Diplomacy Colombia Style, Starring Hillary Clinton

So this post was going to be about the irony of Hillary Clinton acknowledging Colombia's advancement in human rights at the same press conference that Big Al' Uribe criticized the sentencing of former Army Colonel Alfonso Plazas Vega to 30 years in prison. I mean all the guy did was get convicted for the forced disappearances of 11 individuals in 1985. Or, as Uribe described it "someone who was simply trying to fulfill their duty", adding, "That hurts. That makes me sad." Awww. Just fulfilling your duty eh? Is that what you have to say about killing peasants and dressing them up as guerrillas to fulfill quotas too? Whatever, in any case, as ridiculous as his statements may be, the post was ruined because, well quite simply, Hillary Clinton didn't exactly say what I thought she had.

So what happened?

I read this Colombia Reports article that included this line, "Clinton also recognized advances that Colombia had made in terms of human rights." And where did that link take me? Well, the website of the President of Colombia of course! Where I read that Clinton said:

“Reconocemos los avances en derechos humanos que ha hecho Colombia, los retos que aún persisten y la necesidad de la vigilancia, del compromiso en ese tema"

Or, loosely translated:

We recognize the advances in human rights that Colombia has made...blah blah blah

And I'm like damn, Hillary Clinton is recognizing some advances, at the same press conference that Uribe slams the jailing of a human rights abuser and a few days after the International Trade Union Confederation announced that half of the killings of unionists in the WORLD happened in COLOMBIA. But because it's the Colombia government, there is just this hint of doubt about everything they have to tell me, so I check the quote with the State Department's transcript (more trustworthy? Eh, probably), and this is what I find:

We also discussed Colombia’s efforts to enhance human rights, the strides made, the challenges that remain, the ongoing need for vigilance and commitment.

Wait, what? "We discussed Colombia's efforts to enhance human rights"? I mean, even loosely translated that's not "We recognize the advances in human rights". At least she did include discussing "the strides made", but fair to say this statement from the Presidents website is grossly overstated, right?

So not exactly the post we set out to write, but hey, on the same day Uribe criticizes the jailing of a big time rights abuser, the President's press secretary grossly exaggerates the US secretary of state's comments concerning so called "advancements" in human rights....yes, just another day in sunny Colombia!

Full Text of Obama's Letter to Lula on Iran Nuclear Deal

In case you somehow managed to miss the background here; Brazil and Turkey reached a deal with Iran on a nuclear swap, declared victory, only to have the US criticize both the deal and the effort. Then followed a barrage of articles from supposed experts saying how Lula has tarnished his legacy and is coddling dictators. So, understandably pissed, Brazil leaked excerpts of a letter Obama had sent to Lula weeks before the deal that suggested all the major accomplishments of the Brazil/Turkey deal (widely ignored in the US press). But what was really in this mysterious letter? Well, here it is, click it to get a larger view, or click here to view original. Bottom line: Brazil wins and the US needs a towel to get the egg out their eyes.





(h/t to Toma Rosa Bueno who posted a link to a facsimile copy of the original letter in the comments section of Robert Naiman's Huff Post smackdown of Friedman that maladjusted linked to yesterday)

Juan Forero, Chief Propagator

Juan Forero, the Washington Post's resident LatAm ignoramus, goes all in today with his article about Chavez and ties to terrorism. There is really nothing new here; magic laptops, former FARC rebels speaking anonymously, and of course "Colombian government documents". No surprise that the article got Ray Walser's panties in a bunch.

A couple points though; first and foremost, why the fuck would anybody trust anything from the Colombian government? On the same day as Forero's article, Latin America News Dispatch has a terrific rundown on Colombia during the Uribe years and specifically the intelligence agency, DAS. One of the many issues raised being that "documents surfaced indicating that the DAS coordinated “political warfare” against government critics, by disseminating false rumors accusing them of connections with leftist guerrillas." And it gets even better, the article quotes from some files that were released recently, outlining how DAS planned on linking a certain group they didn't like to rebels:

The mission’s objective was to “establish ties” between the collective and the Ejército de Liberación Nacional (ELN), a guerrilla group. “STRATEGIES: Sabotage. ACTION: Exchange message with ELN leader, which will be found during a search of the premises.”

So it is public knowledge that the DAS actually tries to plant evidence, and then find it during raids on the camps. Sound familiar? It should, since it's the basis for almost all the allegations against Venezuela and Chavez.

So there are also former FARC rebels who spoke anonymously to Forero. But if this is such conclusive evidence of anything then why hasn't Forero written about the former DAS member Rafael Garcia who outlined how DAS coordinated with the Venezuelan opposition and Colombian paramilitary forces to assassinate Chavez. Or the former Army major who said there were some 2000 Colombian paramilitaries in Venezuela trying to topple the government.

