by Andrew Korybko
One of the hottest topics of strategic research here in Russia has been the study of how the US uses Color Revolutions as a new form of influence and power projection. Because this destabilizing template can be applied all over the world, and not just against Russian interests, I wanted to share some of my latest findings with you all, in the hopes that you and your countries can better recognize the threat that this poses and adequately prepare for defending yourself and your regional allies from it.
I’ll start by informing you of the strategic weaponization of Color Revolutions, and then explain their forecasted geopolitical application in destabilizing each of the BRICS states and their regional allies. Afterwards I’d be more than happy to answer any questions or speak with people to offer more specific insight.
So to begin, the reality of Color Revolutions might not be what many of you think they are, and it’s necessary to reconceptualize them so that we’re all on the same page here. They aren’t spontaneous social phenomenon, like the Western mainstream media presents them as, but rather military-strategic plans for destabilizing a targeted geopolitical area. I talk about this more in my upcoming book, Hybrid Wars, which will be available for free in print and online from the People’s Friendship University of Russia, but in brief, here’s how it works. Preplanned destabilizing forces, a combination of foreign citizens and domestic so-called ‘opposition’, even if they are not officially affiliated with a political party, either hijack legitimate protests or engineer their own conditions for one and then provoke the government into responding with force. The goal is to delegitimize the state domestically and internationally, and weaken it to the point where an urban guerrilla offensive eventually topples it. Even if it fails to overthrow the authorities, the resultant destabilization spreads throughout the region and creates a favorable strategic environment for US foreign policy, such as a pretext for regional military deployment. There are also scenarios where it can be used to create a secessionist movement within the targeted state, in which case it markets itself to certain ethnic, religious, or regional groups in order to gain supposed ‘legitimacy’.
It’s a bit deeper than that, but this is the main gist. I’ll now outline the geopolitical aspects of Color Revolution strategy against the BRICS. The idea to keep in mind is that Color Revolutions aren’t spontaneous, but are engineered destabilization movements with concrete geopolitical goals. Let’s start with Russia.
I’ve identified something that I call the ‘Color Arc’. Stretching from Hungary all the way to Kyrgyzstan, it’s a continuous line of states whose political destabilization or illegal change of government could seriously jeopardize Russian interests and external security. Hungary, Serbia, Macedonia, and Greece are targeted because of their potential pipeline cooperation with Russia, while Turkey and Iran are in the US’ sights because new governments there might potentially be anti-Russian and direct their spheres of influence north towards Russia’s traditional area of interest. A Great Power clash between Russia and Turkey or Iran, or at least an unfriendly competition, would definitely be to the US’ ultimate benefit. Finally, in Armenia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Kyrgyzstan, unrest in those countries could lead to civil or international wars that might drag in Russia. I’ve sketched out the most probable scenarios for each of their destabilizations and can gladly discuss them afterwards if anyone was interested.
Now let’s move on to China, which faces internal and external Color Revolution threats. The ones inside the country are Hong Kong, Xinjiang, and Tibet, and it’s always been one of the US’ top strategic goals to coordinate these destabilizations so that they can break out simultaneously and throw Beijing off balance. One of my research interests is currently whether or not such a scenario could ever happen in parts of Inner Mongolia after a Mongolian Color Revolution, and I’m also looking at the possibility of ASEAN destabilization, particularly in Myanmar, affecting Yunnan Province. That brings me to China’s other external Color Revolution risk. If Kyrgyzstan descends into chaos, then it, or particularly the southern part of the country, could become a base for Uighur terrorists. An illegal regime change in Mongolia or the creation of de-facto sub-states in Myanmar could also spread unrest and create opportunities for the advancement of US foreign policy and the containment of China.
Moving over to India, there aren’t really any external Color Revolution risks because of the neighboring political geography. Illegal regime changes in the area wouldn’t really change India’s current regional position or impact that forcefully on its domestic stability. A Color Revolution in Pakistan, even though it’s unlikely to succeed, could intensify bilateral tensions if the country falls into chaos. The real Color Revolution threat against India, however, lies inside the country itself. Although engineered uprisings are certainly possible in the major cities, they’d be most devastating in the Northeast States, or the ‘Seven Sisters’, as they’re called. If they present themselves as so-called ‘peaceful, self-deterministic, ethnic-affiliated movements’, then they could potentially get a lot of appeal from certain segments of the population, especially youth. An escalation of civil war in Myanmar could exacerbate this risk. The US might look into this scenario, which I’m also currently studying, as a means of punishing India for any further multipolar outreaches to Russia and the establishment of its own civilizational pole of influence outside of Washington’s control. This region is the most vulnerable to external destabilization, so if the US would deploy this strategy against India, it’s sure to start there.
