Schlagwort-Archive: #Brazil

Insights on the Iran Deal, BRICS and Handling a Crisis in Venezuela

EDITOR’S CHOICE: Amorim is universally recognized as one of the top diplomats of the young 21st century. I had the pleasure of meeting Ambassador Amorim, who is also the author of ‘Acting Globally: Memoirs of Brazil’s Assertive Foreign Policy’in Sao Paulo. Here are some highlights of our conversation – from the birth of BRICS to the current Venezuela crisis.

Quelle: Insights on the Iran Deal, BRICS and Handling a Crisis in Venezuela

EDITOR’S CHOICE | 29.01.2019

Insights on the Iran Deal, BRICS and Handling a Crisis in Venezuela

An exclusive interview with former Brazilian foreign minister Celso Amorim on how BRICS came into being, how the nuclear deal was done with Tehran and how the South dealt with Chavez

Full text dokumented here: (PDF)

escobar handling a crisis venezuela 20190129

Pablo VIVANCO: Latin America’s Right-Wing Turn – Alfredo SAAD -FILHO: Brazil: The Collapse of Democracy?; Jacobin, Oct. 2018

Dear all,

many are stunned faced with Latin America’s right-wing turn – in particular the mass support for Jair Bolsonaro, an incompetent Brazilian fascist.

Pablo Vivanco (former director of TeleSUR English) and Alfredo Saad-Filho (professor of political economy at SOAS, University London) are pointing out key aspects of this development.

Below extracts of both articles; complete see attachment (7p, pdf).

Martin Zeis

27.10.2018 —

Latin America’s Right-Wing Turn

By Pablo Vivanco

Pablo Vivanco is the former director of TeleSUR English.

The far right is on the rise not only in Brazil but across Latin America — driven by the middle class that left-wing governments helped create.


Unfinished business

The decade and more of so-called “Pink Tide” governments made undeniable social progress in the world’s most unequal region. Nevertheless, many of those who attained a measure of social mobility during this period have turned against that political project and the policies that defined it.

Whether a “Brown tide” is imminent or not, Walter Benjamin’s assertion that “behind every fascism, there is a failed revolution,” holds true for the Latin America today, Boron argues.

“It is a punishment, I wouldn’t say that it is not for having made revolution, but rather for not having completed a process of reforms that had to be radicalized, and through this, having suppressed the possibilities of the emergence of fascist political movements,” Boron said, emphasizing the absence of political education and organizing by most of the left-leaning governments in the region.

“Unfortunately, they fell into a kind of economic determinism, a certain economism, on the part of the governments of the progressive era, thinking that improving material conditions was enough to generate awareness of the need to fight against capitalism.”

This also holds true in the case of Brazil, where a popular movement fought a dictatorship and then elected PT candidates like Ignacio Lula da Silva to the presidency. “There was a lot of potential when Lula got elected, with a lot of popular support, to mobilize people and push for more, and people were very much hopeful that the government would be more than what it was,” Fernandes said.

The Left may have failed to organize a sufficient base of support to sustain its project, but it will now have a much harder fight to ensure that the reactionary Right isn’t able to do so either. This is motivating left-wing activists like Fernandes, who were critical of the PT government, to campaign for Fernando Haddad in the second round of presidential voting. “It’s now a question,” she says, “of trying to stop this in any way possible.”

27.10.2018 —

Brazil: The Collapse of Democracy?

by Alfredo Saad-Filho

Alfredo Saad-Filho is a professor of political economy in the Department of Development Studies at SOAS, University of London.


The Improbable Rise of Jair Bolsonaro

Five years of political tensions and degradation of democracy culminated in the 2018 presidential elections. The electoral process revolved around the confrontation between two political phenomena of great historical significance. On the one hand, the extraordinary political talent of Lula, who, even from jail, managed to put together an alternative candidate and outsmart his potential competitors in the center-left, paving the way for Fernando Haddad’s exponential growth in opinion polls.

