“Ungrateful Uncle Sam”: Prospects for Plan Colombia

Semana cartoon on the Jamundi incident: “I hope our frienship is not going to be hurt because of a simple mistake.” Members of the Colombian military allegedly massacred U.S.-trained counternarco police on the orders of narcotraffickers in that incident.

El ingrato Tío Sam (”Ungrateful Uncle Sam”): El Tiempo’s lead editorial this Sunday looks at the impact of the parapolitics scandal on Colombia

El décimo viaje de Uribe a Estados Unidos sembró más interrogantes de los que absolvió.

Uribe’s tenth trip to the U.S. created more question marks that it resolved.

De los diez viajes que ha hecho el presidente Uribe a Estados Unidos, este último ha sido, de lejos, el más duro y complicado. Tanto, que ya hizo saber que está listo a regresar el mes entrante para aterrizar lo que quedó en el aire: nada menos que la aprobación del Tratado de Libre Comercio y la continuidad del Plan Colombia.

Of the ten trips that President Uribe has made to the U.S., this last was without question the most difficult and complicated. So much so that he has alreadly let it be known that he is ready to return next month to try to resolve what was left hanging: Nothing less than the approval of the free trade agreement and the continuation of Plan Colombia.

Las expectativas no eran las mejores, pues desde que el Partido Demócrata asumió en enero el control del Congreso, el ambiente hacia Colombia en Washington comenzó a deteriorarse. Por una suma de factores. A la estrecha identificación de Uribe con Bush y su partido republicano en una coyuntura de frontal enfrentamiento electoral en ese país y a la prevención de los demócratas hacia un TLC que consideran se negoció a sus espaldas con un país con serios problemas de derechos humanos, se sumó luego el escándalo de la ‘parapolítica’. A muchos tampoco les gusta una costosa estrategia antinarcóticos que no ha dado los resultados esperados.

Expectations were not the highest, for since the Democratic Party assumed control of the congress in January the climate towards Colombia in Washington has begun to deteriorate. For a complex of factors. To the close identification of Uribe with Bush and his Republican Party in the context of a heated election in the U.S. and the leariness of Democrats about an FTA they believe was negotiated behind their backs with a country that has serious human rights problems, the “parapolitics” scandal was soon added. And many are not that fond of a costly anti-drug strategy that has not yield the hoped-for results.

No fueron fáciles, pues, los primeros encuentros del Presidente colombiano con los nuevos dueños del balón en Washington y se notó que los voceros demócratas habían hecho la tarea. Preguntaron en detalle por toda suerte de casos “sensibles” (desde el del ex jefe del DAS, pasando por el del Comandante del Ejército, hasta el asesinato de voceros de los desplazados) y dejaron en claro que los actos de violencia contra el sindicalismo son un gran escollo para el TLC. También, por primera vez, la presidenta del Congreso, Nancy Pelosi (quien lleva seis años consecutivos votando contra la ayuda militar para Colombia), y el líder de los demócratas en el Senado, Harry Reid, sentaron posiciones sobre temas como el paramilitarismo, la justicia y los derechos humanos, lo que hace más difícil que den marcha atrás.

So Uribe’s meetings with the new owners of the ball in Washington were not easy, and it was obvious that Democratic spokespersons had done their homework. They asked in detail about all sorts of sensitive issues (from the case of the former head of the DAS to the army commandant and the assassination of representatives of the displaced) and made it clear that the acts of violence against labor unions are a major hurdle for the FTA. Also, for the first time, the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi (who has voted against military aid for Colombia every year for the last seven years) and the majority leader in the Senate, Harry Reid, took firm positions on paramilitaries, justice and human rights, which makes it all the more difficult for them to reverse course.

Nadie esperaba que Uribe fuera a resolver todas las dudas, o a regresar con el Tratado bajo el brazo. De hecho, sembró más interrogantes de los que absolvió. Pero su viaje sirvió para precisar los avances que bajo su mandato ha logrado Colombia en todos estos campos y para neutralizar, en parte, el cabildeo que hicieron en Washington sus opositores. Fiel a su talante, les dio la cara a todos sus críticos gringos, expuso cifras y argumentos y protagonizó incluso insólitos debates callejeros con iracundos manifestantes.