Now let’s look at South Africa. The country would be most destabilized by a breakdown of law and order in Zimbabwe, which could predictably be ushered in with a Color Revolution. We’ve already witnessed how the country has been able to weather a tough economic situation, so the supposedly plausible grounds for a Color Revolution based on those factors aren’t sufficient to bring people to the streets. More than likely, it would be the passing of Robert Mugabe that would trigger the event. There’s also of course the strategic threat that Color Revolutions in Lesotho or Swaziland would have on South Africa, since they may lead to such destabilization, intense violence and uncontrollable refugee flows even, in those states that a military intervention might be forced upon Pretoria. Another risk that South Africa faces when it comes to Color Revolutions is if one broke out in Mozambique. The country has the potential to provide a lot of hydrocarbons to South Africa, so a change in leadership might compel a pro-American government to weaponize this in destabilizing its neighbor. Also, if engineered anti-migrant violence repeats in South Africa, then the counter-response in Mozambique might resemble a Color Revolution, where people agitate to press their government for a response, which might force it to use energy as a weapon as a form of ‘mob-inspired justice’, which in reality would be American-guided.
Last but not least, there’s Brazil. Externally, Mercosur is in a continental competition against the Pacific Alliance, a neo-liberal trading group largely aligned with American economic interests. I wrote last year about how the Alliance wants to poach Paraguay into its camp, but the greatest opportunity for this to happen is if Bolivia goes first. Evo Morales is very popular, but the US has played with the idea of an indigenous Color Revolution against him. If such a destabilization succeeds and the post-coup government takes the country away from its plans of Mercosur integration and into the Pacific Alliance, than more than likely Paraguay’s government would follow. This economic secessionism, if you will, could lead to the entire unravelling of the economic bloc and would dramatically harm Brazil’s interests. Peru, although it’s part of the Pacific Alliance, is susceptible to a Color Revolution hybrid war centered on indigenous rights. This is because the country is cooperating with Brazil and China in the Twin Ocean Railroad plan, which brings me to speak about Brazil’s domestic vulnerabilities. The ‘cashmere revolution’, as The Economic called it in October, tried to throw the elections against President Rousseff, and although it narrowly failed, it can always come back. In fact, the US could even energize it by assembling a loose anti-government coalition of indigenous people, environmentalists, and opposition members in going against the Twin Ocean Railroad. Importantly, the proposed path also cuts directly through territory that the opposition mostly won in the last election, so it’s a distinct possibility that must be considered.
To wrap everything up, I want to emphasize that the strategic-tactical application of Color Revolutions as a geopolitical tool of American foreign policy is largely the result of reverse engineering. They don’t always find a convenient social situation and exploit it because they’re capable of creating their own in certain areas where it would be most effective to have one break out. In preparing for a Color Revolution in your own country or region, some basic questions to ask yourselves are these:
1) The destabilization of, or regime change in, which of your neighbors would harm your country’s interests the most?
2) How can external non-state forces interfere in the relationship between your country and its neighbors?
3) How susceptible are you and your neighbors to Color Revolution scenarios and destabilizing political technologies, be they nationwide or in key regions?
4) and finally, what regional mechanisms can be harnessed to ensure social stability and actively prevent these scenarios? How do your country and its allies respond once these events are set in motion?
If you keep these considerations in mind, it’ll be easier to predict where and when a Color Revolution attempt could pop up, as well as brainstorm effective ways of responding to one in advance of the crisis itself. Also remember that there is a distinction between legitimate protests and Color Revolutions, but the US is dangerously blurring the line between the two in order to hide its strategic intent and gain a certain plausible deniability over its involvement. When foreign NGOs and internationally affiliated opposition members are involved, that’s usually a red flag, as well as statements in support of the movement from the US State Department or local American embassy. If a protest seems to support American strategic interests, more often than not, it actually does, and the US has some kind of direct or indirect role in bringing it about, even if 9 out of 10 of the participants don’t realize this. Always be alert, and if you keep in mind that the US has weaponized Color Revolutions and engineers them for geopolitical purposes, then you’ll be more fully prepared to counter this new type of weapon.