However, Lula’s political acumen was unable to stem the tide of a far right mass movement led by an obscure Deputy who emerged far ahead in the first round of the elections. Despite frequent comparisons with U.S. President Donald Trump (who had a successful career on TV, if not in business), Jair Bolsonaro stands out for having failed at everything he tried to do before the elections, whether as a military officer (frustrated career), terrorist (amateur) or Federal Deputy (ineffective). Despite this history of fiascos, Bolsonaro made enormous gains, both among capital – desperate for any viable alternative to the PT – and among the workers (especially the informal working class), who flocked to Bolsonaro in the millions during the campaign.

Mass support for the incompetent fascist was supported by four platforms: the fight against corruption (the traditional way in which the right gains mass traction in Brazil, for example, in 1954, 1960, 1989 and 2013); conservative moralism (pushed by the evangelical churches); the claim that ‘security’ can be achieved through state-sponsored violence (which resonates strongly in a country with over 60,000 murders per year, in addition to tens of thousands of other violent crimes), and a neoliberal economic discourse centred on slashing a (presumably corrupt) state, that is parasitical upon the ‘honest’ citizens. The rupture of the progressive alliance and the haemorrhage of poor voters toward Bolsonaro is the Brazilian version of the process of consolidation of an electoral majority for authoritarian neoliberalism in other countries.

Defeating the PT and overthrowing Dilma Rousseff were, then, part of a wider process of displacement of the political center of gravity in Brazil upwards (within the social pyramid), and to the right (in terms of the political spectrum). These shifts have created, for the first time in more than half a century, a far-right mass movement with broad penetration in society. This not only drained the potential support for the PT candidate, but also led to the implosion of the traditional center-right parties, which were devastated by the rise of Jair Bolsonaro. Political chaos has seized the country.

The Impasse

In the short term, the Brazilian political impasse implies that the administration to be inaugurated in 2019 will be inevitably unstable, and over time, the 1988 Constitution is likely to become unviable, leading to the disintegration of democracy.

Any elected president would have serious difficulties governing with a sluggish economy, a hostile Congress, an overly autonomous Judiciary making a habit of trespassing into the other republican powers, excited Armed Forces, and a Constitutional amendment setting a ceiling on fiscal expenditures for the next 20 years (which will slowly throttle public administration). At the level of popular mobilization, since 2013 the streets are no longer the monopoly of the left; they now include large masses on the far right, surrounded by a violent fringe.

A centre-left president would find a state in worse situation than Lula found it in 2003, because of the institutionalization of the neoliberal reforms imposed by the Temer administration. These constraints would make it difficult to govern without a constitutional reform; however, a constituent assembly would inevitably be dominated by the right, which would seek to impose an even worse Constitution than the current one: the left is discredited, disorganized, and institutionally immobilized.

A far-right president, with no experience of government, without the support of a stable party structure, and unprepared in every way, will have to confront History: Presidents Janio Quadros and Fernando Collor were also elected by elite alliances that had traded common sense for a victory at the polls; both administrations were cut short. In a decentralized political system, authoritarian leaders face grave difficulties to govern, regardless of their legitimacy or social basis. Further, the ‘coalition presidentialism’ instituted by the Brazilian Constitution demands continuous negotiations in Congress, always running the risk of breaking the law, especially when the President has few reliable allies at the top, or is being challenged by a mass opposition.

In addition to these broad principles, the 2018 elections have led to five specific lessons.

