Sun Blogs: Bird's Eye View
Facebook, Cocaine and Hugo Chavez
February 10, 2008 - 11:59amWhat do Facebook, cocaine and Hugo Chavez all have in common? They only share one thing that I’m aware of- the five decade-long Colombian civil war. This week, following impressive use of Facebook by one average Colombian, Oscar Morales, in order to mobilize the Colombian population, protestors marched within the country and in nearly 100 cities abroad. They demanded an end to the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia (FARC) guerilla movement, an end to the violence and kidnapping. And though the United States did not cause this conflict and is not actively participating, the case of Colombia clearly shows the influence that Americans, from the average person to policy makers have on the world around them.
Colombia has one of the most tragic political histories of any Latin American country. Following bloody partisan conflict, known as “La Violencia” in the mid-20th century, the Marxist-inspired FARC began a revolutionary campaign. Later on, the National Liberation Army (ELN) also began an insurgent campaign against the government. The continued weakness of the Colombian government has made it impossible for it to suppress the conflict and neither guerilla group has ever gained enough strength to take over the country. With the rise of cocaine in the 1970’s and 1980’s, drug cartels and drug-violence further weakened the government and gave guerilla groups a convenient new source of funds. Due to the government’s continued inability to maintain security, landowners and other conservative elements formed paramilitary groups, most notably the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), which also tapped into the growing drug trade and escalated the violence. Both the guerillas and paramilitaries have relied on kidnappings and extortion, as well as drugs, to fund their operations. Human rights abuses have been endemic among all parties, from the guerillas, to the paramilitaries, to the military itself.
Under President Clinton, the United States supported the efforts of the Colombian government to root out drug producers through “Plan Colombia.” Through this, the U.S .vastly increased military aid to the Colombian government, in addition to stationing U.S. military advisors and personnel in the country. Investment in “Plan Colombia” has not brought the conflict closer to conclusion and neither has it significantly decreased the flow of cocaine into the United States. Instead, it has magnified the destruction for already poor peasants in the countryside. In 2006, the paramilitary groups demobilized, while the FARC and ELN continued their insurgencies.
United States policy in Colombia has been a failure. The continuing demand for drugs in the United States, as well as the lure of a steady income in a desperately poor environment, makes it nearly impossible to wipe out supply. Instead, American policy makers should focus on our drug problem and help Americans realize that what they do has an impact on the world around them. Military aid in the form of Plan Columbia is also a symptom of a wider problem in U.S. foreign policy- seeing military intervention as a cure-all for the problems of instability across the world. Rather than jumping to intervention as a solution, American foreign policy makers should encourage an investment in the development of a sustainable Colombian economy and, maybe more importantly, strong institutions to consolidate a Colombian state that can provide both stability and justice to its people, not justweapons and training to a semi-institutionalized military.
In January of this year, Colombia made the news for the successful release of two hostages by the FARC. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, the neo-conservative hawks’ favorite Latin American target, negotiated the release. Though Chavez is alleged to have given aid to the guerillas, his pressure encouraged the guerillas to release the hostages, who had been held for over six years. And though such a hostage release might show a change of heart on the part of the guerillas, it is estimated they still hold over 750 hostages, including one of the 2002 Presidential candidates.
The situation in Colombia exemplifies the failures of our foreign policy, focusing on military intervention and aid, rather than the construction of stable and effective civil societies. If we truly want to bring democracy and development to the developing world, specifically Colombia; we need to focus on enabling the Colombian people to control their own destiny. An important part of this is security- but it is not the security that more helicopter gun ships and military advisors brings, it is the stability of functioning and uncorrupt courts, responsible politicians, and an effectively developing economy. Certainly the drug trade contributes to the ineffective institutions and serves to finance the guerillas, but the fault is with American drug consumers, rather than poor farmers looking to eek a living out of the land. Illicit drug use is a problem that we need to face as a country, and no amount of defoliation and military campaigns in Latin America will ever make the poor farmer think that it is worth his while to grow coffee rather than coca. We, as Americans, need to realize our impact on the world, and our impact on foreign societies. Colombia is such a case, from American patterns of consumption to our obsession with military spending; it shows our impact on the world around us. The sooner we realize our impact beyond our borders, the better off we, and everyone else will be.
This brings us to now. And it brings us to a time when Colombians are actively demanding an end to the violence. The creation of a popular movement through Facebook is something novel and encouraging for the future since it allows people to participate and make demands. Given the dysfunctional nature of the Colombian state, networking sites and the Internet may provide a way for the Colombian people to organize a virtual civil society, safe from violence that can then be translated into action in the real world. Who could have imagined that a networking site for college students could be translated into a mass movement in a country a world away from Mark Zuckerberg’s privileged Harvard? Where does it go from here, and where do we as Americans go from here?
Time will tell.
