Military

KEY FINDINGS

--Latin American and European editorials approve of Colombian President Pastrana's decision to break off peace talks with the FARC and revoke the DMZ, but criticize it as long overdue.

--Most concur with U.S. designation of FARC as terrorists, ending whatever status they had enjoyed as rebels with a "Robin Hood" cause.

--Colombian press see a combination of domestic institutional reforms and international support as the only viable solution, but have low expectations for U.S. help in light of 9/11 priorities.

--Regional writers worry that Colombia's "war" will get worse before it gets better.

 

MAJOR THEMES

Peace process was doomed to fail from beginning.  In hindsight, analysts judged the granting of the rebel-held zone in Caguan to be a mistake.  While most blamed the FARC for the breakdown in negotiations and the escalation of violence, they also criticized Pastrana for prolonging the agony.  Critics argued that the years of the DMZ had "produced more frustration than agreement," and viewed the peace process as a "hoax."  With the exception of a Conservative Party paper, a majority of Colombian papers were cynical of Pastrana's intentions and accused him of a "contradictory" and "ill-fated" policy motivated by political ambition.  But with presidential elections a few months away, the press, hungry for change, put the candidates on notice not to repeat the mistakes of the past.

 

Colombian crisis is internal but has hemispheric 'repercussions.'  Observers in neighboring countries grappled with a desire to remain neutral regarding Colombia's situation while coming to terms with the possible "spill-over" effects.  Some blamed U.S. policies for contributing to the problem.  To wit, they argued that Plan Colombia's focus on illicit crop eradication had done little to resolve the underlying causes of the crisis, but rather created the conditions for the FARC--along with the equally reviled paramilitaries--to "flourish." 

 

Fears of U.S. interventionism compete with concerns about U.S. 'indifference.'  In typical anti-American fashion, most Brazilian, Ecuadorian and Guatemalan writers speculated that the U.S. would use the crisis as a "pretext" to enlarge its presence in the region and spark another Nicaragua or Vietnam scenario.  A growing number, however, viewed the situation against the backdrop of the U.S. war on terrorism.  They concluded that Colombia, "no comparison to Afghanistan," would not rank high enough as a U.S. "priority" for Washington to commit "decisive" military assistance to counter-insurgency operations.

 

COMMENTARY HIGHLIGHT

Quito's leading centrist El Comercio: "The U.S. establishes its foreign policy priorities based on its need to achieve internal security and regional influence, and for now Latin America is not at the top of its list....  It will be very difficult to change a U.S. Congress beset by the need to fight against terrorism and wrestle control of the Middle East."

EDITOR: Irene Marr

 

EDITOR'S NOTE:  This report is based on 56 reports from 12 countries, February 21- March 1.  Editorial excerpts from each country are listed from the most recent date.

 

WESTERN HEMISPHERE

 

COLOMBIA:  "A Violent Interlude"

 

Op-ed by military affairs expert Alfredo Rangel in leading national El Tiempo stated (3/1): "Over the last twenty years, open war between the government and the guerrillas has been nothing more than a violent interlude between two attempts to find a political settlement to armed confrontation ... Collapse of peace talks alters everyone's calculations.  War and politics have a new agenda now.  Although all the parties are not currently aware of it, their military action has as its final objective creating the conditions for future peace talks...the political consequences of [those] efforts...is absolutely critical.  Unless the military balance between the government and the FARC resolves itself in favor of one party or results in a mutually painful standoff, [prospective] negotiations won't have the dynamic needed to resolve the conflict through a peace treaty ... Whatever party remains wed to old attitudes will lose militarily, and thus pay a high political cost.

In order to make its most forceful counterinsurgency effort, the government will need extraordinary legislation, an increased military budget, more troops, and U.S. assistance--either through Plan Colombia or another Congressionally approved aid package.... For now and in coming weeks, the FARC will continue to strike and disperse, with no marked escalation in violence.  The FARC will conserve their resources to bid farewell to President Pastrana and welcome his successor."

 

"One War"

 

An op-ed in leading national El Tiempo by the Dean of the Economics School at Los Andes University, Alberto Carrasquilla, read (2/27):  "Although the Caguan farce has been trashed, it can stimulate [policy discussion]....  Some say that the demilitarized zone was a good idea because it took political support away from the FARC, and that it helped promote hesitant international support for the government.  It's hard to imagine that the FARC would have had political support without the demilitarized zone [or] that, in the aftermath of September 11...international support...would have been any different than it is today....  As Sunday's [El Tiempo] editorial stated, organized crime will exist as long as there are resources financing it, and there'll be resources as long as drugs are illegal....  First, drugs ought to be legalized internationally....  Second, it's indispensable that we succeed not only militarily with a strong and popularly supported Armed Forces, but also in cutting off the criminals' source of financial support."

 

"Urgent Reforms"

 

The lead editorial in the Bucaramanga-based, Liberal Party-oriented regional Vanguardia Liberal held (2/27):  "In the aftermath of what has happened with the FARC, Colombia faces a series of challenges and tasks it must undertake immediately....  It's necessary to carry out fundamental reforms to correct centuries-long social injustice....  [Failing to enact] reforms in a timely fashion [fed] the insurgency.  These reforms are part of the Liberal Party [platform]; a lack of will [to implement these reforms has created a vacuum that the insurgency has filled.]  Land ownership must be democratized.  A more egalitarian economic model than that of the early 1990's must be adopted...and there's more."

 

"Who Is Going To Pay?

 

According to an op-ed by former government minister Apolinar Diaz-Callejas in Barranquilla-based, Liberal Party-oriented regional El Heraldo (2/27): "The Colombian military's effort to retake Caguan after the delayed decision by vacillating President Pastrana leads the Colombian people to ask who will pay for the current government's contradictory, ill-fated peace policy, the dead and wounded, victims of kidnapping and extortion, the unemployed, millions of displaced persons, [damage to] the economy, and subordination of the country's foreign policy to U.S. 'national interest,' -- including possible foreign military intervention."