  • First, the political centre of gravity in Brazil has shifted to the right. From the south to the centre-west, passing through the prosperous south-east, the right-wing electorate has achieved a solid majority. Given the importance of these regions, the left is electorally hemmed in.
  • Second, Bolsonaro’s rise derives from the combination of class hatred in a society bearing huge scars from centuries of slavery, recent right-wing insurrections, and transparent U.S.-led intervention in the Brazilian political process.
  • Third, since 2013, Brazilian politics has been defined by a convergence of dissatisfactions that has consolidated a neoliberal alliance around an economic and political programme that is economically excluding and destructive of citizenship.
  • Fourth, the Brazilian right is deeply divided. While the left, in defensive mode, can unite under Lula’s shadow, the right – surprisingly, given its hegemony over the institutions of the state and its ability to overthrow Dilma Rousseff – cannot generate leaders worthy of note, nor unify around its own programme of radical neoliberal reforms. Its traditional political parties are imploding, leaving in power a rabble of inexperienced, inept, idiosyncratic, and reactionary politicians.
  • Fifth, the worst economic contraction recorded in Brazil’s history and the most severe political impasse in the past century have degraded profoundly Brazilian democracy, and made it impossible for any plausible composition of political forces to stabilize the system of accumulation. The tendency, then, is for these impasses to be resolved by extra-constitutional means. This will be an inglorious end to a democratic experiment that has marked two generations, and that achieved unquestionable successes. Unfortunately, it has proved impossible to resolve the conflict between neoliberalism and democracy in Brazil, inside the political arena built in the transition after the military dictatorship.


Brasilien — Kluge Antifa-Aktion von Roger WATERS auf gestrigem Pink-Floyd-Konzert in Curitiba

Moin, moin,

hervorragende Aktion von Roger WATER’s (Pink FLOYD) + Veranstalter während des gestrigen Konzerts in Curitiba (Parana/Brasilien) s.u.

Eine Reportage zur Lage im Land gestern auf NDS unter:

Roger Waters dodges arrest with a last-minute slap at Brazil’s Bolsonaro

Published time: 28 Oct, 2018 04:47

Edited time: 28 Oct, 2018 08:54

Pink Floyd co-founder Roger Waters toed the line during his show in Brazil, when he urged people to stop right-wing candidate Jair Bolsonaro seconds before he could be arrested for violating election law.

Waters, an indisputable music icon, has been in Brazil with his Us+Them tour since October 9. The singer, songwriter and bassist had performed six shows in the country before arriving in the city of Curitiba on Saturday.

At every one of his concerts, the legendary musician, known for his progressive views, decried neo-fascists, listing among them US President Donald Trump, Hungarian President Viktor Orban, and former UKIP leader Nigel Farage.

— Die Aktion ist dokumentiert (23-Sek-Video) auf:

While touring Brazil, Waters added the frontrunner in the country’s presidential race, Jair Bolsonaro, to this list. It caused mixed reactions among Waters’ own fans, whose ranks include both supporters and opponents of the right-wing candidate from the Social Liberal Party (PSL).

Boos and cheers aside, matters became more serious for Waters as the Sunday vote inched closer. Before the show, the Electoral Court of Parana warned the musician and his Brazilian producer T4F that if he does not abide by the Brazilian law, which prohibits all campaigning after 10pm, he might be arrested and face imprisonment.

And it all went smoothly until two minutes before the deadline. Just as Waters’ producers were, presumably, starting to breathe a collective sigh of relief, the stage went dark and silent. Then a message in Portuguese flashed on the big screen.

They told us we cannot talk about the election after 10 o’clock. We have 30 seconds. This is our last chance to resist fascism before Sunday. Not him!

“Not him” – “Ele Nao” in Portuguese – is the uniting slogan of everyone campaigning and protesting against Bolsonaro.

As the clock struck 10, the words “It’s ten o’clock. Obey the law,” appeared on the display.

In the run-up to Waters’ performance, Bolsonaro tweeted that “any person in the national territory, even if he is not a Brazilian citizen, has inalienable rights as a human being, as well as having a duty to obey the laws of Brazil.”

Bolsonaro, who is sometimes described as Brazil’s Trump, is widely expected to seal the vote in Sunday’s run-off. The right-wing politician cruised through the first round, wining 46 percent of the vote on October 7, with his main opponent, Fernando Haddad from the leftist Worker’s Party, receiving only 29 percent.

The MDA poll released on Saturday predicted a comfortable win for Bolsonaro, who currently holds a double-digit advantage over Haddad. Tens of thousands have protested against Bolsonaro’s all-but-secured rise to power both on the streets and online.

