Did the CIA Write the Playbook for Anti-ICE Activities in Minnesota?

CIA: Manual for Psychological Operations in Guerrilla Warfare  

It's interesting that one can now purchase a CIA manual that was written and produced as an education tool for the Nicaraguan Contra rebels in 1983. The hand
book provides instruction on sabotage, propaganda, and destabilization techniques. Ironically, as I watch events unfold in Minneapolis, it appears to now be the playbook for resistance against our own government. 

Although once top-secret, Psychological Operations in Guerrilla Warfare has been declassified and is available is available on Amazon. Its CIA origin was revealed by the Associated Press in 1984. I suppose the information is public domain now. I just finished reading and can't help but think, "What's this world coming to?"

The manual served as a training guide for "Armed Propaganda Teams" to influence the population and destabilize the Nicaraguan government. It was developed during the Nicaraguan civil war to support the "Contra" forces. The document was highly controversial, detailing methods for political manipulation and "dirty wars," which brought it before the International Court of Justice. 

The book is often listed as a primary source for understanding U.S. cold war-era covert operations in Central America, though I suspect its application has been global and not just here in the Americas. 

* * * 

"Tell me why you are crying my son

I know you're frightened like everyone.

Is it the thunder in the distance you hear? 

Will it help if I stand very near? I am here."

Peter, Paul & Mary

Day Is Done

Related Links

Propaganda Revisited

He Who Controls the Narrative Controls the People

The Purpose of Propaganda: Social Engineering

Humanity Hanging from a Cross of Iron: Eisenhower's Forgotten Warning on the True Cost of War

"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed."--Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1953

"Mankind must put an end to war before war puts an end to mankind."

—JFK

First Atlas test launch, 1957*

The Eisenhower quote above is from a speech President Eisenhower gave on April 16 1953 six weeks after the death of Josef Stalin. It's been alternately called "The Chance for Peace" and the "Cross of Iron" speech. In this address Eisenhower called for global de-escalation and cooperative security as opposed to the Soviet Union's reliance on military force and regional dominance. 

In the middle of the speech Eisenhower notes that the prohibitive cost of armaments represents a theft from humanity, diverting resources from essential needs like healthcare, education, and infrastructure. He challenges the new Soviet leadership to prove their desire for peace through concrete actions, such as ending hostilities in Asia and supporting a unified, free Europe. Ultimately, the speech proposes a global fund for reconstruction, fueled by the savings from disarmament, to wage a "total war" against poverty and hunger rather than against other nations.

He then became quite specific on what increased military spending actually eant. The cost of modern armaments should not be understood as a line item in a budget, but as a direct sacrifice of human well-being. 

One modern heavy bomber (in 1953) cost the equivalent of a modern brick school in more than 30 cities; or two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 people; or two fine, fully equipped hospitals; or 50 miles of concrete highway.

One fighter plane cost the same as a half million bushels of wheat.

One destroyer could have built new homes for more than 8,000 people.**

This reframing was timeless because it pierced the abstract veil of national security budgets in order to force a moral reckoning. Eisenhower was not just making an economic point; he was arguing that a nation's true strength is measured in the well-being of its people, not the sophistication of its arsenal. To reiterate: "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed."

Eisenhower’s speech was a direct and powerful appeal to choose a different future. The world faced a choice between the "dread road" of fear and arms and the "highway of peace" built upon a total war against poverty and need. His proposal was to dedicate the world's strength, resources, and imagination "to serving the needs, rather than the fears, of the world." The monuments to this new kind of war, he said, would be "roads and schools, hospitals and homes, food and health." 

It was as if the backbone of Eisenhower's speech was taken from Robert Frost's famous poem The Road Not Taken. There are two roads ahead, he said. We'd like you, leaders in the Kremlin, to join us as we stroll down the path of peace. It's the Kremlin's responsibility to choose correctly. 

How did this speech ultimately play out?  

As the saying goes, actions speak louder than words. The U.S. stockpile grew rapidly in the 1950s due to expanded fissile material production and thermonuclear weapon development starting in 1954. Production rates accelerated in the late 1950s, exceeding 7,000 warheads per year in 1959–1960. The Soviet Union's nuclear weapons collection grew much slower so that by the end of the decade the U.S. had nearly 10 times as many bombs and missiles as the Soviets.

While making a public appeal for peace, the U.S. was simultaneously taking clandestine measures to overthrow foreign leaders we didn't like. In 1953 we overthrew the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran in Operation Ajax. The following year we took down the democratically elected President Arbeniz of Guatemala. 