Thank you for this interesting synopsis. Colour revolutions are the constant tool the US uses to destabilise countries all over the world and the BRICS are going to be targeted even more as the US economy collapses and they try hard to hang on as the hegemon.
Something to keep an eye on is some sort of youth independence movement in Taiwan. From the MSM it appears NGOs are pushing an independence movement.
Although China is willing to wait a long time for peaceful reunification, they will not tolerate Taiwan declaring independence.
Having China resort to taking over Taiwan by force would be the ultimate for US bad China propaganda.
If China attacks Taiwan it is the aggressor – no matter what happened before.
Please don’t mention China’s red lines. They have more red lines than inhabitants. Yet China seems not afraid to cross the red lines of other countries – as we see now in the South Chinese Sea.
Yeh, coz the U.S has a great claim to waters thousands of miles from its shores…
Or are you on about Vietnam, didn’t the U.S. bomb the shit out of them 40 years ago?
Or maybe Japan, didn’t the U.S. drop nuclear bombs on them?
Or maybe your on about the Philipines, aren’t people protesting there recently about U.S. bases on their soil?
“U.S. go home” seems to be the view of most Asian people.
U.S. = Exceptional people…don’t make me laugh.
Wim, Taiwan is part of China, sundered by the USA in 1949, then the venue for the creation of a compradore regime. Any attempt to remove it from China permanently is a casus belli for China, and justly so. And the South and East China Seas are China’s contiguous waters, not those of Uncle Satan or any other interfering Western supremacists. China, you might have noticed, is the country with the most bordering neighbours. China has resolved all border disputes with thirteen out of fourteen, with only India left, and Xi and Modi have pledged to resolve that. China would also resolve its disputes over the China Seas if left alone, but Uncle Satan, the greatest force for evil in history, is malevolently interfering, aided by Abe, the hereditary fascist boss of the one-party sham democracy, Japan, and the hereditary oligarch, Aquino, of the Philippines, whose grandfather was a major collaborator with the Japanese occupiers during WW2. The USA always picks the most loathsome creatures as stooges.
China, for the first time, had a public showing of live fire anti-terror exercises in the hillside terrain of Hong Kong, this past week. They used helicopter gunships, missiles and ground troops with machine guns and rockets.
Pretty stiff message to the Umbrella students and the US consulate.
Xinjiang is massively under PLA presence. Tibet is very placid.
Taiwan, as I’ve indicated before, really concerns me. I think, strategically, the US could easily destabilize the Straits, the South China Sea, the East China Sea, the Hong Kong-Shengzhen metropolitan zone for decades if it put Marines and missiles on Taiwan.
Why would not the neo-cons do this? They would set back China by decades by humiliating it, tempting a massive PLA invasion of Taiwan.
And the US Navy would drool over bringing its domination to bear in protection of fellow American troops as well as the “freedom loving” Taiwanese.
It would ignite the oldest symbol of anti-Communism, Taiwan and be the excuse to arm the Taiwanese to the teeth.
China has no real answer for such a move except an enormous war.
The CIA has long had basing in Taichung CCK air base/airport, since early Vietnam days.
The ROC military has deep US military coordination.
The KMT political party, corrupt and discredited and voted out, cannot exert counter pressure locally or nationally.
So, all signs are positive for such a calamitous destabilization.
It will make Ukraine look like kindergarten playtime.
Expect a real return to a Pacific war drama. Memories of naval glory, MIC for ship builders would easily get new budget space, CIA and State Department careers would expand, and the Hegemon would rule the Asia Pacific again.
Taiwan is the great danger to China and the Eurasian dream. The Silk Road Belt and Road Initiative would be stunted. The Maritime Silk Road would stop dead. The ASEAN nations would be vassalized like European colonies are.
Larch, saw some of the HK PLA show, but you’re feeding my greatest fears re TW. I spend a lot of time there and was planning to spend lots more. There’s something in the air now that upsets one’s equilibrium.
TW’s political class has been weak since CKS, and even more corrupt. I seriously doubt they’d have any idea how to deal with a ClrRev, and they might even be complicit.
