Publius Pundit

« Previous · Home · Next »

Colombia Hurled Into The Cold - with a kiss

Filed under: Americas

Congressional Democrats are really doing a number on our ally Colombia, shutting it out of free trade. They say that because Colombia has some vaguely defined 'violence,' (Amnesty lists 6 cases) 46 million Colombians should get the door to free trade slammed shut in their faces. It's something they've been doing for awhile. After that, Democrats then assure us that all they want to do is 'help' Colombia.

***

The imperial majesties of the House Ways and Means Committee weighed in with who lives and who dies on free trade. Being anything but Solomons, they decided to split the baby, allowing safe passage for free trade to friendly Panama and friendly Peru.

But for allied, courageous, and dramatically beautified Colombia - the cudgel and the back of their Congressional hand - sealed with a creepy Judas kiss.

Congress put this statement out:

With regard to the Colombia FTA, the House of Representatives recently passed the 2008 State and Foreign Operations Appropriations bill, which redirects U.S. foreign assistance in Colombia. All of us regard Colombia as a crucial ally in a region that deserves our active engagement, and the bill represents an effort to have U.S. funds help address the root of numerous problems there. There is widespread concern in Congress about the level of violence in Colombia, the impunity, the lack of investigations and prosecutions, and the role of the paramilitary. Issues of this nature cannot solely be resolved through language in a trade agreement.


We believe there must first be concrete evidence of sustained results on the ground in Colombia, and Members of Congress will continue working with all interested parties to help achieve this end before consideration of any FTA. Consequently, we cannot support the Colombia FTA at this time.



So you read right - because there is some violence in a society that's been engulfed by war for 44 years, 46 million Colombians are to be denied the right to free trade with America for as long as it takes for Congress to be convinced it's over. That's Congress' idea of a solution. That'll fix 'em.

Instead of a free trade agreement, all Colombia's getting from Congress is the same deal that loudly anti-American Ecuador is getting: ad-hoc trade privileges under the ATPDEA program to fight drugs, which keep American companies out of Colombian markets but allow Colombian companies to trade here in the U.S. freely so long as the U.S. says so.

Colombia doesn't want that. Colombia wants the solid permanent treaty of free trade instead. It WANTS to open its markets to the U.S. as its means of securing permanent growth, but the Democrats in Congress won't let them. Colombia wants the assurance of a permanent pact so that it can continue growing. It wants it so bad it's bent over backwards and gone through every hoop Congress has asked them to.

And it still isn't good enough.

Shunning Colombia, look at how vague those Congressional demands are - Colombia has knocked down deaths of unionists by 90% as of April 2007, and that's not good enough for Congress. It's given 1500 trade unionists bodyguards, bulletproof cars, prosecutors, special protections that ordinary Colombians don't get - all for nothing. I called the House Ways and Means Committee today and pleaded with them: What is it going to take to satisfy you? What does Colombia have to do? How can the agony end? And they had no answer for me. "I'll have to get back to you," they said - for every single one of my queries. It was painful.

But it did convince me that Colombia is being strung along with no relief in sight, and nothing it does will please the leftists who run Congress, nothing short of the overthrow of President Uribe, a democratically elected president that they don't like.

It's absolute horrible to think that the U.S. would do this to an ally that's done so much for us and asked so little in return.

I see signs of weakness in this untenable stand, in that Congress keeps falsely saying it wants to help Colombia, signalling that it fears those of us who state that their act is unfriendly, hurts Colombia's huge private sector and helps only Hugo Chavez. Therefore, there is room for fightback. Congress wants a free hand to abuse Colombia (as Al Gore has) but they don't want to be called its enemy, called to account, by bloggers like me.

Congress, I got one message for you - you are Colombia's enemy and you are harming Colombia. You are on the side of narcotraffickers. You are helping Hugo Chavez - and not doing one thing for Colombia's well-being.

Colombia has risen from the monstrous ashes of a terrifying war to become a nation that has grown into free trade and needs free trade to grow into a first world country. It's been the U.S.'s most faithful ally in the entire hemisphere, it's been a friend to Democratic and Republican administrations alike without fear or favor. The only thing that can be concluded is that Democrats can't stand this country because it's ruled by a rightwinger, a man who won office with 70% of the popular vote, and who now holds an 80% approval rating .... for Congress, this noble nation must be cut down. Colombia's on the hit list of various Soros-funded leftwing think tanks that wield tremendous influence in Washington - that's probably another reason for the unreasonable stance and why they all need to be exposed. Congress' action is a slap in the face of a U.S. ally unlike any other in history. This nation did anything for us, anything, and look how our Congress is treating it!