 

"Preventing Terrorism"

 

An op-ed commentary by presidential candidate Alvaro Uribe in Liberal Party-oriented regional El Heraldo asserted (2/26):  "The main priority of the security policy we need today is preventing terrorism.  Some elements to be considered include...requesting international military cooperation similar to Plan Colombia style, but with aerial interdiction,...requesting urgent international humanitarian cooperation to demand a halt to FARC terrorism, [and] requesting international demands that the FARC renew peace talks without a demilitarized zone."   

 

"Hero Of Nothing"

 

An op-ed piece by regular columnist Daniel Samper in leading national El Tiempo asserted (2/27):  "The FARC are primarily to blame for [the breakdown in the peace process,] but Pastrana also bears some responsibility....  The outcome of the process and the nation's current situation would have been different if the peace talks had emerged from a genuine, planned impulse rather than from an election ploy.  And, if both national and international communities [had been committed in an integral way from the beginning].... The FARC has grown in size and wealth during these nearly four years....  Today, more than ever before, instead of a wider war, a real peace process is important, with all the necessary international assistance." 

 

"The Rupture"

 

Hernando Gomes Buendia reflected in respected weekly Semana (2/25-3/1):  "We buried a peace process that was stillborn because it was tied to the DMZ....  And what's more, there was no peace process....  The war will get worse....  We now grasp at the hope that the current and next president might have the right pulse to apply the only [12] instruments left: 1.  Military and political fortitude: intelligence, mobilities, financial blockades, and results, above all, results....  5.  More help from Bush, radar, airplanes, and above all, dollars to attack the root causes...  10.  Massive social expenditures in the regions affected by the conflict:  This will be the real Plan Colombia....  12. International mediation--as soon as possible--so that the next peace process will really be a peace process."

 

"Colombia And The Blue Helmets"

 

Laura Gil commented in leading national El Tiempo (2/27):  "The arrival of Blue Helmets to help the Colombian army fight the insurgency is not feasible at the moment....  The way that the Colombian conflict continues to be fundamentally an internal matter, evades the application of Chapter VII of the UN Charter.   [The blue helmets] were established to act as neutral forces, without the authorization to use force and only with the consent to the parties to the conflict."

 

"A Suitable Threat"

 

Respected weekly Semana had this commentary by Ana Isabel Vargas (2/25-3/1):  "The end of negotiations between the government and FARC..and the subsequent revoking the 'despeje,' is of deep concern to the hemispheric community.   This appears to confirm the thesis that Colombia is the principal threat to regional security.  In addition, they jeopardize economic interests which could even shake Wall Street.  In order to determine how grave the threat is, its necessary to determine the political risk factors and contemporary interpretation of national security....  Since the 1960's national security has become the militarization of the internal conflicts, with the objective of protecting its highest political value:  constitutional democracy.   The end was to guarantee political and strategic stability of nations, as well as the democratic succesion of their leaders.   In any case, they were fighting external enemies.  Now the fight is against political risk factors...which are the new internal enemies....  The guerrillas and the paramilitaries have been classified as terrorists by the United States.... The territorial expansion of the insurgent groups is undeniable.  It has escalated the armed conflict and increased the indicators of insecurity, [including] assaults on communities, attacks on infrastructure, kidnapings, extortion..hostage-taking, acts of sabotage and clashes with the Armed Forces.  Despite the good faith effort, the peace talks initiated with the FARC produced more frustration than agreements.  The demilitarized zone converted from a laboratory for peace to a den of iniquity.... What makes the situation even worse is the means by which the drug cartels have established direct links with the subversives and the paramilitaries." 

 

"To More War, More Democracy"

 

An editorial in leading national El Tiempo stressed (2/24):  "In difficult times...there are opportunities.  Colombia has in its hands the possibility, and the obligation...to strengthen its democratic institutions.  With or without a dialogue with the groups along the margin, the rule of law must extended to all corners of the country and to all...Colombians.   Nothing else, in the long run, will be able to ensure a climate for a lasting peace....  The end of the peace process has been interpreted, with reason, as a political defeat for the FARC.  Its  'Robin Hood' image has been buried by arrogance shown toward a government criticized for its excessive generosity."

 

"The Cross We Bear"

 

The lead editorial in leading national El Tiempo said (2/24):  "Making [Colombia] the center of coca and poppy production is the cause of many of our problems and of the violence from which the country suffers, of a torturous peace process, and the growth of the guerrilla and paramilitary groups.  Today, drugs and the millions of dollars they generate fuel the conflict. It's a brutal war between paramilitary and guerrilla groups fighting over control of [illicit] crops and drug processing areas under cover of ideology, either revolutionary or right-wing.  In the best case scenario, aerial spraying will result in reducing or displacing hectarage of illicit crops in Colombia.  Yet, the effectiveness of [that] strategy isn't clear.  Plan Colombia has shifted crops back to countries where they were once eradicated....  As long as a kilogram of coca is worth USD 25 thousand in the U.S. there'll always be someone willing to take the risk.... As long as our countries are the weakest link in an unbroken global chain, peace isn't possible, even if we conclude agreements with the FARC, the ELN, and the AUC.  Unless the drug problem is eradicated at its root, coca and poppy will continue to grow, and groups with other acronyms will step in. That's how it'll be until consuming countries decide to [legalize drugs.]  Perhaps, there'll be more middle-class teenagers using drugs in the United States and Europe, but that's a problem the authorities [there] can deal with through public health policy.  As long as this doesn't happen, we here in forgotten Andean countries will continue carrying a heavy cross."

 

"Terrorism Was The Last Straw"

 

According to an analysis by Editor-General Rodrigo Pardo in leading national El Tiempo (2/21):  "The FARC's offensive in recent weeks mainly targeting civilians....  Polls showed widespread disillusionment with the peace process.  The traditional preference for pursuing peace through dialogue gave way to greater confidence in using force and choosing open confrontation.... Alvaro Uribe--the one presidential candidate strongly opposed to the peace process--became a veritable political phenomenon.  His rivals, including those supporting a political solution, moved to the right and stood up to the FARC.  A serious of popular protests against the guerrillas snowballed....  Over the past month, even the international community has reached the end of its tether....  The [U.S. Congress] began debating the Colombian government's request to use counter-narcotics assistance to fight the guerrillas; the U.S. government announced special assistance to help protect pipeline infrastructure and combat kidnapping.  Peter Romero, an influential U.S. diplomat, wrote the day before yesterday in the Washington Post that 'if America's highest foreign policy priority is, in fact, leading a coalition against global terrorism, then there's no excuse for leaving the Colombian government to fight its war alone.'"

