Trojan Horse: The National Endowment
for Democracy
By William Blum
International Endowment for Democracy,
www.iefd.org/
How many Americans could identify the
National Endowment for Democracy? An organization which often
does exactly the opposite of what its name implies. The NED was
set up in the early 1980s under President Reagan in the wake of
all the negative revelations about the CIA in the second half
of the 1970s. The latter was a remarkable period. Spurred by Watergate-the
Church committee of the Senate, the Pike committee of the House,
and the Rockefeller Commission, created by the president, were
all busy investigating the CIA. Seemingly every other day there
was a new headline about the discovery of some awful thing, even
criminal conduct, the CIA had been mixed up in for years. The
Agency was getting an exceedingly bad name, and it was causing
the powers-that-be much embarrassment.
Something had to be done. What was done
was not to stop doing these awful things. Of course not. What
was done was to shift many of these awful things to a new organization,
with a nice sounding name-The National Endowment for Democracy.
The idea was that the NED would do somewhat overtly what the CIA
had been doing covertly for decades, and thus, hopefully, eliminate
the stigma associated with CIA covert activities.
It was a masterpiece. Of politics, of
public relations, and of cynicism.
Thus it was that in 1983, the National
Endowment for Democracy was set up to "support democratic
institutions throughout the world through private, nongovernmental
efforts". Notice the "nongovernmental"-part of
the image, part of the myth. In actuality, virtually every penny
of its funding comes from the federal government, as is clearly
indicated in the financial statement in each issue of its annual
report. NED likes to refer to itself as an NGO (Non-governmental
organization) because this helps to maintain a certain credibility
abroad that an official US government agency might not have. But
NGO is the wrong category. NED is a GO.
"We should not have to do this kind
of work covertly," said Carl Gershman in 1986, while he was
president of the Endowment. "It would be terrible for democratic
groups around the world to be seen as subsidized by the C.I.A.
We saw that in the 60's, and that's why it has been discontinued.
We have not had the capability of doing this, and that's why the
endowment was created."{1}
And Allen Weinstein, who helped draft
the legislation establishing NED, declared in 1991: "A lot
of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA."{2)
In effect, the CIA has been laundering
money through NED.
The Endowment has four principal initial
recipients of funds: the International Republican Institute; the
National Democratic Institute for International Affairs; an affiliate
of the AFL-CIO (such as the American Center for International
Labor Solidarity); and an affiliate of the Chamber of Commerce
(such as the Center for International Private Enterprise). These
institutions then disburse funds to other institutions in the
US and all over the world, which then often disburse funds to
yet other organizations.
In a multitude of ways, NED meddles in
the internal affairs of numerous foreign countries by supplying
funds, technical know-how, training, educational materials, computers,
faxes, copiers, automobiles, and so on, to selected political
groups, civic organizations, labor unions, dissident movements,
student groups, book publishers, newspapers, other media, etc.
NED typically refers to the media it supports as "independent"
despite the fact that these media are on the US payroll.
NED programs generally impart the basic
philosophy that working people and other citizens are best served
under a system of free enterprise, class cooperation, collective
bargaining, minimal government intervention in the economy, and
opposition to socialism in any shape or form. A free-market economy
is equated with democracy, reform, and growth; and the merits
of foreign investment in their economy are emphasized.
From 1994 to 1996, NED awarded 15 grants,
totaling more than $2,500,000, to the American Institute for Free
Labor Development, an organization used by the CIA for decades
to subvert progressive labor unions.{3} AIFLD's work within Third
World unions typically involved a considerable educational effort
very similar to the basic NED philosophy described above. The
description of one of the 1996 NED grants to AIFLD includes as
one its objectives: "build union-management cooperation".{4}
Like many things that NED says, this sounds innocuous, if not
positive, but these in fact are ideological code words meaning
"keep the labor agitation down ... don't rock the status-quo
boat". The relationship between NED and AIFLD very well captures
the CIA origins of the Endowment.{5}
NED has funded centrist and rightist labor
organizations to help them oppose those unions which were too
militantly pro-worker. This has taken place in France, Portugal
and Spain amongst many other places. In France, during the 1983-4
period, NED supported a "trade union-like organization for
professors and students" to counter "left-wing organizations
of professors". To this end it funded a series of seminars
and the publication of posters, books and pamphlets such as "Subversion
and the Theology of Revolution" and "Neutralism or Liberty".{6}
("Neutralism" here refers to being unaligned in the
cold war.)
NED describes one of its 1997-98 programs
thusly: "To identify barriers to private sector development
at the local and federal levels in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
and to push for legislative change ... [and] to develop strategies
for private sector growth."{7} Critics of Yugoslav President
Slobodan Milosevic, a socialist, were supported by NED grants
for years.{8}
In short, NED's programs are in sync with
the basic needs and objectives of the New World Order's economic
globalization, just as the programs have for years been on the
same wavelength as US foreign policy.
Interference in elections
NED's Statement of Principles and Objectives,
adopted in 1984, asserts that "No Endowment funds may be
used to finance the campaigns of candidates for public office."
