Dana Priest is a great reporter. Her piece on the covert American role in the civil war in Colombia is outstanding. Of course, it’s hard to know how to feel about our country’s role in decimating the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). I think my biggest problem with it is just that it isn’t acknowledged as an official policy of the U.S. government. Congress doesn’t authorize it or even really oversee it. They don’t directly fund it. And, while Langley and the Pentagon take certain steps to distance themselves from the actual assassinations, that’s purely cosmetic. For years, the CIA maintained control of the encryption codes for the smart bombs, which meant that they had to sign off on every mission. Under those circumstances, it doesn’t matter that the planes and pilots are Colombian.
I have no sympathy for the FARC, but I don’t buy the idea that they are a national security threat to the United States. I can understand the concept that large-scale drug traffickers who flood our country with addictive substances are a threat, but FARC is only one of many groups who are shipping drugs to America. We need a more coherent and consistent policy because using Reagan’s presidential finding against drug traffickers to take sides in a brutal civil war is disingenuous. Also, it should be remembered that Colombia’s government has a terrible human rights record and the following hardly seems consistent with our president’s own history.
Since 1986, more than 2,800 labor leaders and union members have been killed in Colombia. In recent years this South American nation has led the world in this grim statistic. And more than 9 out of 10 of these cases remain unsolved.
Colombia’s failure to protect workers was a key reason for the five-year delay in U.S. congressional approval of a free trade agreement with it. It was finally approved in 2011. Amid protests from human rights and labor groups, U.S. officials said Colombia had taken steps to protect workers and their labor rights.
Unions, human rights activists and others say the abuses and dangers persist, and in some case have grown. As a result of attacks on unions and other pressures, the percentage of unionized workers in Colombia has dropped from 15 percent 20 years ago to about 4 percent today.
Teachers have suffered along with others largely because they were seen as social activists and community organizers.
So, basically, I have a lot of problems with our policies in Colombia even though I can say that I am kind of glad that the FARC is taking a beating. I just can’t say that I agree with my country doing the beating.
They sell drugs for funding their operations. FARC isn’t as lucky as the far right government of Colombia to have funding and assistance from the US.
I don’t agree with selling hard drugs for any reason.
Knowing of Gary Webb, I’m not so sure that the FARC are the only bad guys here. The game is not to end the drug trafficking, it’s to control it. Like the poppy fields in Afghanistan. Like the Golden Triangle. Like the Cocaine Coup in Bolivia. And so on and so forth…
So that’s at least one reason why we are there. So that our intelligence network controls the revenue stream.
I don’t really think so.
When the CIA has been involved in the opiate or cocaine trade it has been traditionally a way of funding an insurgency without using U.S. tax dollars. This was done in Laos and Nicaragua, for example. But, this case is reversed. Here, we are supporting an established government against an insurgency, and the funding is partly coming directly from Congress and partly coming indirectly from Congress through the use of flexible accounts.
While there have been rogue intelligence officers and former officers who have been involved in the drug trade for personal profit, it isn’t official policy and never has been, in my opinion. It’s always been a way to do what they wanted to do without having to ask Congress for permission or funding.
In Colombia and Afghanistan, the money has been appropriated, so there really isn’t any need to “control” the drug trade. Our interest is probably more in crushing a Marxist movement that engages in terrorism and in selling equipment and services to the Colombian government, and having access to their markers without tariffs.
I wouldn’t be surprised if keeping our hand in the drug trade was part of it (c.f. Webb). But a bigger issue is that Colombia is the only remaining Latin American government willing to host our bases – the lease for the big one in Manta, Ecuador was not renewed by the Ecuadoran government in 2010, and in every other major country – Peru, Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, Brazil, even Venezuela and Bolivia – past abuses by the US and its fascist puppet governments and School of the Americas graduates have ensured that our military is no longer welcome.
The Colombian government’s terrible human rights record is a feature, not a bug, because those are the only kind of people left on the continent who will still play ball with our military. That’s why we care about keeping them in power.
Of course, rather than empowering the final generation of thugs, we could explicitly renounce the Monroe Doctrine and our generations-long commitment to economic colonialism, apologize for our numerous past human rights atrocities on the continent, and start treating South American countries like actual sovereign nations. Over time, we would eventually make some friends again. But it’s so much easier to do things the way we always have.
