US Foreign Policy
The Upside-Down World of Bush and Uribe: Slandering Chávez and the FARC
President George W. Bush yesterday declared, “America fully supports Colombia’s democracy. We firmly oppose any acts of aggression that could destabilize the region.” He then made clear that Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez’s deployment of troops to the border with Colombia, which Bush labeled as “provocative maneuvers,” were the acts of aggression that the United States opposed. These statements represent a denial of reality that is extreme for even the Bush administration. After all, the origin of this crisis was Colombia’s military offensive into Ecuadorian territory. It was this blatant violation of national sovereignty that represents the “act of aggression that could destabilize the region.” And yet, Bush is painting the aggressor as the victim and a neighboring nation that has not violated the sovereignty of another country and seeks to defend itself against a similar attack as that endured by Ecuador as the provocateur. Bush is not alone in his politically-motivated assault on Chávez, the Uribe government in Colombia has also attacked the Venezuelan president and others with blatant lies and gross exaggerations. Read more»
Oil and US Policy Toward Colombia
The Bush administration has come up with numerous justifications for its annual handout of around $700 million in mostly military aid to Colombia. Of these, the war on drugs and the urgency of combating “narco-terrorists,” which is code for battling guerrillas from the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia – People’s Army (FARC-EP), are the most common. Another oft-cited, and far more unlikely, reason for beefing up Colombia’s military is the administration’s ostensible desire to “defend democracy” in Colombia. There is, however, another factor driving US involvement in Colombia that receives rather less public attention: oil. Read more»
The Prospects for Peace in Colombia
While some are holding out hope for success in the peace talks currently being conducted between the Uribe administration and the National Liberation Army (ELN), there is virtually no possibility of the current government achieving peace with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). However, there is reason to be cautiously optimistic regarding the possibility that a post-Uribe government and the FARC could reach a negotiated peace. Read more»
Bush Continues to Support Colombia’s Para-State
As the Colombian government becomes increasingly engulfed by the rapidly evolving “para-politics” scandal, the Bush administration refuses to question the legitimacy of democracy in Colombia. The US government continues to stand firmly behind Colombian President Alvaro Uribe, Washington’s closest ally in Latin America, despite the fact that dozens of pro-Uribe legislators, the president’s former campaign advisor and head of Colombia’s secret police, the family of his foreign minister, and several top military officials have all been implicated in the scandal linking government representatives to right-wing paramilitary death squads. Despite all the overwhelming evidence suggesting a significant democratic deficit, the Bush administration has not once questioned the legitimacy of Colombia’s democracy or re-evaluated its massive funding of a government and military closely linked to paramilitaries on the US State Department’s list of terrorist organizations. Read more»
Colombia’s Conflict and the Lack of a Regional Response: Why the United States is Part of the Problem
What is often called the Colombian civil war is in reality a regional conflict, heavily implicating at least Venezuela, Ecuador and Peru too. Yet despite this, there has been little in the way of a coordinated regional response. The reasons for this are complex, but much of the responsibility lies with the United States. Its approach to the region is hindering cross-border cooperation, thereby undermining economic and security prospects. Read more»
Power and Double Standards in the U.S. Legal System: The Cases of Coca-Cola and the FARC
What does the recent dismissal of the suit accusing Coca-Cola and its Colombian bottlers of complicity in human rights abuses have to do with the indictment in the United States of a Colombian guerrilla leader on charges of kidnapping, murder, drug trafficking and terrorism? At first glance, one may think very little. However, interesting legal and political questions emerge from the comparison of these two cases. For example, why, how and under what terms can groups—whether political such as the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) or economic such as Coca-Cola—be brought to account for their actions abroad through the U.S. legal system? Read more»
U.S. Willing to Deploy Combat Troops to Colombia
While the U.S. mainstream media widely-reported the U.S. Department of Justice’s recent indictment of 50 rebel leaders belonging to the leftist Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), an announcement by the State Department the next day received surprisingly little coverage. On March 24, Assistant Secretary of State Anne Patterson told Colombia’s Radio Caracol that, while the United States would not initiate any unilateral military action to capture FARC leaders, it would intervene if invited by the Colombian government. Given that the U.S. government’s intervention in Colombia already involves everything but the deployment of U.S. combat troops, it is clear that Patterson’s comments were intended to illustrate the Bush administration’s willingness to deploy U.S. troops to Colombia to combat FARC guerrillas. Read more»