No one expected Uribe to resolve all the doubts, or to return with the Treaty under his arm. In fact, he left behind more question marks than he was able to resolve. But his trip did serve to detail the advances that Colobmia has made in all these areas and to neutralize, in part, the ruckus the Colombia opposition had raised in Washington. True to form, he faced his gringo critics in person, displayed numbers and arguments and even engaged in unprecedented street debates with angry demostrators.

Un inmediato subproducto de su defensa ante los críticos de aquí y allá ha sido el notable repunte de popularidad, que según la última Gallup subió 10 puntos. Es explicable: a pocos colombianos, aun a los más antiuribistas, les gusta ver al Presidente de su país humillado o manoseado. Y la forma como se faja por sus ideas y maneja el fervor patriótico genera una espontánea solidaridad ciudadana. Que puede comenzar a traducirse en animadversión hacia Estados Unidos, en la medida en que la gente percibe doble moral, insolidaridad e ingratitud de Washington con quien ha sido su más fiel aliado.

One immediate byproduct of his defense against his critics both here and there was the notable bump to his popularity, which according to the latest Gallup improved by 10 points. This is understandable: Few Colombians, even the anti-Uribe ones, like the idea of seeing their president humiliated and manhandled. And the way he cheerleads for his ideas and uses patriotic fervor to his advantage generates a spontaneous sympathy among his compatriots. This could begun to translate into resentment of the United States, to the degree to which people feel that Washington is morally hypocritical, unsympathetic and ungrateful with a country that has been its most faithful ally.

No sorprende que muchos colombianos se pregunten si así es como le paga Tío Sam a quien bien le sirve. Sobre todo cuando después de extraditar a centenares de narcotraficantes, de fumigar medio país, de jugársela toda por una mal planteada guerra contra la droga y por los principios de libre comercio que pregona el gran vecino del Norte, de haber apoyado incluso la nefasta invasión de Irak, hoy están en vilo temas neurálgicos para el país, como la continuidad del Plan Colombia y la aprobación del TLC. Bush sigue firme en su apoyo a Uribe, es cierto, pero se trata de un gobierno de capa caída y los nuevos mandamases demócratas bien podrían dejar a Colombia colgada de la brocha. No es difícil imaginar el perverso deleite que a Hugo Chávez y compañía debe producirle esta paradoja.

It is not suprising that many Colombians would ask themselves if this is how Uncle Sam repays his faithful servant. After having extradited hundreds of narcotraffickers; fumigated half the country; thrown itself into the ill-conceived war on drugs; said amen to the principles of free trade preached by its mighty neighbor to the north; and supported the indefensible invasion of Iraq, Colombia finds itself in trouble over crucial issues such as the continuation of Plan Colombia and the FTA. Bush remains firm in his support for Uribe, it is true, but his is a lame duck government and the new Democratic power brokers could well leave Colombia in the lurch. It is not difficult to imagine the perverse delight that Hugo Chávez & Co. must be taking in this paradoxical situation.

You put your whole paycheck on a bad pony and you have no one to blame but yourself as you stuff newspapers in your clothes and prepare to sleep in that vacant lot.

En todo esto hay, por supuesto, un elemento de egoísmo pragmático por parte de los sectores demócratas que hoy ven con recelo a Colombia. Lo que prima es su agenda política doméstica, la lucha electoral contra los republicanos y, en el caso de la poderosa central sindical AFLCIO, el proteccionismo a favor de los trabajadores estadounidenses, más que la preocupación por la situación de los sindicalistas colombianos.

In all of this, of course, there is an element of practical self-interest on the part of the Democratic factions that now look askance at Colombia. What matters most is the domestic poltical agenda, the electoral battle with the Republicans, and, in the case of the powerful AFL-CIO labor federation, a protectionist stance that favors American workers, as well as concern over the situation of Colombian trade unionists.

