The LaRouchites as Anti-Interventionists
Previous | TOC | Print | Next
During the late 1980's the LaRouchites covertly sought to expand their
contacts with the left and attempted to link up with progressive groups
over issues such as anti-interventionism, covert action, government domestic
repression, civil liberties and Third World debt. Many progressive researchers
report that during this period they began to receive telephone calls
from LaRouchian operatives suggesting joint work or offering documents
or story ideas.
Progressive activists also were targeted. For instance, LaRouche organizers
involved themselves in an international anti-interventionist conference
held in Panama, and have worked behind the scenes around the issue of
U.S. involvement in Panamanian affairs ever since. Although conference
organizers say they tried to isolate the LaRouchians at the conference,
there is little doubt that the LaRouchians managed to leave the impression
with some activists that they were a key component in the alliance against
U.S. intervention in Panama.
Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark has become a vocal opponent
of U.S. intervention and was a major critic of the U.S. invasion of Panama.
Clark has regularly worked in the same anti-intervention projects as
the LaRouchians, where their presence would have been difficult not to
notice. While there is no evidence (or even a reasonable suspicion) that
Clark willingly works with the LaRouchians or shares any of their bigoted
views, it is clear the LaRouchians delight in implying that just such
a relationship exists between themselves and Clark, especially since
Clark agreed to represent the LaRouchians in filing legal appeals flowing
out of a series of federal criminal convictions of LaRouchian fundraisers
and LaRouche himself.
The ability of the LaRouchites to inject themselves into mainstream
debate around the issue of Panama is astonishing. For instance, at the
April, 1991 conference of the Latin American Studies Association in Washington,
D.C., a panel on Panama included LaRouchian expert Carlos Wesley. Wesley
was not the first choice. Two panelists from Panama who were originally
scheduled to appear did not receive funding to attend the conference,
so panel co-coordinator Donald Bray from California State University
in Los Angeles then called a person he respected as an expert on Panama
for advice on a last minute replacement. "I called Carlos Russell,
a Panamanian who now teaches in the U.S., and who was a former Ambassador
to the OAS for a former Panamanian government," explains Bray. "He
said `you are not going to believe this, but I am going to recommend
a LaRouchite, Carlos Wesley.'" A slightly bemused Bray says he knew
Wesley from long ago and knew he was a reporter for LaRouche's Executive
Intelligence Review. Still, this was a recommendation from a credible
Panamanian source so with some misgivings Bray scheduled Wesley as a
panelist.
Wesley was identified as a correspondent for Executive Intelligence
Review (EIR) but, according to author Holly Sklar, who attended
the session, many in the audience were not aware that EIR was
a LaRouche publication. "Of course if we had identified him as
a LaRouchian, nobody would have paid any attention to what he said," explained
Bray.
The ties between LaRouche and Panama go back several years to when LaRouche
intelligence collectors began trading tidbits of information with Panamanian
leader Manuel Noriega. Following Noriega's indictment for conspiracy
in drug deals, journalist William Branigin, writing in the Washington
Post of June 18, 1988, noted that among Noriega's few supporters
in the United States was "political extremist Lyndon H. LaRouche
Jr., who has praised the general as a leader in the war on drugs."
According to a January, 1990 Associated Press report, LaRouche
sent Noriega a cable after his indictment, telling the dictator "I
extend to you my apologies for what the government of the United States
is doing to the Republic of Panama." LaRouche told Noriega "I
reiterate to you what I have stated publicly. That the Reagan administration
current policies towards Panama are absolutely an offense to your nation
and all of Latin America." This type of rhetoric shows how the LaRouchians
can adopt a critique of U.S. foreign policy ostensibly similar to that
of the left, while weaving in an apologia converting a drug-running
dictator into a drug-fighting humanitarian. LaRouche also has high praise
for other dictators, including the late Ferdinand Marcos. The LaRouchians
claim Marcos actually won his last election.
Another example of ideological cross-fertilization involves Cecilio
Simon, a Panamanian who is an administrator at the University of Panama.
Simon spoke along with Ramsey Clark and others at the April 6, 1990 "Voices
from Panama "forum held at New York City's Town Hall auditorium.
Simon later spoke at the LaRouchian "Fifth International Martin
Luther King Tribunal of the Schiller Institute," on June 2, 1990
in Silver Spring, Maryland. These incidents demonstrate how the LaRouchians
continue to insert themselves into anti-interventionist work and gain
credibility on the left.
Previous | TOC | Print | Next
|