Follow us on social

Shutterstock_1801253857-scaled

The direct line from Portland to authoritarian crackdowns around the world

We shouldn’t be surprised to see federal troops using violence to crack down on protests in American streets — the US has been helping foreign governments do it for decades

Analysis | Washington Politics

This summer, I watched from 3,000 miles away as my hometown of Portland, Ore. became the site of a military occupation. I saw photographs of unidentified federal agents in military fatigues brandishing weapons of war mere blocks from my high school. The sidewalks we used to run during cross country practice were hazy with tear gas. The concert hall where for years my choir sang with the Oregon Symphony, the library I’ve visited since I was born, and the Catholic church where we held my great-aunt’s funeral are all footsteps away from the clashes between federal agents and Oregonians of all ages, races, and religions.

Acting-Deputy Secretary for the Department of Homeland Security Ken Cucinelli called anti-racist protesters in Portland “terrorists.” They’re the furthest thing from it. The people who came out to protest are people I know and love — classmates from elementary school, my teachers, fellow union members from my first job as a lifeguard, priests from my church, and my cousins. During one of many sleepless nights in July, I began thinking about the parallels between what I was seeing in Portland and decades of U.S. foreign policy: supporting militarized security forces who wreak violence on the places abroad where people call home, and disregarding human rights in the name of fighting “terrorists.”

The deployment of federal agents to Portland was alarming partly for its chilling parallels with vicious crackdowns against protestors in authoritarian nations around the globe — especially since the United States often claims that what sets it apart from authoritarian regimes is the right to protest and openly criticize the government.

And yet, perhaps the events in Portland should not have been surprising to anyone. What happened in Portland was not an aberration or unprecedented, but a time-honored American foreign policy tactic, this time directed against American citizens. One can draw a direct line between the Trump administration’s use of paramilitary forces to suppress protest domestically, and the tendency of security forces in foreign countries to violently suppress their own citizenry — security forces that for years have been backed, funded, trained, and armed by the United States government.

While Americans are increasingly calling to dismantle violent policing, our government’s provision of military assistance to security forces abroad that abuse human rights often goes unchallenged. The examples are abundant: in Iraq, which received over a billion dollars in security aid from the United States last year, security forces killed over 500 civilians and injured 20,000 during protests last October. In Burkina Faso, which received $15 million in security aid, government forces recently murdered 200 people and left their bodies in mass graves. And in the Philippines, security forces have killed 27,000 people since 2016, yet in 2018, the United States spent $78 million to provide these same security forces with weapons and training

U.S. government officials argue that foreign civilian casualties are a necessary evil, a side effect of arming foreign governments to combat terrorism. But these are the same arguments used for decades to justify the murder of Black Americans by police officers; that in the name of “security” our government somehow has the authority to extrajudicially execute people of color at home and abroad. The common thread between these phenomena is that our federal government is deeply invested in violent and coercive means to achieve its ends both at home and abroad.

Those who object to militarized policing and authoritarian crackdowns in the United States should also object to the human rights violations committed by foreign security forces who are trained, funded, and equipped by the United States. If the scenes out of Portland strike you as a violation of our basic human and civil rights, you should extend that same concern for rights and dignity to the citizens all over the world. For every person like myself who was horrified to see the city where she grew up and the places she loves occupied by federal paramilitary agents, tear-gassing her friends and family, there are thousands of people in foreign countries watching their own security forces do the same — and often much worse — with the funding and the explicit support of the United States.

Robert P. Alvarez / Shutterstock.com
Analysis | Washington Politics
The Ukraine War at two years: By the numbers


KYIV, UKRAINE - July 12, 2023: Destroyed and burned Russian military tanks and parts of equipment are exhibited at the Mykhailivska square in Kyiv city centre. (Oleksandr Popenko/Shutterstock)

The Ukraine War at two years: By the numbers

Europe

Two years ago on Feb. 24, 2022, the world watched as Russian tanks rolled into the outskirts of Kyiv and missiles struck the capital city.

Contrary to initial predictions, Kyiv never fell, but the country today remains embroiled in conflict. The front line holds in the southeastern region of the country, with contested areas largely focused on the Russian-speaking Donbas and port cities around the Black Sea.

keep readingShow less
Navalny's death shouldn't close off talks with Putin

A woman lays flowers at the monument to the victims of political repressions following the death of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny, in Moscow, Russia February 16, 2024. REUTERS/Stringer

Navalny's death shouldn't close off talks with Putin

Analysis

President Biden was entirely correct in the first part of his judgment on the death of Alexei Navalny: “Putin is responsible, whether he ordered it, or he is responsible for the circumstances he put that man in.” Even if Navalny eventually died of “natural causes,” his previous poisoning, and the circumstances of his imprisonment, must obviously be considered as critical factors in his death.

For his tremendous courage in returning to Russia after his medical treatment in the West — knowing well the dangers that he faced — the memory of Navalny should be held in great honor. He joins the immense list of Russians who have died for their beliefs at the hands of the state. Public expressions of anger and disgust at the manner of his death are justified and correct.

keep readingShow less
Big US investors prop up the nuclear weapons industry

ProStockStudio via shutterstock.com

Big US investors prop up the nuclear weapons industry

Military Industrial Complex

Nuclear weapons aren’t just a threat to human survival, they’re a multi-billion-dollar business supported by some of the biggest institutional investors in the U.S. according to new data released today by the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) and PAX, the largest peace organization in the Netherlands.

For the third year in a row, globally, the number of investors in nuclear weapons producers has fallen but the overall amount invested in these companies has increased, largely thanks to some of the biggest investment banks and funds in the U.S.

keep readingShow less

Israel-Gaza Crisis

Latest