China would issue a Cuba style ultimatum, and then all out war if that failed. TW is a big fat red line for China, and they can bring an awful lot more fire power to bear than any combination the US can put together. Okinawa may see fireworks even before TW.
Not sure the NeoCons would survive the sinking of the 7th Fleet.
All in all, disconcerting. Thanks :-)
Q; And the US Navy would drool over bringing its domination to bear in protection of fellow American troops as well as the “freedom loving” Taiwanese.
R: Are those the same armed forces that ‘won’ and dominated the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?
China builds island in the SCS – unca Sammy does nothing
China puts an oil rig up Vietnam’s ass – unca Sammy does nothing
China sails a submarine through the US fleet – unca Sammy does nothing
All I see is a ‘dance macabre.’ A weird vaudeville about yanks wanting to fight the Americans of Asia… with words.
News @ 11
many a true saying is said in jests so when GEORGE CARLIN bless him said when America goes to war they only kill brown people with the exception of GERMANY, but I would say not only kill brown people but to get them to kill each other, certainly it would seem so with all the conflicts that are going on around the world. so what is really holding AMERICA,BRITAIN and ISRAEL back from making peace, is it the MASONIC ORDER the ROTHSCHILDS or the VATICAN who’s ancient name is VATICANUS which really means DWELLING OF DEAMONS, or is it all of the real elite that we call the dark cabal, that manipulate us and move us around like they are the dung beetles and we are the dung.
It’s all of those three (who have actually been one since quite a while, all intertwined and inbred). No need for random caps there though ;)
They kill all peoples regardless of color or nationality or faith, see Yugoslavia or now Ukraine for most recent examples. Or WW2 in Europe, or WW1…
That with Vaticanus could be true, it used to be quite a mixed pagan graveyard from what I recall.
They themselves say the following in their PR:
“This territory was called ‘Ager Vaticanus’ and was farmed since the early period. According to Cicero though, it was considered very poor land, and apparently the wine that came from it was greatly disparaged! The area was not surrounded by the city walls, therefore it was considered part of Rome’s suburbs. As the centuries went by, it was occupied by private villas which were gradually acquired by various emperors, together with funeral monuments, mausoleums, small tombs as well as altars to pagan gods of all kinds of polytheistic religions.
In the year 40 AD, Emperor Caligula (see post most evil Roman Emperor?), on the left side of the hill, started construction of a circus which, later, was completed by Nero, his nephew. The Circus Gaii et Neronis, as it was officially called, was known commonly as the Circus of Nero. The Vatican obelisk, today standing at the centre of St. Peter Square, was originally taken by Caligula from Heliopolis, Egypt, to decorate the spina of his circus. In Nero’s time, this area became the site of martyrdom of many Christians after the great fire of Rome, which occurred in 64 AD. According to an ancient tradition, it was in this circus that Saint Peter was crucified upside down.
Let’s look at the etymology of the name ‘Vaticanus’. Varro, in the I century BC, believed that ‘Vaticanus’ came from the name of a god, Deus Vaticanus, protector of the lands, inspirer of prophetic powers (hence ‘vaticinium’= prophecy). Originally, this word probably derived from the Etruscan name of a pre-Roman settlement on the hill, which must have been ‘Vatica’, or ‘Vaticum’, of which all trace is lost.
By looking at the history of this hill, we cannot fail to notice the fact that since the early days of Rome it has been a place connected with the divine in all its aspects: the god Vaticanus, the emperors, who considered themselves as living gods, and later the Christian martyrs such as Saint Peter witnessing to the One True God.”
Although even Wiki confirms what I remember, oh wonders:
“St. Peter’s Basilica, the church of the Vatican, is traditionally located at the burial place of Simon Peter, and most scholars parties agree that the basilica was built on top of a large necropolis on the Vatican Hill. In 1939, an excavation underneath the grottoes which lie directly under the current Basilica, uncovered several surviving Roman mausoleums from the necropolis, and in the area directly under the high altar, below the grottoes, the excavators found a structure resembling a temple that they named the aedicula (meaning little temple).”
The West would have a very tough time creating a color revolution if not for the corrupt desire for Western money by most countries, particularly with NGOs. And a color revolution would have a tough time turning into a coup if not for the West buying the allegiance of key personnel, such as the chief of internal security. And, of course, the media inside a country play a key role.
