Connect with us

International

How did the events of the coup d’état take place in Chile?

How did the events of the coup d'état take place in Chile?
Photo: EFE

September 11 |

On September 11, 1973, General Augusto Pinochet led a coup d’état against the president of Chile, Salvador Allende, which ended the Popular Unity Government and began a military dictatorship that would leave nearly 40,000 victims during 17 years.

Pinochet, who three weeks earlier had been appointed by Allende as commander in chief of the Army, interrupted Allende’s democratic government, which had been elected in 1970, and established one of the cruelest and most terrible periods in the history of the South American nation.

In the same way, the military put an end to the experience of a socialist government that had emerged through the electoral process and sought to redefine the role of the State through agrarian reform, nationalizations, expropriation of the banks and greater promotion of education.

It was Allende himself who announced the military mobilization. Informed of the Navy’s uprising, Allende arrived at 07:30 local time on September 11 at La Moneda Palace.

Advertisement
20260101_dengue_cubeta_728x90
previous arrow
next arrow

Hours earlier, Navy ships had entered the port of Valparaíso, some 115 kilometers west of Santiago, and its troops occupied streets and government buildings.

President Allende, in a broadcast on Radio Corporación, asked citizens to remain calm and to stay in their workplaces, while affirming that he would remain at his post.

At 08:30 hours, the Armed Forces and Carabineros, who bombed and raided the installations of the media supporting the Popular Unity, demanded Allende’s resignation.

The president, in another radio communication, told the military that he would not resign and that he would not abandon La Moneda palace. “I point out my will to resist with whatever it takes, at the cost of my life,” he asserted.

In his last message to Chileans, broadcast on Radio Magallanes, Allende -aware of the imminent aerial bombardment of the Moneda Palace- said: “I will not resign. I will pay with my life for the loyalty of the people (…) they have the strength, they can subjugate, but social processes are not stopped neither with crime nor with force. History is ours and it is made by the people”.

Advertisement
20260101_dengue_cubeta_728x90
previous arrow
next arrow

An aide offered him an Air Force plane to leave Chile. Allende rejected the proposal and proposed a dialogue with the commanders-in-chief under certain conditions. However, Pinochet did not accept and demanded the unconditional resignation of the president.

Prior to the bombing of La Moneda, the president demanded a truce so that 11 women, including his daughter Beatriz, who were in the Executive headquarters, could leave.

At 11:50 a.m., the Hawker Hunter planes of Group 7 of the Chilean Air Force began the bombing that lasted 15 minutes. As a consequence, the government building was partially burned.

After 1:00 p.m., Allende, carrying a rifle and wearing a helmet, ordered the surrender and departure of those who were still accompanying him.

After that – based on a 2012 judicial investigation – Allende entered the Independence Hall, where “he sat down on a sofa, placed the rifle he was carrying between his legs and resting it on his chin, he fired it, dying instantly”.

Advertisement
20260101_dengue_cubeta_728x90
previous arrow
next arrow

The Military Junta, headed by Pinochet, took over the Executive and Judicial powers on September 11, and ordered the recess of Congress, establishing a 17-year military dictatorship that left at least 40,000 victims, among them 3,000 murdered or disappeared.

International

Marco Rubio launches U.S. campaign to “dismantle” the International Criminal Court

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced Monday (July 13, 2026) the launch of a diplomatic campaign aimed at “dismantling” the International Criminal Court (ICC), a key institution in the global justice system, while pressuring Washington’s allies to withdraw from the organization, which he accused of interfering in U.S. affairs.

“The ICC represents an intolerable threat to American sovereignty: it claims the authority to prosecute and even imprison military personnel and officials acting in defense of the national interests of the United States,” Rubio said.

He also accused the court of waging “a war against our country, not with bullets or missiles, but with statutes, agreements and the power of what they call international law.”

The United States is not a signatory to the Rome Statute, the treaty that established the ICC. The Trump administration has previously imposed sanctions on senior court officials over investigations into alleged war crimes committed by U.S. personnel in Afghanistan and actions targeting Israeli officials, a key U.S. ally.

“Step by step, if necessary”

The new State Department initiative proposes banning ICC personnel from entering the United States and expanding sanctions against court members and affiliated organizations.

Advertisement

20260101_dengue_cubeta_728x90

previous arrow
next arrow

The plan also includes increasing pressure on Washington’s allies, particularly countries that “benefit from the U.S. security umbrella,” to publicly reject ICC actions and distance themselves from the institution.

