Tuesday, March 04, 2008

Tangled Web Part 2

If anything, the Colombia-Ecuador-Venezuela crisis is just getting harder to sort out, and a solution seems no closer than yesterday.

  • We have the famous laptops, but so far we only know what the Colombian government is telling us. I’m going to bother speculating until we get more info. Colombia needs to offer up something other than accusations to start ratcheting this down.
  • Ecuador has broken diplomatic relations with Colombia. However, the government said that the wounded members of the FARC would still be handed over to Colombia. Correa is also going on a trip to garner support from around the region.
  • The U.S. government got involved by telling Venezuela it shouldn’t be involved, and said the crisis should be resolved with dialogue. You know, because that’s the way the U.S. always solves things.
  • Venezuela has kicked out Colombia’s diplomatic corps, and government officials continue to criticize the Colombian government. Venezuelan authorities have halted trade at the busiest border crossings, which will obviously have economic repercussions in both countries.
  • The OAS is meeting this afternoon to start addressing the crisis.

66 comments:

Anonymous,  9:17 AM  

Like I commented in Boz's blog it is unfortunate that Chavez lost an opportunity to play a peace maker and diplomat by calling for dialogue between Ecuador, Colombia, and the FARC. I wasn't expecting him to, but it is still unfortunate.

Greg Weeks 9:56 AM  

That would take us to a whole new speculative realm about Chavez's motives...

Manuel 10:11 AM  

Have you read Navia´s post on the conflict? Either he has info that I/we don´t, or he is simply speculating...
It´s hard to understand this whole thing when all we get is hearsay.

Greg Weeks 10:19 AM  

Here is his post. I don't really see anything new in it--he's mostly speculating based on the laptops.

Manuel 10:29 AM  

I agree that it´s all speculation... What I wonder is if we are ever going to get past speculation (always and invariably biased, one way and the other) and be able to know more about what is going on.
Greg, thanks for the link.

Greg Weeks 11:00 AM  

Now Uribe is going to charge Chavez with genocide through the ICC.

I have real work I need to accomplish today, but this is all moving very quickly...

Justin Delacour 12:27 PM  

Now Uribe is going to charge Chavez with genocide through the ICC.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Yeah, that'll get real far.

Paul 12:36 PM  

It's interesting to watch Justin lash out as his Master's lies come unraveled.

Bosque 3:55 PM  

So how do laptops survive a bombing but not the people?

Bosque 3:58 PM  

"Now Uribe is going to charge Chavez with genocide through the ICC."

Of course, 'cause Chavez was running around in Colombia during the times Uribe's brother-in-law ran around with his Paramilitary groups massacring people. LOL!!!

Greg Weeks 4:04 PM  

I don't see any reason why laptops couldn't survive even when human life doesn't.

As for the ICC, it makes no sense, and likely could become the source of a counter-charge against Uribe. You have to wonder whether Uribe will actually follow through, but who knows.

boz 4:21 PM  

Laptop hard drives can survive a fair amount of abuse and have recoverable data. They may not be able to just plug it in and turn it on, but most police agencies around the world can recover data from things that appear destroyed.

Anonymous,  4:22 PM  

Regarding Uribe going to the ICC it suggested to me that the "evidence" on those labtops might be substantive...its one thing to make false claims/accusations in COlombia, its quite another to seek out international institutions as a forum for such claims. Of course the FARC is not engaged in genocide so that specific charge is a ridiculous one.

boz 5:35 PM  

The Ecuadorian government proposed a meeting of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs on 11 March and the Colombian government fully backed their proposal. That's a good sign.

Paul 5:43 PM  

Perhaps that "terrorist" designation Chavez was trying to roll back may come in handy at the ICC.

Justin Delacour 5:46 PM  

Looks like Colombia is already dropping the ICC charge because you can't bring such a charge against an acting head of state.

Anonymous,  6:14 PM  

Looks like Colombia is already dropping the ICC charge because you can't bring such a charge against an acting head of state.

That's what I assumed, because since Fidel stepped down, Cuban Americans in South Florida have been on the war path to finally try Fidel for crimes against [BLANK].

Greg Weeks 6:50 PM  

Where is that being reported?

Justin Delacour 6:59 PM  

Where is that being reported?

In Prensa Latina. Their English is sorta choppy, but there it is.

