[R-G] U.S. Native Americans Lead Opposition to Designation of Venezuela as Terrorist Natio

[Anthony Fenton]

U.S. Native Americans Lead Opposition to Designation of Venezuela as  
Terrorist Nation
April 10th 2008, by Gale Courey Toensing - Indian Country Today
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/3341


INDIAN ISLAND, Maine - Members of the Penobscot Indian Nation are  
spearheading opposition to a congressional resolution that would  
designate Venezuela as a state sponsor of terrorism.

James Sappier, former Penobscot Indian Nation chief, and Erlene Paul,  
the head of Penobscot's Human Services Department, said House  
Resolution 1049 threatens not only a program in which the South  
American country has provided free heating oil to hundreds of American  
Indian and low-income communities for the past three winters, but  
would also jeopardize the good relationships tribal members have  
developed with Venezuelans and could impact oil imports for the entire  
U.S.

Sappier said he has alerted the tribes involved to contact their  
congressional representatives to vote against the resolution.

''It's the least we can do. Why would Congress do this? The program  
has provided a donation to the U.S. low-income and poor people of  
almost a billion dollars over the years when domestic oil companies  
did nothing.

''We're worried sick that we're going to lose the program because of  
this kind of frivolous attitude of some congressmen. But it wouldn't  
be just the tribes that would be affected; it would be everyone. If  
you think your oil prices are high now, imagine what they'd be if we  
stopped getting oil from Venezuela - that's 14 to 16 percent of our  
imports,'' Sappier said.

Venezuela provides the U.S. with about 1.4 million barrels of crude  
oil per day.

The resolution was introduced March 13 by Florida Republican Reps.  
Connie Mack and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. It asks the State Department to  
place Venezuela on a list of countries that provide support to  
terrorist organizations, a designation that would impose a number of  
sanctions on Venezuela and U.S. companies and individuals that do  
business there. Other countries on the list are North Korea, Iran,  
Syria, Cuba and Sudan.

Seven other Republicans representing Southern states co-sponsored the  
resolution.

The resolution puts forth a number of unsubstantiated allegations  
first published in a New York Times front-page story March 30 - and  
repeated in a number of mainstream media outlets since then - that  
claimed laptops captured from the Revolutionary Armed Forces of  
Colombia contain potentially ''smoking gun'' evidence tying  
Venezuela's government to the Colombian guerilla group. FARC, a self- 
proclaimed Marxist-Leninist group that formed in the 1960s to  
represent poor rural Colombia's against the wealthier classes, is  
designated a terrorist group by the U.S., Europe and Colombia.

The resolution is ''really a fabrication,'' Sappier said. ''One of the  
elements we've been interested in is that none of the states who are  
acting to sanction Venezuela participated in the heating oil program  
or got to know the Venezuelans. I don't know what their motivation is.''

Maine's Wabanaki tribes - the Penobscot, the Passamaquoddy, the  
Maliseet and the Micmac - were the first to enter into the heating oil  
agreement with Venezuela in 2005. Sappier was a co-signatory to the  
initial document and Paul administered the program for the entire state.

The program has since expanded to provide 100 million gallons a year  
of free heating oil to more than 200 tribes and Alaska Natives,  
homeless shelters and low-income families. The tribes received 25  
percent of the heating oil distributed.

Mack links placing Venezuela on the terrorist list with the passage of  
a free trade agreement with Colombia in a press release he issued  
March 13.

''Naming Venezuela a state sponsor of terrorism and passing the  
Colombia Free Trade Agreement in Congress will strengthen the  
stability of the Andean region and help in the effort to preserve  
freedom, security and prosperity for the Latin American people. I urge  
my colleagues to support this important resolution,'' Mack said.

The Bush administration signed the FTA with Colombia in November 2006,  
but it has yet to be approved by Congress and the Senate. Some  
legislators oppose the FTA because of Colombia's horrific record under  
President Alvaro Uribe's regime of human rights violations that have  
been verified by a U.N.-sponsored mission and other human rights  
agencies. Uribe is strongly supported by the Bush administration.

Mack has gained a reputation in Congress as one of Hugo Chavez's  
strongest critics, referring to the democratically elected Venezuelan  
president as ''a strongman.''

But the resolution goes beyond unsubstantiated allegations about  
Venezuela's involvement with FARC. It also condemns Chavez for his  
relationship with Iran, quoting a U.S. Annual Threat Assessment report  
of Venezuela's ''expressed willingness to cooperate with [Iran] on  
nuclear energy.''

The quote was ''cherry-picked,'' the Venezuelan government said in a  
detailed response to the allegations at www.embavenez-us.org, and  
excluded investigators' statement that they ''are not aware of any  
significant developments as a result of these discussions.''

''It is worth stating that though no significant developments on  
nuclear energy have been produced, every country has the sovereign  
right to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes,'' the embassy  
said.

Mack also cited as evidence of Venezuela's worthiness to be on the  
terrorist list its agreements with Iran on military cooperation,  
shared intelligence, financial cooperation, civilian airline flights,  
and ''initiating cultural exchanges.''

Presented with some of the objections to the resolution, Mack issued  
the following statement to Indian Country Today: ''There is no doubt  
that Hugo Chavez supports the FARC, an internationally-recognized  
terrorist organization, with money, resources, and safe passage within  
his country's borders. Chavez is a clear and present danger to all  
those who cherish peace, freedom and security. Should the  
Administration put Venezuela in its rightful place as a state sponsor  
of terror, we would hope others would step in and provide this type of  
[oil] assistance to those who need it. But that is why I urged  
President Bush in a letter dated March 6 to have proactive policies in  
place to protect our national security interest and increase the  
Strategic Petroleum Reserve.''

