globinfo freexchange
In a 2017 released archive of 13 million pages by CIA, we found further evidence proving that CIA was actually directing IMF (International Monetary Fund) policies behind the scenes.
A 1984 letter from the National Intelligence Officer for Economics to the then Director of Central Intelligence, briefly suggests a specific strategy to relief IMF from the pressure that was growing as a consequence of IMF's failed policies.
More impressively, the letter reveals that, in essence, the IMF policies had failed to recover economies. Yet, the public sector should not be allowed to take action because this would be against "IMF guidelines" and "US Government objectives."
Key parts: [most important highlighted]
As I indicated in my memo of 26 April 1984, I believe it will be essential to find ways of easing the pressure on the IMF, through supplementary financing mechanisms and probably also by easing some of the current conditionality requirements.
Yet these economies [of less-developed countries], including the Mexican economy, are apparently continuing to decline well below what their governments and the IMF had anticipated. The reason appears to be that the public sector is continuing to contract, largely to meet IMF-imposed conditions, while the private sector is not making up the slack, so that effective demand is continuing to decline. This situation may become characteristic of more and more countries in the course of 1984. If it continues for long, political pressure to stimulate economic recovery by once again increasing government expenditures may become irresistible in the debtor countries. Public sector lending growth in turn would quickly come in conflict with IMF guidelines and with US Government objectives. It would require some difficult policy choices.
Recall that, another report (a year later) from the same archive, was predicting an increase of instability in those countries, as well as, methods of reducing potential popular anger.
Specifically, the report was monitoring IMF's changing policy to enforce strict conditions and austerity on indebted countries that could cause political unrest. Concerning the policies imposed by the IMF, the report clearly referred to the complete control of money flow through the central bank.
Note that, at that time, William J. Casey, was Reagan's choice for the post of Director of Central Intelligence.
Recall that under the Reagan-Thatcher era, the West experienced the hard onslaught of the neoliberal doctrine towards massive privatizations, deregulation, tax reliefs for the rich, and gradual degeneration of the social state. It seems that the CIA was essentially the coordinator behind IMF towards those policies.
More and more evidence shows that the IMF, especially during the neoliberalism-domination era, had nothing to do with helping poor countries fix their economies. It is rather a kind of special department run by CIA itself for the purpose of imposing the desirable neoliberal conditions in global scale. And it was using - and still uses today - a type of brutal economic warfare against those countries who would dare to resist.
In a 2017 released archive of 13 million pages by CIA, we found further evidence proving that CIA was actually directing IMF (International Monetary Fund) policies behind the scenes.
A 1984 letter from the National Intelligence Officer for Economics to the then Director of Central Intelligence, briefly suggests a specific strategy to relief IMF from the pressure that was growing as a consequence of IMF's failed policies.
More impressively, the letter reveals that, in essence, the IMF policies had failed to recover economies. Yet, the public sector should not be allowed to take action because this would be against "IMF guidelines" and "US Government objectives."
Key parts: [most important highlighted]
As I indicated in my memo of 26 April 1984, I believe it will be essential to find ways of easing the pressure on the IMF, through supplementary financing mechanisms and probably also by easing some of the current conditionality requirements.
Yet these economies [of less-developed countries], including the Mexican economy, are apparently continuing to decline well below what their governments and the IMF had anticipated. The reason appears to be that the public sector is continuing to contract, largely to meet IMF-imposed conditions, while the private sector is not making up the slack, so that effective demand is continuing to decline. This situation may become characteristic of more and more countries in the course of 1984. If it continues for long, political pressure to stimulate economic recovery by once again increasing government expenditures may become irresistible in the debtor countries. Public sector lending growth in turn would quickly come in conflict with IMF guidelines and with US Government objectives. It would require some difficult policy choices.
Recall that, another report (a year later) from the same archive, was predicting an increase of instability in those countries, as well as, methods of reducing potential popular anger.
Specifically, the report was monitoring IMF's changing policy to enforce strict conditions and austerity on indebted countries that could cause political unrest. Concerning the policies imposed by the IMF, the report clearly referred to the complete control of money flow through the central bank.
Note that, at that time, William J. Casey, was Reagan's choice for the post of Director of Central Intelligence.
Recall that under the Reagan-Thatcher era, the West experienced the hard onslaught of the neoliberal doctrine towards massive privatizations, deregulation, tax reliefs for the rich, and gradual degeneration of the social state. It seems that the CIA was essentially the coordinator behind IMF towards those policies.
More and more evidence shows that the IMF, especially during the neoliberalism-domination era, had nothing to do with helping poor countries fix their economies. It is rather a kind of special department run by CIA itself for the purpose of imposing the desirable neoliberal conditions in global scale. And it was using - and still uses today - a type of brutal economic warfare against those countries who would dare to resist.
Comments
Post a Comment