 

"Time For Unity"

 

The lead editorial in leading national El Tiempo asserted (2/21):  "The FARC's decision to choose the road of terrorism left the government no other option than the one indignantly announced last night by the president....  President Pastrana firmly did what a tired country was desperately asking for....  Given how the FARC has challenged the country, there's no alternative but to confront them with the country's armed forces...  Difficult times lie ahead.  The terrorist wave of recent weeks is only a prelude to what's coming....   It'll be a trial by fire for the armed forces which will have to prove with results the institutional and military effectiveness of which they have boasted.  It's time for unity...for supporting and defending the country's democracy [especially as the country approaches elections.]"

 

"Let's Not Deceive Ourselves"

 

Editorial commentary in top national El Tiempo held (2/21): "Newsweek's [2/18] cover story...makes an overwhelmingly case for how paramilitaries have been making inroads in urban areas while, within Colombia, there have been [only] languid and generic allegations about their role in the electoral campaign."

"No More"

 

The lead editorial in Cali-based, Conservative Party-oriented regional El Pais stressed (2/21):   "The president had no choice but to end the peace process....  Colombia could not continue to be trapped in an illusory peace process, amidst death and destruction, or to compromise its democracy while the FARC continued murdering, kidnapping, and mocking our desire for peace....  Henceforth, Colombians should support their institutions and prepare for a decisive confrontation with their enemies."

 

ARGENTINA:  "Colombia's Crucial Hour"

 

An editorial in daily-of-record La Nacion said (3/1): "The word 'war' does not appear exaggerated to describe the issues that are taking place in Colombia.  There was no other way out for the dignity of the Colombian state....  Sooner or later the government had to decide between the continuity of anarchy--spread practically all over the country--or the other obvious alternative: complying with the minimal duty of restoring order.  The decision had to be clear and it was finally made. President Pastrana certainly deserves full support from his people and from the governments of friend countries in order to face this difficult situation."

 

"Repercussions Of The Colombian Crisis"

 

An editorial in leading Clarin read (2/28): "The collapse of Colombia's peace process opens the door to the worst scenario, in a new phase of the conflict dominated by the unstoppable logic of military confrontation....  Concern for the deterioration of the Colombian conflict grows deeper due to the broader context of institutional and state weakness vis-a-vis economic challenges and growing social tension, particularly in border countries--Venezuela, Ecuador and Peru--but also in other South American nations....  In view of an escalation of the conflict, a multilateral diplomatic intervention is needed in search of a peaceful solution and in order to guarantee peace and democracy, threatened within and outside Colombia."

 

"No More Mr. Nice Guy"

 

Michael Soltys, liberal, English-language Buenos Aires Herald's executive editor, wrote (2/26): "Following President Pastrana's decision to end 40 months of a rebel demilitarization zone last Thursday, Colombia faces the beginning of the end but in what sense? The beginning of an end to its wars or the beginning of an escalation into an end game?... Ingrid Betancourt's kidnap underscores the vulnerability of this year's electoral process to guerrilla attack....  FARC's shift to urban terrorism will surely be escalated. Pastrana was completely right to abolish the haven (which had been abused as a terrorist hideout...) but it did at least have the merit of making Colombia's almost uninhabited southern jungles the rebel focus.... Yet while the U.S. is rapidly moving to give the war against Colombian terrorism the same status as activities against drug-trafficking, there can be no comparison with Afghanistan or even the Philippines. Even though Pastrana tolerated far too long the FARC haven, the State Department would never equate its leader with the Taliban's Mullah Omar.  And while most Colombians would probably prefer their country becoming another Vietnam to the current chaos...the U.S. is in no mood for another Vietnam.  Yet, if the U.S. has no intention of sending troops, who will stop the rebels in coming months.?"

 

"Colombia At War"

 

An editorial in conservative La Prensa read (2/23):  "Seemingly, the war in Colombia has started in order to recover the 42,000 square kilometer area that the Colombian government delivered to the FARC... But the hurry for this war is not due to the failure in the search of peace but because the United States has termed the FARC, the ELN (National Liberation Army) and the AUC (right-wing paramilitary) as terrorist.  This is due to the international war on terrorism unleashed after the September 11 attacks....  A war has started in which everyone is against everyone...and the Colombian people is threatened by a long civil war."

 

"Bush Seeks To Accelerate U.S. Military Help For Colombian Government"

 

Ana Baron, leading Clarin's Washington-based correspondent, wrote (2/23):  "While the Colombian army was advancing in its offensive against the FARC, the Bush administration started to analyze how it can manage to officially provide the Pastrana administration with ultra-sophisticated intelligence and spare parts for its military equipment without breaking the law. In the framework of the Plan Colombia all U.S. military aid for Colombia must be directed to the fight against drug trafficking and not antiterrorist war.  But State Department spokesperson Richard Boucher said yesterday that the Bush administration is ready to speak about 'other ways in which the US' can help Colombia.  Washington has already clarified that drug trafficking and guerrillas is the same in its opinion."

 

"A President Pressured By Guerrillas And Political Confrontation"

 

Nelson Padilla, on special assignment in Bogota for leading Clarin, observed (2/22):  "Most of the Colombian people led by political and economic leaders blame guerrillas for their lack of will and gestures of peace.  Others point the government for not having established clear rules on negotiations before delivering a neutral area as big as Switzerland....  Political analysts like Alfredo Rangel consider there all sides should take responsibility and that the U.S.' new position regarding the Colombian conflict after the September 11 attacks also wielded its influence.  Before September 11, Washington was only interested in the drug against narcotrafficking. After September 11, Washington has declared that both Colombian guerrillas and paramilitary are terrorists and announced that the million dollars used to destroy coca plantations could be used in the fight against guerrillas. This week, former under Secretary of State Peter Romero was direct and said that U.S. troops should enter Colombia, as they did in the Philippines where they led the domestic conflict....  Pastrana assured he has the best-trained troops of latest times, which announces an electoral process marked by criminal assaults. Under these circumstances, a return to peace process appears far off.  Above all if one considers that the best positioned presidential candidate is right-wing former governor Alvaro Uribe Velez, the main critic of the negotiation with guerrillas."