Confused, outdated claims about Colombia
Dear Rob,
I'll resist the temptation to comment on all the typos in your piece about Colombia, and will instead focus on the confused, outdated substance. Colombia is a far more secure place than it was just six years ago. Kidnappings in Colombia are down more than 70 percent since 2002, and the murder rate has also nose-dived. Terrorist attacks in major cities, including the capital, are now almost unheard of, and tourism is growing quickly.
"Plan Colombia" has indeed brought the conflict closer to a solution. The ELN, having been reduced to almost complete insignificance, is now in negotiations with the government. The para-militaries, as you note, have demobilized (although their remnants are still a factor). The country's biggest problem by far remains the FARC, but that group is now losing badly against the Colombian military.
All of this is due in part to U.S. assistance, but even more so to the Colombian government's own fearlessness in taking on the terrorists. Nearly every day brings reports of FARC desertions, or the arrest and killing of FARC leadership by the Colombian military.
You are wrong when you say that U.S. foreign policy sees military aid as a "cure-all" in Colombia. U.S. aid to Colombia devotes enormous resources to helping Colombia build strong institutions. For example, with U.S. assistance the entire Colombian criminal justice system was recently overhauled, from an inefficient paper-based process to the oral accusatorial system we use in the United States. U.S. efforts also, among other things, encourage prison reform and the development of alternative livlihoods for farmers who no longer grow coca. Next year's budget calls for even greater emphasis on these important works.
It's no surprise that the FARC and its sympathizers (i.e., Venezuela, and maybe you) are pressing for an end to the Colombian military enslaught. After all, that's what you'd expect a group to do when it is facing its own anhiliation.
Reply to Your Criticism
http://www.state.gov/p/wha/rls/fs/2001/1042.htm
Given that these figures are from 2001 (but still characterize the nature of Plan Colombia)
I would define $519.8 million towards military aid versus $122 million towards human rights/democracy development (which is substantial), but only $81 million towards economic alternatives to growing coca. And then there's the police support of $115.6 million which is somewhere in between institution building and military aid. I would say the balance is tipped heavily towards military aid.
And I should have mentioned the amnesty program for guerrilla deserters, although it should be mentioned that FARC is not cash-poor and (according to the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7217817.stm) sold over 600 tons of cocaine last year. And despite progress over the past 6 years, it's going to take longer than short period of time to build a stable civil society after half a century of conflict (and that's not a personal attack against Colombia, it's a monumental task.) The continuing security issue can be illustrated through the continued murders of labor organizers (http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/11/07/colomb17269.htm), including over 400 killed during the Uribe government (http://hrw.org/english/docs/2008/02/01/colomb17975.htm.) Both of those articles are within the past six months as well.
Perhaps I should have done more to highlight progress made in Colombia as compared to an earlier time, and thank you for bringing up several points I should have considered in greater depth, but I think the situation remains unstable and there is a great challenge for the future.
Wrong again: crime against labor leaders is way down too
Rob,
Your comment about labor-leader murders in Colombia is a red herring perpetuated by U.S. labor unions and their supporters, whose real motive is to tank the U.S.-Colombia free trade agreement. The same Human Rights Watch that cited the "continued murders of labor organizers" also acknowledges that only five Colombian labor leaders, along with 21 rank-and-file members, were killed during the first 11 months of 2007. (http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/11/07/colomb17269.htm) Some commentators have noted that, compared to the overall homicide rate, Colombian unionists are now actually less likely to be murdered than the average Colombian citizen. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/08/AR200711...)
So if 400 union members have been killed since Uribe took office in 2002, and now we're down to 26 in almost a year, I'd say that's pretty good progress. It certainly doesn't argue for an about-face on Plan Colombia.
Colombia
Ron, Where do you get your information? You are very misinformed about Colombia. I have family in Colombia and travel to Colombia every year. The majority of kidnappings and violence occurred under the old policies. The new policies have made Colombia very safe. Why don't you report how much violence has declined over the last 7 years. When Clinton was President I couldn't drive between major cities because it was too dangerous. Now I can travel between cities because it's safe. I'm traveling to Colombia next month and I'm not scared one bit. Eight years ago I couldn't say the same. It's a shame reporters like yourself do not report the real facts. Colombia's economy is booming right now because safety is good. Colomia will always produce cocaine because millions of Americans spend billions of dollars sniffing up on a daily basis. Will this ever stop ? NO. Why? Because Americans love cocaine. Nobody can change this. Hollywood stars love talking against the Iraq war yet they do not have any problem sniffing lines. Basically cocaine sniffers( hollywood stars ) are financing the terrorist in Colombia. The Colombian terrorist make billions because of Americans. Without the United States help Colombia would never be able to fight the terrorist because they can't afford too. Right now Colombia is heading in the right direction. Why change the current policy if its working? To stop production you have to stop demand. In my opinion the demand will never stop. Hollywood stars get arrested for cocaine and charges are dropped. Why? Maybe the United States should start locking up all the consumers. Instead of dropping cocaine charges on stars like lohan we should be locking her up for 1 year. Maybe this will stop people from consuming.