I am so angry I could throw things. I burn with hatred, I want to break something. How could Congress be so unethical? How could they throw away something so precious?

Colombia and the U.S. are united together by so much! We both share Atlantic and Pacific coasts. We became independent at the same time and with largely through same idea forces. We almost took Colombia's name, except that Colombia got it first, so we used the name 'Columbia' in our capital. We have so much in common, our histories and experiences intertwine. We bought Panama from Colombia and developed the mighty Panama canal from it. We share the drug war, one side buyers and the other side sellers, a war that wreaks havoc at any nation in its way and therefore have an important mission to solve together. Colombians who come here are so like us they blend in and assimilate right away. Colombia is becoming more like us in that it's developing a capitalist economy quite unlike any other in Latin America. How could we betray Colombia, which is our precious ally?

Colombia is going to be traumatized by this. The charges against it are exaggerated, and cutting off free trade as a solution is way too draconian and disproportionate. The failure to give Colombia the free trade pact it's earned is only likely to increase the violence as Colombia's economy tanks. Leaving 46 million people in the cold is no way to make them want to be your ally. Betraying a nation like this will have consequences for us and I shudder to think what they are.

Congress, I curse you!

UPDATE: Jim Hoft at GatewayPundit has an absolutely dazzling item, a must-read here.

UPDATE: Fausta has much more with lots of good newer links here.

Social Bookmarking:
Del.icio.us this del.icio.us | digg this digg | Add to Technorati technorati | StumbleUpon Toolbar stumble upon | Furl this furl | Reddit this reddit

Comments


marc in calgary says:

I can think of nothing to add to this commentary regarding the stupidity of the U.S. Congress.
nothing.


Chris says:

I also agree with you. There's one thing more Colombia has sacrificed for the US: unlimited support for US policy's mistakes and hits, that has earned that country only the hostility of South American nations. The US has no friends in South America, except for Colombia. And in Latin America, it can truly be said that Colombia and Mexico. Mistakes on immigration policies will hand Mexico to the leftists in the next election. And Colombia, denied of a well-deserved FTA, will have to move closer to Chavez and its neighbors and start to make business there. One has to remember that for Colombia's decision to sign a Free Trade Agreement with the US, the Andean Community was put at stake when Venezuela announced its withdrawal. Peru was also negotiating their own FTA. The difference was that Chavez didn't give a damn about Peruvians, he pulled back from the Andean Community (now its members are Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia and Chile) because of Colombia's decision to ally solidly with the US. Indeed, the decision of a minority of the democrats is giving a huge victory to the dangerous left. But in Colombia, Pelosi's statement was replied on June 29 by President Uribe with a clear message on one of his public speeches. Let's see what happens then. All we have to do, as friends of Colombia, friends of our friends, is to protest.


La Russophobe says:

Poetry!!

We are really through the looking glass here. We are persecuting our staunchest ally in South America and feeding lobster to our most malignant enemy in Europe. Surely, we are cruising for a bruising . . .


Joe says:

You couldn't have said it better. Appears our Democrats would prefer to hear from Colombia's left rather than Uribe who has demonstrated a solid alliance with the US over the past five years. Uribe has made incredible progress against all illegal armed groups, provided a safer environment for his citizens, and increasing foreign investment, through his democratic security policy. Uribe is undoubtedly our staunchest, and perhaps only true ally in the region. Thanks to the Democrats, this could be short lived, and worse, could eventually negatively impact democratic stability in the region. We can't afford to lose Colombia. Doesn't appear the Democrats are listening to the (right) message.


Rebecca says:

what a shame that such flights of rhetoric are wasted telling half-truths and outright lies...

Colombians have been demonstrating against what is perceived as their leaders selling them out to the US for months and months. People there realize that the minutia of so-called free trade agreements will always favor the more powerful trading partner. If we truly had free trade, we wouldn't need carts to carry the books of regulations these agreements contain.

Congress is finally doing the right thing -- Uribe and his administration are increasingly notorious for ties to the extremely violent paramilitaries, and Colombia continues to allow impunity for perpetrators of political violence. Having lived there, I know what this means in a way I'm guessing you don't.

Colombia doesn't need us to save it, it needs us to stop fumigating its fields, mountains, and villages in our sadly misguided drug war. It needs us to stop trying to get the best of it in ridiculous trade restrictions and be a true partner in progress, not propping up a glitter economy. Colombia's poverty rate hasn't budged although the obscenely wealthy (obscene because 50% of even the capital live in extreme poverty) have grown wealthier and wealthier.