Justin Delacour 7:02 PM  

It doesn't say that Uribe has dropped the charge yet, but Colombian jurists and politicians are expressing doubts about the viability of the ICC charge.

Greg Weeks 7:02 PM  

It doesn't say anything about Colombia dropping charges, but only that there are Colombian politicians who think it shouldn't go forward.

Justin Delacour 7:08 PM  

Yeah, I just said that. We'll have to see if he tries to go forward with it, but his prospects look pretty dim.

Nichevo 7:21 PM  

Charges or no charges, the evidence of Chavez helping the FARC seems to be quite strong:

http://blogs.salon.com/0001330/2008/03/04.html#a3871

Justin Delacour 7:33 PM  

Charges or no charges, the evidence...

The "evidence"? What "evidence"? We got a bunch of letters that Colombian secret police claim to have pulled from Reyes' laptop. That ain't "evidence" of squat. For all we know, those "letters" could have been written by Colombian and U.S. intelligence for propaganda purposes.

Anonymous,  8:04 PM  

What more evidence do you want than moving your troops to the border because Colombia killed a FARC leader in Ecuador?

boz 8:11 PM  

There are differing views on whether Chavez can be charged. Colombian media is quoting people on both sides of the issue. Some of the lawyer types get pretty nuanced in terms of under which circumstances a head of state can be charged.

To me, it looks like the jurisdictional issue is not clear cut either way.

Bosque 8:21 PM  

How many people has the FARC killed between 1999 and today?

Anonymous,  8:32 PM  

From the Human Rights Watch page on the ICC:

Who can be brought to trial before the ICC?

"The ICC will have jurisdiction over crimes committed by the nationals of governments that ratify the treaty, or in the territories of governments that ratify. It can try any individual responsible for such crimes, regardless of his or her civilian or military status or official position."

Bosque 8:35 PM  

"He warned that strong evidences are required in order to accuse President Chavez for the support and financing of genocide before International Criminal Court."

You need real and strong evidence for that, not a bunch of "paperwork" from a computer in the hands of political entities known to dislike Chavez.

It also opens up the US and a few other nations for their support of groups which committed large scale "mass murder".

The contras come to mind. Former South African heads of state, Belgium, Israel, etc.

This could get interesting.

boz 8:51 PM  

How many people has the FARC killed between 1999 and today?

In that time frame, the FARC are responsible for several thousand casualties as well as tens of thousands displaced and over 10,000 child soldiers recruited. They also have planted landmines in most of Colombia's departments that will be causing casualties for decades to come.

There is some interesting statistical research on the violence in Colombia. The paramilitaries have killed more civilians since 1990, but if you count killed and wounded, the FARC have a significant amount more more blood on their hands. It goes to the difference in tactics between the two groups. The paramilitaries tend to use specific assassinations while the FARC tend to attack civilian populations indiscriminately with cylinder bombs and landmines.

Unfortunately, the difference in tactics allows groups to cherry pick their statistics to prove one was worse than the other. Colombia will be far better when everyone recognizes that both groups are bad, and should be punished for their crimes.

Bosque 9:04 PM  

So in last 8 yrs they have killed thousands is what you are saying?

boz 9:11 PM  

So in last 8 yrs they have killed thousands is what you are saying?

Yes. I know the number of civilians killed and wounded by the FARC is well over 5,000 over the past 10 years, but I don't have the specific numbers on hand at the moment.

Justin Delacour 9:57 PM  

To me, it looks like the jurisdictional issue is not clear cut either way.

The Colombians won't even try it because they have no admissable evidence. This is just a desperate propaganda ploy of a guy --Uribe-- who knows he's under a lot of regional scrutiny.

Bosque 10:05 PM  

Maybe they'll try to get one of those 10 million dollar fines like US Chiquita corporation got for supporting the AUC, another US terror list group?

boz 11:34 AM  

Looks like Colombia is already dropping the ICC charge...

That was proven wrong. So you went to:
The Colombians won't even try it because they have no admissable evidence.

But as you've shown in the other thread, you refuse to identify what you consider admissible.

When they show up with admissible evidence (as defined by whatever legal body is looking at it), what will your excuse #3 be? Will you simply disregard the legal ruling or court? That's my guess.

Justin Delacour 12:21 PM  

When they show up with admissible evidence (as defined by whatever legal body is looking at it), what will your excuse #3 be? Will you simply disregard the legal ruling or court?