In 1956 and 57 the CIA, with British and Turkish intelligence, attempted military takeovers, assassinations, staged incidents, propaganda, and bribes to topple pro-Nasser governments under President Shukri al-Quwatly and successors in Syria. All plots were uncovered and failed, increasing Syrian ties to the USSR.

From 1957-59 the CIA gave support for the Permesta Rebellion in Indonesia. By providing arms, funding, and aerial bombings through front organizations like Civil Air Transport, the U.S. sought to destabilize President Sukarno's government. The effort failed, with the rebellion defeated by 1961 after a U.S. pilot was captured in 1958, exposing involvement.

 

In Iraq (1959) the CIA planned with Egyptian collaboration to support nationalist elements, including Ba'athists, in an assassination attempt on Prime Minister Abdul Karim Qasim on September 7, 1959. Tactics included providing weapons and training to prevent a perceived communist takeover. The attempt failed, and Qasim remained in power until 1963.

According to David Halberstam, in his book The Fifties, "Administration officials had few moral qualms either about their role or about deceiving the American press and people. They saw themselves in an apocalyptic struggle with Communism in which normal rules of fair play did not apply. "

Eisenhower’s speech was a direct and powerful appeal to choose a different future. How did our nation's actions align with his appeal for a peaceful future? 

I think it interesting President Eisenhower's last speech was a warning to Americans.

Here is the speech in which President Eisenhower first made reference to what he called the "military-industrial complex." President Eisenhower gave this speech just days before stepping down,  yielding power to the newly elected JFK.

More than seventy years later, as nations continue to build arsenals of breathtaking expense and destructive power, Eisenhower's words echo with renewed urgency. 

* * * * *

This post was conceived after I saw Eisenhower's speech referenced in relation to a recent article noting our current trillion dollar defense budget, the highest in U.S. history. 

Related Links 

Eisenhower's "The Chance for Peace" Speech

Dylan's Masters Of War Didn't Just Apply to the Cold War

*The SM-65 Atlas was an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile. With the proliferation of intercontinental missiles there was simultaneously a surge in family fallout shelters and air raid drills.

**Based on the way planes and ships are built today (e.g. the F-35 fighter jet), these numbers are way off.

U.S. INTERVENTIONISM: 132 Years of Coups & Government Interference

U.S. soldiers: war in Iraq 

The United States has a long history of interfering with foreign governments, attempting (and executing) coups since 1893. It’s often driven by economic interests, anti-communism during the Cold War, or strategic geopolitical goals. Sometimes the rationales are indefensible, and frequently our activities are so clandestine we never even hear about them till years later, if ever.

Below is a list of notable instances where the U.S. is known to have interfered, either directly or indirectly, in coups or government changes, based on historical records and declassified documents. This list focuses on successful regime changes, attempted coups, and significant interventions, but it is not exhaustive due to the covert nature of many operations and ongoing debates about U.S. involvement.

U.S. Interventions in Coups and Governments Since 1898

1890s

•            Hawaii (1893): The U.S. supported a coup led by American plantation owners and businessmen, including Sanford Dole, to overthrow Queen Liliʻuokalani. U.S. Minister John L. Stevens called in Marines to "protect American interests," effectively aiding the coup. The Hawaiian Kingdom was replaced by the Republic of Hawaii, which was annexed by the U.S. in 1898. 

1900s

•            Philippines (1899–1902): After the Spanish-American War, the U.S. annexed the Philippines, leading to the Philippine-American War. The U.S. suppressed the First Philippine Republic under Emilio Aguinaldo, effectively overthrowing the nascent government to establish colonial rule 

•            Panama (1903): The U.S. supported Panama’s secession from Colombia to secure rights to build the Panama Canal. U.S. naval forces prevented Colombian troops from intervening, ensuring the success of the rebellion and the installation of a pro-U.S. government under Philippe Bunau-Varilla.  

•            Honduras (1903, 1907, 1911, 1912, 1919, 1924, 1925): During the Banana Wars, the U.S. intervened multiple times to protect American business interests, particularly those of the United Fruit Company. Notable actions include supporting Manuel Bonilla’s coup in 1903 and defending his regime against a Nicaraguan-backed coup in 1907.  

•            Nicaragua (1909–1912): The U.S. supported a rebellion against President José Santos Zelaya, who opposed American interests. U.S. Marines intervened, leading to Zelaya’s resignation, and the U.S. installed Adolfo Díaz as president, maintaining control through occupation until 1933.  

