According to a formerly SECRET CIA Directorate of Intelligence’s Office of African and Latin American Analysis research paper, uncovered from the U.S. National Archives and dated August 1985, the CIA never planned for a non-member of the conservative Colorado Party from ever succeeding long-time Paraguayan dictator General Alfredo Stroessner. 

The Paraguayan dictator, who ruled Paraguay from 1954 to 1989 with the backing of the CIA and the Pentagon, was one of America’s staunchest Latin American allies. Stroessner, a Colorado Party stalwart, supported the U.S. invasion of the Dominican Republic in 1965 and sent Paraguayan military officer to the infamous School of the Americas in Fort Benning, Georgia for training. Stroessner also participated in Operation CONDOR, Henry Kissinger’s brainchild that saw Paraguay, along with six other Latin American nations – Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Peru, and Uruguay — coordinate cross-border state terror and assassination operations against leftist officials and labor and student leaders, and even offered to send Paraguayan troops to fight with the United States in South Vietnam.

After Stroessner was ousted in a bloody military coup in 1989 over fears he was grooming one of his two sons as his successor. Stroessner was ousted by Colorado Party member General Andres Rodriqguez, who ruled until 1993. Rodriguez was succeeded by a series of Colorado Party politicians – Juan Carlos Wasmosy, Raul Cubas, Luis Gonzalez, and Nicanor Duarte, until Lugo, the Marxist «liberation theology» former Roman Catholic bishop, was elected president in 2008. The leader of the Patriotic Alliance for Change, Lugo was the first non-Colorado Party member to serve as president since 1948. 

Lugo was ousted in a politicized impeachment process engineered by the Colorado Party and supported by Vice President Federico Franco of the very much misnamed Authentic Radical Liberal Party, which is neither «radical» nor «liberal» but represents Paraguay’s business elite and is a member of Liberal International, which includes other pro-business «liberals» such as British Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg’s Liberal Democrats, in coalition with Tory Prime Minister David Cameron, and German Free Democratic Party of Guido Westerwelle, who serves in right-wing Chancellor Angela Merkel’s cabinet as foreign minister

The CIA research paper, titled «Paraguay: Potential Successors to Stoessner,»states that in 1985, «the 72-year-old President Alfred [sic] Stroessner is not expected to leave office anytime soon». In fact, Stroessner was ousted in a coup some three and a half years after the CIA’s faulty prognostication. However, the CIA did anticipate that Stroessner’s eventual successors would only come from the ranks of the corrupt Colorado Party.

The CIA document states «leading contenders, in our judgment, include Supreme Court Chief Justice and traditionalist Colorado politician Luis Argana; veteran traditionalist Colorado leaders Edgar Insfran and Juan Manuel Frutos; the Defense Minister, Maj. Gen. Gaspar Martinez; and a respected senior military officer, Gen. Gerardo Johannsen».

The CIA gave all these Colorado politicians a clean bill of health by stating, «any of these men would be likely to maintain Paraguay’s pro-West foreign policy». In the CIA’s world, any leader, no matter how blood thirsty and dictatorial, was fine as long as they remained pro-Western. It is the same construct that was used by the Obama administration to drive from power Manuel Zelaya of Honduras and Lugo and be replaced by more pro-Western leaders. And the same «institutional coup» template is being used to stage a constitutional crisis in El Salvador between the ARENA right-wing opposition-dominated Supreme Court and the leftist Farabundo Marti National Liberation (FMLN) party of President Mauricio Funes. 