You're a real hoot, Boz. You actually think the ICC is going to rule in favor of Uribe? My guess is that Colombia won't even bring the case, but if they did, the ICC would throw this shit out in a split second. Uribe already has two legal strikes against him. First, he openly claims to have acquired the so-called laptops via an extra-legal invasion of a neighboring country. That alone is probably enough to render the so-called evidence inadmissable. Secondly, you have interested parties --Colombian secret police and "U.S. experts"-- tampering with the evidence before it's been turned over to any legal body. And then, to top it all off, it's questionable that Uribe could even bring a case against an acting head of state.

Uribe doesn't have shit for a case, Boz. Moreover, it would make an absolute mockery of the ICC if Colombia's paramilitary president were to take his show there.

Justin Delacour 12:44 PM  

It turns out that AP just got ahold of some of the documents and they don't corroborate the government's most sensational claims. No evidence of a $300 million payment from Chavez to the FARC. No evidence that the FARC sought to build dirty bombs.

Of course, AP tries to make a sensationalist story out of facts we already knew. For example, AP's Bajak reports this: "At least three of the documents express Chavez's deep desire to meet with Marulanda, hopefully on Venezuelan soil."

Duh. That's public knowledge. Chavez has stated publicly --on repeated occasions-- that he would like to meet Marulanda. This tells us squat.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080305/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/colombia_farc_laptop;_ylt=A9G_R3eT185HRJ8AzAK3IxIF

boz 12:58 PM  

It turns out that AP just got ahold of some of the documents and they don't corroborate the government's most sensational claims.

So now you're using information from the documents that the you previously believed the Colombian government and US have forged. Which is it Justin? Are the documents legitimately from the FARC or are they forgeries?

You can't call the documents fake and try to use the words in the documents to prove your case at the same time.

Paul 1:56 PM  

aint he a stinker!

------------------------------
"So it's just false to suggest that Chavez has rhetorically supported the guerrillas' armed struggles."
~Justin Delacour

Justin Delacour 2:29 PM  

So now you're using information from the documents that the you previously believed the Colombian government and US have forged.

Wrong again, Boz. Here's what I wrote in response to Miguel: "As for the possibility that there could have been some kind of evidence on the supposed laptops, I don't dismiss that possibility."

What I say is that, according to rudimentary legal standards, it is questionable as to whether the supposed evidence is admissable. Having interested parties tamper with so-called evidence before it's submitted to an international legal body is rather questionable.

But let's assume, for a moment, that the evidence is legit. Well, it looks like the "evidence" doesn't even corroborate the outlandish claims against Venezuela. In fact, I see nothing incriminating with regard to Venezuela in the AP report. So what if Chavez and Correa were in talks with the FARC? We already knew that. In fact, the Colombian government already knew that.

This is a case of Uribe trying to trump up charges without any real evidence to back them up. He doesn't stand a chance in hell in the ICC.

boz 2:54 PM  

While I'm sure your did a very careful examination of that AP wire story, my guess is that most courts would take the time to read the full set of articles in their original language.

Justin Delacour 3:03 PM  

While I'm sure your did a very careful examination of that AP wire story, my guess is that most courts would take the time to read the full set of articles in their original language.

Go get 'em, Boz! I'm sure your Quixotic search for the "$300 million" and the "dirty bombs" will continue.

boz 3:22 PM  

There's a specific reference on the 23 December note from Ivan Marquez:
Con relacion a 300, que en adelante llamaremos dossier, ya hay
gestiones adelantadas por instrucciones del jefe del cojo, las cuales comentare en nota aparte.


I also recommend the 8 February letter from Ivan Marquez to Tirofijo in which he describes his meeting with Chavez along with methods to launder the "dossier" money through black market business deals.

Justin Delacour 9:35 PM  

Con relacion a 300, que en adelante llamaremos dossier, ya hay
gestiones adelantadas por instrucciones del jefe del cojo, las cuales comentare en nota aparte.


And??? What the hell does "300" refer to? 300 what? Ah, yes, it means $300 million from Chavez to the FARC because that's what the Colombian government says it means.

Must be easy being a Washington hack.

Nichevo 10:39 PM  

I read all the docs (as posted online in Spanish) and my strong impression is that they are authentic. I'm no expert but if they are fakes, they are very good fakes. Time will tell. I hope. If I were a betting man, I would bet they are the real thing. And as such they are an embarrassment to Chavez and the FARC, which explains Chavez's overreaction to something that happened in Ecuador.