•            Cuba (1906–1909): Following the Spanish-American War, the U.S. occupied Cuba after President Tomás Estrada Palma’s government collapsed amid a rebellion. The U.S. established a provisional government, effectively controlling the island until 1909 

1910s

•            Dominican Republic (1914, 1916–1924): The U.S. intervened militarily to stabilize the country amid political unrest, occupying it from 1916 to 1924. U.S. forces installed a military government, controlling key institutions and suppressing opposition.  

•            Haiti (1915–1934): The U.S. occupied Haiti after the assassination of President Vilbrun Guillaume Sam, driven by concerns over German influence and debt repayment to American banks. The U.S. installed a pro-American government, dissolved the Haitian legislature, and maintained control for nearly two decades.  
•            Mexico (1913): U.S. Ambassador Henry Lane Wilson supported the Ten Tragic Days coup, which overthrew President Francisco I. Madero. Wilson’s actions, including encouraging General Victoriano Huerta’s rebellion, led to Madero’s assassination and Huerta’s rise to power. 

1940s

•            Panama (1941): The U.S. supported the coup that ousted President Arnulfo Arias, who was seen as pro-Axis during World War II. The U.S. backed Ricardo Adolfo de la Guardia, ensuring a pro-Allied government.  

•            Syria (1949): The CIA facilitated a coup against President Shukri al-Quwatli, who opposed the Trans-Arabian Pipeline. Colonel Husni al-Za’im, with CIA support, overthrew the government, aligning Syria with U.S. interests. 

 

1950s

•            Iran (1953): The CIA, in collaboration with British intelligence (Operation Ajax), orchestrated the overthrow of Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh after he nationalized Iran’s oil industry. The coup reinstated Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, securing Western oil interests.

•            Guatemala (1954): The CIA’s Operation PBSuccess overthrew President Jacobo Árbenz, whose land reforms threatened the United Fruit Company’s interests. Carlos Castillo Armas was installed as a military dictator, leading to decades of repression.  

•            Egypt (1952): The U.S. had extensive contact with the Free Officers Movement after their coup against King Farouk I. While direct involvement is debated, the CIA supported the new regime under Gamal Abdel Nasser to counter Soviet influence.  

•            Indonesia (1959): The CIA supported an attempted coup against President Sukarno, providing arms and funding to rebel groups. The attempt failed, and it strained U.S.-Indonesian relations.  

•            Lebanon (1958): The U.S. intervened militarily to support President Camille Chamoun’s government against internal unrest, deploying troops to prevent a potential coup and stabilize the pro-Western regime.  

•            Iraq (1959): The CIA attempted to overthrow the government of Abd al-Karim Qasim after his neutral stance in the Cold War. The coup failed, but Qasim was later overthrown in 1963 with U.S. support (see below.)

•            Cuba (1952–1958): The U.S. backed Fulgencio Batista’s regime, providing military and economic support against revolutionary forces. After Fidel Castro’s 1959 victory, the U.S. attempted to overthrow him in the 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion, which failed. Over a period of several years schemes were devised to assassinate Castro.

1960s

•            Democratic Republic of Congo (1960): The CIA supported the overthrow and assassination of Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba, fearing his pro-Soviet leanings. Joseph Mobutu, with CIA backing, neutralized Lumumba, leading to Mobutu’s eventual rise to power.

•            Laos (1960, 1961): The CIA backed coups and counter-coups to install anti-communist governments, supporting General Phoumi Nosavan against neutralist and communist forces. The U.S. also organized Hmong forces to fight the Pathet Lao.  

•            Dominican Republic (1961, 1963): The CIA supplied weapons for the assassination of dictator Rafael Trujillo in 1961. After Juan Bosch’s election in 1962, the U.S. supported a 1963 coup against him and intervened in the 1965 civil war to prevent the democratically elected Bosch’s return.  

•            South Vietnam (1963): The U.S. supported a coup against President Ngo Dinh Diem, orchestrated by ARVN generals. The CIA provided funding and assurances of non-interference, leading to Diem’s overthrow and assassination.

•            Iraq (1963): The CIA supported the Ba’ath Party’s coup against Abd al-Karim Qasim, providing intelligence and support. The coup succeeded, and Qasim was executed, though the Ba’athists were later purged . 