And the CIA’s document predicted to ascension to power post-Stroessner of General Rodriguez, who ousted Stroessner in 1989. The document states: «A likely key power broker during a transition would be Maj. Gen. Andres Rodriguez, an Army corps commander whose power is second only to Stroessner’s». That sentence is followed by a redaction, sometimes an indicator that a named individual has an intelligence asset relationship with the CIA. The paragraph continues, «Because of his notoriety, we believe he [Rodriguez] would operate behind the scenes in a transition, rather than seek the presidency». The document iterates that if Rodriguez were to assume power in a political vacuum situation it «might lead Rodriguez to seize power and impose a tough authoritarian government» and that «relations between such a regime and the United States would probably be subject to strains over human rights and drug trafficking». In fact, after Rodriguez seized power in 1989 from Stroessner in a textbook Latin American coup, bereft of a succession struggle, Washington maintained good relations with Paraguay. 

The CIA clearly favored Chief Justice Argana as an eventual successor to Stroessner based solely on «his ability to avoid antagonizing military leaders as he has risen in the [Colorado] party ranks». The CIA analysts pointed out that Argana, according to U.S. embassy officials in Asuncion, the Paraguayan capital, was not considered «honest,» pointing to his past links with General Rodriguez. 

The CIA also appeared to favor the chief of the powerful Rural Welfare Institute [the former Land Reform Agency], Senator Juan Manuel Frutos, the son of a former president. He was described as «tenaciously anti-Communist,» a pre-requisite for American support. It was the controversial issue of land reform and providing arable land to Paraguay’s poor campesinos that sparked the institutional coup against Lugo. Paraguay’s wealthy landowners, most Colorado Party supporters, are averse to any kind of land reform that would see the nation’s landless peasants provided with useful acreage for growing crops and thus competing with the monopolistic landowners. 

The CIA sounded a discordant note on Defense Minister Gaspar Martinez, reporting that the U.S. embassy had reported in 1983 that Martinez had «amassed large sums of money». The remainder of the paragraph on Martinez’s money is redacted. 

However, a clue to what was redacted may be found in a letter, dated March 5, 1985, from the chairman of the U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on Narcotics Abuse and Control, Charles Rangel of New York, to CIA director William J. Casey. The letter states: «The Washington Post of February 27, 1985, reports that your agency has provided Senators Alphonse M. D’Amato and Arlen Specter with a report alleging the involvement of the notorious Nazi war criminal, Josef Mengele, in the narcotics traffic in Paraguay around 1970. Would you kindly provide this Committee with that report?»

The CIA paid little heed to the Paraguayan opposition parties, including the Liberal Party and the Radical Liberal Party, authorized «opposition» parties with little organization, manpower, or finances. The illegal National Accord of four opposition parties – the Christian Democrats, Authentic Radical Liberals, the Popular Colorado Movement, and the Revolutionary Febrerista Party – were also seen as weak and suffering from years in exile, mainly in Argentina. In hindsight, weakness by the exiled opposition, including current President Franco’s Authentic Radical Liberals, made them ripe for co-option by agencies like the CIA.

A 1983 Spanish-language broadcast by Radio Moscow, translated into English by the CIA’s Foreign Broadcast Information Service, appears to provide more realistic intelligence about the situation in Paraguay than can be found in the CIA’s own intelligence report on the country. The Radio Moscow report was on the following issue: «Director of Paraguayan Communist Party’s bulletin Adelante, on torture carried out by Stroessner regime. Says that CIA agents are training Paraguayan police personnel on various methods of torture».

Considering today’s penchant of the United States for torture, it can also be assumed that the clock will soon be set back in Paraguay to the CIA’s «good old days».

The same moment we made this statement: President Lugo impeachment has been done, disguising it as a strictly and cynically “constitutional” act, with an "indicted” political trial in which the most fundamental basis of the right of defense were violated, the “Parliamentary Coup” was performed. This fact should take us to analyze the new methods through which traditional powers run their “adjustments” in order to avoid losing the power they have gained through years of manipulation. Latin Americans should bear this in mind, indeed. The last attempt of traditional coup took place in Venezuela on 04/09/2002, and it ended up failing on 04/14, when Hugo Chávez regained power. As from then, the new coup models have been more subtle: Market Coup (another concept to Political Science coming from Latin America), the case of Alfonsín (occurred in Europe with Italy) to the coups in Argentina in 2001, which ended up in Fernando De la Rúa´s resignation under pressure of his legislators and leaders of his political party UCR; and the case in Honduras, 2009 when the congress revoked José Manuel Zelaya Rosales on the grounds of treason to his country and other offences. This takes us to conclude that demo liberal democracies show one Achilles heel which has been even worse with the unquestionable success of globalization, as the concentration of economic powers do not further need the “support” of national militia, but of more civilized tools. Therefore, with the control of mass media, political and economic pressures are able to put “things in place” by using pseudo legal strategies thereto.

