US foreign policy support for anti-democratic regimes during Cold War containment

U.S. Foreign Policy and the Backing of Non-Democratic Regimes

The United States assumes the role of policeman of the democratic world, using any means possible to squash communism. This attitude toward communism is the result of left-wing extremism during the Cold War. The old ideology is that communism and democracy could not exist together and that one must be eliminated for the other to exist. When a non-communist thinks about communism, it often conjures images of the post-War world where the democracy and communism were combatants (Waller, 2001). However, in its zeal to squash communism wherever it might exist, the U.S. sometimes backed anti-democratic regimes in order to hold back the spread of communism throughout the rest of the world. This research will examine several examples in history where the United States has backed dictatorships and authoritarian regimes in order to prevent communist factions from gaining a stronghold.

Venezuela

The former Soviet Union was viewed as the ultimate U.S. nemesis in the post-War era. Efforts concentrated on the need to rid the world of this menace. As a result, many smaller communist regimes were ignored. The reasoning may be that Soviet Union kept the smaller regimes together. They fell without the backing of the Soviet Union (Wallace, 2001). When the Soviet Union collapsed, many of the smaller Communist regimes could not sustain themselves, according to post-War theory.

The Hugo Chavez regime in Venezuela is turning the country into an anti-U.S. dictatorship. However, the U.S. continues to satisfy a large portion of the U.S. oil demand by purchasing oil from Venezuela (Waller, 2001). Chavez is currently allowing the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia (FARC) to use his country as a safe-haven. FARC descended from the Communist Party and continues to promote a Marxist-Leninist ideology (Waller, 2001). Purchase of oil from Venezuela drives U.S. actions. The key point of contention is that Chavez wishes to raise oil prices by 16% (Palast, 2004). The U.S. is motivated to back government factions that will bend to their will, keeping purchase prices low at the expense of their own economy. Chavez will not agree to such terms for his people.

The most recent attempt to influence the government is Venezuela meant funneling U.S. taxpayer dollars into the National Endowment for Democracy, which is a private, nonprofit organization committed to oust Chavez from power (Jenson, 2004). This practice undermines the meaning of a democracy by taking the power to choose away from the people and placing it in the hands of a foreign government. The key point of contention with Chavez is that he refuses to subordinate his county to the U.S. He maintains a fairer distribution of wealth among the people of his country including literacy program and health clinics for the poor (Jenson, 2004).

The U.S. backed a failed coup to oust Chavez from power (Jenson, 2004), causing further harm to already strained relationships with one of the most important suppliers of U.S. oil. Chavez does not back U.S. rhetoric, therefore must be ousted. Chavez acted according to the referendum; whereas the U.S. backed elitist regime refuses to follow the established rules (Jenson, 2004). Chavez won his Presidency by majority vote of the people. U.S. meddling in Venezuelan affairs represent a source of outrage for many of the citizens. Venezuela represents the most obvious example where the U.S. has backed elitist regimes that support its own interests, while ignoring the democratic process that is the right of the people.

Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia with its lineage-based selection of rulers represents the furthest from a democracy that one can get. Yet, the U.S. established bases in Saudi Arabia, supposedly for helping them to protect holy shrines. U.S. backing of the Saudis led to Osama Bin Laden's dislike of the U.S. (Chomsky, 2001). Bin Laden claims that the U.S. supports repressive regimes in the Middle East, while attempting to destroy democratic societies that do not bend to U.S. interests (Chomsky, 2001).

Many regimes in the region resent the U.S. For supporting harsh and violent regimes throughout the region, including its longstanding support of Israeli violence against Palestinians (Chomsky, 2001). Americans fail to understand how the Middle East can support acts of terrorism against the U.S. However, the news media is largely to blame, as it only tends to publish views that are in agreement with current political policy. Americans are only aware of what is done to us, not what the U.S. does to someone else. This world judges the U.S. from a different perspective than that of the citizenry because they have access to a different viewpoint.