U.S. 'interference' toppled me, ex-Guatemalan leader Perez says

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Reuters

U.S. 'interference' toppled me, ex-Guatemalan leader Perez says
Source: Reuters - Thu, 10 Sep 2015 04:24 GMT

GUATEMALA CITY, Sept 9 (Reuters) - Former Guatemalan President Otto Perez accused the United States on Wednesday of helping to topple him by interfering in the Central American country and endorsing a United Nations-backed anti-corruption commission.

A Guatemalan judge ordered Perez on Tuesday to remain in jail while awaiting trial over a graft scandal that stoked a political crisis ahead of a presidential election, charging him with criminal association, taking bribes and customs fraud.

Guatemalan prosecutors and the powerful U.N.-backed anti-graft body CICIG moved against Perez after months of investigations and findings taken from some 89,000 telephone taps, almost 6,000 emails and 17 raids.

In a series of meetings that began early this year, the U.S. government pressured Guatemala's then-president Perez to rid his administration of corrupt officials and to renew the CICIG's mandate, officials with direct knowledge of the talks have told Reuters.

Read more: http://www.trust.org/item/20150910042608-tfkmp/

[marym625]

1. Thank you, Judi Lynn.

You are an incredibly, great poster. A treasure

[baran]

2. +1000

Thank you, Judi Lynn -- I have learned so much from your posts re Latin America -- and continue to learn from them every day! Your contribution to this website is beyond compare and very much appreciated!

[bemildred]

3. And that is a good thing, if true.

Perhaps someone in DC has finally figured out that corruption is not "the way up".

[McKim]

4. For Once We Did Good

Kudos for toppling this perpetrator of genocide. I am thrilled that he is doing jail time. It's about time. So glad he lived to see jail.

[karynnj]

5. Judi, what is your take on this?

Is Perez corrupt?

Shouldn't the US back the UN backed anti-corruption commission? The wording that the US backed the commission's actions does not seem to indicate that the US was the guiding force for its creation and actions.

If a country is plagued with corruption, should the US suggest that the administration rid itself of corrupt officials or should they ignore problems? (I do get that one might object if the US is inconsistent - tolerating in some countries things that it objects to elsewhere.)

[Judi Lynn]

6. Corruption has never been a drawback for the other murderous leaders in Latin America.

Many of the most sadistic, treacherous monsters who bled their country's national treasuries dry while torturing and slaughtering suspected "dissidents" have stood in good favor with U.S. administrations.

It's an old story. One of the President's was quoted saying, "He's a bastard, but he's OUR bastard." It has never been a reason to overthrow a perfectly good puppet.

The evidence on this guy, regarding corruption, hasn't been revealed in anything I've seen, of course, and will take much longer becoming public. His Vice-President was far more conspicuously exposed already, but there is no doubt far more to come. He may be getting rushed out of there to avoid revealing too much about how extensive his corruption is, and what other people and organizations are involved.

The horrendous problem with this guy is what ordinary Guatemalan people knew long before he was ever "elected." He was completely involved in savage war crimes and atrocities in the hideous war upon the people of Guatemala which became official when the U.S. under Dwight D. Eisenhower overthrew the popularly elected progressive President Jacobo Arbenz in 1954 which triggered suffering, grief, tragedy beyond anything the people of Guatemala could have every dreamed possible. It has lasted for ages. The intensity of the hatred and mistreatment of the indigenous majority has been fully supported by U.S. Presidents like Ronald Reagan, Congressmen like Jesse Helms, so many, many more.

The President the country found guilty for genocide could not have been more beloved by the U.S. American right, fully supported by Ronald Reagan. Efrain Rios-Montt.

It was known Perez was involved in all-out war upon the indigenous Guatemalans long ago, yet he felt he would be safe running for the Presidency. The Presidents he served were all supported by the U.S. Gov't.

It could be they find him an embarrassment now, and disposable, as they finally decided with Manuel Noriega. Could be they have been forced, by his potential "outing" by the people, to make a stand against him in order to preserve our country's "reputation."

Of course corruption is wrong. Why has it been ignored in all the other murderous puppets in the Americas?

[karynnj]

7. Thanks for this response

I would love for it to be a real change - like the opening of Cuba was. I had really hoped when Obama early on after the coup in Honduras happened - called it a coup and spoke against it. I remember the surprise in at least one article in the NYT speaking of how that was the first right wing coup the US ever called a coup. Then ... you know what happened. It seemed clear that HRC was to Obama's right on this, but he as President could overrule anything she did.

For that same reason, it is the President's foreign policy, I realize that Kerry's late 1980s actions to oppose the US covertly funding the Contras, commendable as it was, does not mean that everything changed in 2013 - when Kerry, not HRC was the SoS.

I wonder, if this like many things, is Obama showing his true beliefs now that he never has to face election. It would be interesting if - in addition to other things they are working on - Obama/Kerry really do push a new policy in Latin America. For one thing, it is needed.

[Judi Lynn]

8. It would be so worth waiting for, if each one, who has shown moments of clarity,

real enlightenment in specific, important areas of LatAm policy, finally broke the right-wing pattern of racism, total disrespect, and exploitation toward those multitudes of great human beings south of the U.S. border.