Dilma ROUSSEFF: “Creation of BRICS really scared some countries; The BRICS Post, 10.06.2016 

globalcrisis/globalchange NEWS
Martin Zeis, 10.06.2016

10.06.2016 —

Dilma ROUSSEFF: “Creation of BRICS really scared some countries

Brazil’s suspended President Dilma Rousseff has said those betting on the BRICS to disintegrate are making an “unforgivable mistake”.

“The creation of BRICS was an event of unprecedented significance in world affairs. The emergence of BRICS and the G20 group was a peak from the standpoint of multilateral processes and of building a multipolar world,” Rousseff told Russian state daily Rossiiskaya Gazeta.

The BRICS nations account for about a quarter of global economic output. China and India are among the world’s fastest growing large economies.

“I should say that the creation of BRICS really scared some countries, and we know that. Thinking that this quintet will fall apart or disappear would be tantamount to making a strategic and unforgivable geopolitical mistake,” she added.

The Brazilian Senate voted to impeach President Dilma Rousseff in May.
However, a wave of scandals buffeting Brazil’s interim government is weakening the resolve of some senators to oust suspended Rousseff, offering the leftist leader hope of surviving an impeachment trial in the upper house.

Leaked recordings, of politicians and key allies of interim President Michel Temer, discussing Brazil’s sprawling kickback scandal has dented the credibility of the new administration.
Temer’s Transparency Minister Fabiano Silveira and Planning Minister Romero Juca were caught conspiring against the Petrobras corruption probe in leaked recordings which were broadcast by national media. Both Ministers stepped down subsequently.
Brazilian daily O Estado de S Paulo also reported that Temer’s seven-year-old son, Michelzinho, is the registered owner of properties worth $550,000. The report also said Temer’s total assets nearly doubled between 2006 and 2014.

Meanwhile, Rousseff said on Thursday that each of the BRICS states are currently experiencing economic problems stemming from the West-induced crisis.

A new World Bank report, Global Economic Prospects: Divergences and Risks, says emerging economies need to look to policy reform in order to keep pace with growing global challenges. (1)

“But we will overcome that crisis to get even stronger than we were in the past. Our alliance rests upon the idea of strategic nature of these relations. It is an inter-continental union,” Rousseff said.

The BRICS Bank announced its first set of investments in April this year. The $100 billion NDB will compete with institutions where the US has considerably more influence—organizations such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. (2)

According to surveys by Brazilian media, up to a dozen of the 55 senators who voted last month to put Rousseff on trial are now undecided.

If just a couple of those change sides, the Temer camp would lose the 54 votes it needs – two-thirds of the 81-seat Senate – to convict Rousseff. She would then be able to serve out her term until 2018.

Analyst Sam Cowie says many view Temer’s government as illegitimate. (3)
“What legitimacy does Temer’s unelected government have to impose cuts that will seriously affect tens of millions of mainly poor and lower income Brazilians?” Cowie asks.


8 Latin American Countries Reject Coup Against Dilma Rousseff; telesur-tv, May 16, 2016

globalcrisis/globalchange NEWS
Martin Zeis, 18.05.2016

Dear all,

in his article “Soft” Coups Threaten Brazil, Venezuela and South Africa Hugo TURNER reminds us of the post-WWII-Coups, Military Dictatorships, assassinations prepared/installed/pushed by the US/CIA in Latin America – at last the impeachment-farce in Brazil:

„… For the people of Brazil the battle has only begun. The 1964 coup in Brazil installed a brutal military dictatorship and was only the first of many coups that would leave the entire region under the fascist rule of Operation Condors network of military juntas. The people of Brazil and of all of Latin America are in deadly danger. By this act the US has signaled that even minor reforms like those carried out by Brazil’s workers party are unacceptable. Nothing must be allowed to impede the looting and impoverishment of the planet at the hands of the multi-national corporations.“ (source: Global Research, May 14, 2016 — )

Below the encouraging statements by eight Latin American Countries rejecting the coup against Dilma Rousseff, the legitimate president of Brazil.