But the ways to circumvent the spirit of such a prohibition are
not difficult to come up with; as with American elections, there's
"hard money" and there's "soft money".
As described in the "Elections"
and "Interventions" chapters, NED successfully manipulated
elections in Nicaragua in 1990 and Mongolia in 1996; helped to
overthrow democratically elected governments in Bulgaria in 1990
and Albania in 1991 and 1992; and worked to defeat the candidate
for prime minister of Slovakia in 2002 who was out of favor in
Washington. And from 1999 to 2004, NED heavily funded members
of the opposition to President Hugo Chavez in Venezuela to subvert
his rule and to support a referendum to unseat him.
Additionally, in the 1990s and afterward,
NED supported a coalition of groups in Haiti known as the Democratic
Convergence, who were united in their opposition to Jean-Bertrand
Aristide and his progressive ideology, while he was in and out
of the office of the president.{9}
The Endowment has made its weight felt
in the electoral-political process in numerous other countries.
NED would have the world believe that
it's only teaching the ABCs of democracy and elections to people
who don't know them, but in virtually all the countries named
above, in whose electoral process NED intervened, there had already
been free and fair elections held. The problem, from NED's point
of view, is that the elections had been won by political parties
not on NED's favorites list.
The Endowment maintains that it's engaged
in "opposition building" and "encouraging pluralism".
"We support people who otherwise do not have a voice in their
political system," said Louisa Coan, a NED program officer.{10}
But NED hasn't provided aid to foster progressive or leftist opposition
in Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, or Eastern Europe-or,
for that matter, in the United States-even though these groups
are hard pressed for funds and to make themselves heard. Cuban
dissident groups and media are heavily supported however.
NED's reports carry on endlessly about
"democracy", but at best it's a modest measure of mechanical
political democracy they have in mind, not economic democracy;
nothing that aims to threaten the powers-that-be or the way-things-are,
unless of course it's in a place like Cuba.
The Endowment played an important role
in the Iran-Contra affair of the 1980s, funding key components
of Oliver North's shadowy "Project Democracy" network,
which privatized US foreign policy, waged war, ran arms and drugs,
and engaged in other equally charming activities. At one point
in 1987, a White House spokesman stated that those at NED "run
Project Democracy".{11} This was an exaggeration; it would
have been more correct to say that NED was the public arm of Project
Democracy, while North ran the covert end of things. In any event,
the statement caused much less of a stir than if-as in an earlier
period-it had been revealed that it was the CIA which was behind
such an unscrupulous operation.
NED also mounted a multi-level campaign
to fight the leftist insurgency in the Philippines in the mid-1980s,
funding a host of private organizations, including unions and
the media.{12} This was a replica of a typical CIA operation of
pre-NED days.
And between 1990 and 1992, the Endowment
donated a quarter-million dollars of taxpayers' money to the Cuban-American
National Foundation, the ultra-fanatic anti-Castro Miami group.
The CANF, in turn, financed Luis Posada Carriles, one of the most
prolific and pitiless terrorists of modern times, who had been
involved in the blowing up of a Cuban airplane in 1976, which
killed 73 people. In 1997, he was involved in a series of bomb
explosions in Havana hotels,{13} and in 2000 imprisoned in Panama
when he was part of a group planning to assassinate Fidel Castro
with explosives while the Cuban leader was speaking before a large
crowd, although eventually, the group was tried on lesser charges.
The NED, like the CIA before it, calls
what it does supporting democracy. The governments and movements
whom the NED targets call it destabilization.{14}
NOTES
1. The New York Times, June 1,
1986
2. Washington Post, September 22,
1991
3. NED Annual Reports, 1994-96.
4. NED Annual Report, 1996, p.39
5. For further information on AIFLD, see:
Tom Barry, et al., The Other Side of Paradise: Foreign Control
in the Caribbean (Grove Press, NY, 1984), see AIFLD in index;
Jan Knippers Black, United States Penetration of Brazil
(Univ. of Pennsylvania Press, 1977), chapter 6; Fred Hirsch, An
Analysis of Our AFL-CIO Role in Latin America (monograph,
San Jose, California, 1974) passim; The Sunday Times (London),
October 27, 1974, p.15-16
6. NED Annual Report, November 18, 1983
to September 30, 1984, p.21
7. NED Annual Report, 1998, p.35
8. See NED annual reports of the 1990s.
9. Council on Hemispheric Affairs (Washington,
DC), press release, June 13, 2002, www.coha.org; Washington
Post, November 18, 2003; NED Annual Report, 1998, p.53; Haiti
Progres (Port-au-Prince, Haiti), May 13-19, 1998
10. New York Times, March 31, 1997,
p.11
11. Washington Post, February 16,
1987; also see New York Times, February 15, 1987, p.1
12. San Francisco Examiner, July
21, 1985, p.1
13. New York Times, July 13, 1998
14. For a detailed discussion of NED,
in addition to the sources named above, see: William I. Robinson,
A Faustian Bargain: U.S. Intervention in the Nicaraguan Elections
and American Foreign Policy in the Post-Cold War Era (Westview
Press, Colorado, 1992), passim
National Endowment for Democracy (NED)
Home Page