Thank you for commenting
Thanks for your feedback. I believe that the United States bares a lot of responsibility for the production of cocaine in Colombia and a lot of the problems that such an "industry" causes (the violence and corruption.) I tried to point that out in my post and I'm sorry that it wasn't clear enough. However, though the security situation has improved under Uribe, there remain great human rights concerns (including the murder of over 400 labor organizers during Uribe's time in office: http://hrw.org/english/docs/2008/02/01/colomb17975.htm, http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/11/07/colomb17269.htm.
And though the guerrillas are being weakened by government policies (including the amnesty plans) they remain well-financed due to their involvement in the drug trade. So although their numbers are decreasing, their capabilities may not be. In writing my piece I wanted to bring up some of the important issues relating to Colombia, and especially how the US relates to them. I apologize if I did not emphasize my stance on cocaine consumption enough, and thank you for your comment.
Colombia
Dear Rob, I read your responses and still believe you're a very misinformed person. I have plenty of family in Colombia and follow the news everyday in Colombia. I don't rely on left leaning sites to state my opinions. President Uribe has made Colombia safer for everybody including labor unions. This is a fact! President Uribe enjoys a 70% approval rating which is unbelievable. The approval rating is so high because 45 million citizens love the job he's doing. The reality is Colombia is safe where 95% of the people live and work. If you were going to travel deep in the jungle it wouldn't be safe but who travels there. I feel safer in Bogota than I do in Philadelphia. Every major city in the world has its good and bad places. As for the FARC and ELN, they are terrorist and for any leader to try to make them a legitimate politcial group is a joke. About one year ago FARC executed 11 hostages because the government was closing in. How do you deal with a party like this? The problem in Colombia is that the FARC and ELN do not want peace. When President Pastrana was president all his peace talks produced nothing. He gave away territory and the FARC continued to commit terrorist acts. Plus the FARC strenthen themselves during this period. Peace talks do not work when one side is committed. President Uribe and his current policies are the right path for Colombia. Close to 70% of the 45 million citizens agree with President Uribe and his policies. I'm looking forward to my trip next month to Colombia. If I had to rely on your article I would most likely cancel my trip to Colombia but I presonally know Colombia is a stable country with friendly people.
Colombia
Rob, Are you a student? How old are you? Have you ever traveled to Colombia? I have a strong feeling you're a young student who has never been to Colombia. Like I told you earlier I read the news everyday about Colombia and talk to my family daily in Colombia. My advice to you is not to rely on left leaning sites for your information. Colombia is safe in all major cities. Colombian people love the same things Americans love. Colombians want peace but FARC doesn't want peace. The FARC are the biggest drug traffickers in the world. Why would they want peace? Also if you are a college student you know how many people party using cocaine as a recreation drug. Remember every drug transaction eventually suppurts the FARC. The FARC makes money and it's in american dollars, not Colombian pesos. The American people are the biggest financial supporter of the FARC. Without american dollars the FARC would not exist. One thing you have to realize is Americans will always snort cocaine. I've been to military basis in Colombia and witnessed first hand the people fighting America's drug war. Without the help of the United States Colombia would not be able to fight the drug war. Like one earlier poster stated, the FARC and ELN are losing ground big time and they know it. Also see if you find anywhere on your left leaning sites about the FARC forcing children to fight. The FARC doesn't have any support in Colombia. 45 million citizens/20,000 FARC members, you do the match! My calculator shows 0.000444%
Rob, your assertion is a
Rob, your assertion is a fallacy.
First, singling out the US as the whole problem when 40% of the drugs from Colombia go to Europe via Venezuela, knocks down several of your theories right there. Its a very narrow minded perspective and shows your limited view. It makes you look like a less then educated habitual US basher.
Second. The world is not going to stop taking drugs. From the drug plantains of Asia, the Middle East, Africa, South America, Central America it is the single most profitable commodity in the world. Better then gold, better then diamonds, better then counterfeit currencies, better then prostitution, and yes, even better then oil.
Third. To even think those in Colombia and Venezuela with all the power, cash, protection, and international networking would be willing give it up in exchange for improving the poor farmers is the most naive thing you said. Drug lords need, want, and have guns, lots of them and they are getting more advanced weapons all the time and killing people is dayly business. Hell, I’m sure they even have a place for you where you will never be found just for writhing this article. If you don’t believe me, then go ask them.
The other major issue for Colombia right now, which is as big as the drug lords, it Hugo Chavez whos military is working with FARC to over throuw the conserviitve government of Colombia and this friction between the two countries (all caused and fueled by Hugo Chavez) is only getting started. There will eventioull be war between the two and FARC will be joining up with Chavez military. You talk about out military spending, what about all those new Russian toys uncle Hugo has been, and still is buying?
Rob, you ought to get out more, really!
Colombia--good article
Rob, Here's a good article about Colombia. As a young student this will help you learn more about Colombia.
http://www.speroforum.com/site/article.asp?id=14491&t=Why+did+media+miss+Colombia's+response+to+terror%3F