Justin Delacour 12:06 AM  

And as such they are an embarrassment to Chavez and the FARC...

Well, at least according to AP, they don't corroborate the charge of Venezuelan financing of the FARC. From what I've seen, the documents tell us little if anything that we didn't already know. So what if Chavez was in talks with the FARC? We already knew that. Sarkozy was in talks with them too. So were the Italians. Big fucking deal.

Uribe doesn't have squat on Venezuela. Uribe is just a plain liar.

boz 5:57 AM  

Well, at least according to AP...

As I said before, the documents are online for everybody to read and they seem to indicate the Venezuelan government is transferring money to the FARC.

What the hell does "300" refer to? 300 what?

Here's another quote talking about the "dossier" from the documents that you haven't bothered to read:

Quien, adonde, cuando y como recibimos los dolares y los guardamos?

Nichevo 8:58 AM  
This comment has been removed by the author.
Nichevo 9:04 AM  

[Sorry about the deletion. I caught a bad typo. Hope this one is better.]

Justin, you cannot have it both ways. If the documents are a fake, then you are right that Uribe has nothing on Chavez's Venezuela. The documents, though, do show that there are extensive contacts between the FARC, the Chavez folks, and Chavez himself, so if they are authentic (and I think they are, but I'm no expert) then they put Chavez in a very embarrassing and politically damaging place.

Not all contacts are the same. One thing is to contact the kidnappers of one of your citizens to try to obtain her release (France) and another is to actually assist and collaborate with a guerrilla group fighting against the government of another country.

So, once again: if the published contents of those documents are authentic, they are both incriminating and embarrassing (which may go a long way in explaining Chavez's reactions to the whole thing).

BTW, whether or not these docs can be used as evidence in any sort of court proceeding is a totally different issue.

Justin Delacour 12:13 PM  

Quien, adonde, cuando y como recibimos los dolares y los guardamos?

Oh, so you're gonna build an ICC case on that, you friggin' retard?

Boz, the entire underground economy in Colombia deals in dollars. We have no frigging idea where these dollars are coming from.

One more time, where in the hell is the evidence of $300 million coming from Chavez?

It's time for you to either put up or shut up, Boz.

boz 1:26 PM  

Boz, the entire underground economy in Colombia deals in dollars. We have no frigging idea where these dollars are coming from.

The dollars that quote refers to are dollars coming from the FARC's deals with the Venezuelan government.

Go read the documents where I pulled those quotes from (I'm sure the prosecutors will).

Justin Delacour 1:52 PM  

The dollars that quote refers to are dollars coming from the FARC's deals with the Venezuelan government.

Oh really, Boz? Well, if that were so, it seems awfully suspicious that you wouldn't actually provide any statements that give us some kind of indication that these so-called dollars have anything to do with Venezuelan government. It seems that you --like the Colombian government-- are pulling claims out of your ass.

The bottom line is this: The statement cited makes no reference to the Venezuelan government. Judging from the non-evidence you provide and the U.S. press' own assessment, Uribe doesn't have squat.

Now, how 'bout the "$300 million," big boy? Time to put up or shut up.

Paul 2:46 PM  

"The statement cited makes no reference to the Venezuelan government. Judging from the non-evidence you provide and the U.S. press' own assessment, Uribe doesn't have squat. "

I guess Justin is now saying the documents are legit. Anyone else having trouble following his jagged line of argument?

boz 4:55 PM  

Justin, there is not a large bold statement on page one saying:
CHAVEZ FUNDS THE FARC

If that's what you're waiting for, go read some Dr. Seuss.

However, when you read the documents in full the story becomes pretty clear. The Venezuelan government is sending the FARC money, which they refer to as the "dossier." Ivan Marquez met with Chavez and his letter about his meeting with Chavez describes the different ways in which the FARC can launder the Venezuelan government's donation through Colombian and Venezuelan businesses and the black market.

I'd hate to think a couple pages of reading in Spanish is beyond your comprehension, but it is worth it when you have time.

