Though it deserves clarification that it seems to largely be the US Republicans who are buddy-buddy with torturers. Whereas the Democrats (e.g. Carter, Clinton) spoke out against the death squads, when there's a Republican in power they seem to look on fondly, pat their heads and say "That's my boy..."
Also, is there any proof that it wasn't due to American interference? I'm just considering the other side of the equation (if that's the right metaphor).
Well, anything is
literally possible. But we have declassified US national security documents which state they were in contact with the various stakeholders before the inauguration, and proposing that those same sorts of measures to destabilize the economy should be conducted. When those same stakeholders then implement actions which have the exact same effect as the ones in the US documents, that
might just be a pure coincidence. As for economic disruption, in those third-world economies they tend to have a small number pf plutocrats who own an excessive amount of the wealth (poor countries tend to have
less equal wealth distribution), so a select few can much more easily derail the economy to make the government look bad.
We know a fair amount from
declassified documents, but not all documents are available for inspection, and obviously some information would not have been written down during an operation which was basically a conspiracy to overthrow a political leader (it doesn't work if people know you are behind it).
Notably, on
March 18th it was noted that Obama has order the declassification of documents regarding the US's role in another coup - the 1976 Argentinian coup. So presumably we're going to know a lot more about that, soon.