Martin Zeis

16.05.2016 —

8 Latin American Countries Reject Coup Against Dilma Rousseff

Venezuela and El Savlador have recalled their ambassadors from Brazil, while several other countries have stated they support the suspended president.

Brazil’s controversial Senate-coup-imposed President Michel Temer has been largely isolated in Latin America in his first days in office after a the legislative body’s decision to suspend Dilma Rousseff, with only Argentina’s conservative government of President Mauricio Macri publicly stating support for the newly-installed right-wing government.

Brazil Coup: The First of Many Blows Against the People

The South American bloc UNASUR was one of the first bodies to condemn the decision to remove Rousseff for 180 days to make her face an impeachment trial over accusations of manipulating accounts to hide a budget shortfall.

UNASUR Secretary-General Ernesto Samper insisted that Rousseff remains the “legitimate president of Brazil” and that the impeachment bid against her undermines the “democratic governability” of the entire region in a “dangerous way.”
Here’s a look at the countries across Latin America that have rallied behind Rousseff to reject the right-wing attack on democracy.

1. Venezuela
Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro recalled his ambassador to Brazil the day after the decision to suspend Rousseff. He called the impeachment bid a “painful page” in the country’s history and said that Rousseff has been the victim of a parliamentary coup.

2. El Salvador
Salvadoran President Salvador Sanchez Ceren announced he will not recognize the Senate-imposed government of Michel Temer and recalled El Salvador’s ambassador to Brazil. He called the impeachment process a “political manipulation” that has sought to achieve what “was once done through military coups.”

3. Ecuador
Ecuador’s foreign ministry released a statement reiterating support for the Brazilian people and suspended President Dilma Rousseff, calling her the “legitimate” leader of the country who faced an impeachment bid despite not facing “a single accusation linking her to a criminal offense.”

4. Bolivia
Bolivia rejected the Brazilian Senate’s decision to suspend Dilma Rousseff, calling the process a “legal and political farce.” In a statement, the foreign ministry condemned the impeachment bid as an attempt to harm democracy and to “destabilize democratic processes and ignore the will of the people expressed in the popular vote.” The statement also argued that the suspension is based on the “criminalization of administrative actions” that does not fulfill the legal basis for impeachment.

5. Cuba
The government of Cuba released a statement condemning the impeachment bid against Rousseff as a move by the country’s oligarchy, with the help of the “reactionary press,” to “overthrow the legitimate government and seize the power that they could not win with an electoral vote” as part of a project to roll back progressive politics.

6. Nicaragua
Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega rejected the decision to suspend Rousseff as an “anti-democratic process that has cast a shadow on the reliability and strength of institutions” in Brazil. He added that the Workers’ Party has been essential in ensuring “freedom and justice” and reiterated solidarity with Rousseff and her predecessor Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

7. Chile
The government of Chile released a statement expressing concern over the situation in Brazil, calling Rousseff a “friend” of the Chilean government. The statement did not go as far as to reject the Senate-imposed Temer government but did raise concern over the “uncertainty” the impeachment bid has caused at the international level.

8. Uruguay
Uruguayan Foreign Minister Rodolfo Nin Novoa said the situation in Brazil is “worrying” and expressed hope that the situation will be resolved “in accordance with democratic and institutional canons.” Ahead of the vote in the Senate to suspend Rousseff, the Uruguayan government raised concern over the threat to the “legitimate and democratically elected” president.

9. Other Reactions
Argentina’s government released a statement saying it “respects the institutional process” in Brazil and trusts that the result will “consolidate the strength of Brazilian democracy.” The statement also expressed support for the Senate-imposed government, saying Argentine authorities will continue to engage in dialogue with the “established authorities” in its neighboring country.

