Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Chavez's Call for FARC Disarmament Takes Washington By Surprise

By Mark Weisbrot, AlterNet. Posted June 11, 2008.


Political chasm between Washington and Latin America continues to deepen, as Chavez rejects FARC's armed campaign.
Advertisement

Washington's foreign policy establishment -- and much of the U.S. media -- was taken by surprise this week when President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, said the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) should lay down their arms and unconditionally release all of their hostages. The FARC is a guerilla group that has been fighting to overthrow the Colombian government for more than four decades.

Chavez's announcement should not have come as a surprise, because he had already said the same things several months ago.

On January 13, for example, Chavez said: "I do not agree with the armed struggle, and that is one of the things that I want to talk to Marulanda (the head of the FARC who died last March) about." Chavez also stated his opposition to kidnapping, and has made numerous public appeals for the FARC to release their hostages.

Chavez had also explained previously that the armed struggle was not necessary because left movements could now come to power through elections, something that was often difficult or impossible in the past because of political repression.

The surprise in U.S. policy and media circles is a result of a misconception of Chavez's recent role in Colombia's conflict. A comparison: former President Jimmy Carter has recently called upon the United States to negotiate with Hamas -- dismissed as a terrorist organization by the U.S. and its allies in Israel and Europe. Carter is not an advocate of Hamas nor of armed struggle. He has met with Hamas and called for negotiations because he is trying to promote a peace settlement.

The same has been true for Hugo Chavez in the Colombian conflict. This is how Chavez's role has been seen by the families of the FARC's hostages (including U.S. military contractors), Colombian anti-violence activists, the governments of Brazil, Argentina, Ecuador, Bolivia and almost every other state in the region, and also in Europe. None of these people (including FARC kidnapping victims) or governments are admirers of the FARC. They have strongly supported Chavez's efforts, including but not limited to his success this year in gaining freedom for six hostages that were held by the FARC.

But for Washington and its right-wing allies in Colombia, Chavez and the FARC have become comrades in arms. The media has honed in on about two or three positive statements uttered by Chavez about the FARC (out of thousands of hours of his speeches) to describe Chavez as a "staunch FARC supporter" (Time Magazine June 9). On June 10, the Associated Press reported, falsely, that Chavez had five months ago been "urging world leaders to back their [the FARC's] armed struggle."

The U.S. State Department has even said it would consider placing Venezuela on its short list of "state sponsors of terrorism." This is unlikely in an election year, since Venezuela is our fifth largest oil supplier and the Republicans are already getting enough political headaches from gasoline at $4.00 a gallon.

For at least six years the Bush Administration has tried to make it look like Chavez and his government have been arming, funding, and otherwise supporting the FARC.

Until March of this year, Washington had supplied no evidence, documentary or otherwise, of such support. News articles containing such allegations were for years based on anonymous sources. But on March 1 the Colombian military bombed and invaded a FARC camp in Ecuador, killing more than two dozen people. These included FARC commander Raul Reyes, who was also the chief negotiator for the release of high-profile hostages held by the FARC, and some non-combatants. The incursion was condemned by governments throughout the hemisphere, except for the United States and Colombia.

The Colombian military claims to have captured eight computer exhibits, including laptops and flash drives, during the attack. Since March, the Colombian government has been releasing various files that allegedly come from this equipment, claiming that these files and communications indicate that Venezuela's government has been supporting the FARC. The government also alleged, on the basis of these files, that the FARC had helped finance the 2006 electoral campaign of Ecuadorian president Rafael Correa. Both Venezuela and Ecuador have contemptuously dismissed the charges, with President Correa arguing that the computers and equipment did not even originate in the FARC camp.

On May 15, the international law enforcement organization INTERPOL released a report that was widely described as having "authenticated" the computer files. But the report is ambiguous. In one part it says, "INTERPOL found no evidence that user files were created, modified or deleted on any of the eight seized FARC computer exhibits following their seizure on 1 March 2008 by Colombian authorities."


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: chavez, venezuela, colombia, uribe, farc, propaganda

Mark Weisbrot is Co-Director and co-founder of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. He is also president of Just Foreign Policy.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Media and Technology! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Both Bush and Uribe need the FARC
Posted by: BobS on Jun 11, 2008 2:15 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Without the FARC, there is very little justification for the militarization of Columbian society and the millions of dollars we spend there supplying their army and their rightwing terrorists with weapons.

Remember when the FARC guerillas put down their arms for a while in the 1980's and tried to organize a normal Latin American Center-Left coalition to run in elections? They and their supporters were massacred by the hundreds and they soon returned to their jungle camps to wage war once again.

The exact details of the US role in this bloody business remain murky. But one thing is for sure, the US had little interest in protecting free elections in Columbia then and Washington has little interest in protecting free elections now.

What is ironic is that FARC supported Patriotic Union didn't even do all that well in the popular vote. Apparently even the smallest dissent from US policy is grounds for a massive US supported campaign of state terrorism.

Bob Simpson
The BobboSphere

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

At long last
Posted by: Last Chance on Jun 12, 2008 7:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Revolutionary Marxism is being replaced by democratic socialism within a growing industrial complex. That too will fail as the growing population destroys the environment. Only family planning to stop economic growth could save it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: At long last Posted by: John Annis
I'm sure some Neo-Con somewhere is laying the blame...
Posted by: Bearzerker on Jun 12, 2008 9:35 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... for the rise of oil squarely at the feet of Chavez, Putin and Ahmadinejad...

didn't they have a meeting last sept-nov and now the oil price has soared?


well to me it stinks more of the rich hedge funds playing havoc and moving the wealth around then anything else!

Recession?... forget that nonsense!... It's going to be deflation followed by massive depression!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

antipathy to Chavez by mainstream media
Posted by: whealeydj on Jun 14, 2008 9:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is wide spread including Washington Post and NPR who are ironically are viewed as leftist by the totalitarian (cryptofascist and cryptoStalinist) right .

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Lies, lies and more of the same.
Posted by: osd on Jun 19, 2008 8:54 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When is Bush/Cheney not spreading more BS about someone when they won't dance to the power brokers tune. Bush/Cheney are working on some false flag piece of BS, so they can go in a take over for Chavez and get his oil to. Columbias corrupt puppet will say anything Bush/Cheney wants as long as he's in power and getting his pound of flesh out of the deal. Don't forget the Bankers do not like Chavez either. He wants to start a bank for South American countries so that The World Bank doesn't take over anymore of the best land in countries, like they did in Brazil. Same bankers are the brokers raiseing oil prices per barrel. The old Enron energy shortage slide of hand. The more power and money they get, the more they want. They Screwed over East Indias farmers and the land so now they've got them over a barrel (of oil). The New World Order is taking over the World.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is the first time I've heard Chavez wants FARC to disarm.
Posted by: Sojourner on Jun 22, 2008 11:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I had only heard that Chavez supports FARC. I guess I am reading the wrong news. And I'm probably one of the better informed. Even my Latin barber is under the impression Chavez is the enemy. The problem with half-truths, Twain told us, is you never know which half you got a hold of.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]