A WSJ editorial trumpets that Colombia helps prove that only a military solution successfully combats “terror” by noting the deaths of FARC leaders. Now, there is certainly no doubt that military operations are having an important and significant impact. The problem is assuming they are the sole impact.
What I’m getting at here is that the U.S. relies much more on good old Mother Nature than we like to admit. Tirofijo was really old and died of a heart attack. A demobilized member of the FARC says that Mono Jojoy has a serious problem with diabetes (more specifically, “jodido por el diabetes”). Fidel Castro famously has diverticulitis, and Raúl is marching his way toward octogenarianhood.
At the very least, we should ponder why, despite military and other solutions, some of our proclaimed enemies are simply dying of old age. Adam Isacson has brought up this point as well. Tirofijo’s death isn’t a victory in any conventional sense of the word—he was getting old and lived in the jungle. And eventually, unless you’re Strom Thurmond, you die.
7 comments:
Yes, another 30 years of war and we shall have victory in Iraq. Is that the lesson?
Just to argue the other side, let me say that it is a success in Colombia's case.
Military pressure on the FARC has increased stress, increased mistakes, and restricted their access to medicine. Pushing them further into the jungle has brought them closer to disease (particularly leishmaniasis) and further from medical care.
Tirofijo died of a "heart attack" while facing a military offensive. Mono Jojoy has likely had diabetes for a long time; the difference now is that he can't get the same level of treatment. It's not all waiting for "Mother Nature" in Colombia. Just because they aren't being taken out with sniper bullets or bombs doesn't mean their problems aren't due to military success.
On Cuba, there is no argument. I agree with you.
I'd still say that's a stretch. Tirofijo was in his late seventies and in poor health, so would've gone soon even in the absence of attacks.
However, it occurs to me that having leaders in poor health can provide leads. That's how the Peruvian government got onto the trail of Abimael Guzman (for his skin problem). Keep on the insulin trail!
Colombia's on the right track: Hunt them, find them, and hit them. Generally just make it so unpleasant for these people that they give up. Wear the bastards down, and if that means waiting as well, so be it; the whole thing is a kind of siege anyway...
People have argued - I have, myself - that the FARC is so tough and Colombia's so big, that ultimately, a negotiated settlement is necessary. Lately, though, indications have been that the FARC is weakening and deteriorating. Great, now's the time to pile on rout these people...
At the very least, we should ponder why, despite military and other solutions, some of our proclaimed enemies are simply dying of old age. Adam Isacson has brought up this point as well. Tirofijo’s death isn’t a victory in any conventional sense of the word—he was getting old and lived in the jungle. And eventually, unless you’re Strom Thurmond, you die.
Whats the point? Nothing unique about really old Communist leaders dying after being in power for decades. While outlasting pretty tough external and internal enemies. And they were replaced by equally old fossils.
Mao, Chou-En-Lai, Deng, Tito, Stalin, Kim-Il-Sung, Ho Chi Minh, et al.
like Kim Il Sung, Fidel owes at least 30 years of his longevity to the Kremlin. And like Kim, he outlasted the fall of the wall, through cult of personality, Leninist control, charisma, and very particular aspects of his country's history - and its historical entanglements w/the US.
You're right, there is no point in analyzing why we had to wait for all those people to die as we pursued failed policies. After all, we have nothing to learn from the fact that Ho Chi Minh died comfortable from old age. No point, indeed, of thinking at all.
You're right, there is no point in analyzing why we had to wait for all those people to die as we pursued failed policies.
Yeah, Containment was a real failure....Ask the former members of the Warsaw Pact. Or for that matter the South Koreans who avoided the misery of being reunited w/the North.
. After all, we have nothing to learn from the fact that Ho Chi Minh died comfortable from old age. No point, indeed, of thinking at all.
Getting sucked into intervention in Vietnam was a mistake. Can't see any "alternative" preventing the inevitable: millions of boat people, 100's of thousands in re-education camps, political persecution, scarcity, confiscations. Ho might have been a nationalist, hated the Chinese, and made flattering remarks about the US Constitution, but him and his cronies were committed Soviet line Marxist-Leninists.
Post a Comment