•            Brazil (1964): The U.S. backed a military coup against President João Goulart, fearing his leftist policies. The CIA provided support, including fuel and arms, to Humberto Castello Branco’s forces, leading to Goulart’s ouster

•            Dominican Republic (1965): The U.S. intervened militarily during the Dominican Civil War to prevent supporters of deposed President Juan Bosch from regaining power, ensuring a pro-U.S. government.  
•            Indonesia (1965): The U.S. supported a military coup against the Sukarno government, providing lists of communists to the Indonesian army. The coup led to the massacre of up to 1 million people and the rise of Suharto’s regime. 

1970s

•            Chile (1973): The CIA, under President Nixon’s orders, destabilized President Salvador Allende’s government through economic warfare and propaganda. The U.S. supported General Augusto Pinochet’s coup, which overthrew the democratically elected Allende and established a brutal dictatorship. 

•            Argentina (1976): The U.S. supported the military coup against President Isabel Perón, with Secretary of State Henry Kissinger endorsing the junta. The regime committed widespread human rights abuses, including the deaths of up to 30,000 people.  

•            Bolivia (1971): The U.S. supported General Hugo Banzer’s coup against President Juan José Torres, who was seen as too left-leaning. Banzer’s regime repressed opposition and aligned with U.S. interests.

•            Nicaragua (1979–1980s): After the Sandinista revolution overthrew the U.S.-backed Somoza dictatorship, the U.S. funded and trained the Contra rebels to destabilize the Sandinista government, leading to a decade-long conflict.

•            El Salvador (1979–1980s): The U.S. supported a military junta that overthrew the reformist government in 1979, backing the regime against leftist rebels. The U.S. also intervened to prevent right-wing coups, fearing instability. 

 

1980s

•            Grenada (1983): The U.S. invaded Grenada (Operation Urgent Fury) after a military coup deposed Prime Minister Maurice Bishop. The invasion ousted the new regime, installed a pro-U.S. government, and held elections.

•            Panama (1989): The U.S. invaded Panama (Operation Just Cause) to depose Manuel Noriega, who had been a U.S. ally but became a liability due to drug trafficking. Guillermo Endara, a U.S.-backed leader, was installed as president. 

1990s

•            Haiti (1991): The CIA is alleged to have supported the coup against the democratically elected President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, with coup leaders Raoul Cédras and Michel François having received U.S. military training. The U.S. later reinstated Aristide in 1994 via Operation Uphold Democracy.  

 

2000s

•            Venezuela (2002): The U.S. supported a failed coup against President Hugo Chávez, providing funding and encouragement to opposition groups. The coup briefly ousted Chávez, but he was reinstated after mass protests.

•            Honduras (2009): The U.S. tacitly supported the coup against President Manuel Zelaya, who was ousted by the military after aligning with leftist leaders like Chávez. The U.S. recognized the new government despite international condemnation. 

•            Iraq (2003): The U.S.-led invasion overthrew Saddam Hussein’s government, replacing it with a U.S.-backed interim government. The operation aimed to establish a democratic regime but led to prolonged instability. 

•            Libya (2011): The U.S., with NATO, supported a military intervention that led to the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi. The operation began as a humanitarian mission but resulted in Gaddafi’s death and a power vacuum.  

 

2010s

•            Paraguay (2012): The U.S. is alleged to have supported the impeachment of President Fernando Lugo, seen as a rapid coup by his allies. The U.S. quickly recognized the new government under Federico Franco.  

•            Ukraine (2014): The U.S. is alleged to have played a central role in the overthrow .

•            Brazil (2016): The U.S. is accused of supporting the impeachment of President Dilma Rousseff, viewed by some as a “soft coup.” Declassified documents show U.S. interest in her removal due to her leftist policies.  

•            Venezuela (2018–2019): The U.S. backed opposition leader Juan Guaidó’s attempt to oust President Nicolás Maduro, recognizing Guaidó as interim president and imposing sanctions to destabilize Maduro’s regime. The effort has not succeeded.  
•            Bolivia (2019): The U.S. supported the ouster of President Evo Morales after disputed elections, backing Jeanine Áñez’s interim government. Critics argue the U.S. encouraged the military’s role in forcing Morales to resign. 

* * *

I shared this list with a friend who replied, "The list might include the Clinton/NATO bombing of Bosnia.... Also, Afghanistan, Somalia, Yemen.... Not sure what your requirements are lol... Where haven't we intervened might be a better list."