Paraguay could not easily escape from 60 years of tyranny of Alfredo Stroessner with a bipartisan system ran to guarantee the power of conservative parties, composed by landowners and prominent businessmen. President Lugo, was able to break up with another rule of the conservatives as he joined the continental view of “Big Nation” refused by this power (last 06/22, the senator who was heading the impeachment show announced in a local radio program in Córdoba that the Paraguayan Congress denied the UNASUR and that they would take President Lugo to court for signing the PROTOCOL OF USHUAIA, on the basis of democratic commitment of MERCOSUR, along with Bolivia and Chile). We should add as “a testimony, a piece of evidence” that this same "Paraguayan Senate" still considers Taiwan Island as a representative of the people of China – being this just an example to show the Cold War mind of these conservative members of Paraguayan politics. Moreover, Lugo has been rather arrogant in certain decisions which have not been easily forgotten; e.g., the veto of the admission of a humanitarian mission which was commanded by the American militia as a result of the scandal in the region on the military agreement between USA and Colombia. In addition, there was a freezing of the Estigarribia Military Base built during Stroessner´s tyranny, together with the presence of American militia and continued during “democracy” until the arrival of Fernando Lugo – who invited Bolivian President Evo Morales to the base in order to show that there was not any North American militia in the premises (I personally reported this in 2005).

This devastating chapter of Latin American history does not end up with the consolidation of a new Coup, but with its Regional geopolitical projection; Paraguay is in the center of this geo economic group called MERCOSUR, and this slip back clearly means an extremely critical situation for the continental ideas of most of the countries in the region, but mainly this means serious damage to its most important partners: Argentina and Brazil. This is highly detrimental to Brazil’s aspirations to consolidate itself as a continental leader and to strengthen its global projection as a member of the BRICS, as it might be seen as incapable of keeping peace in the borders with a partner who supplies it with energy from Itaypu Damn. We should even add to this step backward the recent creation of the so called Pacific Alliance with its objectives as a worldwide power being seriously questioned.

On the other side of the story this means to Latin America a strong attention call on methods used for reestablishing the old political conditions based on social conflicts. For example, people assassinated in Curuguaty (main argument for the impeachment) when some cops were trying to proceed with an eviction order in a place which was full of farmers claiming rights on land and they were attacked by sniper rifles (Who set them up?). This resulted in: 17 casualties; 6 policemen and 11 farmers with a dozen of them injured. This eviction was run by the GEO Special Forces of the National Police Force, being it an elite group trained in Colombia, under Uribe´s administration, for the fight against counter-insurgency. Isn´t it hard to understand why highly trained cops were easily led to an alleged trap set by farmers? Even more, among the dead cops was the chief officer, Erven Lovera, brother of Lieutenant Alcides Lovera, chief security of President Lugo (a clear mafia message). It is necessary to understand how new intervention models are framed on the basis of social conflicts, even more when we see the police force conflict in Bolivia is worsening. This issue calls for a close outlook because of its upcoming institutional consequences.

