A few sentences about the CIA are pertinent because the NED has taken on some of the roles that the CIA performs. The CIA's history began in 1947, and the agency functioned as a U.S. spy organization during the Cold War with the Soviet Union and to the present time. However, it also has another function, covertly supporting U.S. interests in foreign countries, particularly interests that are market and labor oriented.

U.S. government foreign policy has traditionally supported friendly military dictators in many areas - the Philippines, Iran, the southern core of South America, Central America - and the CIA has been involved in each of these areas. To disguise their programs, the CIA established relations with cooperating U.S. foundations through which it channeled funds to foreign recipients, a model that NED also uses. The Vietnam war, the Contra-Iran money laundering scheme, and Watergate break-in produced scandals involving CIA intelligence. In part because of this, in 1983 under President Ronald Reagan, the U.S. Congress passed legislation forming the NED as a private foundation, an NGO that was touted to be independent of the U.S. State Department and the CIA.

The NED has a lofty stated goal: a bipartisan mission of promoting democracy throughout the world. The NED operates by directing money through four institutes that are, like the NED, private foundations: The International Republican Institute (IRI), the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (NDI), the Chamber of Commerce's Center for Private Enterprise (CIPE), and the AFLClO's American Center for International Labor Solidarity. Multiple other foundations and organizations also receive funds directly from the NED. Although the NED is publicly funded, the activities of these four institutes and other recipients of grants are not reported to Congress.

According to William Robinson,(2) NED employs so complex a system of intermediaries that operative aspects, control relationships, and funding trails are nearly impossible to follow, and final recipients are difficult to identify. Some 97 percent of NED funding flows from the U.S. government including the State Department and, thus, is theoretically controlled by the House of Representatives; however,(1) there are right-wing donors such as the Bradley Foundation, the Whitehead Foundation, and Olin Foundation, as well as corporate donors, e.g., ExxonMobil, Enron, and Texaco that likely influence NED policy. The total NED budget is modest, but in 2005 the Bush administration doubled its funding to $80 million per annum. Although the NED was originally designed with a view to creating a broad base of political support, identification of members (former and present) of the board of directors indicates a close alignment of its activities with U.S. foreign policy interests. These members have included former U.S. secretaries of state Henry Kissinger and Madeleine Albright, former secretary of defense Frank Carlucci, former National Security Council chair Zbigniew Brzezinski, Paul Wolfowitz, and Richard Perle, and Michael Novak from the American Enterprise Institute.(1)

So what does the NED do to promote democracy around the world? Speaking to the House of Representatives Committee on International Relations, (3) long-time NED president, Carl Gershman stated that the NED was operating in 80 countries with programs that supported open markets, the rights of workers, human rights, women's rights, the healing of war-torn societies, the strengthening of political parties in other countries, and what he described as many other key facets of democracy. He described the continuation of global grant programs to organizations in South Korea, North Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, China, Poland, Lithuania, Ukraine, and the Czech Republic designed to overcome barriers to democratic progress. President Gershman seemed particularly proud of NED's "Courage Tributes" given to the Iranian Student Movement, the Democratic Mayors of Columbia, the Civil Society Movement in Democratic Congo, the Mothers of Tiananmen Square, and a human rights group that works in Chechnya. In this report, there is no mention of programs operating in Haiti, Venezuela, or other South American countries that have recently elected left-leaning governments.

In a more recent report presented to the House of Representatives Subcommittee on International Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Human Rights,4 Gershman depicted the NED as a human rights organization that in 2003 to 2004 provided 170 grants to programs in 50 countries-including Latin American countries-to protect political rights and civil liberties and to protect against unjustified detention, exile, terror, or torture. These awards, according to Gershman, were consistent with the objective of the NED not to neglect those who keep alive the flame of freedom in closed societies.

However, from the viewpoint of activists concerned with economic and social justice for people living in Latin America and Haiti, there is a darker side to the NED and its associated institutes.(2,5,7) Despite the lofty goals of NED, it was clear early on that the "development of democracy" goal was an umbrella for the use of this NGO to support the foreign policies of the U.S. government, following similar operations as the CIA. The well-researched NED operations in Nicaragua starting in about 1990, discussed below, were directed to control the politics of that country. Also there is no doubt that Nicaragua was not the only foreign country where the NED operated and is currently involved in interventions into political and economic life.(2)

The mechanisms for these interventions are the funneling of money via grants to support governments that are favorable to U.S. interests and to prevent the coming to power of governments that are not seen as favorable to U.S. interests, including the interests of U.S. corporations who want to operate with minimal restrictions. Some 170 other NGOs charged with "development of democracy" have been created or sponsored by the U.S. government, (1,5) so we may only be beginning to see how the U.S. government is using NGOs to support its foreign policies via interventions in foreign politics by funding foundations and political party-associated groups. It is likely there is coordination of political activities between these NGOs and the NED. Phillip Agree(7) writes about the coordination of the CIA, the U.S. Agency for International Development (U.S.AID) Office of Transition Initiatives (OTI), and NED in their campaign to dispose of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela.