Uribe is just using that concept to bilk US taxpayers out of billions to fight a maddening, never ending war against his father's killers. This is not sound public policy, and it is a relief to see our own leaders may have finally stopped falling for it.

Yes, Colombia is breathtakingly gorgeous and impressively courageous. But they don't need our chicken legs (under the trade agreement they would have to sell us most of their production of chicken breasts, while the US would send chicken thighs...confused? Me too) any more than we need to pay for a drug war that puts money in the pockets of known killers, the paramilitaries responsible for the majority of violence against civilians in Colombia.


German Cruz says:

Seems like the propaganda by the FARC is becoming the postmodernist truthiness that it wants to be. Just last week the FARC assassinated 11 members of a regional legislature it has held for 3 years. They bhave refused to turn over the bodies since they would then be subject to examination by laboratories that will show categorically how they were killed (hands tied behind their back and shot in the head). The guerrilla war against Colombia counts on numerous supporters across USA and Europe.
Somehow they are seen as romantic figures that kill for a cause yet to be defined but much too precious to abandon. That Uribe has them on the run perturbs those elites and makes them redouble their support efforts. Of course.none among the elites has endured the guerrilla war or even come close to the state of insecurity and violence that has gripped Colombia since 1948. The paramilitaries are not the only violent armed group since there are the ELN (National Liberation Army) and the Armed Revolutionary Forces of Colombia (FARC) who hve kidnapped and killed thousands of people with no other reason than the creation of fear and chaos that advances their drug trade. They have all well placed and well paid "spokespeople" in USA and Europe that invade opinion sections with quick justificatory stetements that confuse an ill informed public. The war against the Colombian people is based in a search for drug tradedominance covered with a mask of a marxist idea of "guerrilla" war to change the lives of the poor. The FARC, the ELN or the paramilitaries have done NOTHING to alleviate the condition of the poor but hhave done quite a lot to add misery tom their lives. Colombia is tired of this and thus their 80% support for Uribe. The average citizen wants peace with the extermination of the guerrilla. The useful idiots (Lenin's term) want a continued war that benefits some weak political aims and keeps the sick romance of their lives going on longer. I would not be surprised if Uribe decidees to fight a strong and conclusive war to eradicate this cancer. Arms can be purchased anywhere and the airforce can bomb campaments of the guerrilla even in their safe harbors within the jungle in Venezuela and Ecuador (the leaders of the FARC do not stay long in Colombian territory). Uribe could ddo no worst than to send the heads of these leaders to Mrs Pelosi and her democrat (socialist) brethen in a bag of Colombian coffee.


A.M. Mora y Leon says:

Rebecca - interesting post. So even though you have lived in Colombia, you're telling me you're among the 20% of Colombians who don't approve of President Uribe. Might I tell you that's a pretty small minority of people? You don't seem to be in contact with the 80% who do support Uribe, and that's a whole lot of Colombians.

As for your concerns about free trade, I sympathize. I don't like uneven trade. I don't know about the chicken leg problem you describe but I'm not gonna say offhand that you must be wrong. The broad picture on free trade - and President Uribe (with his 80% approval rating) wants it - is that free trade provides a platform for permanent growth. When there's a treaty in place, instead of some ad hoc arrangement like we have now with Colombia - foreign investment comes in. You wouldn't want to invest millions in an offshore drilling or a factory making blue jeans if you weren't sure you'd be able to sell the stuff to the US, would you? You'd only be sure if there was a permanent pact. That's the real reason why free trade is so important.

Did you know that Mexico's economy increased fourfold after it signed the NAFTA pact? That's four times as many jobs as the country used to have before free trade. Mexico's example is the big reason why many countries seek free trade. If you can increase your economy, you can provide jobs to people who need them. You can't do that without free trade, and free trade with the world's biggest market, the $11 trillion US one, is the ultimate prize, the gold standard of all trade pacts. US trade pacts are the toughest to negotiate and insist on the most concessions from all sides. They aren't cheap. But their reward is high. That's why so many countries want them.

Free trade = US-style permanent prosperity
Nonfree trade = Spanish empire with a tight little closed oligarchy that hogs all the privileges and trade and shuts out most people into poverty-stricken shantytowns.

Which do you prefer?


Rob Taylor says:

I'm sorry for what my government is doing to Columbia, and I'm sure I, and America, will be even more sorry if FARC puppets take over and there's a new soviet union just run by Hugo Chavez just a missle launch away from our boarders. More and more I get the sinking feeling that WW III is going to be fought here in the Americas, and that half my country will be fighting on the wrong side.


Nicolas says:

After spending much time in Colombia and with average (meaning working class, i.e. poor) Colombians, I feel I can give a different perspective than most.

Rebeca - Many Colombians not only do not have a problem with paramilitaries, they support them dispite their genocide. A good example is the small coastal village, Cienaga. Before paramilitaries moved in, the area was shook by constant economic shifts that were a result of mafias and rebels war for control of the drug trade. This was a relatively calm area up to that point that earned a livlihood from growing bananas. After the marijuana boom of the 80's, the warring factions had killed so many people (wasn't even safe to go out after sunset) that the people welcomed paramilitaries with open arms. Granted, massacres still occured, but much fewer, and the banana crops started to return and grow peacefully alongside the para's coca. There is now order in Cienaga, it is safe for people to sit outside and enjoy a beer after sunset, and Cienageros are generally much happier. Not to say that genocide is right, just a small example of why paras are so much more popular than you make them out to be.

Mora y Leon - While 80% is a bit exaggerated (polls in Colombia are almost always "influenced" by certain powers that be) there is still a majority that support Uribe. I highly doubt the possibility of long term prosperity thru a trade agreement with the U.S., although it may help. To me, it seems a bit counterproductive to have a trade negotiation that forces Colombia to buy U.S. rice (amongst other agricultural products) for next to nothing at the same time that we are trying to convince their coca growers to make a new living off of rice (amongst other agricultural products). Also, while Mexico's economy has grown, the minimum and average wage has gone down thru NAFTA. There are now more "shanty towns" than ever as U.S. companies move to China after a few years to avoid the tax agreement that they would pay after these several years, leaving thousands of people with contaminated living conditions, no schools, no hospitals and no revenue to create such things. Trade agreements are only beneficial to those doing the trade. Your remarks are insightful, for the most part, and I do agree that Congress has done Colombia a disservice. However, I don't think that you can purely blame the "leftist" Congress for this action. Many people throughout history have led us to this point and the future will remain cloudy and ever changing in regaurds as to how this mess will be taken care of. The only thing that I believe is certain is that Colombians, in the face of whatever happens, will do as they have always done and continue to be some of the most generous, hardworking, loving, fun, and morally upstanding people on the plantet. We could all learn a lesson from them and their situation... not just the "leftists". (you will remember that it was our "right-wing" military commanders that suggested that Colombia create fear thru paramilitary terror many years ago)


John says:

There is no doubt that Colombia is at a critical juncture in its history. Let's not forget that it was only a short six years ago that the FARC was on the verge of attempting to lay seige to Bogota, according to its national strategy. Since then, President Uribe has created the security conditions from which economic prosperity is now taking hold. His principal focus for this term is to create the logistics and economic infrastructure promised by many politicians, but seldom delivered. He can now do this with much less concern that the FARC will inhibit or derail these intiatives by intimidating/killing those attempting to improve the lives of Colombian citizens.

Let's not also forget that President Uribe has done much to rid Colombia of the paramilitaries,(a big concern of US Democrats on the FTA debate)having demobilized nearly the entire organization, and is attempting to hold those leaders accountable for their actions. This has also done much to improve the security conditions for many Colombians in rural areas, who were once caught between the FARC/ELN and paramilitaries. Is it a perfect system, absolutely not, but I would challenge the U.S. to do better; look at Iraq, albeit a different situation militarily speaking, we are having far from perfect results there.

President Uribe now has the ELN backed into a corner, its leaders attempting to get what they can from the government through negotiation. The ELN will eventually fall under Uribe's tenure, yet another condition that will likely fuel even greater security conditions/prosperity in Colombia. The ELN's eventual demobilization will not be perfect either, and we should not hold Colombia to this standard.

Finally, one only needs to look just beyond Colombia's borders to see that the US and Colombia relationship is more important now than ever. Colombia is the U.S.'s anchor of democratic stability in the region and one we should vehemently protect. As stated in the beginning of this debate, Uribe is improving security conditions for trade union leaders, but as with improving conditions for its citizens, this will not occur overnight and it will not be a perfect system, one which U.S. Democrats appears to be looking for, in their own debate with Republicans. These same Democrats could use a short history lesson on Colombia; one which would open their eyes and allow them to look beyond their party differences. Colombia need us now, more than ever!


Mikek says:

Columbia can take it. When things go well it is because of the people, not a treaty. In the long run everything will work out. (I wish the U.S. was on Columbia's side, and I hope it will be in the future)


Nicolas: "Granted, massacres still occured, but much fewer, and the banana crops started to return and grow peacefully alongside the para's coca."


This is the only time I can speak for everyone:

"Please go away and never come back. Just go away."