The Trump administration will summon foreign ambassadors and senior officials to highlight what it describes as “ICC abuses” and encourage them to withdraw from the court.

Washington also plans to increase scrutiny of countries that refuse to reject what the administration calls the ICC’s “claimed authority” while continuing to rely on U.S. assistance.

Rubio said the ICC seeks to become “a global unaccountable arbiter.” In an opinion piece published Monday in The Wall Street Journal, the secretary of state said that with the support of its allies, the United States would dismantle the ICC “step by step, if necessary.”

Advertisement

20260101_dengue_cubeta_728x90

previous arrow
next arrow

Continue Reading

International

ICE reverses course and moves forward with New Jersey migrant detention facility project

The administration of President Donald Trump has reversed course and resumed plans to convert a warehouse in New Jersey, purchased for $129.3 million, into a migrant detention facility with capacity for up to 1,500 people, according to a court filing in the state.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) submitted a document Friday to a federal court in New Jersey stating that it will continue moving forward with plans to establish the facility in the township of Roxbury.

According to the court filing, ICE had previously informed the court on June 29 that it had decided to abandon the plan to convert the property into a detention center.

However, on July 8, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials notified attorneys that, “after reconsideration,” the agency intended to continue evaluating the renovation of the warehouse for use as a migrant detention facility.

“DHS officials further informed counsel that, as of July 10, the agency’s deliberations remain ongoing,” the document stated.

Advertisement

20260101_dengue_cubeta_728x90

previous arrow
next arrow

The decision to revive the project comes two weeks after The New York Times reported that ICE had decided not to proceed with plans to establish new detention facilities as part of the Trump administration’s immigration detention and deportation strategy.

According to that report, the agency had planned to sell seven warehouses, including the Roxbury property, for more than $700 million or transfer them to other federal agencies.

The New Jersey facility proposal is part of broader efforts by the Trump administration to expand immigration enforcement infrastructure amid its push to increase detention capacity and accelerate deportations of undocumented immigrants.

Continue Reading

International

Judge rules Trump’s IRS lawsuit was a “bad faith” attempt to manipulate the judicial process

A federal judge ruled Monday that a lawsuit filed by President Donald Trump against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) was an attempt to “manipulate the judicial process” and determined that the case was brought in bad faith.

U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams ordered sanctions against the attorneys involved in the lawsuit, which led to an effort to create the now-defunct $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund aimed at addressing alleged political targeting by government institutions in favor of Trump allies.

The lawsuit was also used to justify a government order that sought to provide Trump and his companies with immunity from any past tax-related matters.

In a 56-page opinion, Williams sharply criticized both the Department of Justice (DOJ) — saying the government’s response to the case disregarded agency policies and may have violated the law — and the private attorneys who filed the lawsuit on Trump’s behalf.

“The very nature of the lawsuit and the conduct of the parties and counsel since its filing make clear that this was an attempt to use the court to provide legitimacy to an agreement designed to grant immunity to individuals and entities connected to the president and to allocate billions of taxpayer dollars to remedy grievances that the law does not recognize,” Williams wrote.

Advertisement

20260101_dengue_cubeta_728x90

previous arrow
next arrow

The judge also ordered that her opinion be referred to attorney disciplinary authorities in New York and Washington, which are already reviewing previous ethics complaints involving Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and Deputy Attorney General Stanley Woodward.

Williams criticized the Justice Department for abandoning its responsibility to defend the interests of the United States, arguing that the government entered into an agreement that departed from its position in similar legal cases, ignored DOJ policies and pursued objectives beyond what is permitted by law.

“By abandoning its responsibility to vigorously defend the interests of the United States, the government entered into an agreement that deviated from its litigation position in similar cases, ignored Department of Justice policies and achieved objectives that exceeded those authorized by law, as well as others expressly prohibited,” Williams wrote.

The judge also referred one of Trump’s private attorneys to the Florida Bar for possible disciplinary action and barred another lawyer representing the president from appearing before the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida for one year.

The ruling adds another legal setback for attorneys involved in cases connected to Trump’s administration and raises new questions about the conduct of government lawyers and private counsel involved in the IRS lawsuit.

Advertisement

20260101_dengue_cubeta_728x90

previous arrow
next arrow

Continue Reading

Trending

Central News