The Revolution Betrayed?
DRCLAS was founded in 1994 to Neil L Rudenstine, then University President, and David Rockefeller, who: “shared a sense that Harvard should be intellectually poised to respond to real-world changes in the Americas resulting from democratic transitions and economic restructuring.”[14] Translated from globalist jargonese this means that DRCLAS was established as yet another Rockefeller think tank to formulate policy on how best to change the Continent in accordance with the interests of world plutocracy. The advisory committee of DRCLAS includes:
- Manuel Arango (Mexico), who is also director of the Institute of the Americas, another plutocratic think tank set up in 1983 to promote business relations throughout the Americas. Corporate backers include J P Morgan, ExxonMobil, Enron South America, et al.
- Gustavo A. Cisneros (Venezuela), Chairman and CEO of Cisneros Group of Companies. He is also on the board of advisors of the Museum of Modern Art in New York, which happens to be a long time Rockefeller family flagship, presently including David Rockefeller as Honorary Chairman; David Rockefeller Jr. and Sharon Percy Rockefeller on the board. Cisneros is also on the Council of Rockefeller University, International Advisory Board of the CFR, etc.
- Peggy Dulany (USA), David Rockefeller’s daughter; board of Rockefeller Brothers Fund, etc.
- Israel Klabin (Brazil), one of the wealthy elite who compares himself to the Rothschilds.
- Martha T Muse (USA) long-time member of the CFR.
- David Rockefeller.[15]
It might well be asked whether the partnered think tank at Havana University, under the nose of the Cuban Government, is a hotbed of plutocratic subversion, where the future generation of leaders is being trained under the influence of foreign academics sponsored by the predictable network of oligarchs.
In a typically Cold War neo-con attack on Cuba, Dr Miguel A Faria nonetheless made some interesting observations back in 2001, stating of Cuba and the CFR that:
Out of the shadows, a little-known but powerful organization has stepped out this new millennial year advocating a more accommodating stance with the communist regime of Fidel Castro.[16]
…In short, before we change our policy toward Cuba based on sagacious-sounding CFR reports, we should stop to pause and consider that these measures may not necessarily be in the best interest of the Cuban people or intended to aid in a “transition to democracy,” as sold to us, but rather to advance chiefly the internationalist goal of this organization. Nor does the interest of the American people often coincide with those of this organization.
While Dr Faria patriotically suggested that any such reconciliation between the USA and Cuba would strength the communist regime rather than encourage openness and democracy, those who are not so enthusiastic about the role and nature of the USA are more likely to conclude that the closer one relates to America the nearer one gets to a pervasive moral and cultural rot that will inevitably bring about the fall of a state into the hands of the plutocratic elite that feeds on corruption.
Globalist Strategy for Latin America
The globalist agenda for Cuba has been set down for the Obama Administration, in a report released by the Washington-based Inter-American Dialogue in March 2009. The LA Progressive stated of the Dialogue mission that spanned the Latin American region:
By far the most controversial relates to Cuba, which, the Dialogue notes, “Washington’s 50-year-old policy of isolating and sanctioning Cuba has never accomplished much,” adding that “there is no other issue on which Washington is so out of step with the rest of the region. Nothing would better demonstrate the new administration’s intention to dismantle the web of restrictions that the United States has imposed on Cuba. A policy shift on Cuba, which carries great symbolic weight in the region, would be a powerful signal that Washington will be more responsible to Latin American views.”[17] It concludes by declaring that “a democratic society in Cuba should be the objective of U.S. engagement, not a precondition.”[18]
The last sentence, citing the report makes it clear enough that the agenda for such a “dialogue” if typically subversive. “Democratic society” like Soros’ “open society” is a euphemism for globalization and the cultural and moral rot that goes with it.
The answer for Latin America’s development is the globalist formula of increasing the already disastrous incursions of the World Bank and IMF in the region.[19]
The report places the responsibility for the continued US embargo on Cuba on the Cuban anti-Castro émigrés, but notes that it “is politically weaker and more diverse than it once was.”[20]
Nor should there be much resistance to a US decision to stop trying to block other nations and multinational institutions from doing business with Cuba. Washington should simply cease its efforts to keep the OAS and multilateral development banks from engaging Cuba and not intrude into the diplomacy of such nations as Brazil, Canada, Mexico and Spain that are strengthening their political and economic ties to Cuba. Instead, the US should encourage such engagement as a means to facilitate Cuba’s successful reintegration into hemispheric affairs and avoid its dependence on Venezuela and its allies.[21]
This paragraph is very telling in regard to oligarchic strategy for Latin America. Chavez’s Venezuela “and its allies” affirms the aim of isolating the “Bolivarian” hemispheric bloc forming around Venezuela which has the potential to challenge American hegemony in a unipolar world.[22]
The US members of the delegation include the predictable bunch representing interests such as Goldman Sachs, Salomon Bros., CFR (including Richard Haass, president of the CFR; until 2003 director of policy panning for the US State Dept.), Bechtel Group; DRCLAS (Martha Muse, CFR, see above), while the Latin American delegates include a fair share of Leftists; i.e. another example of the quite frequent historical phenomena of collusion between plutocrats and socialists.
What appears to be the current policy of the US ruling elite for Latin America is to integrate Cuba into the world economy, much like Vietnam, rendering it tame whilst simultaneously isolating Venezuela and undermining the Bolivarian bloc.