure and pays reparations to Iraq, and where leaders from across the middle east engage in discussions over a practical way forward - recognising, of course, that this is never going to happen, even under a Clinton administration.

Imperial cocaine bandits

Chávez has, apparently, accused the US of selling cocaine at "below-market prices" in the barrios of Caracas as a means of destabilising Venezuela. This accusation is bizarre as it gives the impression that the US is muscling in on his territory - as if Chávez wants to be the only coke-dealing big daddy in THIS neighbourhood!

Of all the extreme accusation he's come out with, this has to be one of the more unusual ones. It undermines the credibility of his rhetoric and means people are more willing to dismiss what he says, even when he is in fact right.

Just take the whole Farc issue. Chávez had a real opportunity to denounce the many human rights abuses of the Uribe administration by staying as neutral as possible and pressing for a peaceful solution, thus highlighting the failure of the Colombian government to resolve the country's problems.

But instead he has affiliated himself with the Farc rebels and opened himself up to criticism that he aids and abets terrorists. This in itself is an exaggerated claim from hysterical rightwingers but why give your opponents the opportunity to label you in this way if it can be so easily avoided?

As I have always said, Chávez is his own worst enemy.

Heating up...

The debate is getting interesting following the publication of the New Statesman article. It hasn't stooped to name-calling (yet!) which is good, as people are engaging with some interesting issues. Check it out here.

Frontline Club

This is an interesting discovery - a club for journalists, diplomats and policy makers to openly discuss current affairs. Channel 4 News' Jon Snow is a member (he features on the video) as do other established journos.

Free hugs

I had never heard of this campaign until now, but it looks like it's been going a while. Free hugs - it helps that the girl is quite fit.



Mind you, the Scottish chap in this one gets plenty of hugs too, even from other blokes. Aah, heart-warming stuff, isn't it?

Uribe's commitment to peace

Check out this article and this one about how the Colombian military attacked the convoy releasing the hostages from Farc imprisonment. It was clearly an attempt to undermine the release effort in order to humiliate Hugo Chávez, who brokered the deal.


As you will see from my articles I'm not a massive fan of Chávez and believe he deserves most of the criticism he receives, but it's stories like this that make me think that (US-backed) leaders who are just as dastardly as he is - if not moreso - aren't getting the media haranguing they deserve too.

$12 billion oil squabble - truth or dare?

An interesting story is brewing in the hazy world of international business law.

Venezuelan state oil company PDVSA has, according to Exxon Mobil, been ordered to freeze $12 billion of its overseas assets by a UK court. The case arose last year, when president Chávez's nationalisation drive forced foreign oil operators in Venezuela to either hand over majority control of their operations or leave for good. All companies concerned came to an agreement except Exxon Mobil, which chose to pull out of Venezuela and sought recompense in the international courts.

Friday's ruling has been widely reported but I am yet to read a definitive explanation of what it means for PDVSA. Rafael Ramirez, the PDVSA boss and oil minister, has denied that any ruling has been made against PDVSA and has dismissed the whole episode as some sort of gringo PR conspiracy to destabilise the Venezuelan economy. (I know the Chávez government always comes out with this kind of reasoning, but part of me often thinks, "it's not totally out of the question...")

So was there a ruling or not? If there was, how can Ramirez credibly claim that there wasn't? And if there wasn't, what is Exxon making such a hullabaloo about?

Either way, the announcement has managed to undermine the value of PDVSA's bonds, which fell to an all-time low on Friday, which certainly establishes a clear motive for any Exxon-Bush destabilisation conspiracy.

But then again, could it be the Chávez government once again playing the "external forces" card to justify its own incompetence?

Watch this space.