The following operations of the NED in Nicaragua, Venezuela, and Haiti serve as examples of NED activity and the scope of their programs. As early as 1990, NED developed its large program in Nicaragua to insure the defeat of Daniel Ortega for the presidency. This story is best documented in Robinson's book(2) and articles by Philip Agree.(7) The CIA had already intervened in the Nicaraguan elections in 1984, and of course, this agency supported the Contras in the civil war with the Sandinistas. In 1990, $9 million was spent by the NED, along with CIA and the USAID/OTI,(7) to support the U.S.-chosen presidential candidate, Violeta Chamorro. Intervention techniques involved multiple grants to opposition organizations, a model for later interventions in Haiti and Venezuela. This insured the defeat of Daniel Ortega. The NED and its affiliate organizations continued to operate to make certain that the Sandinista Front was not reelected again.

In Venezuela, the administration of George W. Bush is intervening in political processes with a combination of activities very similar to those the U.S. carried out in Nicaragua from 1980.(6,7) Along with U.S. journalist Jeremy Bigwood, Eva Golinger has begun to uncover, using the Freedom of Information Act, interventions by NED and its foundations in three political events: the failed coup in 2002 aimed at removing the democratically- elected president Hugo Chavez; the massive strike in 2004 aimed at precipitating anarchy; and the 2005 recall election.(6) (These events also are described in the Spring 2006 Pledge newsletter on delcopledge.org). The NED funneled about $1 million dollars to U.S. and Venezuelan groups that wanted to stop the Bolivarian revolution. This involved funding of at least 17 Venezuelan NGOs apart from its financing of many others through its four associated foundations.(6) Activities organized and funded included: seminars, conferences, and training courses; campaigns to register voters and support to an extensive network of political parties; the use of the mass media; and manipulation of exit polls. After the failed coup of April 2002, the U.S. government widened its program to include the CIA and AID/OTI. Although Chavez survived as president, NED, CIA, and U.S.AID/OTI programs continue to this day.(6)

Of course, the U.S. government has a long history of intervention in Haitian politics; however, the role of the NED and its associate NGO, the International Republican Institute, has only been publicized in recent years. In the 1990 presidential election, NED supported Marc L. Bazin, a former World Bank official, providing a large percentage of his total U.S.-supported campaign funds. Despite this, Aristide was elected with a huge majority of the vote. Evidence is not available indicating whether or not the NED was involved in the 1992 coup. However, prior to the second coup that removed President Aristide from office in 2004, the NED funded grants to groups that opposed Aristide, including the Democratic Convergence and the Group of 184. This campaign, the "Haiti Democracy Project," supported organized demonstrations, civil disorder, and anarchy. Grants were also provided by the IRI in the Dominican Republic to facilitate organizing and arming "freedom fighters," who later marched into Haiti and forced the removal of Aristide. The removal of Aristide and his exile were coordinated with a U.S. military intervention. In the time period prior to the recent election, the NED and other U.S.AID-linked organizations again were active in supporting anti-Lavalas groups, operating a demonization campaign, fomenting civil disturbances and murders, and evoking terror in City Soleil and elsewhere. However, as we know these interventions were unsuccessful in that Andre Preval was elected president.

In conclusion, we all know that in the U.S. it is illegal for foreign countries to become involved with our political process. Why not be consistent and make it illegal for our government to use our tax dollars to promote interventions in the political processes of foreign countries?

___________________________________________________________________

1. National Endowment for Democracy, SourceWatch, at www.sourcewatch.org.
2. W.I. Robinson, A Faustian Bargain: U.S. Intervention in the Nicaraguan Elections (Boulder, Colo.:Westview Press, 1992).
3. NED president Carl Gershman, The House Committee on International Relations, July 9, 2003.
4. NED president Carl Gershman, The House Committee on International Terrorism, Non-proliferation and Human Rights, June 9, 2004.
5. Anthony Fenton, Democracy Now, Jan. 23, 2006.
6. Eva Golinger, Venezuelanalysis.com, Nov. 14, 2004.
7. Philip Agee, Venezuelanalysis.com, Sept. 6, 2005

Note: This article first appeared in the Spring 2006 newsletter of the Delaware County Pledge of Resistance.