"O Globo also reported that the documents it's seen indicate the US had data collection centers in 2002 for material intercepted from satellites in Bogota, Caracas, Mexico City and Panama City, along with Brasilia." --from the OP (my emphasis)
I'm reminded of the Wikileaks item about the rightwing prez of Panama demanding the same spying help against his "enemies" that the Bush Junta was giving to their mafia boss/prez of Colombia, Alvaro Uribe. Uribe, of course, is notorious for his domestic spying agency (DAS, now disbanded) which was spying on judges and prosecutors, and other Uribe "enemies," and drawing up 'hit lists' for assassinating labor leaders. Clearly, the Bush Junta was aiding Uribe in this crime. Testimony about it revealed that Bush Junta ambassador to Colombia (Wm. Brownfield) had a U.S. liaison between DAS and the U.S. embassy. Panama's prez thought he ought to get similar aid.
Also interesting: Uribe's head of DAS, Maria Hurtado, got instant asylum in
Panama when Colombian prosecutors sought to interrogate her about Uribe and DAS. I suspect that the CIA--Leon Panneta--arranged that asylum, in the process of cleaning up after Bush Jr. (Panetta was a member of Bush
Sr.'s "Iraq Study Group"--the group that probably ousted Rumsfeld back in 2006.)
The Wikileaks item on Panama's prez was pre-2008 (Bush Junta era). The other article you cite (in comment #1) says the data collection on Colombia and others goes "back to 2008." Several thoughts occur: Bush Junta purged evidence of
their worldwide and domestic spying when they exited direct power over the U.S. government in 2008? Why does the evidence of data collection/spying go back to only 2008? It does not seem probable that the Bush Junta was "clean" on general worldwide and domestic spying--indeed, that is laughable--while the Obama administration came in and
started up a worldwide and domestic spying operation? Much more probable, a continuum, initiated within the MIC out the outset of the Bush Junta and presented to Obama as a fait accompli--which, like many other gross crimes by the Bush Junta, he cannot, or doesn't want to, stop. He has acted as an apologist for many Bush Junta crimes, and stated, with regard to their obvious war crimes, that "We need to look forward not backward." (GAWD. And him a legal scholar out of Harvard!) (But then, guess who got a cushy academic sinecure at Harvard? Alvaro Uribe!)
Panama (spied upon). The Canal, of course, and the labor unions (esp. the dock unions), would be of interest to the U.S. war machine. And I imagine that keeping track of all political actors including "friends" (i.e., getting the goods on them, for control purposes) would be a priority. It's very funny, in a ludicrous way, that the U.S. was spying on Panama's prez, while Panama's prez was demanding U.S. help to spy on his "enemies." Oh, the irony!
Venezuela, Brazil (spied upon). Oil, obviously. That is the biggest driver of U.S. policy. Venezuela has the largest reserves of crude on the planet (more than Saudi Arabia), and they got good and sick of most of the profits going to the likes of Exxon Mobil (Chavez drove Exxon Mobil out of Venezuela with a hard bargain on profit-sharing with the Venezuelan people). Brazil had just discovered a new major reserve, when the U.S. (Bush Junta) reconstituted the U.S. 4th Fleet (mothballed since WW II) in the Caribbean. Brazil's prez (Lula da Silva) stated that the 4th Fleet is "a threat to
Brazil's oil" (let alone Venezuela's), and proposed creating a common LatAm military defense. He took a cue from Venezuela and dedicated a big portion of the new oil profits to social programs.
All this needs to be closely spied upon, if you're running a war machine and if oil corporations are running the government, as here. But more than this, you can't do successful black ops, dirty tricks, disinformation campaigns and coup d 'etats, without keeping close track of all trends and movements in the targeted societies, so you can plug your agents into various groups, for timely disruptions and chaos, to capitalize on any political weaknesses you may find, to learn how to effectively slander leftist leaders who oppose your designs, to study the election system and figure out how to rig it, to find out how to "make the economy scream" on cue (product and financial manipulation), and so on, to weaken and even overthrow good governments and democracy itself, so that all the oil flows into the U.S. war machine and all the profits flow into the pockets of the very, very, very rich.
Oil!
Frankly, I think that Obama-Panetta have been better at this sort of thing (spying, targeting) than the Bush Junta was, in LatAm anyway. The Bush Junta probably had plenty of illicit data on everyone but didn't use it very well. The region was fast going "red" under their auspices; whereas the Obama team has had some fascist victories (Honduras, Paraguay) and a near victory in Venezuela (close-call leftist win, which Obama has yet to recognize, though all the world--including all the world's election monitoring groups--have recognized it as legit).
Colombia (spied upon). It, too, has a lot of oil, but it is already a U.S. client state and the linchpin of U.S. strategy to regain control of Latin America. That strategy begins with the U.S. "circle the wagons" region--Central America and the Caribbean, including both Colombia's and Venezuela's Caribbean coast areas. The U.S. re-conquered Honduras in 2009 with a rightwing/military coup d'etat. Honduras is the traditional stepping stool for U.S. aggression against its Central American neighbors. Nicaragua (leftist government) is a target, again. El Salvador (weaker leftist government) is on a short leash (was kneecapped into dropping its application to join ALBA--the Venezuela/Cuba-organized trade group). The U.S. is desperately trying to hold dominion over this "circle the wagons" region. And while Honduras is important to this dominion, Colombia--a big hunk of South America that edges on this region--is the key. It straddles Central and South America. It has a long, porous border with Venezuela, already used for spiriting rightwing death squads from Colombia into Venezuela, with the purposes of assassination and overthrow, and setting up Murder, Inc., (the "Black Eagles" criminal organization) within Venezuelan territory.