So the key thing is to not want Western money.
The other question is why Russia and China almost always take a passive policy against its opponents. Is there no alternative to this? As it stands, the West has no reason to stop.
I know of only one way to make color revolutions more expensive for the US, and to make Western money less attractive to its fellow-travellers, and to make people less corruptible.
If the IMF/Fed system were terminated, allowing every country to manage its own money supply an outpouring of wealth & progress would result– just like the “German economic miracle”. It would end the ability of the US & EU to create disproportionate currency and credit. It would end the constant hankering after “something to export” in order to earn dollars– dollars that permit the printing of local currency. It would allow a rational assignment of resources. It would make sanctions impossible.
Without the US’s unlimited creation of currency & credit– possible only due to the IMF/Fed system– it would soon be no more powerful than other countries.
Here in Brasil, a destabelazing campaing agaist the elected goverment is in full swing. The Media, specialy Globo TV- a US 5th collumn- teamed with escores of officials from Judiciary Power, including Supreme Court ( Supremo Tribunal Fedreal-STF) members. The Oposition, guided by its main Party, PSDB and TV Globo, are openlly calling to topple de government, upon corruption allegations against de Party in power, PT ( Partido dos Trabalhadores- worker’s party). Although, there is corruption, the Media turns it over the President herself, using allegations from convicted men. There is no proofs, the evidences point to another directions, the statements from these people in jail has no consistence, it referes also to cases not investigated or shown in the News when PSDB was in power, but the narrative on TV is a monopoly of the PSDB.
And although it hurts, the truth is that the general public here, in Brasil is extremaly uneducated and sees everything that comes from TV as a Divine Truth.
PSDB Party is openlly pro-US and is calling to terminate all comercial deals whith China in oil exploration anr trans fer it to american companies, to finnish Mercosul and total State assets privatization, and, upon all, move the country away from the BRICS.
In my opinion, the next Grecce will be here. My hope is that we not become another Ukraine. That is what the Oposition and its patron wants.
Julio, the USA has a willing Fifth Column inside every country. The greedy, unprincipled, treacherous and opportunistic-in other words, the scum. In Latin America these are the upper classes, the parasites, exploiters and thugs, educated in the USA, with their loot invested in US Treasuries and Manhattan real estate. Moreover there is, nowadays, the horror of US Pentecostalist Protestant ‘churches’, preaching reaction and subservience to the USA. And, of course, behind the scenes until required, are the military fascists, trained, indoctrinated and armed by the USA. I think Brazil will fall, alas, but fingers crossed. The PT needs to fight, but seem to lack the stomach. Undoubtedly the party would be riddled with US ‘assets’, ever ready to sell out their colleagues-that’s a type the US loves dealing with.
As speaking color revolutions I dont comment now Latin america but Eurasian sphere which has got much greater attention in discussion before, as these things I have wanted to bring up already for a long time.
This is important issue how USA is doing subversive work, like using 5 billion dollars in Ukraine into it. This is important to analyse. But greater question what has not been basically discussed in this kind of strategic blogosphere at all is that, how Russia which has pumped like hundreds of billions at least as much in same country in form of various subsidies happens to loose it with such a great ease, and so many other countries which were part of Czar and Soviet empires before to another country from other continent. Russian foreign political incompetency should be seen as much greater reason than American subversion on Ukraine style developments that have been repeated itself in so many countries. But still analyses from this viewpoint are almost non-existant.
I find greatest weakness of this type of media and analyses that this most important issue is such a taboo, that USA can so easily grab countries away from Russian periphery with such a small money after all, which would naturally and economically belong to that connection. If analyzed over and over here, it could give important ideas about why things like that happen to Russian decision making authorities which I think their patriotism blindens them to understand why these political processes happen and therefore are incompentent to prevent them elsewhere than in Russia itself with strong discipline measures.