 

"The Jungle's Law"

 

Claudio Uriarte, left-of-center Pagina 12's international analyst, opined (2/22):  "The United States is now better-off than it used to be regarding Latin America: the final collapse of the Colombian peace process has just aligned this country with the post-September 11 antiterrorist U.S. logic, and the weakening of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela increasingly feeds the increase of popularly supported right-wing civilian and military opposition.  These changes have not been U.S.-made but an outgrowth of the miscalculation of its opponents.  In other words, both the FARC and Chavez are the involuntary authors of today's end.  In this new game, Washington has all the chances to win, not only for its military superiority...but due to the fact that the guerrilla's recruiting ability cannot be improved any better while the Colombian paramilitary are increasing....  The FARC's bet on spreading war will be counteractive for them because they are politically more isolated than ever since the peace process started and they lack any serious military support from neighboring countries.  This is why Colombia will not be Vietnam: one jungle is not the same as another."

 

"The U.S. Fully Supports Pastrana"

 

Jorge Rosales, daily-of-record La Nacion's Washington-based correspondent, wrote (2/22):  "The USG decided to fully support Colombian president Pastrana to combat guerrillas but it also dismissed its direct intervention in the conflict.... The Bush administration...is assessing how to convince the U.S. Congress to authorize more aid, this time directed to combat guerrillas.... The U.S. Congress has established limits on the U.S. active participation in Colombia to only focus on the fight against drug trafficking....  U.S. Assistant Secretary Otto Reich said that Washington is evaluating Pastrana's request to use the equipment sent to him by the U.S. to fight drug trafficking against guerrillas."

 

BRAZIL:  "A Necessary Confrontation"

 

Liberal Folha de Sao Paulo editorialized (2/24):  "The military action against the FARC guerrillas seems indeed the only alternative left to Colombian President Pastrana....  The FARC are to blame for the failed peace talks...as they have shown an inability to abandon armed conflict in order to become a political movement.  Brazilian President Cardoso is right to support Pastrana.  As a neighbor and regional leader, Brazil could not act any differently.  A firm Brazilian posture is especially important to counterbalance the increasing U.S. presence in Colombia....  U.S. pressure for a military solution of the guerrilla problem has become more intense after September 11, and the Department of State calls the FARC a terrorist group.... The fact that the Colombian government's attack against the guerrillas is a legitimate action does not authorize the Colombian armed forces to do whatever they want.  There are humanitarian and environmental concerns involved that cannot be ignored.  The civilian population in the area of conflict must be protected.  Even the guerrillas must receive humanitarian treatment if they surrender or are captured....  Environmental concerns include the U.S. readiness to use chemical and biological agents to destroy coca and poppy plantations, in addition to other operations with herbicides to uncover the guerrillas in the forest. Brazil must firmly support Colombia in this difficult moment.  Such determined support is also a way for Brazil to demand from the Colombian and U.S. military some respect for human rights and for the environment."

 

"GOB Concerned With Situation On The Border"

 

Liberal Folha de Sao Paulo's political writer Eliane Cantanhede opined (2/24):  "Venezuela and Ecuador are on the front-line to be affected by the Colombian guerrillas, but Brazilian officials have concluded that Brazil is not in a comfortable position. The vulnerability is due not only to the border between the two nations, but also because of the characteristics of the region.... The GOB considers the current situation delicate because of the spill-over risk in Brazil, Venezuela and Ecuador....  Brazil is more concerned with Venezuela, which is involved in a terrible internal crisis and has had serious problems in its relations with the United States.   One of the reasons is the treatment President Hugo Chavez has given to the Colombian guerrillas....  More than the Colombian domestic situation, Brazil is concerned with the excellent pretext the U.S. has had to enlarge its presence and actions in the continent by providing arms and planes to reinforce the Colombian Armed Forces.  The U.S. armed presence is, therefore, not only growing inside Colombia but is also strategically near Venezuela.  As long as the war is limited to Colombia, Brazil will not do anything.  If, however, the feared spill-over occurs in Venezuela or Ecuador, the matter will become much more serious.  And if it happens in Brazil, a situation that is not considered imminent, the issue will not be just diplomatic, but also military."

 

"The End Of The 'Peace Process' In Colombia"

 

The lead editorial in center-right O Estado de Sao Paulo noted (2/23):  "Without foreign aid there is a risk of the military situation in Colombia returning to the impasse of two years ago....  According to former Assistant Secretary of State Peter Romero, the USG should provide training and equipment for Colombia to fight the guerrillas.  With the worsening of the crisis, this may occur thereby provoking greater U.S. involvement in the Colombian civil war.  The FARC is in fact a threat to the regional peace and stability because it sponsors drug trafficking and has tried to overthrow the Colombian democracy through arms.  Neighboring nations, including Brazil, which are running the risk of contagion, should provide the Colombian government with all possible assistance." 

 

"Thanatos In Colombia"

 

An editorial in independent Jornal do Brasil stated (2/23):  "Plan Colombia, supported by the United States, is a previous demonstration of  the current military offensive and has obviously accelerated the exodus of  drug dealers and [coca] producers to neighboring countries.  Brazilian  diplomatic involvement in this conflict is inevitable.  In the open fight against guerrilla, Colombians will request the use of  air space, right to landing and other sensitive situations in the  extensive Amazon border.  The 42-thousand-kilometer long de-militarized Zone is no longer the  last refuge of national truce.  The new scenario means that the [Colombian] army will increase bombings in the de-militarized zone, the FARC will increase attacks in rural and urban areas and the para-military will try  to occupy the South.  The most affected borders will be Ecuador, Peru and  Brazil, in that order.  Politically, Pastrana was no longer able to postpone action... .He is  left with the only option to go ahead.  It's not in vain that this week's military operation is called 'Operation Thanatos (death, in Greek)."

 

"Kidnapped Negotiations" 

 

An editorial in liberal Folha de Sao Paulo argued (2/22):  "The guerillas are the  ones to blame the most for the failure of the (peace) negotiations.  Not only did the FARC keep on kidnapping people and sabotaging the country's  infrastructure, but it also maintains a close association with drug traffickers.  Since 9/11, the USG has been putting more pressure on Colombia to engage in a military solution for the guerrilla issue.  At every opportunity, the U.S. State Dept. labels the FARC as a terrorist group.  The USG has given Colombia $1.3 billion in aid.  Washington has already suggested it would not be against using this money to fight the guerillas.  Faced with the high degree to which the guerrillas and drug traffickers are connected, this approach makes sense."

 

ECUADOR:  "Commitment For The Border"

 

Leading centrist El Comercio editorialized (2/28):  "Today, history exposes us to a different experience.   We are neighbors with the biggest continental problem and we still lack a national attitude...a defensive strategy or behavior to face it.  On the contrary, our northern border is a convulsed, marginal zone, victim of every type of political manipulation....  The present government and those seeking to replace it must evaluate what has been done and what they have to do in order to achieve a stable and orderly border.  It is indispensable that political parties and social movements at the national or provincial level express their commitment in order to rescue the most sensitive provinces.  Otherwise somebody could presume that there are intentions to contaminate with foreign violence those zones where--in addition to the security of our fellow countrymen and Ecuador's territorial integrity, which are our unquestionable priorities--exist strategic resources for our economy."

 

"Active Aid For Colombia?"

 

Centrist Expreso opined (2/27):  "The conflict is necessarily and typically an internal one.  The neighboring countries, not only under the principle of non-intervention consecrated in international law, but also because of their special characteristics have to avoid active participation...because it would mean the spreading of a problem that is specifically Colombian to a continental level....  All American countries wish for the conflict to be settled at the negotiating table through a peaceful solution which would prevent the intervention of other forces....  What the governments from the region and the neighboring countries should do is to encourage such a solution.  Without it, the internal war in Colombia will be prolonged indefinitely with a tragic balance of death and destruction."

 

"Seduced"

 

An opinion column by Diego Cornejo in center-left, influential Hoy asserted (2/27):  "We can't help it, the Colombian conflict is bound to concern us....  At this time, it is very difficult to imagine the Ministry of Foreign Affairs attempting to depart from the U.S. State Department's general guidelines regarding the fight against subversive groups, which has been subsumed by the fight against terrorism after September 11....  And, beyond that, there is undeniable proof that shows that the Colombian guerrillas are far from their heroic origins, when the weight of communist ideology marked their fight for a social and political revolution....  Whether we recognize it or not, we are playing the role of 'anvil' while Pastrana's army is the hammer than pounds from the north.  Besides, independent Colombian analysts demand that Ecuador reduce the freedom with which the guerrillas have established their safe heavens and logistical sources in Ecuadorian territory; among other things, they are trafficking in weapons, provisions and supplies for the insurgency (from Ecuador).  We know how it began, but we ignore how the military conflict will continue or end in a country that has been dubbed as 'locombia' because of its violence, insecurity and the constant ruptures at all levels.  I fear that the participation of Ecuadorian soldiers is going to be increasing not only along the border, but also in the territories of Putumayo, Caqueta and Narino.  With the repugnance I feel for war, I can verify that the angel of death is seducing us with the force of circumstances."

 

"We Should Not Minimize Danger, Nor Exaggerate It"

 

An "Analysis" column in center-left, influential Hoy read (2/27):  "War in Colombia may affect Ecuador--the country's media have been warning about this for some time....  However, one sees two extreme attitudes:  we either minimize it, bordering on indifference, or we exaggerate it to apocalyptic levels. Certainly, it was a mistake to yield to the FARC such an extensive demilitarized zone..., without foreseeing any control or inspection system that would guarantee its use for the purposes of the peace negotiations only....  Today the violence is the same, only its intensity has changed.... Part of the evolution of the war in the neighboring country will be defined by U.S. decisions.  The U.S. State Department has already announced that it would increase intelligence cooperation with the Colombian government.  Pastrana has requested permission to use the equipment given by the U.S. for the fight against drugs in anti-guerrillas actions. Such a perspective justifies the suspension of President Noboa's trip to China, Korea and Japan, so that he can instead be present in Lima for the meeting with George W. Bush, where they will address the plans against drug trafficking and discuss the Colombian conflict.  Ecuador does not have a reason to get involved in a war that Colombia alone must resolve.  What we have to do is to increase surveillance along the border to preserve the security of our people....  It is also our duty to join the international community in their efforts to reform...the path of political negotiation as a way out of the internal Colombian conflict.  Finally, those who fight with increased violence, sooner or later will have to gather around a negotiating table again."

 

"The Colombian Conflict"

 

Leon Roldos Aguilera (former Vice President) cautioned in leading centrist El Comercio (2/27): "Colombia cornered subversives along the border with Ecuador, and this fact alone should be of concern to us.  We have to remember that when the U.S. decided to finance the contras fighting against Daniel Ortega's government in Nicaragua, it used Honduras as a mobilization base, which led to social and economic damage to the latter.  Ecuador cannot become the Honduras of the Colombian conflict, at any price, let alone if it would be only to gain brownie points."

 

"Colombia:  A Drama Of Mistakes"

 

An "Analysis" column in center-left, influential Hoy stated (2/25):  "The escalation of the conflict occurs in a zone closer to Quito than to Bogota, which means that our country cannot remain idle given the seriousness of this situation....  The Colombian government has stated that in this area they (the guerrillas) have engaged in kidnappings, have established laboratories for the processing of cocaine, and have developed air fields to be used for drug trafficking.  This is a tragedy of mistakes, according to Carlos Eduardo Jaramillo, the (Colombian) ex-Counselor for Peace....  As Antonio Caballo expressed in the (Colombian periodical) 'Semana,' this is the consequence 'of the fight against drugs imposed 25 years ago by the U.S. Government, and the fight against subversion imposed 50 years ago by the U.S. Government.'  Did Colombia or the Colombian elites have another alternative, apart from that proposed by the State Department?...  Now, we will see the enormous damage caused.  To obtain peace following the path of war is an extremely painful, bloody and uncertain alternative.  This is a serious problem not only for Colombia, but also for the whole continent, especially for the region."

 

"Colombia Standing Tall"

 

An opinion column by the Colombian ambassador to Ecuador in leading centrist El Comercio stated (2/25):  "Colombia, according to one of our poets, is the land of people of the 'hardened neck.'  This metaphor achieves new meaning in the light of what is happening now in our country....  Guerrillas insisted on carrying out acts of terror and frustrated the negotiations process.  The international community and Colombians, therefore, have understood and supported the presidential decision of eliminating the demilitarized zone.  Because of their actions and because of the support given to the government, subversion is politically defeated.  Power will never be attained by force of arms.  As the (Colombian) president also stated, an army of peace formed by forty million Colombians is undefeatable."

 

"Colombia And Realpolitik"

 

An opinion column by Grace Jaramillo in leading centrist El Comercio judged (2/25):  "Official positions do not necessarily become diplomatic doctrines.  Diplomatic doctrines almost never reflect the realpolitik of the world of international relations.  The declaration of war in Colombia offers us more than one lesson in that....  After September 11, the 'terrorist' statute was able to change the correlation of forces in the U.S. Congress enough to authorize the lifting of funding restrictions (for U.S. aid to Colombia) and even more, to increase the scope of aid....  Washington is still sunk in the collective catharsis of September 11. Only official subjects are monolithically addressed in reference to the Middle East....  Given such a serious situation, the symbols are more than evident.  The U.S. establishes its priorities in foreign policy based on its need to achieve internal security and regional influence, and for now Latin America is not at the top of its list.  If the governments form Colombia and the Andean countries expect more decisive support from the U.S.--under these circumstances--they will have to generate new strategies. It will be very difficult to change a U.S. Congress beset by the need to fight against terrorism and wrestle control of the Middle East. Paraphrasing Cesar Montufar, diplomacy limps if it is not based on a minimal amount of political realism."

 

"End Of Peace Process Of A New Phase In The War?"

 

An opinion column by Diego Araujo Sanchez in center-left, influential Hoy held (2/25):  "Last January 4, Bogota's El Tiempo published this impressive balance:  During 2001, the FARC kidnapped almost 3,000 individuals....  Within this context how can they (the FARC) talk about peace?  Moreover, during the 37 moths of the so-called peace process, violence was on the increase....  Hence, there was no alternative left for the Colombian president....  Guerrillas precipitated the Colombian president's decision with the wave of violence of last week....  But to continue this war is equal to playing with a scorching fire, especially when guerrillas are interested in demonstrating their strength with an escalation of attacks, against which the military forces--strengthened by U.S. advisors, military equipment and funding provided by Plan Colombia--are of no use."

 

"42,000 Square Kilometers Of Foolishness"

 

An opinion column by Jorge Ortiz in center-left influential Hoy noted (2/24):  "A notable theoretician of war, Sun Tzu, proclaimed twenty five centuries ago that, 'every war has its foundation in deceit.'  The FARC, in fact, intensified their war while Tirofijo deceived everyone by speaking about peace.  Until Wednesday February 20, that is, when he just crossed the line with the kidnapping of a civilian airliner filled with passengers, thereby crowning a wave of attacks and finally exhausting the patience of Colombian society.  And Pastrana had to say 'enough!' Now, the Colombian conflict is open and frontal after a three-year delay, in which the number victims rose shamefully, on the eve of presidential elections with an uncertain outcome, and after many hopes were disappointed.  Will it be 'now or never' as claimed by the press and all political sectors?  Or will Pastrana come up with a sudden unilateral truce out of 'humanitarian motives?'"

 

"The Colombian Decision"

 

An editorial in leading centrist El Comercio argued (2/23):  "The conflict--due to its political and military seriousness--must end in the defeat of the power structure and organization of the guerrillas, in a massive disarmament and in the participation of the international community to guarantee both the human rights of irregular forces, as well as their reintegration into Colombian society.  Otherwise, political violence, guerrillas, and terrorists will prove to be endemic and constant scourges of the generous Colombian land."

 

"War In Colombia"

 

An editorial in Quito's center-left, influential Hoy read (2/22):  "The decision to end peace negotiations is a justified reaction considering the persistence of terrorist acts that grew even worse after the commitments reached in January....  The situation might unleash a war of serious consequences not only for Colombia, but also for neighboring countries.  We foresee an escalation of the armed conflict:  the FARC, whose military and economic power was strengthened by having at their disposal a demilitarized zone, will respond with an even more intense wave of attacks....  Besides a loss of human lives and material destruction, a war will lead to increased military expenditures and will hinder investments, with all kinds of additional harmful consequences in society and politics.  For all these reasons, we hope that Colombia finds a negotiated way to achieve peace, on foundations that would guarantee the end of terrorist violence.  In this effort, (Colombia) can count on the solidarity of its neighbors and the international community."

 

"The Peace Process Was A Fraud"

 

An analysis column by Julio Prado Vallejo (former MOFA) in Guayaquil's centrist Expreso asserted (2/22):  "Given what has transpired in Colombia, every Latin American and Ecuadorian in particular must regret the fraudulent way in which the FARC participated in the peace process.  President Pastrana did the right thing when he refused to continue a dialogue that has not been anything more than a hoax and a waste of time, which the guerrillas took advantage of to gain political and economic strength. I say political, because they received a piece of territory as if they were some kind of government, with responsibilities that belong exclusively to the Colombian state.  And economical, because the FARC has lived off of and grown from the drug business....   Many observers consider President Pastrana very nanve for having spent three years in frustrating negotiations before finally realizing that the FARC were deceiving the Colombian people and that they were not interested in peace at all. Now it is the turn of the state to take all measures to control the guerrillas and demand that they respect the norms of civilized life and the constitutional principles of peace.  Naturally, if it is necessary to fight violence with the armed forces, they have to do it to give back to our Colombian brothers their security and peace."

 

"The Colombian Reality"

 

Fernando Ribadeneira, Ecuadorian ambassador to Colombia, argued in leading centrist El Comercio (2/22):  "The regionalization of the conflict...is a hypothesis already rejected by the Colombian government, which has not been supported by the neighboring countries because they recognize that the conflict is an internal Colombian issue which should be resolved by Colombians....  The Colombian conflict is not included on the agendas of organizations such as the UN, OAS, the Rio Group or the CAN, nor on thhe agendas of countries such as Mexico and Brazil--all of them have reiterated that the conflict is an internal Colombian issue.  Ecuador should not propose that any of these organizations include the Colombian internal conflict on their agendas, because it is well known that the Colombian government would oppose such a thing and the proposal will not enjoy the support of other states." 

