Tuesday, February 20, 2007

Are We Financing Terror?


Shakedown in Colombia, my mom's homeland and the destination for 700 million of our tax dollars every year to combat left-wing guerrillas.

Says the Washington Post: The political scandal that forced Colombia's foreign minister to quit and put other close allies of President Alvaro Uribe in jail is being driven in large part by a rebel-turned-senator who has defied death threats to become the opposition's most fearless provocateur.
***
The following post might be a little long, so here are bullets:

-- On Monday, Colombia's foreign minister, Maria Consuelo Araujo, resigned following allegations that her brother and father were involved in dealings with murderous right wing militias.

-- The civil war in Colombia has pit leftist rebels against right wing paramilitary groups. Both groups have killed civilians indiscriminately in this 50+ year war.

-- Colombia is a staunch U.S. ally and receives $700 million in U.S.-aid every year to combat the guerrillas and there are concerns that some of the money may be funding paramilitary groups that are just as violent.

-- Charges that the Colombian government, up to the presidency, is in bed with the paramilitaries could be a huge blow for U.S./Colombian relations. W does not need another human rights crisis.


***
Here's how things work in Colombia: since the 1950s, a period now referred to as "La Violencia," or The Violence, the country has been embroiled in a civil war that was sorta placated during the advent of the drug cartels in the late 70s through the 90s. Since then, after the druglords were killed or shipped off to jail here in the States, the armed forces of the Revolutionary Armed Forces (FARC, Spanish acronym), have taken over the country's drug trade and have waged war on the country's established government. Kidnappings and bombings are the stock and trade of this group, who have kidnapped countless civilians and politicians and foreigners.

The Colombian government has relied on the support of the U.S. to combat the guerrillas and the country's current President, Alvaro Uribe, is BFF with W. In fact, in spite of his conservative views, people I spoke to in Colombia cited their president's amicable relationship with Washington as a huge win for the country.

However, as is the case with all U.S.-funded counter-insurgency movements, the situation in Colombia is fraught with human rights violations. In the fervor to weed out rebels, many innocent people have been killed by right wing paramilitary groups who gun down anyone suspected of having ties to the FARC. Some human rights groups claim the U.S. supports the paramilitaries, who by now have become a terrorist group of their own.

So what does this mean for U.S./Colombian relations now?

Our new democratic congress will rightfully demand more accountability from the Colombian government. Still, the problem remains that a war that has raged on for half a century can't be quelled with hundreds of millions of dollars. While this kinda sounds like the situation in Iraq, the situation in Colombia has shown remarkable signs of an upswing. The economy is growing, the country is even embracing gay rights, and Bogota is by far one of the most cosmopolitan and exciting cities in Latin America. With all of this potential harnessed into one place you have to wonder what the missing piece of the puzzle is for a nation so ravaged by war?

I guess money can't fix everything.






4 comments:

James Henry Bailey said...

Our new democratic congress will rightfully demand more accountability from the Colombian government.

I am not 100% certain the the Democrats will demand any accountability on this. I am hopeful that they see the thin line being tread in Colombia.

Though I would not be surprised to see them work to turn the county over to FARC-EP and watch the violence really explode. Then, instead of 700 million, we can send 2 billion in humanitarian aid. That would be a "win/win" by liberal standards!

Unknown said...

Let's fight the war on drugs here in the U.S. rather than exporting the battle to South America, or any place else.

Follow the money--who benefits from having the fight exported, at the cost of hundreds of millions?

(teensy cavil, Mr. B. Hasn't the congress been "small d" democratic since the inception of the Union?)

Agape

Anonymous said...

In most of these modern crises, we have seen that negotiation succeed more than war. But no--we don't negotiate with terrorists unless you happen to be Yasser Arafat. How did that happen? Because we had smart people who knew how to compomise with people who we may label as so-called terrorists. I think Bin Laden should hang for killing so many innocent people but we use the term "evil doers" a little too often. Many of these people truly believe they are doing the right thing just like a bunch of oppressed colonists felt 230 yearas ago. During the Revolutionary War, we won because we fought "dirty" and used guerrilla tactics against a more orderly and "civilzed" English army. If you truly believe in your cause and you are willing to die for it, what is funding a war going to do for anyone? Don't expect Bush to win a Nobel Peace prize for his exemplary efforts in freeing the Iraqis, who, by the way, aren't our biggest fans. Furthermore, Bush is not God. This is why negotiation is important. Take the Israeli/Palastinian conflict. It's holy land and I don't think God is too happy about breaking the 7th commandment "Thou Shalt Not Kill". For all you literal Bible fundamentalists, where does it say you can kill enlisted army people but not civilians. Practice what you preach.

Rob said...

It's holy land and I don't think God is too happy about breaking the 7th commandment "Thou Shalt Not Kill".

Ummmm....Sorry to shoot a hole in your pomposity, but that's the 5th commandment which says "you shall not murder".