Meanwhile, Colombia’s position was more ambiguous, saying in a statement that the country “trusts in the preservation of democratic institutionality and stability.” The U.S. State Department was similarly vague, saying in a statement that the United States is “confident that Brazilians will work through these difficult political questions democratically and in accordance with Brazil’s constitutional principles.”

Fakten und Hintergründe zum Staatsstreich in Brasilien – Texte von Harald NEUBER und Pepe ESCOBAR

globalcrisis/globalchange NEWS
Martin Zeis, 14.05.2015

Hallo zusammen,

Harald Neuber zeigt in seinem heute auf telepolis veröffentlichten Text die soziale Herkunft, die (kriminelle) Vita, die politischen Vorstellungen und den unbedingten Herrschaftswillen der alten Kompradoren-Oligarchie Brasiliens auf, die in enger Koordination mit den zuständigen US-Stellen einen Staatsstreich gegen die gewählte PT-Regierung orchestrierte.

Wikileaks enthüllte vorgestern, dass der neue „Interims“-Präsident Temer ein Informant für US-Geheimdienste und das Pentagon war/ist. In zwei Depeschen vom 11. Januar und 21. Juni 2006, die von Sao Paolo an das US Southern Command in Miami übermittelt wurden, erörterte Temer die politische Situation/Entwicklung unter der Präsidentschaft Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva und die Aussichten seiner Partei, falls sie die anstehenden Wahlen gewinnen sollte. (vgl. zerohedge, 13.05.2015: „Another US-Sponsored Coup? Brazil’s New President Was An Embassy Informant For US Intelligence“; URL: )

Dem „Empire of Chaos“ geht es bei dem Staatsstreich darum, Brasilien als bedeutendstes Land Süd- und Mittelamerikas

a. aus dem Bündnis der BRICS-Länder und damit aus dem dort vertretenen Konzept eines vom US-Dollar-System unabhängigen Wegs der infrastrukturellen, ökonomischen, politischen Entwicklung herauszubrechen;

b. damit des Weiteren die eigenständigen Bündnisse der süd- und mittelamerikanischen Staaten entscheidend zu schwächen;

c. den gesamten früheren kolonialen US-“Vorhof” – wie parallel den EU-Raum (über die NATO, TTIP, CETA) – den US-Konzernen und dem Wallstreet-IWF-Weltbank-Plünderungs-Komplex zu unterwerfen.

In einem auf zerohedge am 08.05.2016 geposteten Artikel “The New Normal: Cold War 2.0″ schreibt Pepe ESCOBAR zu diesem „Roll-Back“-Projekt der USA u.a.:

Das imperiale Projekt der U.S. besteht darin, die NATO, welche bereits zu einem global agierenden Weltpolizisten (Robocop) mutierte, in eine integrierte politische, ökonomische, Handel treibende, militärische Allianz umzuformen – und zwar unter dem Kommando Washingtons, wobei zentrale Vasallen/contributors wie die Ölmonarchien am Golf und Israel einbezogen werden.

Der „Feind“ des Imperiums ist das einzige authentische, selbstbestimmte Projekt des 21. Jahrhunderts: die Eurasische Integration, welche von den durch China konzipierten Neuen Seidensstraßen über die von Russland geführte Eurasische Wirtschaftsunion (EEU) bis zu den BRICS reicht mit deren Neuer Entwicklungsbank im Tandem mit der Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) – plus dem wiedererstarkten, noch unabhängigen, mit Eurasien verbundenen Iran sowie den anderen Zentren der blockfreien Länder.“ (zit.a. Übers.)


Pepe ESCOBAR: Hybrid War Hyenas Tear Brazil Apart; RI 18.04.2016

globalcrisis/globalchange NEWS
Martin Zeis, 19.04.2016

Dear all,

for months Pepe Escobar covers the Brazilian Coup in preparation noticing specific details of an US-backed/driven Hybrid Warfare in Latin America to destroy „the neo-developmentalist project for Latin America – uniting at least some of the local elites, invested in developing internal markets, in association with the working classes“ and to spure a neoliberal restoration.”