* * *

From 1898 to 1994 alone, the U.S. intervened in Latin America at least 41 times, averaging once every 28 months, often citing security or economic interests like those of the United Fruit Company. Many interventions, especially during the Cold War, aimed to counter perceived communist threats, though these claims were often exaggerated to justify action. 

* * *

Related Link
Orwell Castigates Wells, Defends Patriotism

* * *

Note how many of today's contemporary trouble spots have dark roots deep in the past.  Note also that America's bad behavior abroad is not isolated to the bad behavior of a single ruling party.  And note how many times our interventions were aimed a overthrowing a democratically elected leader. So much for our belief in Democracy with a capital D. 

As Dylan has written:

Democracy don’t rule the world

You’d better get that in your head

This world is ruled by violence

But I guess that’s better left unsaid

--Union Sundown, Infidels 1983

Photo credit: Encyclopædia Britannica

What Really Happened in Iran?

It's unfortunate how limited our knowledge of history is. In part, it's because the amount of work involved to be informed. It's impossible to have any depth of understanding by only following media sound bytes. Hence, the importance of reading, but even here you have obfuscation and disinformation taking place so as to mislead. Here's an example.

How many Americans were aware that the Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, was put in power by U.S. covert action in the early 50s? How many knew any history at all about the roots of the hostage crisis that took place during the Carter administration? I myself knew nothing about the reasons the Shah had to flee his country. Perhaps the media heads themselves were ignorant, except for those who played the mouthpiece for an American spin on these events.

It wasn't until I read David Haberstam's The Fifties that I learned how the Shah came to power, an early "victory" for the CIA, overthrowing a democratically elected leader whom we (the U.S.) didn't like. 

And why didn't we like him? Because he wanted to keep his country neutral during the Cold War. The U.S. wanted a leader who was pro-U.S.

Here's what Halberstam wrote about the overthrow:

[The coup had] gone so smoothly... because local conditions were favorable.  The Shah's historical legitimacy had proved far more compelling than Mossadegh's popularity, which was shaky at best. But Roosevelt [EdNote: not FDR] sensed that Dulles was not terribly interested in that part of his report.

In fact, even as Roosevelt was briefing the top national security people about Iran, planning was going ahead on the next coup--one that they hoped would topple the leftist government of Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala. In fact, soon after Roosevelt's return, he was offered the job of running the new covert operation, which confirmed his earlier suspicions about Foster Dulles's eagerness to proceed in this sphere. The success of the coup in Iran, Roosevelt sensed, had provided an irresistible inducement for the Eisenhower administration: It had been quick, painless, and inexpensive. A potential adversary had been taken out with almost ridiculous ease. American newspapers had all carried the cover story, although the press elsewhere and the Iranian people talked openly about the CIA role.

Administration officials had few moral qualms either about their role or about deceiving the American press and people. They saw themselves in an apocalyptic struggle with Communism in which normal rules of fair play did not apply. 
--David Halberstam, The Fifties

* * * 

Earlier this spring I picked up Stephen Kinzer's book All the Shah's Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror. The frontispiece sets the tone with this quote by Harry Truman: "There is nothing new in the world except the history you didn't know."

That pretty much sums it up. 

Kinzer begins his preface with this attention-getting anecdote:

PREFACE
One day I attended a book party for an older Iranian woman who had written her memoirs. She spoke for an hour about her eventful life. Although she never touched on politics, she mentioned in passing that her family was related to the family of Mohammad Mossadegh, who served as prime minister of Iran for twenty-six months in the early 1950s and was overthrown in a coup d'etat staged by the Central Intelligence Agency.

After she finished speaking, I couldn't resist the temptation to ask a question. "You mentioned Mossadegh," I said. "What do you remember, or what can you tell us, about the coup against him?" She immediately became agitated and animated.

"Why did you Americans do that terrible thing?" she cried out. "We always loved America. To us, America was the great country, the perfect country, the country that helped us while other countries were exploiting us. But after that moment, no one in Iran ever trusted the United States again. I can tell you for sure that if you had not done that thing, you would never have had that problem of hostages being taken in your embassy in Tehran. All your trouble started in 1953. Why, why did you do it?"

This outburst reflected a great gap in knowledge and understanding...
--Stephen Kinzer

* * * 

Sadly, we have seemingly countless gaps in our knowledge and understanding, but this doesn't seem to stop us from expressing strong opinions on almost everything. Becoming aware of our limitations ought to make us exercise a little more humility before we speak, shouldn't it?