http://www.counterpunch.org/carlsen03222008.html
*Weekend Edition
March 22 / 23, 2008*
/From Bombs to Markets/
The Andean Crisis and the Geopolitics of Trade
By LAURA CARLSEN
Day One: the Colombian military and police forces launched an attack on
an encampment of the Colombian guerrilla group /Fuerzas Armadas
Revolucionarias/ /de Colombia/ (FARC) in Ecuadorian territory, killing
over 20 people.
Day Two: Ecuador's President Rafael Correa denounced the violation of
his country's sovereignty and called the Colombian president a liar.
Colombia's President Alvaro Uribe accused Ecuador and Venezuela of
forging secret pacts with the guerrillas.
Day Three: Ecuador had broken off diplomatic ties with Colombia,
Venezuela had expelled the Colombian ambassador, and Colombian General
Oscar Naranjo was saying that computers recovered at the camp revealed
Venezuelan funding of the guerrilla group.
Day Five: the Organization of American States convened a commission to
investigate the incursion, reiterating its support of national
sovereignty and noting that the attack had "triggered a serious crisis
between [Ecuador and Colombia] that led to "grave tensions in the region."
And then, on Day Seven, everybody made up and went home.
Even for a continent famed for volatile political relations, the events
of the Andean crisis passed by with dizzying speed and dangerous
passions. Accusations tossed back and forth went way beyond the exchange
of insults common in the past, and revealed deep fissures and mistrust
among nations in the hemisphere.
The immediate crisis has been averted. But the geopolitical divisions in
the region threaten to lead to more conflicts in the near future.
*Corssborder Attack on the FARC*
In the pre-dawn hours of March 1, Colombian forces dropped a series of
"smart bombs" on a FARC encampment. Military and police forces followed
up by entering the Ecuadorean border province of Sucumbíos.
The main target was Raúl Reyes (real name Luis Edgar Devia), a member of
the FARC´s leading secretariat and possibly the next in line of
succession following the ailing Manuel Marulanda. Reyes was killed in
the attack.
Reyes's death represents a major blow to the guerrilla and a victory for
the Colombian government. Although the Colombian government at first
asserted that it had crossed into Ecuador in pursuit of the guerrillas,
an Ecuadorean government investigation of the site indicated that many
had been killed in their sleep and that the attack was premeditated.
Despite the illegality of Colombia's incursion, the FARC can hardly be
considered an innocent victim. Its war on the Colombian government spans
over four decades, including several unsuccessful peace negotiations.
Particularly over the past two decades, the guerrillas have adopted
tactics that have been widely documented and denounced by human rights
organizations. These include forced recruitment of minors, massacres of
indigenous and peasant communities, and financing through drug
trafficking and kidnapping. On February 4, hundreds of thousands of
Colombians marched in protest of the FARC and the displacement and
violence that the guerrilla war has caused throughout the country.
Although the FARC is a major nemesis of the Colombian government, the
militarization of the conflict since the rise to power of President
Alvaro Uribe has dimmed prospects of peaceful resolution. Continuous
scandals involving evidence of the government's close ties to
paramilitary groups have deepened divisions. The arming of both sides
in large part as a result of U.S. military aid under Plan Colombia has
heightened the violence.
The cross-border attack of March 1 weakened the guerrillas but also
further entrenched the conflict and threatened to spread it to
neighboring nations. In the short term, it scuttled hopes of obtaining
the release of FARC prisoners. Under mediation efforts led by
Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez, several had been liberated over
recent months, and negotiations seemed close to obtaining the release of
the guerrilla's most high-profile hostage, former senator and French
citizen Ingrid Betancourt. France's Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner
revealed shortly after the attack that Reyes had been the contact for
negotiating her release.
*Regional Diplomacy*
When Latin American and Caribbean heads of state met in the
already-scheduled Rio Group summit on March 7, tensions were high. The
group had two tasks before it: to calm the waters and to keep Washington
as far out of the picture as possible.
They succeeded. After a morning name-calling session, the group exacted
an apology from the Colombian government and a promise not to repeat
incursions in foreign territory. Photo ops at the end of the meeting
showed Uribe and Correa shaking hands cordially.
The Organization of American States (OAS) also faced a critical test of
its relevancy. A resolution passed on March 5 called for a special
commission headed by the secretary general to visit both countries and
present a report to a meeting of foreign ministers. The resolution did
not mince words when describing Colombia's action as "a violation of the
sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ecuador and of principles of
international law."
On March 17, after a fourteen-hour discussion between those in favor of
a condemnation of the action and those led by the United States and
Colombia against, the OAS passed a resolution that affirmed charter
principles of "respect for sovereignty and abstention from the threat or
use of force." It resolved:
"4. To reject the incursion by Colombian military forces and police
personnel into the territory of Ecuador, in the Province of
Sucumbíos, on March 1, 2008, carried out without the knowledge or
prior consent of the Government of Ecuador, since it was a clear
violation of Articles 19 and 21 of the OAS Charter.
5. To take note of the full apology for the events that occurred and
the pledge by Colombia, expressed by its President to the Rio Group
and reiterated by its delegation at this Meeting of Consultation,
that they would not be repeated under any circumstances.
6. To reiterate the firm commitment of all member states to combat
threats to security caused by the actions of irregular groups or
criminal organizations, especially those associated with drug
trafficking;"
*Threat of Spill-Over *
Despite the efforts of the Rio Group, the OAS, and civil society, the
nightmare of other Latin American countries is that the Colombian
conflict could spill over the border into neighboring nations and
enflame a region-wide conflict. Immediately after the incursion, the
governments of Ecuador and Venezuela sent troops to the border, and Hugo
Chavez warned that an incursion into Venezuelan territory could result
in war. Panama also fears that violence between the FARC and
paramilitaries could flare up and cause more problems along its border.
Attacks by paramilitaries on FARC units that have crossed over into the
Darien Gap region have displaced indigenous communities in the dense
jungle of that part of the Panama-Colombia border.
The Bush administration is not far from this equation. The antagonism
between the Bush and Chavez governments, both known for rhetorical
excess and ideological rigidity, has led to an open battle for
allegiances in the region. Chávez, betraying certain sympathies for the
guerrilla, called for a moment of silence following Reyes´ death while
Washington diplomats justified the Colombian government's attack on
Ecuador, criticized Venezuela and called for stronger action in
combating terrorism.
In Latin America, some have speculated about the timing and broader
strategy behind this attack. Wellington Sandoval, Ecuador's defense
minister, travelled 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 Mar. 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 Ecuadorean 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 Mar. 3
said 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 March 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 advisor 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.
The Colombian Network on Free Trade (RECALCA) notes that the argument
that a free trade agreement with the United States will reduce poverty
and conflict is especially questionable now, with the U.S. economy going
into recession and the Colombian economy in frank discussion over
protection of certain sectors of the national market to avoid job
displacement and business closures.
On March 16 Colombian rock star Juanes organized a "Peace without
Borders" concert on an international bridge between Colombia and
Venezuela. Thousands of young people from both nations showed up to hear
the music and call for peace.
Government leaders in the hemisphere and the people of the nations
involved in the Andean crisis insist that the only solution is a
peaceful one. Whether or not the United States supports that conviction
depends a great deal on the vigilance and advocacy of U.S. citizens.
*Laura Carlsen* (lcarlsen(a)ciponline.org) is director of the Americas
Policy Program (www.americaspolicy.org <http://www.americaspolicy.org/>)
in Mexico where she has worked as a writer and political analyst for two
decades.