 

"Ecuador And The Colombian Conflict"

 

An editorial in left-sensationalist La Hora stressed (2/22):  "Andres Pastrana...ended the peace process that he had been conducting with the FARC....  As far as Ecuador is concerned, the reality is that now more than ever before there exists the danger that the Colombian conflict, having turned into a declared war, will spill over the border.  For quite some time now, many Ecuadorian observers and politicians, as well as those from other nations, have opposed the regionalization of the so-called Plan Colombia against drugs--one of the objectives of the Andean Regional Initiative announced by Secretary Powell.  The widening of the Colombian anti-drug plan to other countries could involve Ecuador in the Colombian conflict....  Now is the time to confirm that--just as Ecuadorian territory is vital for the strategic objectives of Plan Colombia, it may also become the target of any attack....  We hope that the consequences of the battles that will take place in Colombia will not be felt in Ecuador.  We also hope that the Colombian conflict can be solved in a way that will avoid the useless bloodshed of innocent communities trapped in an internal war....  We are sure the Ecuadorian Armed Forces will continue taking security measures along the northern border--perhaps the hottest spot in Latin America at this moment."

 

"Arms Control"

 

Franklin Barriga Lopez commented in leading centrist El Comercio (2/22):  "In Sucumbios, near Nueva Loja (along the border with Colombia), a shipment that contained thousands of missiles destined for neighboring Colombia was seized....  Showing great knowledge of the case, a top Colombian military officer told the press that the mentioned drug-related rebel group has enough money and drugs to buy the most sophisticated weapons, the best training and the most developed technology in the terrorist world. This statement reflects a dangerous reality that is damaging Colombia and its neighbors.  For this, it is necessary to put in place rigorous controls of arms and ammunition in the Andean region.  This is a profitable business that increases considerably their profits in the black market, and therefore it is powerfully attractive for those whose only concern is their criminal greed.  Those weapons, in the hands of discredited individuals, increase the misfortune of third-world populations."

 

GUATEMALA:  "'Axis Of Evil,' U.S. National Security Doctrine And Colombia"

 

In an editorial critical of the 'axis of evil' and the Bush administration, columnist Nery Villatoro Robledo tied the war on terrorism to the situation in Colombia in conservative, business-oriented Siglo XXI (2/28):  "The 'axis of evil' is so broad and so difficult to identify concretely that it will fit all those countries and social forces that are not a threat but an obstacle to realization of the 'manifest destiny' of the United States as regulator of world affairs....  The announcement of a possible attack on Iraq...represents one more link in the articulation of the national security doctrine for the 21st century.  Another is about to be finished in...the Western Hemisphere: Colombia.  President Pastrana's breaking off talks, even as a response to the intransigence and lack of will of the FARC to resolve the conflict through negotiation, was followed by an offensive...with bombings that have all the characteristics of U.S. bombings in Afghanistan."

 

"Beijing, Jerusalem, Colombia"

 

Karin Escaler commented in conservative, business-oriented Siglo XXI (2/27):  "The one-China policy and its evolution at times seem like the situation in Jerusalem and in Colombia. They all have a common denominator: U.S. foreign policy....  [B]ut the United States must understand that its foreign policy should not be treated like domestic policy, having to satisfy U.S. public opinion, CNN, Congress, and the Senate.  It concerns the interests...of people who do not necessarily measure and weigh the world in the Western manner of the United States, and who in the case of Beijing will become economic and military powers whether the United States wants them to be or not, and therefore are better as allies than as enemies.  This means that a military strategy figures in Jerusalem as well.  Prime Minister Sharon has fallen into Arafat's trap in making Israel into a Vietnam: it has become a low-intensity war that could go on and on.... In the same way, the leaders of the FARC, whom we could call the Arafat of Colombia because they never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity to make peace--because in reality they don't want to end the war--today face a wise decision (well though tacitly supported by the United States) to end the war once and for all, by Pastrana, because for the FARC the war is no longer about idealism; it is a political business.  And the exclusively military solution of Plan Colombia on the part of the United States is a failure.  If they do not support Pastrana and also provide an economic solution, they will have another Vietnam."

 

PERU:  "We Must Stop The New Tactics Of Narco-Senderismo"

 

An editorial in flagship, conservative El Comercio declared (2/28):  "Narco-senderista (Sendero Luminoso) groups are attempting to reinstate themselves in the Apurimac and Ene Valleys... These groups don't use their obsolete ideological postulates anymore, nor do they explicitly threaten to use arms.  (Instead) they offer farmers and their families assistance and cash in exchange for letting them stay in their towns.... We are talking about the remaining columns of Sendero Luminoso, which protect and receive orders from drug traffickers.  This association reveals a criminal...relationship that has nothing to do with politics.  We can not allow this hidden narco-senderist assault.... The government must disrupt the liaison between these two gangs.... This is extremely urgent in the current Latin American situation and in the wake of the serious situation in Colombia."

 

URUGUAY:  "A Desired Kidnapping?"

 

Political-economic El Observador commented on the kidnapping of Ingrid Betancourt (2/26):  "Being kidnapped by the guerrillas can be an effective way--although a dangerous one- of gaining fame for electoral purposes.  But taking into account that Ingrid Betancourt is a severe critic of the FARC and that the government of President Pastrana has launched a strong military operation against the guerrilla, she probably did not adequately measure the advantages between gaining votes and becoming a prisoner of a powerful and revolutionary movement which controls the traffic of Colombian cocaine to the United States and that, at present, has a mere of 800 kidnapped persons in its hands."

 

"A Long And Cruel War"

 

Top-circulation El Pais held (2/26):  "We certainly know when wars start but we never know when and how they are going to end.  The military results of this campaign and of the immediate response from the guerrilla and the outcome of this conflict are two unanswered questions that the Colombian people and all the rest of Latin Americans and Americans ask themselves.   The new equipment of the army obtained after the increase in military expenses and due to the assistance provided by the United States in intelligence and money seems to anticipate an official victory.   However, the cost of this victory will be high in lives and material losses."