See Mama Coca, Violence in Colombia: 1990-2000.

During the Cold War decades the leadership of the largest U.S. labor confederation, the American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) uncritically supported the foreign policy of the U.S. government. Like the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions, in which it played a decisive role, the AFL-CIO opposed Communist-led and Communist-influenced labor organizations and generally supported the international capitalist agenda of the government of the United States. This began to change by the late 1980s, as U.S. labor began to realize that the expansion of U.S. manufacturing corporations abroad was steadily eliminating jobs and eroding the strength of industrial unions, and as the Soviet Union entered into crisis and the Cold War came to an end. During the 1990s the U.S. labor movement became increasingly critical of the neo-liberal economic agenda of successive Washington administrations and its leaders became more vocal supporters of workers’s rights and democratic reform both at home and abroad.

Not that AFL-CIO has always and consistently supported democratic freedom of assocation when those associations advocated “irresponsible” postions. See also AFL-CIO Foreign Policy: Report from the Convention, by Kim Scipes, on the AFL-CIO’s operations through the National Endowment for Democracy. While it has made lots of noise about the legitimate plight of farmworker organizers in Mexico, for example, it certainly does not seem to have squawked much about the problem Elba Gordillo poses to union democracy at the head of the teachers there. Why is that?

Varios sectores en Estados Unidos, incluyendo a no pocos demócratas, han alertado sobre el riesgo de aislar o discriminar a un aliado regional tan estratégico como Colombia, o incluso, como lo advirtió The Wall Street Journal, de terminar empujándolo en brazos de Chávez.

Various groups in the U.S., including not a few Democrats, have warned of the risk of isolating or discriminating against a regional ally as strategic as Colombia is, or even, as The Wall Street Journal warned, of ending up driving it into the arms of Chávez.

The Wall St. Journal editorial pages, that is, which are so consistently full of shit that you really start to wonder whether Chávez is such a terrible danger as all that.

So the Cuban exiles do not get to turn back the hands of time to the golden days of Batista. So what? There would be no Beard in the first place if it were not for people of that ilk. So fuck ‘em.

La actual confrontación político-electoral entre los dos grandes partidos estadounidenses ha perjudicado sin duda la causa colombiana, pero no sería concebible que los demócratas le dieran la espalda al país. Tal como quedaron las cosas tras el viaje de Uribe, el apoyo de ese partido al TLC y al Plan Colombia depende, entre otras, de que haya claridad sobre los vínculos de altos funcionarios (civiles y militares) con el paramilitarismo y que se investiguen y sancionen efectivamente las violaciones de los derechos humanos. En materia de aplicación de la justicia, el mensaje de los demócratas fue claro: esperamos hechos y no palabras; resultados y no promesas.

The current political and electoral clash between the two great political parties has certainly damaged the Colombian cause, but it is inconceivable that the Democrats would turn their backs on us. As things stand after Uribe’s visit, their support for the FTA and Plan Colombia depends, among other things, on there being clarity about the ties between senior officials (civilian and military) with paramilitaries and that human rights violations be effectively investigated and punished. With respect to the administration of justice, the message from the Democrats was clear: We expect deeds, not words. Results, not promises.

Razón no les falta, porque en cuestión de impunidad o ineficacia de la justicia sobran los ejemplos, a cual más de aberrantes. Basta mencionar uno, en el cual Washington tiene los ojos puestos: la matanza de Jamundí. Si semejante crimen sigue sin castigo, es poca la comprensión que podemos esperar de nuestros amigos del Norte.

And they certainly have plenty of reason for it, because there are plenty of examples of impunity and ineffective justice, many of them more than grotesque. It is enough to mention one of them, on which Washington is keeping a close eye: The Jamundi massacre. If a crime like this goes unpunished, we can expect little comprehension from our friends from the North.

El Tiempo is a damn good paper, I am starting to think, both in the news hole and on the editorial page.