The most important point of this attack is Brazil, a key member of the BRICS and the 7th largest economy in the world.

Quite bluntly David Ignatius, Washington Post Opinion writer, exposed the tools and aims of the Empire’s foreign policy to this effect:

“U.S. power flows from our unmatched military might, yes. Anything that expands the reach of U.S. markets – such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership in trade, for example – adds to the arsenal of U.S. power. But in a deeper way, it’s a product of the dominance of the U.S. economy.

Conversely, U.S. power is limited by measures that drive business away from America, or allow other nations to build a rival financial architecture that’s less encumbered by a smorgasbord of sanctions.”

Source: David IGNATIUS: A grim warning against America’s overuse of sanctions; WP March 29, 2016, URL:


Pepe ESCOBAR + Ted SNIDER about "Unconventional War"- and "Silent Coup"-Tactics in Brazil + Latin America

globalcrisis/globalchange NEWS
Martin Zeis, 02.04.2016

Dear all,

amongst others Pepe Escobar recently points to the concept of Unconventional War (UW) detailed by the 2010 US Special Forces Unconventional Warfare manual:

“The intent of US [Unconventional Warfare] UW efforts is to exploit a hostile power’s political, military, economic, and psychological vulnerabilities by developing and sustaining resistance forces to accomplish US strategic objectives… For the foreseeable future, US forces will predominantly engage in irregular warfare (IW) operations.”
“Hostile” powers are meant not only in a military sense; any state that dares to defy any significant plank of the Washington-centric world “order” – from Sudan to Argentina – may be branded “hostile”.

„In the UW manual, swaying the perceptions of a vast “uncommitted middle population” is essential in the road to success, so these uncommitted eventually turn against their political leaders. The process encompasses everything from “supporting insurgency” (as in Syria) to “wider discontent through propaganda and political and psychological efforts to discredit the government” (as in Brazil). And as an insurrection escalates, so should the “intensification of propaganda; psychological preparation of the population for rebellion.” That, in a nutshell, has been the Brazilian case.“

Source: Pepe ESCOBAR, 28.03.2016: Brazil, like Russia, under attack by Hybrid War;

Similary Ted SNIDER writes on „silent coup“ tactics as U.S-backed political movements are spured discrediting Brazil and other Latin American progressive movements in order to remove trublesome leaders.

„This strategy began to take shape in the latter days of the Cold War as the CIA program of arming Nicaraguan Contra rebels gave way to a U.S. economic strategy of driving Sandinista-led Nicaragua into abject poverty, combined with a political strategy of spending on election-related NGOs by the U.S.-funded National Endowment for Democracy, setting the stage for the Sandinistas’ political defeat in 1990.

During the Obama administration, this strategy of non-violent “regime change” in Latin America has gained increasing favor, as with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s decisive support for the 2009 ouster of Honduran President Manuel Zelaya who had pursued a moderately progressive domestic policy that threatened the interests of the Central American nation’s traditional oligarchy and foreign investors.

Unlike the earlier military-style coups, the “silent coups” never take off their masks and reveal themselves as coups. They are coups disguised as domestic popular uprisings which are blamed on the misrule of the targeted government. Indeed, the U.S. mainstream media will go to great lengths to deny that these coups are even coups.
The new coups are cloaked in one of two disguises. In the first, a rightist minority that lost at the polls will allege “fraud” and move its message to the streets as an expression of “democracy”; in the second type, the minority cloaks its power grab behind the legal or constitutional workings of the legislature or the courts, such as was the case in ousting President Zelaya in Honduras in 2009.

Both strategies usually deploy accusations of corruption or dictatorial intent against the sitting government, charges that are trumpeted by rightist-owned news outlets and U.S.-funded NGOs that portray themselves as “promoting democracy,” seeking “good government” or defending “human rights.” Brazil today is showing signs of both strategies.“ — emphasis, m.z. —

Source: Ted SNIDER, 30.03.2016: A ‘Silent Coup’ for Brazil?; URL: