Santos (Colombia) has withdrawn OAS charges against Venezuela re the FARC

[Peace Patriot]

This is the first I've read that this withdrawal of charges is official. I was aware of the Santos/Chavez meeting and accord, but wasn't sure if the charges had been formally withdrawn. This article (interview of Greg Wilpert, cofounder of venezuelanalysis.com, by RealNews Network senior editor, Paul Jay) says so...

--

JAY: The US rhetoric has been all about FARC and Venezuela, and Venezuela is the point for drugs to head north to the United States, and the Plan Colombia. Much of this rhetoric about the investment in Colombia has recently been about Venezuela. Now, Santos apparently withdrew the application or his request to the OAS to do an investigation whether FARC's in Venezuela, saying he's—I think he said, more or less, they're going to accept Venezuela's word on this. It seems a break not just with Uribe but also with the American rhetoric.

WILPERT: Colombian policy towards Venezuela has been inconsistent for—at least since Uribe came into office, for the past eight years, because there seems to be an internal tension within Colombia, that on the one hand they want the good economic relations, on the other hand they're often pushed, I think, by the United States to criticize Venezuela. And also, because they're politically on opposite sides of the ideological spectrum, they've often entered into conflict with each other. And the United States actually has been actually quite consistent in trying to foment discord between the two countries.

http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/5602

----------------------

The interview (posted yesterday 8/31) is entitled "Recession Forcing Colombia-Venezuela Peace," and is mostly about Venezuela/Colombia trade and how they both need to restore it, but it also makes several other interesting points, one, (Wilpert) that the "drums of war" between the two countries have "definitely stopped for now," and that Colombia is vigorously pursuing participation in UNASUR (the all-South American trade group and prototype for a South American Common Market). (The U.S. is not a member.)

Santos, as Uribe's Defense Minister, threw monkey wrenches into UNASUR's development of a common defense. But now he's seeing advantage in more economic integration. I wonder if this is a gage of just how much trouble the U.S. economy is in, from Bushite wars, looting, deregulation, banksterism, deliberate mismanagement and off-shoring of jobs. Colombia can no longer count on the U.S. military gravy train and U.S.-imposed "free trade for the rich"? Or is Santos on a mission to disrupt UNASUR (as he was with regard to a common defense)? To play along, and to disrupt when the time is ripe? (--as I think may be the case on "the drums of war" as well).

There may be some heavy shit about to come down, with regard to Bushwhack murderous doings in Colombia. It may be that Santos (who was Defense Minister during some horrifying military/death squad activity in Colombia) may need to distance himself from the U.S. in as many ways as he can, given that he is running a U.S. client state. I think a coverup of U.S./Bushwhack crimes in Colombia may already be in progress (with this State Department "fine" against Blackwater for its allegedly "unauthorized" military "trainings" in Colombia). Things are already dicey between Colombia and the rest of Latin America (over the U.S./Colombia military agreement). Things could get worse--if Santos had anything to do with unleashing Blackwater on Colombian civilians (or endorses the "total diplomatic immunity" for U.S. soldiers/'contractors' part of that military agreement, secretly negotiated by Uribe, if direct U.S. military war crimes emerge.) The agreement was recently declared unconstitutional by Colombia's Supreme Court because it wasn't discussed or voted on by Colombia's congress. If and when it is introduced there, Santos will have to take a firm position, and this might be difficult for him. If he opposes immunity for U.S. soldiers/'contractors,' he may be crossing important backers in the U.S., and if he endorses it, and U.S. war crimes emerge--for instance, Bushwhack authorization of Blackwater's illegal "trainings--his complicity in a coverup will be suspected.)

Paul Jay points out that Colombia/Venezuela relations have been a rollercoaster, and that is certainly true. He wonders if this new accord is only temporary before relations break up again. Wilpert just says that, for now, there is an accord. But there is a lot more going on here than meets the eye.

[bherrera]

1. Unasur is not an all America trade Group

Unasur is a non-functioning meeting ground, it is not a trade group. It can not emerge as one because there is too much conflict within the Latin American nations. Mercosur, a much smaller entity, isn't functioning properly because Venezuela isn't being given admission. The Andean Pact, which was functioning well, was damaged by Venezuela's actions to use trade as a weapon against Colombia. Therefore Unasur will remain just a talking forum, and will not be used for anything else.

Relations between Colombia and Venezuela can not improve as long as the Chavez government is in power, because they are a fascist type government, militaristic and engaged in the cult of personality of a maximum leader. This puts them at odds with other, more democratic nations, and in the end makes them a sour addition to the Latin American recipe.

[Peace Patriot]

2. Thanks for another of your "La-La Land" posts. They are very educational.

I swear, some of you anti-Chavez posters are actually living down the "rabbit hole" in an "Alice in Wonderland" world, where everything is upside down, inside out and backwards. Your posts illustrate this madhouse of anti-Chavez ideas best of all.

