I'm no conspiracy theorist, but I've learned over the years that the machinations of great powers -- be they governments, corporations, or other groups -- are not always conspicuous. They are discernible, but only if you know how to read the signs and decode the rhetoric.
For example: One of the major keys to understanding the Iraq War was a little-noticed reference by George W. Bush, just days after his "Mission Accomplished" speech three years ago, to a "U.S.-Middle East free trade zone".
Sounds benevolent, doesn't it? But Bush called on Yegor Gaidar, the man who privatized Russia into the hands of the oligarchs, to help with this project. It's not hard to figure out that the real goal is to open up formerly socialist Iraq for pillaging by American capital.
Today I read another story in which benevolent-sounding rhetoric about "development" and "progress" cloaks another agenda. This time, the hot topic of illegal immigration is used as a front for something completely unrelated:
Ex-Clinton aide calls for Mexico Marshall plan
By Bernie Woodall
LA JOLLA, California (Reuters) - The United States could reduce illegal immigration from Mexico by helping its neighbor develop its vast oil resources, the former chief of staff for President Bill Clinton told an industry conference on Wednesday.
Thomas McLarty said the United States should partner with Mexico, and to a lesser degree with Canada, in a "Marshall Plan" effort -- named for the U.S. aid offensive for a ravaged Europe after World War Two -- that could inspire Mexico's work force to remain at home.
A Marshall Plan for Mexico! Proposed by "Mack" McLarty, a former aide to good old Bill "I Feel Your Pain" Clinton. What could be warmer and fuzzier than that? Help Mexicans help themselves, and reduce illegal immigration too. Everybody's happy.
Wait, what was that about oil?
Mexico's energy minister, Fernando Canales, on Tuesday at the same conference said Mexico will continue to have difficulty developing its energy infrastructure as long as international private investment is outlawed. Mexico's constitution calls for all energy sources and development to be controlled by the national monopoly, PEMEX.
The United States needs to make nuanced efforts to help open Mexican energy development to outsiders, McLarty said.
Ahhhhhhh. Now it starts to become a little clearer.
This has nothing at all to do with immigration. It's certainly not about helping the Mexican people. It's about letting American capital, and American oil companies, take over a petrochemical system currently owned by the Mexican people. How does that help them, exactly?
Undoubtedly, McLarty's proposal is inspired by two men: Hugo Chavez and Evo Morales. Venezuelan president Chavez continues to assert that his country's oil industry should be operated for the benefit of all Venezuelans. And Morales, the new president of Bolivia, just nationalized that country's petroleum assets (undoing a decade-old privatization that has left many Bolivians feeling cheated out of the benefits of their own natural resources).
[ADDENDUM: Ecuador's president Alfredo Palacio also belongs on that list. On Tuesday he sent army troops to seize facilities belonging to U.S.-based Occidental Petroleum, which has been locked in a long-running dispute with the Ecuadorian government over royalty payments. And what was the immediate consequence? "The Bush administration responded to the measure by breaking off negotiations on a free trade agreement with Ecuador."]
And why is McLarty the one floating this particular proposal?
McLarty is now president of Kissinger McLarty Associates, a consulting firm that includes former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. He is also senior adviser to the Carlyle Group.
That's all we need to know. He may be an ex-Clintonian, but he's most assuredly part and parcel of what I call the Oil Party -- that faction which, since the time of the Rockefellers and the formation of our government's fateful alliance with the House of Saud, has championed the cause of American petroleum interests. The Oil Party (like the War Party that backed military involvement in both Kosovo and Iraq) transcends political parties.
In fact, it's frequently easier for factions like this to achieve their aims if their proposals are endorsed by someone who doesn't seem to be one of "the usual suspects". If Dick Cheney called for opening up Mexican oil fields to ExxonMobil and ChevronTexaco, it'd be too obvious. Better to give the task to a old Clinton hand, and have him sell the idea as a "Marshall Plan for Mexico" and a salve for immigration woes.
With Latin American oil supplies increasingly locked away from U.S. companies (but not U.S. consumers -- we can still buy the oil at fair market prices, it's just that the profits stay in the countries where the oil is produced), and Iraq's devastated oil industry still not delivering the miraculous output promised before the war was launched, the Oil Party figures maybe they can squeeze some more of the black stuff out of our immediate neighbor to the south.
Vicente Fox's friendship with Bush may have cooled, but he's still much more of a right-leaning free marketeer than Chavez or Morales. And during Clinton's term, the Mexicans signed on to NAFTA, another project for the benefit of big capital dressed up in the rhetoric of "freedom". Maybe they can be persuaded to roll over again. That Mexican energy minister certainly sound eager to help. Maybe he's got a job at the Carlyle Group lined up too, if this all works out.
Keep an eye on this story. (And please recommend, if you think more people should read this.)
More commentary at The Subversive Intellectual Society