Venezuelan ambassador: Terrorist resolution has 'no basis in reality'

An interview with His Excellency Bernardo Alvarez Herrera, Embassy of  
the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, on House Resolution 1049.

Indian Country Today: It's hard to imagine anyone really believes  
Venezuela is a state sponsor of terrorism. What do you think is behind  
this resolution?

Bernardo Alvarez Herrera:This is not the first time there's been an  
effort to put Venezuela on the list of state sponsors of terrorism.  
It's always been a threat; sometimes it reflects the domestic policies  
of the U.S. and sometimes it expresses the degree of hostility which  
the administration has had with Venezuela over the years of the Bush  
administration. Basically, it's a way to undermine the process of  
change that's going on in Venezuela and also to contribute to this  
matrix in the public opinion that we have rogue countries, rogue  
states, in the hemisphere.

ICT: Congressman Connie Mack links naming Venezuela as a terrorist  
state to passing the free trade agreement with Colombia. How does the  
FTA come into play?

Alvarez: It's also not the first time they've done that. I remember  
when they were about to pass the FTA in Central America. There was a  
famous article by Donald Rumsfeld, who was Defense Secretary at that  
time, saying the only way to counteract President Chavez was to  
approve the FTA in Central America. It's always the same story - when  
there's no way of justifying things, you always appeal to the idea of  
''national interests.'' I think they've been trying even in Congress  
to use that argument, telling people if you oppose the FTA you're  
sitting with the terrorists.

I want to make something very clear. We don't have anything to do with  
trade agreements between the U.S. and Colombia or the U.S. and other  
governments in the hemisphere. We have our own view of how we should  
go. We have a definite scheme of integration, but you can do all the  
research you want and you will find nothing about Venezuela regarding  
the FTAs between Latin American countries and the U.S. This is not our  
business. This is the sovereign right of the countries, but it is  
being used here, and it's clear that for the Bush administration the  
approval of the Colombia FTA has been like an emblematic objective.

ICT: What does that mean?

Alvarez: There was a speech by President Bush recently where he  
suggested in a way that the way to counteract the ''threat'' of  
Venezuela, etc., is to approve the FTA with what he called ''the best  
U.S. ally in the hemisphere'' - which is Colombia.

But don't forget - one thing is the resolution in Congress to put  
Venezuela on the list; but the other thing is the executive decision.  
The U.S. administration has been saying they have a team of lawyers  
studying whether Venezuela should go on this list. This is a decision  
they will likely make in May.

ICT: Do you think the resolution will pass in Congress?

Alvarez: There are few people who really believe that Venezuela is a  
terrorist country. I don't think that's going to fly in Congress, but  
the administration does have their lawyers studying this executive  
decision.

The funny thing is trade between the U.S. and Venezuela has grown from  
$29 billion in 2004 to $50 billion in 2007. We're the second biggest  
trading partner to the U.S. in the hemisphere [after Canada]. We have  
an incredible commercial relationship - we have the heating oil  
program, we have 67 players in the major leagues, 15 flights daily  
from Florida to Caracas. It's amazing that [the resolution] is coming  
from [three representatives in] Florida.

ICT: Is it a partisan issue? They're all Republicans.

Alvarez: These people want to put together a more ideological  
neoconservative approach and it's basically the Cold War mentality. If  
you read the resolution, it's the same narrative from the Cold War  
with lots of contradictions.

ICT: What will happen if the resolution passes or there's an executive  
decision to place Venezuela on the terrorist list?

Alvarez: We are ready for everything. This is a decision of the U.S.  
government, the U.S. companies. I think they have to understand the  
consequences of such a decision. I think there will be unanimous  
rejection from the hemisphere. I think there will be incredible and  
very difficult economic effects. It would be bringing that to a  
hemisphere that has been moving toward peace, democracy and social  
change - because as you know, there is a very complex situation in the  
Andean countries - and that will have a reaction from all the  
countries in Latin America.

But it will be a legacy, because it's very easy to put a country on  
the terrorist list, but how easy is it to take it off? And it will be  
a legacy that will create a lot of problems for the U.S.

ICT: What problems?

Alvarez: I want to be clear: We are a country with dignity. We do what  
we think we should do. We have relationships with countries all over  
the world. We participate freely everywhere and no one is accusing us  
of anything except the U.S. government. We have made our positions and  
we're ready to work with the world.

So, we're not begging the U.S. not to do this to us. This is a problem  
of the U.S. We haven't done anything to harm that relationship. I  
think people in the U.S. should sit down and think about this and  
evaluate the consequences of this.

ICT: What would happen to U.S. oil imports from Venezuela?

Alvarez: I don't know, but do you think this is a time to play with  
that? Do you think we can keep the heating oil program for the  
indigenous people of the U.S. if the U.S. puts us on a terrorist list?  
Imagine; put yourself in the role of Venezuela. What are we going to  
do? We don't know yet, but of course something is going to change. You  
can take that for granted. Are Venezuelans going to sit down and say,  
''Sorry, U.S., we'll behave better in the future''? It's clear to  
everybody that this is a political decision. It has no basis in  
reality, none at all.