Chavez may be nuts, but this time, beneath his usual huffing and puffing, he's right. Colombia attacks inside Ecuador's border, Uribe lies to President Correa of Ecuador by saying it was done 'in pursuit' of FARC rebels, fails to apologize even when the lie is exposed and instead begins accusing Correa of wrongdoings. Hello? Let's say Mexico bombed Texas because rebels had managed to cross the border. And that's excused away by saying, 'yeah but...it was in pursuit' only later to have that turn out to be a lie. Ya' think the US would be a little pissed another country bombed inside its borders without permission or forewarning?
Next, Chavez pulls an Al Sharpton...as usual...and now, miraculously after bombing a rebel campsite, Colombia apparently has such such advanced weaponry, it only killed people and left a laptop untouched.
Correa, Chavez and Castro exchange calls. Uribe and Bush exchange calls. FARC rebels are suddenly aspiring to global terrorism and Chavez should be charged with genocide for funding them? Well, if the Bush backed Uribe says it's true, it must be true. And God knows, err... some may still believe, that the US would never lie to justify a preemptive measure where they can't control a head of state.
Here's the timeline of events:
Saturday:
- Colombia attacks FARC rebels, among them the infamous #2, Raul Reyes early Saturday. Uribe calls Correa to explain Colombian crossed into Ecuador while in pursuit of the the rebels during fighting.
- Correa dispatches the Ecuadorian army to the scene where it's obvious no pursuit ever took place which of course, means Uribe lied to him. Instead of a pursuit, Colombia bombed inside Ecuador territory without first clearing it with the Ecuadorian government and without forewarning. Then he lied to cover up that truth. Correa is now pissed both about being lied to and about Colombia invading Ecuador territory with complete disregard to the Ecuadorian government.
- Chavez must be in the mix as usual and unlike Correa, has a tendency to really puff. Which he does by condemning the move and calling Uribe a bunch of bad names.
Sunday:
- Tensions mount as both Ecuador and Venezuela recall their ambassadors from Colombia. Venezuela closes their embassy and threatens Uribe if he attempts to invade Venezuelan space.
- Ecuador issues a 'strong protest' and calls for both official and rebel military forces in Colombia to stay out of Ecuador and resolve their differences peacefully.
- Colombian spokesperson for Uribe says that Colombia will apologize to Ecuador.
Monday:
- Instead of receiving an apology from Uribe, Correa is now accused of being in cahoots with the FARC and Chavez is accused of funding the FARC, all thanks to this laptop miraculously unharmed in the raid.
- After adding insult to injury, Correa breaks diplomatic ties with Colombia. Chavez orders troops to the border and Correa follows suit. Both expel Colombian embassies on their turf and recall Ecuadorian embassies on Colombian turf.
Tuesday:
- Uribe holds a press conference to announce that Colombia intends to charge Chavez with genocide. Again reinforces to the world's media both Correa's contact with the FARC and Chavez' funding of the FARC based on intelligence from this computer uncorroborated by anyone else.
- Correa gets calls from many other leaders in hopes of assisting to de-escalate the matter and probably because they realize calling Chavez is a waste of an international call.
- All 3 Presidential candidates offer support statements for Uribe. All 3, in essence, suggest Chavez and Correa need to just shut up, roll over and get over the fact that the US backed Uribe, just bombed another country.
- Bush makes a statement expressing his support for Uribe's position, not unlike what the 3 candidates said, though he can actually still make the 3 am call.
- French officials corrobarate Correa's acknowledgement of being in touch with killed FARC leader Reyes re: negotiations to release additional FARC hostages and reiterated that, "The Colombians knew we (the French and Correa) were in touch with Reyes."
Hmmm, call me cyncial, but...Colombia bombs Ecuador and then instead of apologizing for it and making nice, they 'suddenly' have documents they now use to turn the table and accuse Correa of something? I almost laughed at what the AP termed 'independent' copies of these documents from the computer of the FARC leader killed over the weekend. Only the Colombian government had those documents to share. I'm not sure of how that translates to receiving an 'independent copy.'
Indeed, later it was confirmed that the AP's 'independent' documents came from a Colombian military officer who wished to remain anonymous.