We can assure you that this geopolitics and geo-economics coup is a step backward in the consolidation and expansion of MERCOSUR (let´s bear in mind that the Paraguayan Senate blocked Venezuela from entering a Common Market). Paraguay is a Mediterranean country, which connects the region through its long water gate rivers, strengthens its importance as food producer, with great power of hydraulic energy. It holds the key of land path among Mercosur´s partners and makes part, together with Bolivia, of the characteristic geography of the countries joining the Atlantic with the Pacific, having its territory great significance for the Guarini Aquifer Region. (Let me remind you that future wars will be over water supply, World Bank´s concept). Another relevant military-strategic issue is the Triple Frontier as in the last years the Southern Command has pointed the need to have greater participation in controlling the so called international terrorist groups and the drug dealers.

All said takes me to the simplest conclusion that if the regional organizations: Mercosur and UNASUR, its Defense Council, are not successful in controlling these measures taken by Paraguayan oligarchic groups, as during Bolivian crisis (Camba separatism) and the Ecuadorian-Colombian conflict, the importance of the latter shall be mere rhetoric and the consolidation of the continental model of current multi-polarity shall be stopped. Then, Brazil will have to lower its aspirations as leader of the region to a mere privileged partnership with the North American Power (USA is back to the region with this coup and the Pacific alliance), as it is hard to believe that the Paraguayan Senate took the decision of impeachment without the support of the American power. All in all, this means a path of no return and a direct attack to the heart of Unasur. We cannot remain aloof to this situation, indeed.

The bloody incident in Curuguaty immediately drew response from the Paraguayan legislature, with the parliamentarians and senators, mostly representatives of right-centrist parties, charging that president Lugo had lost his grip on the situation and was unable to run the country. Even the Liberal Party which upheld Lugo's candidacy in the 2008 elections distanced itself from its former protégé. Overall, Lugo faced an impeachment which he described as the parliament's “express coup”. 

Lugo's legal counselors were given practically no time to prepare for his defense vis-a-vis the parliament, but, in fact, it was clear that the critics of the president had no intention to dive into details and the senate's verdict was a forgone conclusion. The whole operation which led to the displacement of Lugo was carefully planned so as to rule out an unbiased parliamentary inquiry and was implemented as a snap offensive. No doubt, part of the motivation behind the rush was to have Lugo ousted before Paraguay's UNASUR peers could convene for consultations and decide on a set of measures in his support.  

The victory must have been easy for the coordinators of the plot from the US embassy in Asunción. It is true that Lugo's presidency was fairly nominal as the parliament, the police, and the army in Paraguay were on the side of the opposition. Having thrived on USAID funding for decades a cohort of NGOs were prepared to orchestrate mass protests if the anti-Lugo plan stalled but did not have to, and – apart from the death toll in Curuguaty – the overthrowing of the legitimate president in Paraguay deserves to be listed as an exemplary case on the record of the US intelligence community. 

A team of UNASUR envoys headed by the organization's secretary general, Venezuelan Alí Rodríguez Araque, toured Paraguay, met with Lugo and with a parliamentary delegation, and witnessed the impeachment procedure, but were unable to redirect the developments. The Paraguayan Senators showed little regard for the visitors, not to say that they were openly hostile. Lugo, it must be noted, showed a complete lack of will to par the challenge – contrary to his initial pledge to defend himself at the parliamentary hearings, he simply watched them on TV from his residence. Citing his commitment to law, the president being lawlessly ejected accepted the impeachment ruling (to which only four senators said No). Lugo's inaction can be largely attributed to his having no leverage under the circumstances: over the three years of his presidency, he failed to build a popular support base and, when the pressure peaked, still had no party of his own or a populist movement to back him. Street protests demonstrating support for Lugo erupted incoherently on the impeachment day but were dispersed by the police which used water machines, tear gas, and rubber bullets against the crowds. 

Paraguayan vice president Federico Franco who was sworn in without delay as Lugo was out is to stay in office until the ousted president's term expires in August, 2013. The elections are due the same month, and Washington openly favors Colorado party leader Horacio Cartes, a businessmen whom, according to ABC Color, US DEA briefly suspected of money laundering and complicity with drug cartels. The twist in Cartes' reputation is reflected in some of the cables put on display by WikiLeaks, and chances are US agencies have assembled such a stockpile of reports implicating Cartes that Washington should have no difficulty keeping him – like quite a few Latin American presidents – under tight control. 