Problem is that, while Putin seems rather smart with his visionary ‘economical community to from Lisbon to Vladivostok’ and Eurasian union projects, but majority of lower level officials seem to repeat same old things learned in KGB academy as purposed to keep own people, dissidents and minority ethnities in line, which work very very badly when applied to foreign policy to external smaller countries that have been traumatized by Soviet thing. And it also plays just in CIA hands who want to paint such picture of Russia in order to pull any country of its periphery out of it. As saker have in his most important articles described typical Kremlin political zigzagging and internal fight of eurasian souvereignists and atlantic integrationists as weak point of Russia. I see very much zigzagging and internal fight of ‘eurasianist diplomatic expansionist’ which line Putin seems to go now and ‘securocrat isolationists’ which seem to constitute most of lower level political authorities repeating soviet and securo-agency worldviews and representing psyche well described by Kennan which can so easily be used for US goal of containing Russia with minimal provocation only. And no doubt that Americans can use this oppurtunity maximally and synchronized work of both parties reviwing soviet style political imagery or Russia creats engine to any color revolution in its soviet-traumatized periphery- or like Lukashenka style moves towards west without any revolution.
I learned to understand a bit over last fewq years, as living neighbour country of Russia, which would greatly benefit if connection to eastward would be expanded. Interestingly atlantic side which naturally struggles to prevent this development European wide seem to work very little, while Russian political incompetency (I dont mean Putin but lower level authorities of securo-political system) seems to be enough to prevent this process by advancing. Reason is simply that those eurasianist expansionist thoughts which would be need of hour are something very new and immature, but soviet inheritance (which evokes disgust in every abroad country that remembers it) is still strong underneath and any kind of diplomatic soft power is unkown to it – only bullying with power or bribing with gas subsidy or such. Some persons I have discussed say that situation in Russian foreign policy towards smaller neighbour countries is more schitzophrenic than soviet era as eurasianist merging is goal and simultanoesly any inevitable foreing influence is automatically seen as greatest security threat. In soviet era there was at least a powerful friendship policies and programs, and certain degree of soft power via left-wing political organisations and general sense that system was more self-aware and coherent in its foreign policy. Now situation is very mixed up, and USA seems to use methods of creating color revolution threat only to push siloviki fraction securocrat isolationist to rule the system as an answer so then Russia will contain itself. This not last days analysis, but general trend I observed over time span of longer period. If there was more analysis on this phenomena, mayby some smarter parties in Russia would get idea on problem and start to think how to find way out.
And what it comes to me, living in European country near Russia, would hope Eurasian integration to come true and western influnce using Europe as tool only to stay out. Especially opposed to any integration of post-soviet impoverished and overtly corrupt countries towards Europe as they would need loads of money what Europe dont have, and their peoples hopes to get corruption away that serves as engine of color revolutions leads to false hope as that can be only solved by their people not any external integration. Therefore I hate many Russian politicians who with their actions passively push most of countries of their periphery to Europe with bad consequences. And especially hoping more analysis on this primary important phenomena for to help improving understanding of Russian political people too.
Anonymous, I know your pain all too well. It spoils my sleep.
Great post. Whew!
ian fleming’s law of probability…
once is accident, twice is coincidence, thrice……enemy action !!
the assault on malaysia will continue until kl bends to washington’s dictat.
failed regime change by washington’s man anwar
flash flood ?
earthquake sabah ?
Malaysia Airlines’ woes continue: MH148 makes emergency landing in Melbourne
wsj *exposed* pm najib’s *massive corruption*
opposition demands *internatonal investigation* !
It’s not like any of this is new. Look at Chile in 1973. The coup didn’t come out of nowhere–the US orchestrated an economic war with “color revolution” style managed unrest based on the economic troubles they had caused. Only once the country was seriously destabilized did they bring in the military to “restore order”.
I would suggest that if you’re going to buck the Empire, you’d better make sure that your government is broad based and your policies provide real benefits to the majority. It’s not a sufficient condition for resisting the attack that’s coming, but it will certainly help.
While all the countries mentioned are at danger.I think from the “Empire’s perspective” the greatest risk for the World is Brazil.The US has over a 100 years of infiltration in Latin America.They have “Westerized/Americanized” the mass of the elite almost totally throughout Latin America.They have longstanding co-option of the military and business elite from one end to the other of the region.They have the same influence there that they “claim” Russia has in the ex-Soviet elites in the old USSR.While in particular I’m not well versed in the “fine print” of their dealings with Brazil,I am with Cuba, Mexico,and Chile.And the US is very predictable,if something works they stick with it (and if it doesn’t they double-down on it,listen up Russia).