UNASUR is, IN FACT, an all-South American trade group, and prototype for a South American Common Market. (I did NOT say "all-American." I said "all-South American"--a typically sloppy mistake in your upside down, inside out, backwards posts). Every South American country is a member. Its purposes are plainly stated in its charter: economic/political/defense integration. Brazil, in fact, proposed a common defense, and an official UNASUR committee is working on that proposal. UNASUR presidents have already been acting as diplomats to resolve South American disputes, officially, in the case of Michele Batchelet and the U.S.-funded/organized white separatist insurrection in Bolivia, in September 2008, and unofficially, recently, with UNASUR President Nestor Kirchner's behind-the-scenes activities for the Venezuela-Colombia accord. In BOTH cases, economic integration was the goal and the solution.

It is plain stupidity and "know-nothingism" to WISH that this were not the case--that South America is not moving toward their own Common Market--and to state that WISH as reality, when South America is, IN FACT, moving toward a Common Market and one that does not include the U.S.

Further, you apparently WISH that the U.S. will overthrow democracy in Venezuela so you project your WISH onto reality. This demonization of the Chavez government that you engage in DOES NOT EXIST among the leaders of South America. Lula da Silva, for instance, meets monthly with Chavez to discuss integration projects, and has said, of Chavez, "They can invent all kinds of things to criticize Chavez but not on democracy!" When the Bushwhacks sent down their dictate that Latin American leaders must "isolate" Chavez, Nester Kirchner (then president of Argentina) said, "But he is my brother!" When Rafael Correa was running for president of Ecuador, and was asked about Chavez's remarks at the UN implying that Bush is "the devil," said that it was "an insult to the devil" (and won his election, hands down). When Paraguay elected a leftist president (their first, ever), Evo Morales sent him this message: "Welcome to the Axis of Evil!" Latin American leaders don't share your peculiar, propagandistic views of the Chavez government. They are WORKING TOGETHER to achieve Latin American independence from U.S. domination and interference. Chavez is a highly respected leader of this historic movement.

But perhaps the MOST "La-La Land" statement in your post is this: "Relations between Colombia and Venezuela can not improve as long as the Chavez government is in power...".

You don't even read recent news? Colombia and Venezuela JUST RESTORED diplomatic relations and all trade agreements. Chavez JUST MET with the new president of Colombia, in Bogota, and signed an accord. Colombia JUST WITHDREW the absurd charges against Venezuela that the outgoing president had lodged with the OAS. The war that you apparently WISHED FOR--the U.S./Colombia war to oust the Chavez government and destroy democracy in Venezuela--has been called off. Where have you BEEN?

And on this WISHFUL premise of yours--that "relations between Colombia and Venezuela can not improve as long as the Chavez government is in power"--you base a further diatribe against Chavez, that relations--which, in reality, just DID improve--in your fantasyland, "can not improve," because "they" (the Chavez government) are "a fascist type government, militaristic and engaged in the cult of personality of a maximum leader."

Your premise is as false, unfactual and unreal as your diatribe.

Then you say that "This" (your false premise and your false diatribe) "puts them at odds with other, more democratic nations, and in the end makes them a sour addition to the Latin American recipe."

You have everything upside down, inside out and backwards. Colombia is the pariah in South America, not Venezuela. Colombia's government is the one that has been feared and hated--not Venezuela's--because of the U.S./Colombia military agreement, granting the U.S. military use of seven more military bases in Colombia, U.S. military use of all civilian infrastructure in Colombia, and total diplomatic immunity for all U.S. soldiers and U.S. military 'contractors' no matter what they do in Colombia. Colombia's government has been the one that nobody believes when they make wild charges against Venezuela or Ecuador. Colombia is the country with the 40+ year civil war that threatens the region--not Venezuela. Colombia is the country where thousands of trade unionists, human rights workers, teachers, community activists, political leftists, peasant farmers and others have been slaughtered by the Colombian military and its closely tied rightwing paramilitary death squads--not Venezuela. Colombia is the country where five MILLION peasant farmers have been displaced from their land, by state terror--not Venezuela. Colombia is the country from which some half a million poor peasant farmers have fled the violence of the Colombian military INTO Venezuela and Ecuador--not the other way around.

Venezuela is NOT "at odds" with democratic nations. Venezuela is a key LEADER of the democracy revolution in South America, and its president is a close friend and ally of all the most democratic leaders of the region--including Lula da Silva of Brazil, Nestor Kirchner and Cristina Fernandez of Argentina, Evo Morales in Bolivia, Rafael Correa in Ecuador, Fernando Lugo in Paraguay, Tabare Vasquez of Uruguay and others. They AGREE with Venezuela that U.S. domination and interference must be resisted, that South American integration is the way to do it (that is WHY they formed UNASUR), and that Latin American-decided goals of social justice, peace and development need to be cooperatively pursued if they are to succeed.

You are DEAD WRONG about Venezuela. It is not "at odds" with anybody except for the fascist narco-thugs who have been running Colombia funded with billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars.

But, hey, as I said, your posts are educational. By them, we can plainly see what the wishes and goals of the fascist elite in Latin America, and their U.S. allies, are: war, destabilization, "divide and conquer," overthrow of the Chavez government and prevention of a South American Common Market.

And we can know how important the Chavez government is, to democracy, independence, peace and social justice in Latin America, by how much you hate and slander them--and by the sheer lack of reality of your statements. You are like the "Red Queen" in "Alice in Wonderland," who ordered her minions to PAINT the white roses red.