FARC on the run ?

Tuesday April 22, 2003 08:00

by joe ranii

Continued heavy losses and heightened public revulsion for their actions may be nudging the FARC leadership towards suing for peace. However, while fervently wishing for peace and reconciliation, Colombians will be wary of any peace process that replicates the failed strategy of discredited former president Andres Pastrana.

Rebel Leader Wants Peace Talks

By JUAN PABLO TORO
ASSOCIATED PRESS
BOGOTA, (AP) -
Colombia’s top rebel commander has asked Colombia's government to renew peace talks, the third such request in a month.
Manuel Marulanda, commander of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, said the FARC is seeking a "civilized political end to the conflict," which has been tearing at Colombia for almost four decades.
Gen. Carlos Alberto Ospina, commander of the Colombian army, said Monday that the military had no intention of responding to Marulanda's communique. The government rejected Marulanda's two previous statements.
"Our job is not to receive letters from the bandits," he said. "The army will continue its operations."
The Colombian government ceded a Switzerland-sized territory to the FARC in 1998 to facilitate peace talks but retook the demilitarized zone a year ago after years of fruitless negotiations.
The Colombian military complained the FARC was using the safe haven to stash hostages and run its drug trafficking business.
The FARC, which is responsible for the majority of kidnappings in Colombia, currently holds captive dozens of politicians, soldiers and police officers.
Meanwhile, the army said Monday that 28 rebels were killed in scattered fighting with the military throughout Colombia on Sunday. Of those killed, 17 were rebels from the FARC and 11 were from the nation's smaller rebel group, the National Liberation Army.

(PS: "demilitarized zone" is a very inaccurate translation of the Spanish. The fact is that the zone was anything but demilitaried, it was chock full of FARC weaponry ! --j ranii)

save preference

Comments (3 of 3)

El presidentes death squads on the run

by Cleo

Tue Apr 22, 2003 11:18

More like FARC have got miserable el presidentes junta death squads on the run. Even with millions of pounds worth of US funding and backing, Colombian death squad juntas still haven't managed to wipe out popular FARC guerillas. Rumour has it, Colombia's ultra corrupt right wing junta death squads pocketed US money for themselves, nevermind spending it on fighting FARC. Looks like El presidente's Colombian junta death squads are saying thanks for the cash, US suckers.

Tinpot dictators and their friends in Washington

by Brendan Hogan

Tue Apr 22, 2003 16:38

Why would FARC not want peace? They have been open to all dialogue, and it is the military and the cabal of generals, tinpot dictators and drug barons which run the country who suspended talks in the hope of crushing the rebels.

Let us not forget the stake the US has in this - with $1 billion worth of 'aid' being supplied to wipe out the rebels. There are also three Irish men imprisoned in appalling conditions in Columbia, against whom no credible evidence has been produced, and indeed the main state witness has been proven a liar.

The Columbian state is rotten to the core, and 'peace' is a concept it despises.

Ignorance about Colombia easily discerned in some postings

Tue Apr 22, 2003 18:38

I suspect neither Cleo nor Hogan have been to Colombia. I have. More than once. That doesn't mean I claim to know all, but I certainly know more than Cleo or Hogan. I am getting a little tired of stating basic facts about Colombia, but here goes once more.

1/ Colombia is a democracy. For Hogan to use the phrase "tinpot dictators" shows only that he knows nothing and really should shut up. Uribe is no dictator. He will leave office at the end of his four-year term, just as all his predecessors have done.
International observers monitored both presidential and congressional elections last year, and found no cause for complaint. Colombia even allows its citizens abroad (a couple of hundred of whom who live in Ireland) the right to vote in elections (More than does Leinster House for Irish citizens !) The fact that the Colombian govt is unpleasant does not justify murder and kidnap, no more than would the fact that Bertie Ahern is unpleasant justify similar action in Ireland. Or was the kidnapping of Don Tidey and others justified ? Answer that, Cleo or Hogan. And if kidnapping Betancourt was a legitimate revolutionary act, would Hogan or Cleo support the kidnapping of a prominent Green such as Patricia McKenna in Ireland, since Ireland too is a deeply unjust and corrupt country ? Grow up.

As to the US aid, in reality US aid is going to the FARC as well. This is in the form of the vast sums spent by American drug consumers, large slices of which go to the FARC and other murder gangs.

As to the suspension of the "clear zone" (NOT demilitarized zone), this was voluntarily ceded by the Colombian state in the first place, so they had every right to take it back when it became evident it had been turned into a vast jail for FARC's kidnap victims. Most Colombians were angry with the govt for not doing so sooner--indeed that partially explains the wipe-out of the Conservative Party in the 2002 elections.

Finally, I think the three Irishmen were ill-advised to go to CO, since it is clear that the FARC has not the slightest interest in a peace process such as we have seen in Ireland. It is clear that these men are not receiving a fair trial, just as the Birmingham Six in Britain or the Sallins Trains Robbery suspects in Ireland did not get fair trials (would that justify murder and kidnapping in Britain or Ireland ?).
I have attended Bring Them Home functions, but have been disappointed to see support for these 3 men twisted into support for the FARC. You can't support justice and human rights on the one hand and defend the FARC on the other.

Upcoming Events

New Events

Other Press

User Preferences

Feeds

Blog Feeds

Anti-Empire

The Saker

Public Inquiry

Human Rights in Ireland

FARC on the run ?

Comments (3 of 3)