Colombia has acquiesced to the blood-soaked, murderous, corrupt, failed U.S. "war on drugs" and the brutal displacement of FIVE MILLION peasant farmers from their lands. (Hundreds of thousands of these have fled into Venezuela and Ecuador for refuge and for their good social programs.) Colombia is riddled with cocaine traffickers from the top to the bottom of its society (the most corrupt society in Latin America, and thus eminently bribable and threaten-able). And, most important, Colombia has acquiesced to U.S. military bases and "forward operating locations" (and recently proposed to become a member of NATO). It has become, quite literally, a base for U.S. military operations. Colombia's military has received $7 BILLION in U.S. aid (that we know about).
So, spotting trends and knowing what's what in Colombia is very, very important to the U.S. war machine and its corporate allies.
It is quite fascinating, in this context, that Colombia's new prez, Manual Santos, has come out for the complete legalization of drugs and has also initiated serious peace talks with the FARC guerrillas, to end Colombia's 70-year civil war. It is probably very important to the U.S. war machine and its corporate allies how these two policies play out, and especially that this, what might be called "liberalization," not go too far. Big Pharma, Monsanto, et al, probably want the market in herbal, recreational and addictive drugs. They and other U.S. corps want the land and the resources. The FARC wants the peasant farmers' lands restored and a chance at political participation. (Last time they demobilized, 5,000 of them were slaugtered by rightwing death squads.) The other thing that Colombia's political elite acquiesced to was U.S. "free trade for the rich"--an extension of U.S. economic policy in Central America (blanket exploitation of labor and natural resources).
The trend in the rest of South America is the opposite--with strong, popular, leftist governments elected in Brazil, Argentina, Bolivia, Ecuador, Uruguay and, of course, Venezuela, and soon to be elected in Chile (this year). Peru has a sort of leftist government (saddled with a Bush era "free trade for the rich" agreement). Paraguay had a leftist government (first in 60 years!) until a recent U.S.-supported rightwing coup. (But Paraguay doesn't amount to much, as to economics. They do, though, control a big aquifer, and are now a "forward operating location" for the U.S. military, in the heart of leftist South America.)
The leftist governments are united on many policies and are working together, in very smart ways, to implement them. These include social programs (education, health care, pensions, etc.), eliminating poverty, sharing the wealth, economic development, REGIONAL and multilateral financing of economic development (anti-World Bank/IMF), creating "south-south" trade and multilateral trade, creating regional institutions that exclude the U.S., and rejection of U.S. control and domination.
Colombia becomes all the more important as a bulwark against this independence trend, given the awesome leftist democracy movement in South America. And it is vitally important that the rich, rightwing elite that runs Colombia (interlaced with the cocaine trade, the death squads and the military) stay in power. If the people of Colombia are ever able to elect a government like those in Brazil, Venezuela and these other leftist democracies, it's all over for U.S. corporate exploitation and war planning starting at the Panama Canal and going south. They will be restricted to Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Costa Rica and Panama (and Nicaragua will be rather isolated, if they are able to retain their democracy; as Paraguay will be isolated in the south--Paraguay may go back the other way, toward the left and toward democracy, if the U.S. cannot maintain its support of the Paraguayan rightwing, in these circumstances; but as long as Colombia remains a U.S. client state, Paraguay can probably maintain elite rule**).
There is another factor in U.S./LatAm relations that should be mentioned and it is this: Even the rightwing in Latin America resents U.S. dictation (most of them), and its political leaders are routinely compelled to give at least lip service to the sovereignty of their own countries. The U.S. is
playing with fire when it does things like detain Evo Morales' official jet, and announces the bombing of Libya FROM Brazil (Obama visit--major breach of diplomatic protocol; an insult), and persists in its insane policy on Cuba and its insane "war on drugs," and spies on all of them. Is this stupidity, tone-deafness, deliberate provocation or war prep? Was John Kerry's reference to LatAm as "our backyard" a slip-of-the-tongue, or intentional?
Many of these things seem designed to alienate Latin America, even the natural U.S. allies (rightwingers and fascists). Is the U.S. on a war path with South America? I have long worried over this. But I hate to think it's true and that our own Democratic Party leaders are helping it along (as with Clinton prepping Iraq for the Bush Junta war). Seems like the worst often turns out to be true, of our government, no matter who is in alleged control of it.
---------------
**(On the other hand, Colombia going leftist democratic may liberate Central America. One of the Honduran coup generals stated that their coup was "intended to prevent
communism from Venezuela reaching the United States." I have translated "communism" to mean (to this general) universal free medical care, universal free education through college, labor rights, etc. But perhaps he meant something broader--that their coup was intended to prevent
democracy from Venezuela spreading north, as it has spread south. Venezuela was the pioneer of South America's
democracy revolution. This is one of the reasons that the U.S. hates the Chavez/Maduro government so much. If Colombia undergoes a similar democracy revolution--not likely, but if they did--then it might well spread up through Central America to our very border. Our rulers had better get that wall firmed up!) ('The Leftists are coming! The Leftists are coming!')
= new reply since forum marked as read