Now, I'm not saying all these allegations are true, but that's exactly the point. Former members of DAS, just like former members of the FARC have plenty of reasons to say plenty of different things. But you'd never see the MSM air these types of allegations against Colombia, only if they fit the narrative of evil, terrorist supporting Venezuela. But maladjusted is hardly the first to notice this, just the most recent to point it out. For a much deeper look at the hypocritical coverage of Colombia vs. Venezuela, check out this FAIR study, or Kevin Young's take for Media Accuracy on Latin America. Young looks at how MSM coverage fits the Edward Herman/Noam Chomsky propaganda model, put simply:

The model predicts that the news media will look favorably upon the Colombian government of Álvaro Uribe, a close U.S. ally, while consistently vilifying the Venezuelan government of Hugo Chávez, whom the U.S. government frequently identifies as an antagonist. If the model holds, U.S. media outlets will be found to portray the Uribe government as relatively democratic, progressive, and peaceful, while casting the Chávez government as authoritarian, regressive, and militaristic.

Well, the model holds, and Forero is the chief propagator.

How to buy access to the US congress, example # 23,113

This is about as unsurprising as it gets in Washington, but never the less worth noting. (even though the story is a week old..must have never hit post...my bad) Congressional slime and right-wing zealot Ileana Ros-Lehtinen is facing some heat over possible ethics violations. Not sure what the fuss is about, I mean it's not like the top Republicant on the House Foreign Affairs Committee sent out an email with the subject line:

“Ros-Lehtinen invites YOU to join her Foreign Affairs Advisory Board.”

Wait, she did? Holy shit! And all it takes is the $2,500 cover to attend an “intimate dinner”? Not a bad deal really.

Unfortunately (since I was definitely going to try and infiltrate her advisory board), the whole thing prompted accusations that this somehow violated ethics rules…as if ethics rules actually existed in Washington…and she canceled the whole thing.

For those who don't know much about Ros-Lehtinen, she is the worst of the worst when to comes to US foreign policy in Latin America. For instance she has been the main protector of the terrorist Luis Posada Corriles, while at the same time trying to put Venezuela on the list of state sponsors of terrorism. Most recently she was an ardent supporter of the military coup in Honduras, even heading down there for some nice photo-ops with the golpistas (pictured above, taken from her website under the section "Dignitary Meetings - Western Hemisphere").

What is going on at the Washington Post?

So yesterday morning was a morning like any other at the Washington Post; the editorial board trashes Venezuela and calls the government soft on terrorism. The Post characterizes the US government as not caring about Venezuela's "abuses" and even says the US is ignoring the "links" to terrorism because they don't want to sanction Venezuela. But then something strange happened, by midday the editorial was no longer available on the website. Technical error maybe? Doubtful, by last night it was back....but much different. Instead of leading with criticism of the State Department's treatment of Venezuela, they just plain old bash Venezuela. Finally in the last paragraph the Post calls Obama soft on Venezuela, but it sure is toned down from the original; removing the "we don't care" quote and replacing it with something much harsher from State.

What happened in these few hours that may have changed the tone of the editorial? I guess we don't know, but I know what I think. In any case, here are both versions of the editorial below (bold in the first means it was cut, bold in the second means it was added). Read them both; if you don't think the Post got a call from State complaining and then changed their editorial stance, well, let me know what your theory is, I'd be happy to hear it. Changing your editorial line to be less critical of the government due to government pressure? Sounds pretty much like the Post's criticism of Venezuela....just saying. Stay classy Washington Post.

First version:

Mr. Chavez's weapons
Wednesday, April 7, 2010

RUSSIAN PRIME Minister boasted after returning from a visit to Venezuela on Monday that he had sold President Hugo Chavez another $5 billion in weapons -- a huge sum for a Latin American army. Hours later State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley was asked for a reaction at his public briefing. First answer: "We don't care."

Mr. Crowley went on to say that State didn't see a legitimate need for all that equipment and was concerned that it might "migrate into other parts of the hemisphere." But his initial response was all too indicative of the continued complacency with which the Obama administration regards the political, economic and human rights meltdown underway in a major U.S. oil supplier -- and where it may lead.

The last time we looked in on developments in Venezuela, in January, we pointed out that Mr. Chavez had reacted to the unravelling of his economy and his own shrinking popularity by stepping up repression of the opposition. That continues: In the last couple of weeks the government arrested and brought criminal charges against three more leading critics. One is a former state governor and presidential candidate, who said in an interview -- correctly -- that Venezuela has become a haven for drug traffickers and terrorists. A second is the owner of the last television network that dares to criticize Mr. Chavez; the third is a deputy in the National Assembly who had denounced corruption involving members of the president's family.

Mr. Chavez's move against former Gov. Oswaldo Alvarez Paz came after a Spanish judge issued an indictment accusing the government and armed forces of facilitating contacts between Colombia's leftwing FARC terrorists and those of the Basque group ETA, who were allegedly concocting plots to assassinate the Colombian president and other leading politicians. Mr. Paz's "crime" was to talk about this development. The Spanish dossier is one of several demonstrating material support for terrorism by Mr. Chavez, who has made little secret of his preference for the FARC over Colombia's democratic government.