While Lugo's unfinished term was marked with Paraguay's sluggish drift towards Latin American populist regimes, the right-conservative takeover promises that the country will fully submit to the US dictate. The agenda looming on the horizon likely includes efforts to destabilize UNASUR by forming within the alliance a dissenting bloc to balance the influences of Brazil, Venezuela, and Ecuador. It can be expected as well that new life will be breathed into Washington's other project – the bracketing within some sort of a new union of Chili, Peru, Columbia, and Mexico – in order to weaken Brazil internationally.

UNAUR secretary general Alí Rodríguez Araque said the dismissal of Lugo was unconstitutional and was tantamount to a disguised coup, and further stressed that many of Latin American governments would deny recognition to Franco. Brazilian president Dilma Rouseff cited the charters of UNASUR and MECOSUR to suggest expelling Paraguay from the groups over the violation of democratic norms. Argentine's Cristina Kirchner also opined that sanctions against Paraguay would be appropriate. She described the developments in the country as a coup and mentioned in the context the coup attempts against R. Correa and E. Morales and the putsch in which M. Zelaya had been deposed in Honduras. The Argentinian leader stated firmly that such undemocratic phenomena are unacceptable for the region and said action would be taken in line with the decisions to be made by MECOSUR. Ecuadoran president R. Correa expressed support for D. Rousseff's call to put to work the provisions of the UNASUR charter which warrant various forms of pressure – non-recognition of the corresponding governments, exclusion of countries guilty of undemocratic conduct from the alliance, and the closure of borders – as punishment for putschists. Venezuela's Hugo Chavez and Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega contributed similar statements on the issue. 

Prospects for a serious investigation into the shooting incident in Paraguay are bleak. The bloodshed helped the opponents of F. Lugo by adding credibility to their grievances list, while the majority of Latin America watchers discern parallels between the recent Paraguayan drama and the April, 2002 shooting at the Llaguno Bridge in Caracas. In the latter case, snipers randomly fired on anti-Chavez protesters, Chavez's supporters, and whoever happened to pass by. The incident was blamed on the forces under Chavez's command, but curious circumstances surfaced later: for example, a CNN correspondent managed to record an interview with the army officers opposing Chavez who, as it transpired, were aware of the planned sniper attack and the imminent fatalities. 

Several versions of the Curuguaty shooting incident are found on the web. One potential explanation is that the responsibility lay with Blas Riquelme who hired the snipers via his army connections but then, however, it remains unclear why the snipers fired on the police. An alternative version is that the episode was a provocation staged by the Paraguayan People's Army, a shadow group supposedly forged by the police to fight extremists. This hypothetic origin may be the reason why the army lives on despite the intense work being done in Paraguay by invited US and Colombian anti-terrorism experts. 

Alvarado Godoy wrote on the site titled Descubriendo Verdades (Disclosing the Truth) that the whole episode had been “montaje fabricado”, essentially a show following a certain blueprint. He claims to have information that the operation involved US Navy Seals who stayed in Paraguay to train the country's marines (Fusna). The storyline does not sound exotic considering how often US citizens get caught with sniper rifles across Latin America, as recently in Argentine and Bolivia. The CIA, DEA, and the US Defense Intelligence Agency routinely hire contractors to pull off covert operations with firearms being used. 

The straightforward forecast is that the pattern successfully tested by the US in Honduras and Paraguay – the pseudo-constitutional displacement of defiant leaders – will be extensively replicated in Latin America over the coming years. Yet, Washington would be naïve to believe that the accompanying violence can be contained. In Honduras, the puppet government of P. Lobo clings to power at the cost of waging a terror campaign which already took hundreds of lives of progressive politicians, journalists, trade union activists, student and Indian leaders, and that almost surely is what the future holds for Paraguay.