WHAT KILLED Nicolae Ceausescu

WHAT KILLED Nicolae Ceausescu

 

http://historum.com/european-history/58063-what-killed-nicolae-ceausescu.html

Google.com/translate
WHAT KILLED Nicolae Ceausescu
(Arthur Bagirov.)

In the 1970s and the first half of the 1980s, all the countries of the West, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the other multinational financial institutions strongly supported the head of Romania and his policies. Romania received preferential loans and credits, its products were given access to the markets of the West, to trade with all countries of the "Big Seven" mode it was "most favored nation". Such privileges had no country is a member of the Warsaw Pact and Comecon. Why?

Because Nicolae Ceausescu often criticized foreign policy actions of the Soviet leadership took an independent position in international affairs. Thus, Romania refused to support Brezhnev, Suslov's adventure in Afghanistan, and in 1968 the Bucharest said the refusal to join the commissioning of Warsaw Pact troops into Czechoslovakia. Nicolae Ceausescu has repeatedly stressed that the action of the Kremlin in Prague and Kabul will lead to the discrediting of the Soviet Union, exacerbate the situation in the world and will contribute to the development of anti-Russian and anti-Soviet sentiment among the people of the socialist countries. Romania's position on these issues suited the West, so Western governments and financial institutions began to support the policies and rhetoric of Nicolae Ceausescu. Well, when in the 1970s and the first half of the 1980s, Moscow has applied economic sanctions against the "crooked" in Bucharest, the West appeared once a trump card in its confrontation with the USSR. It is known, for example, that the Soviet Union suddenly reduce their trade in Romania, delayed payment of Romanian exports to the Soviet Union used the "information blockade" against Nicolae Ceausescu position on many international issues on the world communist movement.

Increases the tension in the Romanian-Soviet relations contributed to the socio-economic programs of Romania were threatened. In addition, Brezhnev and Suslov forced other Comecon countries to reduce trade and economic ties with Romania. Other methods applied pressure. Hungarian leader Janos Kadar, who was appointed head of the Hungarian Khrushchev's leadership in 1956, instigated a campaign to "return" Hungarian Transylvania (Romanian territory traditionally occupied by Hungary until 1945) against "discrimination Transylvanian Hungarians." Puppet Khrushchev and Brezhnev Todor Zhivkov also became the "conductor" of anti-Romanian campaign: Bulgaria began to demand a revision of the Bulgarian-Romanian border on the Danube.

In these circumstances, Romania was forced to seek financial and economic assistance to the Western countries and their agencies. Since the share of CMEA countries for decades had over 60% of the total foreign trade of Romania, the crisis accelerated the Kremlin put these links in Bucharest no-win situation. According to estimates of Romanian sources and the IMF, the loss from Romania to worsen relations with CMEA countries accounted for the years 1980-1985 more than $ 3 billion.

Spoof on US State Departments Position on Egypt

Documental Cotrain sobre el caracazo (1/5)

clipped from: www.counterpunch.org
the origins of the global rebellion against neoliberalism
Seattle 1998
London's J18 protests earlier the same year
public emergence of the Zapatista movement on January 1st 1994
Caracazo
described by Fernando Coronil as "the largest and most violently repressed revolt against austerity measures in Latin American history."
Carlos Andrés Pérez
"bait-and-switch" reform
anti-neoliberal campaign
IMF as a "bomb that only kills people."
Pérez proceeded to implement the recently-formulated Washington Consensus to the letter
about-face
Pérez's neoliberal economic "packet" (the "paquetazo"
two weeks after the inaugural
signed with the IMF on February 28th
basic premises of the Pérez plan were laid out as follows:
a potent cocktail of stagnating incomes in the face of skyrocketing prices and monetary devaluation. As might be expected, poverty reached a peak in 1989
February 27th 1989 was a Monday
first stage
immediate 100% increase in
gasoline
Protests kicked off
early commute
fares had doubled
morning of February 28th

clipped from: www.counterpunch.org
At 6pm, Pérez
announce the fateful decision to suspend constitutional guarantees and establish a state of siege
Repression was worst in Caracas' largest barrios: Catia in the west and Petare in the east
neighborhood of 23 de Enero
the organizational brain of the rebellion
Former Chavista vice president José Vicente Rangel put it clearly: "Venezuelan history split into two
A clandestine revolutionary movement had formed within the armed forces years earlier, led by Hugo Chávez, Jesús Urdaneta, Raúl Isaías Baduel, and the late Felipe Antonio Acosta. 1982 to be precise
Caracazo caught them off-guard.
Young soldiers, largely drawn from the lower classes, were sent into the barrios to slaughter their own, and many refused to do fire
anniversary of the Caracazo was celebrated
in El Valle, one of the large barrios in Caracas
As Luis Britto García, radical poet and political writer (recently named to the presidential committee for constitutional reform) has long argued: "World War IV began in Venezuela. WWIII was the Cold War, which culminated in the fall of the Soviet Union and the apparent triumph of neoliberalism. World War IV began in Venezuela on February 27th 1989, with the first rebellion by an entire nation against a neoliberal package. As a result, we have discovered that a global extension of neoliberalism into the economic, social, political and cultural fields is impossible."

As the opening volley in the war against neoliberalism, the legacy of the Caracazo lives on as long as that struggle continues.

ARAB GOVERMENTS

Arab governments must immediately:

Expel all officials of the International Monetary Fund, World Bank, and their subset of lending institutions.

Arab countries which are currently under the yoke of IMF conditionalities (notably Egypt and Jordan among the Arabs, and Pakistan among the Moslem states) must unilaterally and immediately throw them off and reassert their national sovereignty.

Every Arab state should unilaterally and immediately declare a debt moratorium in the form of an open-ended freeze on all payments of interest and principal of international financial debt in the Argentine manner, starting with sums allegedly owed to the IMF-World Bank.

The assets of foreign multinational monopolistic firms, especially oil companies, should be seized as the situation requires.

Basic food staples and fuels should be subjected to price controls, with draconian penalties for speculation, including by way of derivatives.

Dirigist measures such as protective tariffs and food price subsidies can be quickly introduced.

Food production needs to be promoted by production and import bounties, as well as by international barter deals.

National grain stockpiles must be quickly constituted.

Capital controls and exchange controls are likely to be needed to prevent speculative attacks on national currencies by foreign hedge funds acting with the ulterior political motives of overthrowing national governments.

Most important, central banks must be nationalized and reconverted to a policy of 0% credit for domestic infrastructure, agriculture, housing, and physical commodity production, with special measures to enhance exports.

Once these reforms have been implemented, it may be time to consider the economic integration of the Arab world as an economic development community in which the foreign exchange earnings of the oil-producing states can be put to work on the basis of mutual advantage for infrastructure and hard commodity capital investment across the entire Arab world.

The alternative is an endless series of destabilizations masterminded by foreigners, and, quite possibly, terminal chaos.