Ian says:

I agree whole heartedly, but don't waste your breath convincing the convinced. Please comment on the sites that are praising this disasterous move. Write to Congressman Rangel. Read and discuss Kathleen Peratis' article with her and others: http://www.forward.com/articles/11088/


Ron says:

What ever happened to the idea that--The enemy of my enemy is my friend?The Dems. just don't get it.Colombia is probably one of the last friends we have in S.A. and here they are,giving Col. a hard time on the FTA.
The problem with ignorant people running our country is that the mistakes they make have consequences that last long after they are out of office.Hugo Chavez is trying to turn all of S.A. against the U.S. What are we dong to stop him?


papertiger says:

Hugo Chavez is trying to turn all of S.A. against the U.S. What are we dong to stop him?

Grandma Nancy is popping out her false teeth, and strapping on her knee pads.
The rest of you proles can shut the heck up, and listen to the official Democrat government position regarding whom is or is not a valued American ally on NPR (the only 100% fairness doctrine ready voice of America available).


peter jackson says:


It's the drug war. Stop the drug war, and watch FARC and the paramilitaries vanish overnight as the price of coca drops to the same level as coffee. Watch government corruption disappear as soon as there is no longer $billions in illicit profits to fight over. End the drug war and virtually the entire list of ills and controversies is utterly resolved. We defeated alcohol prohibition and we can defeat drug prohibition too. But until we do, violence and corruption and backwardness and strife will hang about our necks like an albatross.

yours/
peter.

It's. The. Drug. War.


Sir William of Ockam says:

"Appears our Democrats would prefer to hear from Colombia's left rather than Uribe who has demonstrated a solid alliance with the US over the past five years."

Democrats find it difficult to work with allies of the US for the same reason that arsonists find it difficult to work with firefighters.

Hey, has anybody around here seen my razor?


Keith_Indy says:

Thomas Barnett comes to much the same conclusion...

http://www.thomaspmbarnett.com/weblog/2007/07/congressional_meddling.htmlWhat

I don't get is the violence focus in Colombia. The Dems admit that is way beyond the scope of an FTA, so why hold it hostage?

This is a terrible signal to send an ally whose main misfortunes are fed by our own bizarre anti-drug policies (the main reason why we imprison so many). Why should we passive-aggressively punish Colombia by denying trade for our own sins?

This is Congressional meddling at its best: misguided, misapplied, and chock full of misunderstanding of political developments beyond our shores.

Pelosi screws this one up nicely.


Keith_Indy says:

Thomas Barnett comes to much the same conclusion...

http://www.thomaspmbarnett.com/weblog/2007/07/congressional_meddling.html

"What I don't get is the violence focus in Colombia. The Dems admit that is way beyond the scope of an FTA, so why hold it hostage?

This is a terrible signal to send an ally whose main misfortunes are fed by our own bizarre anti-drug policies (the main reason why we imprison so many). Why should we passive-aggressively punish Colombia by denying trade for our own sins?

This is Congressional meddling at its best: misguided, misapplied, and chock full of misunderstanding of political developments beyond our shores.

Pelosi screws this one up nicely."


Martin says:

It is obvious, Columbia is fighting communist narco-trafficking guerillas, the natural ally of the left. When non-communist, non-drug traffickers defend themselves, why, it's just like white people defending themselves against black gangbangers in the US, THEY MUST BE STOPPED!!!


Mr. Roberts says:

Keith_Indy, thanks for the Barnett link. Actually, the list of things Speaker Pelosi has gotten right would be shorter.

Here, I'll start:

1.


Serge says:

Even though Colombia is trying very hard to be a better country, there are other countries that do not want to see it progress. The drug trade will never end because it will be an economic disaster, especially for the U.S. The major bulk of money profited by illegal drugs does not go to Colombia, but rather the people who sell it in the U.S, not to mention the number of legal & illegal jobs it creates. Plan Colombia for example, most of the money "given" to Colombia stays here in the States through contractors. It is not to the best interest of the U.S to fully help Colombia get out of war and poverty.

I wish the day my Country will be freed from so much violence, but I don't think I'll be alive to see it.


M. Simon says:

Serge July 6, 2007 9:25 PM is so correct.

The drug war is a price support mechanism for criminals.

So how many here love socialism?
How about criminals?

Then why provide them with price supports?


Nicolas says:

Mikek - you would wish me away for stating an observed fact that in no way reflects my personal opinion of paras or genocide??? Perhaps you should learn to spell Col>O


Post a comment


(will not be published)



Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)




TrackBack

TrackBack URL: http://publiuspundit.com/mt/contages.cgi/261