Bernd
03/29/2025 (Sat) 19:58
No.54196
del
03/29/2025 (Sat) 19:58
No.54196
del
>>35592
Found something for this.
Specifically for the USian role of the coup against Goulart. So directly connected to these posts: >>36702 >>36703
Book:
U.S. Foreign Policy in Perspective: Clients, Enemies and Empire by Davud Sylvan and Stephen Majeski, Routledge, 2008
Chapter 5: Client maintenance by interventions
Section: Military opposed: coups d'état: Node 16, pages 168-170
I upload the whole fugging book coz why not.
Essentially supports what has been said.
The US had a cold-warm relationship with Goulart, starting from a "clever opportunist" whom they can work well with and arriving to a dangerous communist who can turn Brazil into China. They get info from their local contacts and wrote reports for Washington, to State, Treasury, and DoD. They encouraged the coupists to do what they want and organized support. The book doesn't say what the rebels actually got or not.
What have to be know about the book and that chapter: it's about how US created, increases, and maintains it's client empire. The client allows US to gather information about the country, and the US as patron gives advice and suggestions to the regime. The US helps it to stay in power, in return some perks (for US military or companies, etc). When leaders don't listen the US might pressure them. If the leaders themselves became nuisance the US will start contemplating to swap them with someone else. There are a number of possibilities depending on the circumstances. This specific one with in Brazil, the military (or at least sufficient part of it) opposed the leader, so a coup could be encouraged, green lighted, supported, and after the events: legitimized.
Note: their first choice is always nudging the client's military to coup - since most of the time the US has excellent relations with these armies, usually they organize, equip, train, advise, or even pay them. But sometimes the military is too cozy with the unwanted leader. Not in case of Brazil.
The part of the book cites lots of quotes. The source are the official documents, published in the series of Foreign Relations of the United States, two volumes, specifically:
- 1961-1963, Volume XII, American Republics
- 1964–1968, Volume XXXI, South and Central America; Mexico
Both can be read and downloaded here:
Found something for this.
Specifically for the USian role of the coup against Goulart. So directly connected to these posts: >>36702 >>36703
Book:
U.S. Foreign Policy in Perspective: Clients, Enemies and Empire by Davud Sylvan and Stephen Majeski, Routledge, 2008
Chapter 5: Client maintenance by interventions
Section: Military opposed: coups d'état: Node 16, pages 168-170
I upload the whole fugging book coz why not.
Essentially supports what has been said.
The US had a cold-warm relationship with Goulart, starting from a "clever opportunist" whom they can work well with and arriving to a dangerous communist who can turn Brazil into China. They get info from their local contacts and wrote reports for Washington, to State, Treasury, and DoD. They encouraged the coupists to do what they want and organized support. The book doesn't say what the rebels actually got or not.
What have to be know about the book and that chapter: it's about how US created, increases, and maintains it's client empire. The client allows US to gather information about the country, and the US as patron gives advice and suggestions to the regime. The US helps it to stay in power, in return some perks (for US military or companies, etc). When leaders don't listen the US might pressure them. If the leaders themselves became nuisance the US will start contemplating to swap them with someone else. There are a number of possibilities depending on the circumstances. This specific one with in Brazil, the military (or at least sufficient part of it) opposed the leader, so a coup could be encouraged, green lighted, supported, and after the events: legitimized.
Note: their first choice is always nudging the client's military to coup - since most of the time the US has excellent relations with these armies, usually they organize, equip, train, advise, or even pay them. But sometimes the military is too cozy with the unwanted leader. Not in case of Brazil.
The part of the book cites lots of quotes. The source are the official documents, published in the series of Foreign Relations of the United States, two volumes, specifically:
- 1961-1963, Volume XII, American Republics
- 1964–1968, Volume XXXI, South and Central America; Mexico
Both can be read and downloaded here:
Message too long. Click here to view full text.