 

VENEZUELA:  "From A Violent Peace To Total War"

 

Robert Giusti observed in respected conservative El Universal (2/28):  "If anyone thought that Colombia at war would be the same as during the violent peace under Andres Pastraba, they were mistaken.  The reaction of the FARC since its exit from the safe-haven has been ferocious.  An exit, in relative terms, because its has continued its military domination of the region....  Now that the war is open and the guerrillas squeezed...the question is whether the armed forces will be able to advance and eventually force the insurgents into submission.   For the time being, [the answer] appears to be no...there is no end in sight.  Whether Uribe or Serpa, what is certain about the next president is that he will find himself with a war that one day will demand restarting the peace negotiations.  For now, the war is popular.  Fed up with the cheating in the dialogues and sick of a president literally surrendered to the FARC, the Colombians called for force because they could not see any other way to achieve peace....  In Bogota and in the big cities, where the acts of terrorism have not yet arrived, the majority want to be done with the guerrillas once and for all.  But if the phenomenon extends and intensifes, the people will again, sick of the violence, return to calling for peace."

 

EUROPE

 

BRITAIN:  "Peace Hijacked"

 

The independent weekly Economist observed (2/23):  "Most Colombians long since despaired of the peace talks, which began three years ago but produced no tangible benefits.  Their current mood is likely to be reflected in a presidential election in May.  Poll show a surge of support for Alvaro Uribe, a hardline critic of the peace process, at the expense of the previous frontrunner, Horacio Serpa, who has supported Pastrana on the peace talks....  The FARC's leaders have always seemed to view the talks as a tactic, rather than as an acceptance of democracy....  Pastrana has strengthened the army, partly with American aid.  This is officially aimed, so far, at fighting drugs, rather than guerrillas.  But the United States is now proposing to train and equip a new army brigade to guard oil pipelines and the electricity grid against guerrilla sabotage.  Barring sudden changes of heart, much fighting may lie ahead before Colombia can again think of peace." 

 

GERMANY:  "An Attractive War In The Jungle"

 

Latin America correspondent Eva Karnofsky filed for center-left Sueddeutsche Zeitung of Munich (2/25):  "Colombia's peace process has never had a chance.  The only one who believed in it was President Pastrana...but there are too many forces who are interested in the government and the rebels reaching no agreement....  It is true that the Colombians want an end to kidnappings, massacres, and expulsions from land by the guerrilla forces, but an old-established economic elite has not the slightest interest in making social concessions in peace negotiations.  The guerrilla forces needed such concessions if they wanted to survive as a political force in times of peace, but big landowners do not want any land reform, powerful family concerns do not want a redistribution of wealth by paying higher wages and taxes....  That is why both sides are profiting from keeping everything as it is.  Many Colombian military officials also prefer war over peace, because it safeguards their political influence and modern equipment.  And if the view gained the upper hand in the U.S. government that Colombia needs support not only in the fight against drug trafficking but also in a guerrilla war, further billions of dollars could flow into the country. Colombia will have presidential elections on May 26.  According to opinion polls, right-winger Alvaro Uribe will win....  He is said to have best relations with para-military forces.  Colombia is further away from peace than ever before."

 

"Rogues In The Backyard"

 

Armin Lehman stated in centrist Der Tagesspiegel of Berlin (2/23):  "The guerrilla in Colombia is a giant economic enterprise that lives off war--without any interest in peace....  The United States was the first to take note of this danger....  Colombian terror is considered the biggest threat on the American continent.   Therefore, it is only logical that the United States has urged Pastrana to take military action against the guerrillas.  Washington has provided Colombia with the necessary weapons for this mission.  Was there really no road to peace?  There might have been one if the international community, including the Europeans, had shown an interest in Colombia and named a high-ranking official as mediator.  But, once again, Europe let the United States to make the decision."

 

"Declaration Of War In Colombia"

 

Hildegard Stausberg opined in right-of-center Die Welt of Berlin (2/22):  "Colombia finds itself in a dirty war, in which the armed forces fight against the guerilla forces of FARC and ELN and where marauding soldiers do their foul work.  The demilitarized zone which President Pastrana offered them is a state in the state of Colombia in which the government has no sovereignty.  Now, Pastrana ordered the military to occupy it and launch a national offensive against these guerilla forces.  This declaration of war could provoke another escalation of violence.   Nevertheless, the overwhelming majority of Colombians backs Pastrana. The guerrilla forces have unmasked themselves long since as terrorists.  Since September 11, even the United States has no longer any sympathy for these guerrillas.  The fight in Colombia's tropical forest could become a tough and long fight, a perspective which Washington has well realized."

 

"Bloody Normalcy"

 

Left-of-center Frankfurter Rundschau observed (2/22): "President Pastrana finally failed with his negotiating concept. He was under enormous pressure from radical opponents of reform, great parts of the armed forces, and the right-wing para-military units.  The guerilla forces, in turn, have turned into an authoritarian fighting apparatus which pursues the increasingly important goal of enriching itself with kidnappings and drug trade.  The FARC forces increasingly acted like normal criminals, and made it thus increasingly difficult for Pastrana to find a credible basis for his willingness to negotiate. If there is no miracle, the future development will be as follows: bombs will mainly hit the rural population, which has been ground between the fronts anyway.  And the right-wing, which is already calling for U.S. forces, will win the presidential elections in May.  Poverty, unemployment, and an unfair distribution of land remain what they are, while the warlords from the right and left-wing camps will continue to enrich themselves in this war.  Everything is as it always was."

 

SPAIN:  "The Hour Of War"

 

Left-of-center El Pais wrote (2/22):  "Even with American material support and training--nobody would request direct intervention, even after 9/11--there is no reason to believe that the insurrection will be put out any time soon.  With an eye on the next presidency, which is to be inaugurated August 7, citizens have to demand a lot more from their country if they really believe there is no other way out than war....  If  Colombia is to support its government in light of the upcoming presidential elections, it should also calibrate how much war it is ready to bear and how much it will pay with lives and property.   Peace is expensive, but war is even more so."

 

##