The OAS response

The OAS has issued a draft resolution regarding the Colombia-Ecuador incident, which does not say all that much. It “rejects” the Colombian incursion, asserting that it violated Articles 19 and 21 of the OAS Charter, but also “takes note” of Colombia’s apology. It then suggests creating “mechanisms” and “measures” to foster better bilateral relations. All the OAS documents surrounding the incident can be found here.

More interesting is the report of the commission that went to Ecuador and Colombia. Regarding the laptops:

[T]he OAS Secretary General and some Commission members held a brief meeting with members of INTERPOL who had come to Colombia at the request of that country’s government to conduct an expert examination of three computers, three USBs (portable memory), and three hard disks, which, according to the Colombian officials, had been found in the FARC camp. The INTERPOL delegates, accompanied by officials from the Administrative Security Department (DAS), informed the Commission that the results of their investigation would be ready in late April (p. 5).

Now, as for the differing versions of events:

The Government of Colombia indicates that the operation was initially planned to take place in Colombian territory because, according to intelligence information, Raúl Reyes was going to be at that camp that night. At 22:30 hours on Friday, February 29, they received human intelligence information to the effect that Raúl Reyes was at a camp located in Ecuadorian territory. For that reason they decided to carry out a dual operation on both of the identified camps. The two operations were carried out using different planes. During its flight over the area, the Commission was shown the location of the camp on Colombian territory and a map showing where the bombs were released [See Annex 6 – List of documents received by the Commission].

The Government of Ecuador expresses doubts about the –in its view—very short period of time in which the Colombian authorities decided to carry out the operation and regards it as unlikely that it was done on the basis of human intelligence data because of the precision of the bombing. The Government of Ecuador also states that, according to the investigation carried out by its Air Force technical staff, six 500-pound GBU12 bombs were dropped by planes flying from South to North and four more were dropped by planes flying in a North-South direction, from Ecuadorian air space. It also points out that, judging by the remains of the bombs found at the camp, their delivery required advanced technology, which, they say, the Colombian Air Force does not possess (p. 6)

From what I see, however, the OAS is not going to verify which version is accurate. Instead, it seeks to move forward and improve relations. But if we want to establish confidence, isn’t it necessary to determine the truth of the incident first?