Cuba has been their greatest defeat in Latin America (and they have “never” forgiven that,and never will),the one “slave” that got away.It shouldn’t have been that way from their thinking.Cuba is 90 miles from the US.They owned almost the entire economy in Cuba.Certainly the export economy.But also much of the internal economy.The elite was (in the main) more ” culturally Americanized” than any other in Latin America.So why the “perfect storm” in Cuba.And what lessons can possibly be learned from it?
While Cuba was officially more “white” than most of Latin America.The large non-white minorities,along with most Cuban whites weren’t greatly divided by race.There was (is) a “Cubanismo” feeling among the population.Many of the whites were also fairly recent immigrants (within a 100 year period) mostly from Spain.A Spain that at that time was still reeling from the humiliation of the so-called Spanish-American War.And anti-US feeling was just below the surface.While much of the elite was “culturally” Americanized (cars,clothes,TV,radio,newspapers,education).Another part of them was “Hispanidad”,and the young were badly split.Its not an accident that most of the Cuban Revolutionary leaders are from middle or upper class origins (and from the white Spanish descended ).The Castro brothers father was a very rich ex-Spanish soldier who stayed in Cuba after the war.He was from a peasant background who grew rich working with US economic interests after the war. During what was known as the “dance of the millions”.But even with that,personally he despised the US, and North Americans, for Spain’s humiliation during the war.You could repeat that story throughout much of the Cuban elite of the era.
I won’t go into the direct causes of the Revolution or the fighting.But skip to the aftermath,and the split with the US.
After supporting the dictator Batista for years (weapons,training ,cash,sound familiar,cough…cough…Ukraine).When it looked like Batista was going to be totally defeated the US looked to switch sides (in a manner).To put in either a military government acceptable to the rebels (claiming it was a coup against Batista for freedom).Or failing that getting some of the “acceptable” political elite to take over and “reestablish democracy”.Saying “thank you rebels,good boy,now run along home we got this from now on”,but they failed.The Rebels refused to accept either offer.And Castro led a processional march to Habana.While pro-Rebels in Habana seized power and disarmed the troops.They appointed the lest objectionable of the more neutral forces as a new government.And started to plan elections.But the US wasn’t defeated by a “long shot”.The Rebels tried to deal with the US (shades of Tsipras maybe) and get aid to rebuild the damaged economy.As well as correct the imbalance of a US dominated capitalist system.But that was far more than the US would allow.They refused the aid,but it “just” so happened the USSR jumped in and promised the aid.As well as good trade relations.The US went insane with rage at that.They cut Cuban’s biggest export and import market off (themselves) almost overnight.Driving Cuba even closer to the USSR.From the US standpoint,how could this small nation.That imported almost “everything” from the US.And exported mostly to the US “dare defy them”.A few months of turning the screws and the Rebels would collapse.
They didn’t count on the “patriotism” of the majority of the Cuban people (sounds familiar again,Russia).While there were thousands,and hundreds of thousands even.That couldn’t stand the weight from defying the “Empire”.Most of Cuba’s people did.The US used everything you can think of in the way of vile dirty tricks to destroy Cuba.They encouraged terrorism.they bombed ships,factories,and other buildings.They sent saboteurs to poison livestock and destroy crops in the fields.They spread crop diseases to destroy whole harvests.They slipped agents into ships in foreign ports to sabotage industrial equipment bound for Cuba.And used their foreign stooges to hold up ships with food goods while the food spoiled in the holes.They plotted and carried out murders of Cuban political leaders.As well as tried to kill Fidel himself around 40 or more times.They armed,trained,and funded “free Cuban armies” made up of pro-US exiles most of them ex-Batista fighters to invade Cuba.They forced their stooges around the World to eliminate or vastly limit their trade with Cuba over the years.They forced those same foreign stooges to slap crippling financial restrictions on Cuba.And worst of all they encouraged the Cuban people to leave Cuba,especially the middle classes.Their idea was,if all the technical experts left Cuba the nation would fall apart.That worked with quite a few of the “more Americanized” elements.Those with jobs connected to the US in particular.But what they failed to understand was,most Cubans loved Cuba.It was their homeland.And between those people.And the aid in technical help from the “Eastern Bloc” Cuba survived that. But what those constant attacks did was instill a stern backbone in the Cuban government.They mobilized the populous,arrested their 5th column that they knew about.And kept constant “vigilance” for the Empire’s plots and internal traitors.It worked,and until today all attempts at “color revolutions” have failed.Every plot to destroy Cuba and return her to slave status has failed so far.So now the US is trying a new tactic.Whether it will succeed,is too early to tell.I hope not,and doubt it.But I don’t know.I think it has a lot to do with, if Russia and China will become proactive with helping Cuba stay free from the Empire.It actually benefits them to have an example of an “escaped slave” to show Latin Americans.But I’ve seen those two go against their own true interests in the past.So I can’t say about today.