Now, it's certainly no secret that the only hostages FARC has released happened because of Chavez and that Correa was willing to assist in this endeavor if he could. Remember how badly that hurt relations between Venezuela and Colombia because in the process, apparently Uribe decided it was inappropriate for Chavez to have discussions with his military and in essence, go around him? From this, can one assume that, to President Uribe, to have a conversation on the phone without prior knowledge is enough to strain diplomatic relations, but bombing inside another country without permission is acceptable?
In US Politics, Russ Feingold is as close as it comes to a 'hero' for me. He was the sole Senate vote against the War in Iraq as well as voting against the Patriot Act. On Feb. 7, 2008, he and Chris Dodd wrote Condoleeza Rice a letter asking that aid be reduced to Colombia and investigations begun on the frightening number of civilians being murdered by the Colombian Military, not the FARC nor a rebel group, but the official army.
"The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCHR) in Bogotá have documented an increase in the number of civilians killed by the army over the past few years. In many cases, someone witnessed the victim being detained by soldiers. Later on, the body was found dressed in guerrilla clothing and claimed by the army as killed in combat. As paramilitary forces are being demobilized, the army, under pressure to "get results," appears to be directly involved in more human rights abuses."
Now...look at Colombia's official report of the killing of Reyes...it occurred during 'fighting.' Yet, the Ecuadorian army investigation reveals they were killed as they slept.
I am sorry, but I have grown far too suspect of anything that is backed by a Bush Whitehouse. Which Colombia is. Colombia receives almost $2 out of every $3 of aid earmarked for the whole of Latin America. It received $4.9 billion out of $7.3 billion in 10 years.
I recently read an interesting article about how all of the former phrases used, especially in regards to Latin America, have changed after 9-11, no doubt in accordance with appropriations that needed to reflect the 'global war on terror.'
The infamous 'School of The Americas' was changed to 'Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation'. (Morales has already withdrawn from using this 'institute' and Correa has pledged to cease participation by 2009). Drug traffickers are now 'narcoterrorists'; Guerillas, rebels and paramilitary outfits are now all 'terrorists'; and the US Southern Command came up with a new way of describing democatically elected Presidents in South America. They are now collectively the "threat" of "radical populists."
Just to recap, duly elected Presidents in South American countries are deemed security threats when their politics don't line up with a US agenda and others are now labeled terrorists for funding purposes?
In short, it's not so simple anymore to just look at the events and draw conclusions based solely on English coverage of events in other countries. It is impossible not to believe that the long arm of the Bush version of the US is certainly weighing in on these events and especially Colombia's actions at this point since Colombia, and to a degree Peru, is the only country in SA still under tight US control. It's impossible not to factor in that Chavez, Correa, et al are not.
For this reason and this reason alone, I am suspect of any English coverage of events as I've watched the English press being used time and time again for propaganda purposes without objectivity. I've watched lies that could care less about human rights, the welfare of other countries, etc. No, I'm no conspiracy theorist, but I no longer take any article at face value anymore and anyone who has ever heard the name Karl Rove should understand by now, things are rarely as they seem at face value.
One thing I have noticed regarding the English Press and Latin America is a tendency to be superficial and tote the party line, the Republican party that is. I would highly recommend a couple of reads by scholars who don't have that nasty habit of stopping short of research. "Hemispheric Echoes" in the Harvard International Review is a great place to start. In fact, HIR has a slew of good reads.
One can't help but ponder whether or not those pulling Uribe's strings are going to use the moment to justify preemptive measures against Chavez at this particular juncture or whether some diplomacy still exists somewhere in the world that motivates some leader to stand up and say, "President Uribe...you were wrong to bomb Ecuador without forewarning to the governement of Ecuador and now you really should make nice rather than continuing to escalate the situation."
UPDATE: While the Uribe government finally did apologize, Correa now wants a formal OAS condemnation of the Colombian invasion of sovereign space. Also Uribe now trying to formally charge Chavez with genocide.
I did want to link an article that fleshes out some ideology in this whole thing. James J. Brittain (Assistant Professor) and Jim Sacouman (Professor) are Canadian sociologists at Acadia University in Nova Scotia who have been researching the Colombian civil war and political economy over the past decade. Entitled, "Uribe's Colombia is Destabilizing a New Latin America," read their article here.