Nichevo 5:44 PM  

Boz is right. Moreover, I would not overly focus on the 300 figure. You really have to read the whole thing to get a sense of how much the FARC was counting on Chavez's support and by how extensive their contacts were with Chavez's Venezuelans. It's an interesting read even because of some of the mundane details it contains. In my opinion the Colombians (or was it the mass media?) made a mistake in concentrating so much on the Uranium and 300 figure--it's the whole set of messages that is so importantly revealing. Besides interesting details about how their contacts, it reveals some of their psychology.

Justin Delacour 8:54 PM  

The Venezuelan government is sending the FARC money, which they refer to as the "dossier."

Hey, if Uribe says so, it must be true. Never mind that the very guy you link to, Adam Isacson, contradicts your assessment.

First things first, we still don't know if the documents are authentic. And secondly, even if they were, nobody knows who "Angel" is, and, as Adam clarifies, there's no evidence of any payment.

So, once again, Boz, you and Uribe don't have squat. But it sure is nice to see you showing your true colors by lining up with the biggest piece o' shit in Latin American politics. So much for Boz the "real leftist," I guess.

boz 9:14 PM  

For those who haven't read it, Adam's post is here and provides translations of some of the key quotes in the documents.

If you read the February 8th document, I think it's pretty clear that Angel is Chavez. That document has Ivan Marquez writing to Tirofijo about his meeting with President Chavez.

Nichevo 9:16 PM  

Justin, did you read all those documents in Spanish? Somehow I have the impression that you didn't. If not, pleases do so (it does not take that long).

Justin Delacour 9:40 PM  

I think it's pretty clear that Angel is Chavez

Oh really, Boz? Well, it's certainly not clear to your buddy Adam, but I understand why it would be "clear" to a Washington hack like yourself.

Justin, did you read all those documents in Spanish?

No, because I'm not gonna waste my time until an accredited international legal body (1) verifies the authenticity of the documents and (2) tells us whether there's anything of relevance legally and evidentially. Until then, there's no point in speculating (unless, of course, you're a Washington hack who has an axe to grind against Chávez).

Naturally, the pro-Uribe circle jerk of the Washington hacks will continue, but serious people have little interest in watching the hacks jerk off.

Nichevo 11:07 PM  

Justin, one thing is to doubt or deny the authenticity of those documents, and quite another is to state that even if authentic the documents do not show anything relevant. I read the docs. As I wrote before, I'm no expert but I was much more doubtful about them before I read them than after. As to the content itself, I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt that thy contain plenty of very relevant information (regarding Chavez, Venezuela and other things). If you have not read them you cannot in good faith assert that if they are authentic they do not corroborate Chavez's government substantial involvement with the FARC.

In any event, I will not bother with you anymore. It's obvious that for you this is not a factual issue. Instead, for you this is an emotionally charged ideological issue.

Justin Delacour 11:38 PM  

I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt that thy contain plenty of very relevant information (regarding Chavez, Venezuela and other things).

Ah, yes, "tushin" will be our new arbiter of what constitutes legal evidence. Who needs legal bodies anyway?

Speculate to your heart's content, my friend. Meanwhile, the rest of the world will recognize the real violation of international law in this case.

boz 4:57 PM  

Who needs legal bodies anyway?

Coming from someone who has refused to even read the documents, that's humorous.

Nichevo 5:15 PM  

Boz and others, just to make myself clear. I have no idea whether those documents can be used as evidence in in a legal court proceeding. I'm not hang up on that question. I'm more interested in whether the docs are authentic (after reading them I think they are, but I'm no expert) and, if so, in what they reveal about the FARC as well as what they reveal about their contacts with Chavez and Correa. If authentic, they reveal a great deal.

Justin Delacour 5:46 PM  

If authentic, they reveal a great deal.

Well, not according to most press accounts or Adam Isacson. Your so-called "revelations" appear to be based on completely idle speculation about what the "dossier" is and who "Angel" is. I'm not interested in speculation.

Once again, I'll leave it to an international legal body to determine which documents are actually authentic.

Justin Delacour 5:59 PM  

Coming from someone who has refused to even read the documents, that's humorous.

Why bother speculating until we know what's authentic and what the code names actually stand for? I'll leave the speculation to propagandists like yourself.

Nichevo 6:11 PM  

Actually, even if "Angel" is not Chavez and "300" is not money, those laptop documents reveal plenty about the FARC and about their relationship with the Chavez and Correa governments. To me, at least, they were quite an eye opener.

Of course, I'm not totally certain that they are authentic, but I think they are.

  © Blogger templates The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP