Military Crisis in South America: The Results of Plan Colombia

[Judi Lynn]

Military Crisis in South America: The Results of Plan Colombia

Raúl Zibechi - 3/31/2008

The military operative executed by Colombian soldiers on Ecuadorian soil to kill the FARC commander Raul Reyes is part of the strategy of the United States to alter the military balance in the region. In the crosshairs is Venezuelan and Ecuadorian oil; however it also serves as a check on Brazil as an emerging regional power.

In official declarations, the objective of the operative is the FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia), or rather narco-terrorism. But in reality, the Colombian-American military operative that violated the sovereignty of Ecuador is directed specifically at Hugo Chavez. What we are witnessing could be the first phase of a vast offensive to destabilize the "Bolivarian Revolution" and to alter the relationship between the powers in South America. This strategy has been implemented in stages. First there was Plan Colombia, intended to strengthen the military capacity of the Colombian state and place it among the most powerful on the continent. Next came the "spilling over" of the internal war into neighboring countries. The third stage seems to be "pre-emptive war," which has become the Pentagon's most widely used military strategy since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

This is the first time in a long time that Washington has taken the offensive in the region, and it is capable of putting a significant portion of Latin American countries behind its strategy. It is also a show of force during moments in which Chavez is encountering serious internal difficulties and is unable to receive support for this strategy of responding to tension with more tension.

The first thing that stands out is the lack of decency of those involved. The FARC present themselves as a revolutionary and popular organization, when in reality they are an armed group that violates human rights, recruits minors for its ranks, abuses women and the hostages that they maintain in their power, and are financed thanks to drug trafficking (see sidebar). Many countries consider them a terrorist organization.

On the other side, president Alvaro Uribe Vélez has integrated drug trafficking and was aided by paramilitary groups, as it appears in the U.S. National Security Archive. This finding was revealed by Newsweek in 2004. There it was established that in the 1990's Uribe had a role in the Medellin cartel, which was commanded by his close friend Pablo Escobar.1 This is the kind of person whom on March 4 George W. Bush called "our democratic ally." Uribe has become the main operator of White House policies in the region.

More:
http://www.globalpolitician.com/24380-colombia

[Judi Lynn]

1. If any of this seems familiar to you, you'll probably recognize it when you recall Peace Patriot

called this MONTHS AGO, as in LAST YEAR. We were forewarned about it all by an astute reader, thinker, writer already.

[Judi Lynn]

2. Any search on the author will lead you to realize there is actually a HUGE number of S. American

people who have been watching _Bush's actions toward Latin America very, very closely from the first.

Reference to _Bush's position with Colombia against its neighbors is noted here, raising some important points:

The Andean Crisis and the Geopolitics of Trade
mercredi 26 mars 2008 par Laura Carlsen

~snip~
In Latin America, some have speculated about the timing and broader strategy behind this attack. Wellington Sandoval, Ecuador’s defense minister, traveled to the border region to demonstrate the lack of Colombian troops along the 720 kilometers of shared border. He noted that the Ecuadorian army had been on the verge of capturing Reyes last November and questioned the fact that the Colombian army waited until the guerrilla leader was inside Ecuador to attack. "Why did they wait for him to come into Ecuador to attack him ?" Sandoval is reported to have asked. "Are they trying to involve us ? Unfortunately, for some time there has been an evil plan to involve Ecuador in Plan Colombia ... it’s not our war."

The use of U.S. satellite equipment to intercept signals leading to the camp and speculation about other forms of involvement have fed fears that the attack forms part of a larger plan. President Correa, speaking on his weekly radio program on March 15, expressed his suspicion that the attack formed part of a "destabilization plan" aimed at retaining the U.S. airbase in Manta, Ecuador, which he has vowed will be ousted when its current lease runs out in 2009. He also accused "Mister George W. Bush" of joining in a "criminal smear campaign" against his government.

Americas Policy Program analyst Raúl Zibechi expressed his view that the "strategy under Plan Colombia is not so much to win the internal war as to spread it into bordering countries as a way of neutralizing their increasing autonomy from Washington. Militarizing interstate relations is always good business for those who bet on supporting hegemony through military superiority."

Nobel Peace Prize winner Adolfo Pérez Esquivel stated in a letter to Correa, "There is no justification for the aggression on the part of the Colombian government and its president Alvaro Uribe on Ecuador’s border—action supported by the United States, seeking to provoke an armed regional conflict to destabilize it and lead to confrontation between brother countries ..."

From Bombs to Markets

As Latin American countries unanimously condemned the bombing and military incursion in Ecuadorian territory, the U.S. government defended Uribe’s decision to unilaterally attack a neighboring nation. Deputy Sec. of State John Negroponte reportedly called the operation "justifiable" and White house spokesperson Tom Casey stated on March 3 that the U.S. government "supports the need of the Colombian government to tackle and respond to threats posed by this terrorist organization," falling well short of a condemnation of the attack. He and Sec. of State Condoleezza Rice called for a diplomatic solution and criticized Venezuela’s deployment of troops to its border region.

Inexplicably ignoring international law, neither Barack Obama nor Hillary Clinton condemned the Colombian government’s attack in a neighboring country. Clinton went so far as to scold Ecuador and Venezuela for "criticizing Colombia’s actions in combating terrorist groups in the border region" and called for more pressure on Venezuela "to change course." By excusing the bombing in the context of Venezuela’s increasing influence in the region, Clinton seems to support an ends-justifies-the-means argument that patently erodes global governance and would set the stage for more aggressive actions on all sides.

Recently, the Bush administration has used the heightened tensions in the Andes to pressure for passage of the U.S.-Colombia free trade agreement. In a speech to Hispanic business leaders, President Bush said that failing to approve the agreement soon would play into the hands of "antagonists in Latin America, who would say that ... America cannot be trusted to stand by its friend."

Bush continued, "The Colombia agreement is pivotal to America’s national security and economic interests right now, and it is too important to be held up by politics." His remarks were pointed at the Democratic congressional leadership that has been reluctant to approve the agreement due to concerns about human rights violations and the assassination of labor leaders in Colombia.

Ironically, the push to approve the trade agreement coincides not only with the illegal attack but with an intensification of human rights violations in Colombia over recent weeks. On Mar. 6, labor unions organized a nationwide march against paramilitary violence, responsible for 80% of all crimes against humanity in the Colombian war according to the United Nations. An Uribe adviser implied the mobilizations were organized by the FARC. Following the demonstrations, several important labor leaders and march organizers were murdered.

Although the Democrats have stated their opposition to the Colombia free trade agreement, there has been some indication they might be willing to negotiate its passage by extracting a promise of improved human rights protection from the Colombian government and more trade adjustment funds for displaced U.S. workers. Many labor and civil society groups in the United States would be unsatisfied with this kind of compromise and have called for a moratorium on free trade agreements, an appeal echoed to some degree by the Democratic presidential frontrunners.

http://alternatives-international.net/article1922.html



Raúl Zibechi

[MasonJar]

3. Why are we so evil? I am sick of our arrogance and our hegemony.

The worst thing for the USA is to remain a super power; we suck at it!! Al Gore was on 60 Minutes tonight. Oh, what could have been!!!!!!