He also told me that Chávez envisions an axis of power linking Brasilia, Montevideo and Buenos Aires. As it is, these populist governments aren't much for standing on principle and anything anti-Yanqui scores cheap domestic points; some may even aspire to Venezuelan-style authoritarianism. But it is also possible that cooperation with Chávez is part survival technique to ward off his use of bullying militants.
...[T]he revolution must necessarily "break the spine of democracy in the region. That is Colombia."
Colombians are specifically worried about three things. The first is Chávez's overt weapons buildup. War is not considered imminent. But there is a fear that the persistent threat from a hostile neighbor engaged aggressively in arms acquisition will take a toll politically and economically.
The second concern is Chávez support for the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and the smaller National Liberation Army (ELN). For years Castro has been giving their troops medical care in Cuba. But now Chávez is providing safe haven to them just across the Colombian border....
The third big worry that Colombians have about Venezuelan aggression is the likelihood that Chávez will try to interfere in the 2006 presidential elections. There is good reason to believe that Chávez will choose his Colombian protégé, fund him liberally, and should he "win," help him to consolidate power....
Castro's revolution is alive and active all over Latin America. Where he and his Venezuelan mini-me have not gained the upper hand, they have been successful in fueling violence and instability and discouraging development.
If Mr. Bolton felt, in recent years, that U.S. intelligence in the region was wanting and could end up costing U.S. interests, he was prescient....***
He first got in trouble with the regime in 1998 when he was working at a Havana hospital and he presented to authorities the results of a clandestine study he had done on the government’s use of the chemical substance Rivanol to abort advanced pregnancies. The practice is widespread in Cuba, including its common use among girls as young as 12, who during their government-mandated school time in the countryside without their parents, often become pregnant.
Dr. Biscet has written that the study proved “the murder of infants born alive, denied of medical assistance.” According to his report “the umbilical cord was cut and they were allowed to bleed to death or they were wrapped alive in paper and asphyxiated.” His opposition to these practices made him a counter revolutionary and qualified him for the corresponding government program: He was fired, lost his home and was set upon by mobs that beat him and harassed his family.
In December 2002, Dr. Biscet’s plan to create small groups meeting in private homes to promote human rights landed him in jail again and he received a 25-year sentence. The Web site www.free-biscet.org says that since his incarceration “he has staged protests against Cuba’s violation of human rights at the prison with acts of civil disobedience, such as fasting and holding prayer services.
“Consequently, he was punished by being locked up in solitary confinement for 42 days in an unlit cell.” Cuba’s notorious “punishment” cells have no windows, a hole in the floor for a toilet and measure only about three-feet wide. Yet despite such grim circumstances, Dr. Biscet send messages like this on: “My conscience and my spirit are well.”
Of course, Dr. Biscet’s real crime is that he is an Afro-Cuban who is neither grateful nor obedient to the regime and who answers to a higher power. Perhaps his worst transgression is his courage, which makes him a dangerous inspiration to the many Cubans that are now organizing in small groups.***