Alvaro Uribe’s Foreign Minister says the president is willing to talk to Hugo Chávez, and that Colombia would really like the Venezuelan Ambassador to return to Bogotá. I’ll be interested to hear Chávez’s reply, because his opponents believe he wants to use enmity with Colombia for his own benefit. Some sort of rapprochement with Uribe would deflate that argument. My impression is that they don’t like each other much personally, but friendliness is not a precondition of diplomacy.
This can work in Chávez’s favor in another way, because the United States likes to use the Venezuela/Colombia tiff as a means of criticizing Chávez. Smoothing the rough edges between the two leaders (to the extent possible) would also deflate that to some degree. Uribe, meanwhile, will be able to retain good relations with the U.S. while opening up talks with Venezuela about border problems. A hostile neighbor definitely does not benefit Colombia.
So let's see what the Venezuelan response is.
27 comments:
Maybe this is a good PR ploy by Uribe but I don't know how much real mending can be done after Chavez dropped the mask and revealed he openly supports the FARC.
But even while Uribe's domestic approval ratings have benefited from the rally-round-the-flag effect produced by Chavez's denunciations of him, the fact that he's been largely sidelined from the negotiations to free the hostages has not gone unnoticed. Mending or no mending, it would be foolish for Uribe not to try and appear involved, if only to gain some of the credit for any future releases.
Chavez dropped the mask and revealed he openly supports the FARC.
Actually, Chavez has never done any such thing. Chavez's position is no different than the European Union's was prior to 2002. His position is that the FARC's terrorist classification should be removed in order to facilitate negotiations. That's identical to the position that the European Union took prior to 2002, but nobody is silly enough to argue that the European Union was "pro-FARC" prior to 2002. (Incidentally, Brazil has never agreed to officially classify the FARC as a terrorist group either.)
So it should be pretty obvious to folks that the claim that Chavez "openly supports the FARC" is based on fundamentally faulty logic.
If Uribe, who obviously has access to good intelligence, believed that Chavez openly supported the FARC, would he make this unilateral gesture of rapprochement?
Chavez's position is no different than the European Union's was prior to 2002.
Actually, there is a small difference. Chavez is actively calling on other countries and organizations to change their lists. That's different from the EU or Brazil, which maintain their own lists but aren't trying to influence other countries to follow their lead.
Ignoring the Tough Questions: Bootlicker Delacour Lets Chavez Off the Hook in FARC Alliance.
"Chavez's position is no different than the European Union's was prior to 2002."
Although there are some European douches who support the FARC, did the EU ever declare the Colombian border FARC territory? EU ever laud the FARC's "Bolivarian project that is respected here"?
No, of course not. Did any of their ministers say anything close Minister of the Interior Chacin's “President Chavez wishes to let you know that we pay great attention to your struggle. Keep up your fighting spirit and your force. You can count on us”.
And Chavez's latest remarks are just the icing on his longtime baking terrorist alliance cake. His efforts to roll back the progress made in classifying the next-door FARC as "terrorists" says far more than the pre-2002 EU lack of attention on a faraway problem.
I know this is rather difficult to grasp for someone who still uses pro-FARC Colombiajournal as a source.
"If Uribe, who obviously has access to good intelligence, believed that Chavez openly supported the FARC, would he make this unilateral gesture of rapprochement?"
Sure, he can play the same games Chavez plays.
Chavez is inflammatory, while Uribe is conciliatory. Hardly the same game.
Chavez seems to support the FARC in much the same way as the Bush administration supported the 2002 coup.
If Uribe, who obviously has access to good intelligence, believed that Chavez openly supported the FARC, would he make this unilateral gesture of rapprochement?
Being president of Colombia means dealing with people who might want to kill you. Talking to Chavez is no big deal in that context.
That's different from the EU or Brazil, which maintain their own lists but aren't trying to influence other countries to follow their lead.
You might want to go back and check on your Brazil info, Boz. Last I checked, Brazil keeps no official list of terrorist groups. Colombia and the United States have tried to get it to classify the FARC as a terrorist group, but I recall reading a statement from Brazilian intelligence to the effect that they have no official terrorist list.
Chavez seems to support the FARC in much the same way as the Bush administration supported the 2002 coup.
Support the FARC? How is he supporting the FARC by taking the same position towards them as the European Union did prior to 2002?
Miguel would have been better cut out for a propaganda ministry than academia.
His efforts to roll back the progress made in classifying the next-door FARC as "terrorists" says far more than the pre-2002 EU lack of attention on a faraway problem.
You obviously don't know your recent history, Paul. The European Union was very much involved in the discussion about Plan Colombia because the United States and Colombia worked to bring the EU on board. Nevertheless, up until 2002, when the United States began twisting arms about terrorist classifications, the EU refused to officially classify the FARC as a terrorist group. Nobody argues that the EU was therefore "pro-FARC" on account of that fact, but propagandists like you and Miguel have no qualms about applying your own logic selectively for propaganda purposes.
Justin, I'm agreeing w/ you. Chavez "supports" the FARC (by saying nice things about them) in much the same was as Bush "supported" the 2002 coup (by saying nice things about it). No more, no less.
Unless we use the standard that supporting people w/ rhetoric *automatically* translates to supporting them materially. I agree completely with Justin: saying nice things about an organization doesn't translate automatically into material support.
Hence: "Chavez seems to support the FARC in much the same way as the Bush administration supported the 2002 coup."
"Miguel would have been better cut out for a propaganda ministry than academia."
Justin is unintentionally hilarious with his lack of self awareness.
"saying nice things about an organization doesn't translate automatically into material support."
But it certainly shouldn't automatically lend that person the benefit of the doubt, especially when they say "we support you." And we have the material support, too. Example, Rodrigo Granda affair anyone?