I would certainly support your view on this.
Notwithstanding, like everything it isn’t that simple.
Sadly I wouldn’t hold my breath for a genuine reversal.
One should note that the wild card in all of this is the all to encouraged dark side of all too encouraged dark side ( obsessive selfish self interests) of US citizens.
The pressure against such a ‘intelligent’ move from those who benefit from this money pit quagmire.
If for example the military were to withdraw there would be everybody from the the hierarchy of the capitalist military manufacturing complex, The Defence Dept,Generals, CIA and the rest of the alphabet soup to local MMC jobs at stake. Oh yes let’s not forget the media who rely on advertising, congress members and the political parties all who have vested interests in the Status Quo. Lastly don’t forget the increase in refugees (A.K.A. illegal immigrants [sic]).
That doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be done however the US does have some culpability( USA hysterical paranoia of non USA compliant countries…particularly leftish ones). in the whole sordid cesspool not that the average American gives a sh!t.
Boo, that’s a matter of faith on your part. I refer you to:
http://www.madcowprod.com
Just because the MSM doesn’t report ongoing drug trafficking involving our intelligence/enforcement agencies doesn’t mean it’s not happening. I’m still curious about Huffman Aviation’s plane that was 43 pounds of heroin while Mo Atta was matriculating there. It seems that a lot of stuff flows in and out through the Sunshine State, and various federal agencies are only a few steps away from the indictments.
Consider our recent history. After a devastating attack on 9/11, we greatly restricted civil liberties in ways that are only now being fully acknowledged and (hopefully) rectified.
Colombia has made real progress on stabilizing its internal political situation, recently. Within the last decade it was not hyperbolic to wonder if Colombia was becoming a failed state. (In 2005, Colombia ranked 14th between North Korea and Zimbabwe on the Failed States Index. This year, Colombia ranked 57th, better than Georgia and only a little behind the Philippines.)
Until Colombia enjoys a political climate devoid of an armed insurgency group, it’s not going to enjoy any of the rights and liberties that we can be supportive of. And right now, FARC is probably what stands between Colombia and earning rankings like Nicaragua, Ecuador and El Salvador.
One reason the United States (and Britain, for that matter) developed such strong traditions of civil liberties, is that they have for long periods been free of internal civil violence. And when the US HAS restricted civil liberties, it has almost always been during times of conflict.
So, if you want a freer Colombia, first it has to be freed of violence. And that means getting rid of FARC. Or at least that’s the rationale I think is being applied here.
.
What do we know about the history of FARC and the CIA support of right-wing paramilitary groups in Columbia. Who was Barry Seal?
○ Amnesty International: Plan Columbia ignores deep-rooted causes of the conflict and the human rights crisis (2000)
○ FARC peace negotiations with Colombia held in Havana, Cuba
If you go to:
http://www.madcowprod.com
there are several articles there about Barry Seal.
FARC is a bunch of self-righteous assholes, while the Colombian government is a quasi-police state. I doubt either side gives two shits about the people.
Ostensibly, FARC exists to combat US imperialism and the corrupt depredations of capitalism on the poor. At this point, I don’t understand why FARC remains a thing: because they can no longer engage govt military forces directly, they’ve resorted to kidnappings, assassinations, and bombings and as a consequence have lost virtually all popular support.
This is no longer a civil war. Whatever you want to call it, I agree the US shouldn’t be involved.
Legalize drugs and stop giving right-wing pieces of trash money and weapons, and watch how fast the whole fucking war vanishes.
US Imperialism is the biggest problem in Central and South America.
Period.
Significantly reduced by the people in S. American countries over the past thirty years. Colombia is a hold-out, and the people in Central American countries struggle with mixed results.
A big part of that was that in the 2000s we got obsessed with the Arabs, so we took our attention off SA and as a consequence it improved for the most part.
Called this one way back in 2006: A Case for Staying in Iraq.
Nice to see Michelle Bachelet was elected to another term as President of Chile. Hope she has more wind at her back this time than she had last time.
.