That brings us to the latest round of arms puchases from Russia, which come on top of $4 billion in weapons Mr. Chavez already ordered from Moscow. The arsenal includes T-72 tanks, MI-17 helicopters, and advanced fighter jets -- weapons suitable for the conventional war with which Mr. Chavez has repeatedly threatened Colombia.

The Obama administration's response has been to ignore or soft-pedal most of this. Political arrests are met with perfunctory statements of concern; the extensive evidence of support for terrorism is studiously ignored, lest the United States be compelled to act on its own laws mandating sanctions in such cases. About the flood of Russian weapons, aimed at intimidating one of the closest U.S. allies in Latin America, the administration publicly says, "we don't care." Colombians -- and average Venezuelans -- can only hope such breathtaking nonchalance is justified.

And the one without the criticism of State but with all the same blows at Venezuela:

Venezuela's strongman splurges on Russian weapons
Thursday, April 8, 2010

RUSSIAN PRIME Minister Vladimir Putin boasted after returning from a visit to Venezuela on Monday that he had sold President Hugo Chávez another $5 billion in weapons -- a huge sum for a Latin American country that is deep in recession and busy rationing its water, electricity and hard currency. Take it as one more sign of the political, economic and human rights meltdown underway in a major U.S. oil supplier -- and where it may lead.

The last time we looked in on developments in Venezuela, in January, we pointed out that Mr. Chávez had reacted to the unraveling of his economy and his shrinking popularity by stepping up repression of the opposition. That continues: In the past couple of weeks, the government arrested and brought criminal charges against three more leading critics. One is a former state governor and presidential candidate who said in an interview that Venezuela has become a haven for drug traffickers and terrorists. A second is the owner of the last television network that dares to criticize Mr. Chávez; the third is a deputy in the National Assembly who had denounced corruption.

Mr. Chávez's move against former governor Oswaldo Álvarez Paz came after a Spanish judge issued an indictment accusing the government and armed forces of facilitating contacts between Colombia's left-wing FARC terrorists and those of the Basque group ETA, who were allegedly concocting plots to assassinate the Colombian president and other leading politicians. Mr. Paz's "crime" was to talk about this development. The Spanish dossier is one of several demonstrating material support for terrorism by Mr. Chávez, who has made little secret of his preference for the FARC over Colombia's democratic government.

That brings us to the latest round of arms purchases from Russia, which come on top of $4 billion in weapons that Mr. Chávez already ordered from Moscow. The arsenal includes T-72 tanks, Mi-17 helicopters and advanced fighter jets -- weapons suitable for the conventional war with which Mr. Chávez has repeatedly threatened Colombia.

The Obama administration's response has been to soft-pedal most of this. Political arrests are met with perfunctory-sounding statements of concern. About the flood of Russian weapons, aimed at intimidating one of the closest U.S. allies in Latin America, the State Department spokesman observed that "we're hard-pressed to see what legitimate defense needs Venezuela has for this equipment . . . we can probably think of better things that could be invested on behalf of the Venezuelan people." Colombians -- and average Venezuelans -- can only hope such nonchalance is justified.

(image courtesy of BoRev...may it rest in peace)

The Ultimate Comeback

So last week the State Department released their annual Human Rights reports, and every year the voices from around the world criticizing it get louder and louder. So in the Western Hemisphere we already have Brazil, Ecuador and Venezuela speaking out and probably more. Perhaps more surprisingly Big Al had some choice words about the US report on Colombia, calling the report both biased and politically motivated. That’s right, the US’ main ally in the region agrees with Chavez, Correa and Castro that these reports are total bullshit. Then today we get Haitian President Preval with some harsh words for the US, even though he needs every friend he can get right now.

Lat/Am Daily noticed that Correa suggested Ecuador put out its own report, on human rights in the US, but one country already does this, China.

Yeah, China ain’t new to the game, they’ve been pissed about this before it was the cool thing to do and this is their 11th report on human rights in the US. So take a look at excerpts from this years report, from Xinhua:

The report is "prepared to help people around the world understand the real situation of human rights in the United States," said the report. 


The report reviewed the human rights record of the United States in 2009 from six perspectives: life, property and personal security; civil and political rights; economic, social and cultural rights; racial discrimination; rights of women and children; and the US' violation of human rights against other countries. 


It criticized the United States for taking human rights as "a political instrument to interfere in other countries' internal affairs, defame other nations' image and seek its own strategic interests." 


China advised the US government to draw lessons from the history, put itself in a correct position, strive to improve its own human rights conditions and rectify its acts in the human rights field. 


This is the 11th consecutive year that the Information Office of China's State Council has issued a human rights record of the United States to answer the US State Department's annual report. 


"At a time when the world is suffering a serious human rights disaster caused by the US subprime crisis-induced global financial crisis, the US government still ignores its own serious human rights problems but revels in accusing other countries. It is really a pity," the report said. 


You should really click through and read the whole thing, here is the link again just in case.