No, Paul, I'm willing to give Chavez the benefit of the doubt on this one until there is credible evidence that Chavez has given material support to the FARC.
Which is why I'm in full agreement w/ Justin. I'm sure he's never argued that Bush "ordered" or in other ways deliberately offered material support for the 2002 Venezuelan coup merely because he spoke well of it, or because members of his administration seemed pleased. I'm extending the same courtesy to Chavez.
Justin, I'm agreeing w/ you. Chavez "supports" the FARC (by saying nice things about them) in much the same was as Bush "supported" the 2002 coup (by saying nice things about it).
No, that's not a legitimate comparison. First of all, the State Department has admitted to having provided material assistance to groups that were later involved in the 2002 coup. Secondly, during the short-lived coup, Otto Reich worked diplomatically to dissuade other Latin American governments from denouncing it (as former Mexican foreign minister Jorge Castañeda has divulged). Moreover, the released CIA documents show that the White House knew a coup was in the works but then tried to cover up that there had been a coup in its press conference at the time. That's active support for the coup. There's no two ways about it.
But beyond that, there's still a double standard here. If the European Union says prior to 2002 that it won't classify the FARC as a terrorist organization, we wouldn't say that the EU was rhetorically "supporting" the FARC. The EU negated --for a time-- the legitimacy of a pejorative classification, but it said nothing affirmative about the FARC as an insurgent group. The EU was simply doing what it thought was in the best interest of a potential negotiated peace. And that's what Chavez is doing as well. You say Chavez says "nice" things about the FARC, but I haven't heard one affirmative assessment from Chavez about the FARC as a military organization. I've heard Chavez say that the FARC and ELN's ideologies are respected in Venezuela, but I've also heard him denounce the groups' kidnapping.
So it's just false to suggest that Chavez has rhetorically supported the guerrillas' armed struggles.
And the Dorm Room Revolutionary provides the parallels apparently unwittingly...
"during the short-lived coup, Otto Reich worked diplomatically to dissuade other Latin American governments from denouncing it.."
Which is basically the same as Chavez, in his typical gorilla style, working diplomatically to aid the FARC by getting the "terrorist" label removed. Accomplishing this would give them legitimacy and on a more equal footing with the democratically elected govt of Colombia.
"If the European Union says prior to 2002 that it won't classify the FARC as a terrorist organization, we wouldn't say that the EU was rhetorically "supporting" the FARC.."
Right, we would say the EU's typical fecklessness was on display here. That and the fact the FARC wasn't menacing them, so they could afford to be less judgemental. Chavez is attempting to roll back the progress made, something entirely different and loathsome.
"but it said nothing affirmative about the FARC as an insurgent group."
Unlike Chavez who says he respects them and their Bolivarian project.
"I haven't heard one affirmative assessment from Chavez about the FARC as a military organization."
Your master Chavez: "The FARC and ELN are not terrorist groups; they are armies, real armies that occupy a space in Colombia. We have to acknowledge the Colombian Revolutionary Armed Forces and the National Liberation Army."
"I've heard Chavez say that the FARC and ELN's ideologies are respected in Venezuela,"
Your master Chavez: "They are insurgent forces that have a Bolivarian and political project that is respected here."
And who, except maybe a Dorm Room Revolutionary, could deny that a very big part of their "political project" is the
very terror Justin and his repulsive pals wish to deny?
"but I've also heard him denounce the groups' kidnapping."
And I've heard his say the hostages are reallly "prisoners-of-war," a classification that justifies the practice as a "legitimate army."
"And that's what Chavez is doing as well."
Chavez and the Dorm Room Revolutionaries are trying to put the FARC terrorists on the same moral footing as the Colombian government. They are trying to gain them some breathing room after the ass-kicking Uribe has administered to their friends since 2002.
Once again, it's just false to suggest that Chavez has rhetorically supported the guerrillas' armed struggles. You haven't provided any evidence to the contrary, Paul.
Here are some points to ponder:
It is a fact that FARC deals cocaine to support itself, and that it sends it through Venezuela. How do you distinguish between what "hats" they are wearing: drug dealers or guerillas?
When high Venezuelan military officials giving safe haven to FARC, letting them train in Venezuelan territory, and helping them "transact business" through Venezuela, considered an act of "the government of Venezuela" or Chavez?
When FARC top commanders meet in Venezuela with Chavez top intelligence guy, and seem to be able to roam around free in Venezuela with Venezuelan military id. Is it official Venezuelan involvement?
When Venezuelan military rug dealers w/ties to FARC show up dead in Venezuela with military id's, is it the Government of Venezuela?
Or, is Chavez accountable or responsible for a situation where top military officers in border areas envious or resentful of their many peers in state administration getting filthy rich, give in to temptation and take payoffs from the FARC? Does widespread corruption in Venezuela, make it easier to hide drug payoffs?
One of Chavez most trusted underlings his intelligence chief, General Carvajal has helped the FARC, as well as protected some pretty unsavory characters like big-time drug dealer Jabon, shot and killed in Venezuela recently. Beyond the level of impunity that the FARC operates with in Venezuela, and rogue "elements" in Venezuelas military, there are many instances that show a deep link between Venezuelan authorities and the FARC
No one is saying that Chavez himself is authorizing the drug dealing. But FARC training of Boliviarian "militias", Venezuelan military posts ringing insurgent camps as protection, logistical support, are the sort of things that Chavez would be hard pressed not to know about.
Game over, Delacour.
Who is the propagandist now?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23435878/
Is this the same "Boli-Nica" that claimed that Venezuelan intelligence was trained by the East German Stasi more than 10 years after the Stasi was disbanded?
Hey Justin, did you observe the moment of silence for Reyes when your master ordered it yesterday?
Post a Comment