What is true for Cuba though is also true for Brazil (and the whole World).Only “constant vigilance”,mobilizing your patriotic population.And dealing sternly with 5th column traitors will save you.Cuba is the ultimate example of the failure of the Empire’s color revolution strategy.And as such needs to be studied for what to do (and maybe do better,since they were the first to learn from).If they can defeat the Empire for 56 years (so far) so can others.
The US has over a 100 years of infiltration in Latin America. …
I was intended to write something like that but you beat me to it, Bob, and in good style too.
The only thing that may be added is that Latin America was the laboratory where dolour revolutions tactics were perfected if not even conceived US.
Good expose, the mechanics of colour revolutions well detailed and explained, thanks Andrew.
Now it would be interesting and useful to work out counter-strategies to neutralise and nullify colour revs. Surely there are some examples of that being done in South America and EuroAsia.
Beyond Color Revolution.
Don’t know why this made me angry all over again:
The Pentagon announced Monday that it has begun paying “moderate” Syrian rebels up to $400 per month to fight ISIS and eventually the Syrian government.
The program, deemed “critical” by Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter, aims to equip as many as 5,400 fighters within the next 12 months, reports USA Today.
According to Pentagon spokeswoman Elissa Smith, roughly 6,000 Syrians have already expressed interest in the program, with more than half preparing to be vetted.
The program has reportedly taken months to move forward due to a lack of fighters willing to “adhere to laws of war and pledge to conduct themselves properly.” [Yes, sure, Saint America]
hi Andrew ! as always, I’m going to print this as I get more out of your articles by reading them carefully. But I’m looking forward to reading it !! Thanks.
more nasty surprises coming up for china, courtesy of the unitedsnake.
Here in Venezuela we’ve beaten several of them, the last one last year (2014). But we also did that in 2009, 2007, 2004 and (one of many) coup d’ etat back in 2002. Think about that.
I believe Vietnam is ripe.
Bill Clinton in a session with students stated that America is always willing to support democracy. But the Vietbamese have to start. They have. The energy super high. I am expecting the death toll of police due to civilian retaliation will start this year 2015. It is like the stand off waiting for a fire cracker to go off.
I don’t belive the Vietbamese communist party are aware or prepared for the color revolution
The way to defeat the Euro-Americans is very simple: Give America and Europe a taste of their OWN MEDICINE.
America is nothing more than the bastard spawn of Europe, a White Euroepan colonizer empire that is based on the the aggresssive colonization and occupation of Native Indian, Mexican, and Hawiian lands.
As such, there are many independence movements agianst Euro-American domination that other nations could support like the Hawaiian independence movement, the return of Aztlan (aka the “American” southwest and California) back to Mexico, or Native Indian sovereignty.
Then, there are the rebellions of Black people against White racism and power, like the rebellions in Ferguson, MO and Baltimore.
These are the 1000 pound gorillla issues that Euro-Americans don’t want anybody to noice.
Give the Euro-Americans a taste of their own “Color Revolution” medicine and they will squeal and cry like the hypocritical, two-faced White supremacists, which they are.
was chavez murdered by a cia mole ?
From Dictatorship to Democracy, A Conceptual Framework for Liberation is a book-length essay on the generic problem of how protest movement to destroy a sitting government and to prevent the rise of a new one. The book was written in 1993 by Gene Sharp (b. 1928), a professor of political science at the University of Massachusetts. The book has been published in many countries worldwide and translated into more than 30 languages.
Umbrella Movement in Hong Kong = NED Color Revolution
NED Programs in Hong Kong: http://nedprogramsinhk.blogspot.com/
NED Hong Kong Commentary: http://nedhkcommentary.blogspot.com/
NED Activities in China (grants): http://nedactivitiesinchina.blogspot.com/