"What the FARC is Obama Talking About?"

[magbana]

EXCERPT:

More recently, Obama as he traveled through Florida seemed to give some contradictory statements about Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez and the Colombian terrorist group FARC.

On Thursday Obama told the Orlando Sentinel that he would meet with Chavez and "one of the obvious high priorities in my talks with President Hugo Chavez would be the fermentation of anti-American sentiment in Latin America, his support of FARC in Colombia and other issues he would want to talk about."

OK, so a strong declaration that Chavez is supporting FARC, which Obama intends to push him on.

But then on Friday he said any government supporting FARC should be isolated.

"We will shine a light on any support for the FARC that comes from neighboring governments," he said in a speech in Miami. "This behavior must be exposed to international condemnation, regional isolation, and - if need be - strong sanctions. It must not stand."

So he will meet with the leader of a country he simultaneously says should be isolated? Huh?

On Friday in an interview with the Miami Herald, Obama also used language suggesting that he's not as positive that Venezuela is supporting FARC.

"When I asked him what he would do about the estimated 37,000 Interpol-certified Colombian FARC guerrilla computer files that indicate an active support from Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa to the Colombian rebels, Obama went farther than the Bush administration," wrote the Herald's Andres Oppenheimer.

Said Obama: "I think the Organization of American States and the international community should launch an immediate investigation into this situation. We have to hold Venezuela accountable if, in fact, it is trying to ferment terrorist activities in other borders. If Venezuela has violated those rules, we should mobilize all the countries to sanction Venezuela and let them know that that's not acceptable behavior."

"If" Venezuela "is trying to ferment terrorist activities in other borders"? Just one day before Obama had asserted that Chavez was supporting FARC in Colombia.

I've asked the Obama campaign for a clarification and will get back to you as to what they say.

- jpt

UPDATE: The Obama campaign says there's nothing unusual about proposing the isolation of a country at the same time a President talks about meeting with its country's leader. (The Obama campaign cites how the U.S. is talking to North Korea via the Six-Party talks as an example. Though it might be observed, those diplomatic efforts are quite different than a presidential-level meeting.)

As for the statement, and then the very qualified "if" statement about Chavez and FARC, the Obama campaign says Obama is laying out his principles. The U.S. government says all the time, "If Iran continues its nuclear program," the Obama campaign says. I don't know. Saying, "if in fact" Venezuela is aiding FARC seemed to me at least to be different than saying "if Chavez continues aiding FARC." What do you think?

May 25, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (50)

FULL ARTICLE:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/05/what-the-farc-w.html

http://snipurl.com/2aker

[MasonJar]

1. Chavez was dealing with FARC to get prisoners released, a situation

that Bush and the rightest leader of Columbia have now effectively dismantled. If anyone should be investigated it is the Bush administration. Until that happens, I do NOT want to hear about any other world leader. We are the terrorists!

[gbscar]

7. He wasn't going to get all of them released, only a token few in order to force concessions...

...such as the ill-fated and ill-conceived "demilitarized zone", which is what FARC has always demanded, from a better bargaining position.

Not to mention that none of FARC's "economic" hostages were ever part of these negotiations anyways, even though they're more numerous than the politicians and officers.

But no...it was all going to be peacefully resolved just around the corner, until evil Uribe blocked everything.

For the record, I do think Uribe blocked further progress, but I question how much of it is reality and how much is just...castles in the sky. I can see only very few more people getting released (not even Betancourt, the most important human "merchandise" in FARC's hands, as cold as that sounds) until the pressure switched over to the government's side and the DMZ was demanded one again, leading us to the same circle. Even a DMZ wouldn't automatically resolve the issue, it would just give FARC a concession in order to get them to accept to talk to the Colombian government directly, so that's yet another hoop that Chavez can't exactly resolve.

As for Chavez's links to FARC, they remain to be proven and several claims are suspect, and even if he himself has none there is always the possibility that other officials do have such connections, explaining the actual content of the files publicly released so far (none of which are terribly incriminating for Chavez himself, per se, at least at this time).

Whatever Obama actually does, at least he publicly recognized that the issue should be looked into. Not dismissed because Chávez is closer to his politics than, say, Uribe.

[EFerrari]

2. Coincidentally, I saw a doc on the Cuban Five last night.

What the f was Obama doing talking to a front group for terrorists? :shrug:

I'm going to ask his campaign.

[magbana]

3. CANF may be an obligatory stop for most candidates, but ususally . . .

the campaign strategy is to make it a SHORT visit with a SHORT speech that says crappy things about Fidel and then make a quick exit. What was unusual about Obama's speech to CANF on Friday is that it was LONG an fodcused on a wide variety of Latina American issues.. Given his nuanced and not so nuanced shifts on what he has been saying about Chavez, I think the whole point of his CANF speech was to lett the world know that he is ready to kick ass in Venezuela. This makes me think that his advisors are privy to information suggesting the US is closing in on Chavez a la the article I posted about the Pentagon moving around the chess pieces.

His speech was unfortunate, but certainly meant to go well beyond the CANF folks.

[EFerrari]

4. The news from FARC tends to back up that assessment.

And, it's still idiocy.

Well, you go to war with the so called progressive candidates you have. :(

[roody]

5. Maybe Obama should shut the farc up.

[magbana]

6. AMEN!!

[Zorro]

8. I prefer he shut the FARC down

[EFerrari]

9. Does anyone have a good email for the Obama campaign

besides the general one at their site?

The more I think about this, the worse it seems to me.

He's going to have to "isolate" every left leaning government in Latin America. :shrug: