I Wasn't Born a Medium or a Magician, But…

I wasn’t born a medium or a magician, but months ago (actually, years ago), I ‘guessed’ that the next country on the map would be Syria, in the Middle East. Just looking at a world map, I noticed that Syria is right alongside of Israel, Iran, Iraq and the so-called (by the U.S.) Christian ‘democracies,’ like Baireth and Jordan.* I agree with the Uruguayan writer and poet Eduardo Galeano, who said that the countries that have oil (a lot of oil) are in constant danger, considering that if they were to plant and harvest “little radishes,” who knows if that would be motive for a war or an invasion.

I was mistaken about Libya and the extravagant Commander Gadhafi (or however it’s spelled), that the old and corrupt NATO and European countries, who used to roll out the red carpet for him each time he visited with his camels and divas, killed him in the streets of his hometown after annihilating half of the Arab world who were more than fine living off in the desert of Libya. Why? I don’t know what to say, except for that it was Gadhafi’s own bad luck for himself, his children and the descendants of the Green Revolution, even though he had the best life expectancy of the region and plenty of oil. The loans that the lavish colonel gave them were worthless; the truth is that they invaded Libya because it had oil. And the European countries, NATO and the U.S. wanted to continue having their own oil, so they invaded Libya.

Within the margin of error, it is only a matter of looking at a globe to realize why they are pestering Syria. It reminds me of the best American scholars, when they couldn’t (or didn’t want to) realize that Washington is the capital of the U.S. Not to mention poor Syria, and the man that inherited it from his father; at this point, one is obligated to defend it. At this point I remember an old joke: “How I hate you, Mr. So and So, that you make me defend it,” to Assad, without knowing himself what it is. It is certain that it’s Syria’s turn, even though it has no oil — but it is very close to Israel, who doesn’t have oil either, but is the spearhead of imperialism of the region. Or for many other reasons that the best American scholars just ignore Syria. Or so I think.

In reading Fidel (Castro Ruz, who is still alive despite more than 600 CIA attacks), I find that if the Jews launch atomic or smart bombs against Syria, surely the third world war will have begun. In World War II (1940-1945) 50 million people died (mostly Europeans), even without atomic bombs. Israel has them this time. The same with chemical weapons: Certainly the great empire and the smaller empires wouldn’t dare ‘overdrawing’ them. It’s an upside-down world. The best Persians and Muslims won’t take risks with the worst (the newcomers) because they have atomic weapons. This is the case with Israel. And I still haven’t gotten a satisfactory answer: Why did the horrible Hitler (German) hate the Jews as much as the communists? The communists I get, but not the Jews.

I pose this question because I have no answer. Even less in seeing how the Jews treated the Palestinians. This is why, in the 68th Session of the U.N. General Assembly, the poor man representing the Palestinians wanted to cry. Not so with those who throw stones at the Jews while they go around taking away land from the poor Palestinians; it was on the squatted land that the newcomers build every day, in Palestinian land, of course. It would be a different case if the Jews respected the Palestinians — lest the Jews break a plate. And they had a crazy desire to get to Iran through Syria. This is why they are paying the great empire, or so their enemies say: The Jews are giving money to the U.S. so that they don’t do anything to them. Just in case the Jews wanted to take advantage of the moment and had the same prerogative as the Palestinians, according to the U.N. Lest they remember that they gave them land, even though the Palestinians have been there for a long time.

And speaking of the U.N. and its Security Council, I only find that there are many countries saying, “Enough is enough.” It was good (or bad?) for post-WWII, but not for these times. For what reason are some countries better than the rest? It doesn’t take much to figure out that the U.N. Security Council is being run by five empires, or smaller empires. Or at least, they go about without any authorization. Be it far from them to ask Mr. Bush (Jr.), who went to war against Iraq because he wanted to do so, without anyone’s permission but with the help of Blair and Aznar. And because he had to hang Mr. Hussein in front of the whole world (as if there weren’t any other way). But no one said anything. The same with bin Laden, who the U.S. claims they threw in the sea, whose ancestors then let them win some wars, and so forth. But best I not go on because they are going to accuse me of not being supportive of Western civilizations. There is nothing more to talk about now, except the U.S. and Europe, since the Soviet Union (the former USSR) and China do not go much further.

And not to mention the famous U.N. Assembly. It has been about 20 times that they’ve resolved the embargo they have against Cuba; and the U.S. wipes its hands clean of it every time. What does it matter? What’s even more telling is that some states have not ratified what many have already done — the U.S. leading amongst the first. And many Latin American countries have done it as well. We’ve stopped being the backyard of the U.S. There are governments now in Latin America that are saying “no” to the U.S., citing what the great Simon Bolivar predicted (200 years ago) about the great empire of the north. And the Venezuelans (who love Simon Bolivar and Chavez Frias more than anything) are not only seeing the ‘bulls’ up close, but getting closer to Evo Morales, Rafael Correa, Daniel Ortega and the widowed Cristina Kirchner. And then there is Colombia and President Santos, who as if to change things up, continues with his peace talks with the FARC and the ELN (National Liberation Army) in Havana. And there’s Mexico, Colombia and Peru, and Chile, unable to break free from neoliberalism, and the like. The Americans (who never sleep) not only have Colombia, but also a few Central American countries and Mexico which, for what it’s worth, has Peña Nieto, who looks more like (because of his wife) a soap opera heartthrob than a Mexican president. And the U.S. goes around not wanting to know anything about the southern part of the continent.

I also don’t understand why we [Argentina] made peace with Peru if our natural enemies were the Peruvians. Former President Mahuad walks around freely in the United States, lecturing in Harvard, while former President Fuijimori walks around Lima, wanting to lecture — but he can’t because he was convicted. Even the soldiers who guarded the border with Peru (no more than 5,000) are now guarding the border with Colombia, where from time to time there are skirmishes; we do not know if the Colombians are doing anything to counteract them. For some reason it was known that in the north we were bordering with the FARC, since President Santos (who was Minister of Defense, no less than the former president Uribe Velez) was “very proud” of what he did in Angostura (the northeast of our Ecuadorian Amazon rainforest), which is what a journalist friend from Costa Rica, had written about in a book called “The Claws of the Phoenix” and says (in the book) that the countries that align themselves with the U.S., Europe and NATO, are in low spirits because they cannot just do what they please.

Without straying off too far, to my understanding, there is a new kind of colonialism nowadays. In other times, the great empire, or small empires, would go and loot a country or region until they left it penniless. In Latin America, not only did they take everything they could, but then they left us with the Spanish language, particularly “poorly spoken” in Argentina. But we are no longer the backyard of the United States. I’ve said that it is a new kind of colonialism. The great states will no longer take what they can; rather, they must justify what there is. Not everywhere, of course. In poor Syria they first put in some ‘mercenaries’ that do whatever they don’t want to do in front of everyone; and because of a ‘worldwide’ outcry, the empires must intervene. Former President Bush (Jr.) invaded Iraq, killed Hussein and those who appeared defending the country, leaving them worse than before. The same happened in Panama, by the man better known as ‘Piña.’ And the same in Chile, until they got Allende shoot himself, and didn’t the same thing happen in the Dominican Republic? The same thing will happen in Venezuela, since they go around saying that they have plenty of oil. And if the U.S. goes against Maduro, it won’t be to ‘save the democracy,’ but because Maduro has plenty of oil, and because the U.S. needs it. The same thing with the small empires. And so on.

*Translator’s Note: What the author means by “Baireth” is unclear; given the context of the article, it’s possible he is referring to Beirut, the capital of Lebanon.