Colombia's deteriorating security situation

[bemildred]

During President Alvaro Uribe's first year in office, officials in Washington and Bogotá, along with the mainstream media, repeatedly trumpeted the "successes" of the new administration's democratic security strategies. They rushed to point out the decrease in killings, kidnappings and forced displacement, claiming that the military had seized the initiative and had the guerrillas on the run. In sharp contrast to last year's public relations campaign, government officials and the mainstream media have been far less eager to discuss the most recent statistics pertaining to Colombia's conflict, which show that the situation has deteriorated dramatically over the past year.

Two large-scale attacks against the Colombian military by Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) guerrillas last week killed a total of 23 Colombian troops and made it clear that the rebels still pose a potent military threat. In fact, claims by officials in Washington and Bogotá that the FARC are on the defensive are also contradicted by figures that show the rebels launched more attacks during President Uribe's first two years in office than during any two-year period of former President Andrés Pastrana's term. According to the Bogotá-based defense think tank Fundación Seguridad y Democracia, the FARC attacked Colombia's security forces an average of twice a day in 2004.

---

Government officials and the mainstream media have also mostly-ignored Colombia's disturbing upward trend in forced disappearances. More than 3,500 people were "disappeared" during President Uribe's first two years in office, more than the total number of Colombians who disappeared during the previous seven years combined. According to the Association of Family Members of the Detained and Disappeared (ASFADDES), right-wing paramilitaries and state security forces are responsible for a huge majority of the disappearances.

ASFADDES spokesperson Gloria Gómez says it is much harder to focus international attention on Colombia's growing problem of forced disappearance than it was in the more publicized cases from Argentina's dirty war. "In Argentina," she says, "their tragedy happened in a short space of time, and the image of the junta in their military uniforms made it easy to generate international antipathy. Our authoritarianism wears a suit and tie and was democratically elected."

ReliefWeb

[On the Road]

1. That's a Surprise

All the news I've heard has been that FARC is weakening. But I guess it should never come as a surprise when the media present the rose-colored official view.

While the revolution may be legitimate, I am not sure I would want the FARC people running the country. Three decades into a rebel movement tends to make the leaders nasty and ruthless. Look at the IRA.

And all over a stolen election in the 70s. It would have been better for everyone if the people's will had been honored and the new government had been allowed a chance to run the country.

[bemildred]

2. That's why I posted it.

You don't see much that isn't suitable for feeding mushrooms.

[On the Road]

3. Think of What Bush Would Do

if FARC actually wins. OMG. Danger! Fear! Communists! We'll be right back to the 50s, regardless of whether it has any direct impact on the US at all.

[bemildred]

4. Not doubt they would crank up the mighty Wurlitzer another notch.

Unlikely though, continued stalemate seems the prognosis, as long as the
US keeps throwing money down the rathole, unless Colombia's neighbors
decide to take a hand in the dispute.

FARC is a big thorn in their side. Colombia's role as our surrogate
pit-bull in Latin America cannot get traction while FARC might decide
to capture Bogota if the military gets distracted.

[On the Road]

5. LOL -- "The Mighty Wurlitzer"

Yes, that's about right.