It must have been the third or fourth rave review of Vijay Prashad’s work that pushed Washington Bullets to the top of my TBR. Specifically, a fellow reviewer had called Washington Bullets a “critical (yet still accessible) intro” to US imperialism. I had already been primed on the topic by works like Inventing Reality and Manufacturing Consent as well as myriad YouTube channels and podcasts, but the story of US imperialism is so winding and chasmic that it seems no amount of sources could cover it all.
Prashad opens Washington Bullets by telling us that his personal library, for example, contains an entire bookshelf of International Monetary Fund (IMF) reports alone. CIA coups make up another section of Prashad’s library.
I have files and files of government documents that had investigated old wars and new wars, bloodshed that destabilized countries in the service of the powerful and the rich.
Vijay Prashad, Washington Bullets, p. 13
Sources
At the other end of the book, Prashad elaborates in a section titled “Sources”:
A book like this relies upon a wide range of sources, but more than that, it relies upon a lifetime of activity and of reading. Listing all the books and articles would surely make this book double its current size. I have been involved — in one way or another — in the left movement for decades, and in these decades have been active in campaigns against the criminal behavior of imperialism. And I have been reading about this behavior in pamphlets and newspapers for these past many decades. There is no greater clarity for a writer than being involved in the very process that they wish to write about; distance is useful, surely, but distance can also create a false sense of dispassion.
Vijay Prashad, Washington Bullets, p. 155
Prashad’s unconventional method of sharing his sources actually brings me to my first criticism of the book. “Sources” is not a bibliography as one would expect, but rather an appendix of sorts in which Prashad explains how he came upon a handful of his sources. He takes readers on a journey of his research as he approached mainstream media stories about topics like the Grenadian Revolution by the New York Times with skepticism. In this case, he shares the name and date of the news story — but only to make his point and not as a matter of necessity.
Prashad shares sources for further reading about Grenada such as The Grenada Revolution: Reflections and Lessons and Maurice Bishop Speaks, but Grenada was only one of dozens of revolutions and coups that Prashad covered. There are no footnotes, and there is no bibliography or index. This might seem picky of me, but Washington Bullets reads like a sampler of US imperialist crimes. Prashad teases us with details of each story, leaving readers wanting to dive deeper but forced to do it on our own. What’s worse, many of his readers are likely new to learning about US imperialism and wouldn’t have the discerning research skills that Prashad told us he has honed for decades.
From what I read in Washington Bullets, I agree with Vijay Prashad ideologically. That is what matters most. I’m glad that my book review is criticizing structural issues and not flawed logic or racist thinking. Prashad is a trusted voice in leftist literature, so while I always hold onto my skepticism, I have no reason to disbelieve the historicity of his claims. Still, I’d feel better if I knew where he got more of his information from.
Okinawa
For example, Prashad tells us a story about the US military base in Okinawa, Japan. “For decades now,” says Prashad in 2020, “Okinawans have complained about the creation of enclaves of their island that operate as places for the recreation of US soldiers.” Okinawans like Suzuyo Takazato, head of the Okinawa Women Act Against Military Violence, have never wanted this base — and the rampant sexual violence that has come with it — on their island. In 2009, Japan’s Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama and Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada were both opposed to having the US base on the island. Due to pressure from Obama and his officials, Hatoyama’s party “was forced to accept almost all the US demands,” but “It was not enough. The US wanted more. Hatoyama told Obama at a dinner April 2010 that he would do what the US said. The tone of Obama’s response was so sharp that the Japanese decided to keep no record of the conversation.”
In addition to the disgust I am left with for America’s favorite president of my lifetime, I’m wondering how Prashad knows about a conversation whose records haven’t been kept. Perhaps a US government document acknowledges the conversation, although I would be a bit surprised as the US does not look like the good guys here. I wouldn’t even know where to look to back up Prashad’s claims about Obama’s tone over dinner.
A regime change whirlwind
Unfortunately, I have a greater criticism of Washington Bullets, and that was the style of storytelling. Prashad groups historical tales by date or by similar trajectories, but he never sits down and tells each tale in full. This made it nearly impossible for me to retain information.
The United States, often through the CIA, has done a lot of coups. The government’s regime change experts have the process down to a science — which Prashad actually shares in Washington Bullets in a section titled “Manual for Regime Change.” The similarities between this process for government overthrow in every corner of the world are shocking. That’s the point. You could substitute out the names of the CIA officials, the year, the revolutionary leaders, the countries involved and the companies invested, and see the same story play out again and again. The problem is that I now don’t have a solid understanding of any one of the conflicts at hand.
“Manual for Regime Change” primarily focused on the US conspiracy against Jacobo Árbenz in Guatemala in the 50s and the coup against Salvador Allende in Chile in the 70s. Along the way, Prashad also pulls details from 1962 Cuba, 1973 Brazil, 1953 British Guiana, 1947 France, 1962 Dominican Republic, 1953 Iran, 1960 Congo, 1965 Indonesia/Korea/Vietnam/China, and 1971 Sudan — in that order!
If you were wondering, the steps in the manual for regime change are as follows:
- Lobby “public” opinion
- Appoint the right man on the ground
- Make sure the Generals are ready
- Make the economy scream
- Diplomatic isolation
- Organize mass protests
- Green light
- A Study of Assassination
- Deny
Each step includes an example of a time when it was implemented in the coups and other conspiracies I listed above. A step would get somewhere between one and four pages. As I’ve said, I understand Prashad’s aim in demonstrating how the US, primarily through the CIA and often through USAID, follows one regime change handbook all over the globe. I personally would have retained more information if the author had structured this chapter differently.
If I could have reorganized this section of Washington Bullets, I may have begun by listing each step with a brief description up front. It would sound so crazy that you might not believe me when I tell you that the “greatest country on earth” could ever do things like this. “Ah,” I would say, “I’ve brought examples,” as I crack open my proverbial briefcase. I would tell you the story of the overthrow of Árbenz followed by that of Allende. You are shocked at how precisely these stories fit within the Manual for Regime Change. “Well, that was only two times,” you say. You are speechless as you glance down and see the numerous footnotes connecting these exact same actors and acronyms to instances of state violence in the Dominican Republic, France, and everywhere in between. The only thing in which the United States does not discriminate is which country they will destroy next for their own capital gain.
Conclusion
I’m glad that Washington Bullets is accessible for so many people, even if it wasn’t for me. Short but packed with examples, the book makes a very strong case that, for most of the world, the American flag evokes not liberty but terror.