Posted on 01/20/2007 3:16:20 PM PST by StJacques
Mercosur Summit: Evo generates an impasse and discomfort with Colombia
In an encounter dealing with subjects such as how to unite the region, the President of Colombia, Alvaro Uribe, replied strongly yesterday to unexpected criticisms made by his colleague from Bolivia Evo Morales and requested the Venezuelan Chief Executive, Hugo Chavez, who intervened in favor of the Bolivian, to understand the "legitimate right" of Bogota to clarify whatever doubt could arise in the region over the Colombian situation.
The impasse was produced during the session of speeches of the second and last session of debates of the Chief Executives of the Mercosur bloc and associated countries, meeting in a summit in the Copacabana Palace Hotel, in Rio [de Janeiro].
At the end of the summit and through the discussion, Chavez assumed a conciliatory tone when commenting on what happened and he referred himself to Uribe only affirming that "we are friends," according to a dispatch of the private news service Agencia Estado.1
The incident began when, as third in line to speak in the meeting room of the hotel before all the heads of state seated at a table, the Bolivian President, Evo Morales, commented as he observed that "sovereign" and "antiimperialist" countries could live with dignity like Cuba.
Immediately and without an apparent linkage, Morales mentioned that he had read many reports of bodies like the Economic Commission of Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLA)2 on the situation of the commercial and fiscal deficit of Colombia, where the United States had put millions of dollars under the "pretext" of combatting narcotics traffic. "I heard and read plenty in some reports on Colombia (that) the United States, under the pretext of fighting against narcotics trafficking, had invested not just millions, (but) billions and billions of dollars and I also read some reports from Colombia of its commercial deficit and fiscal deficit, I hope not to be mistaken, it's data from some international bodies, especially the ECLA," Morales said, afterwards continuing his speech alluding to other subjects, without returning to mention Colombia or President Uribe.
The Colombian Chief Executive, who had to hope that Morales would end his intervention and after the turn of the President of Chile, Michelle Bachelet, began his response to the commentary of the Bolivian [President] about his country saying that he would believe in the integration and in the union of the Andean countries with Mercosur. But, Uribe said, "permit me to make a reference to the Colombian subject especially after the unexpected mention of it which President Morales has made because in my long conversations with him, the last ones during the day yesterday, I did not have the pleasure of hearing those criticisms of Colombia so that I could have responded to them in a bilateral manner."
Immediately afterwards and throughout more than 40 minutes, Uribe expounded on what Colombia was in terms of economic indicators before and now under his government, his re-election in 2006, his good relations with Washington as much as with Cuba and on at least six occasions he directly mentioned Morales.
"President Morales, Colombia has calmly and institutionally entitled 33% of the cultivatable hectares of the country to the indigenous communities,"3 Uribe said on one of those occasions he mentioned Morales, not without elevating the tone of his voice at times.
Uribe finished his speech making excuses to the host, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva,4 who had asked that the speeches of the heads of state be kept within a margin of 13 to 15 minutes. "President Lula I exceeded my time but President Morales has the blame, thank you very much," Uribe finished amid a salvo of applause from his colleagues. But surprisingly, Morales did not ask to speak nor did he reply to Uribe. It was Chavez who asked Lula for the right to speak.
Chavez: "Lula, only a comment, only a little comment. I believe that the comment of President Morales was a healthy comment, it did not reveal any bad intention to attack anyone. I only make that comment, I believe Uribe's response has been out of proportion. Thank you very much Lula."
Uribe: "President Chavez, a question -- has been out of proportion with respect to or without respect to ...?"
Chavez: "Only out of proportion. We can talk later, thank you Uribe."
Uribe: "Good, but I have always listened to you with full attention and with all respect, when they leave these doubts about Colombia you have to understand my legitimate right to throw light upon them, as on such occasions when you and I have conversed."
Chavez: "Correct, thank you."
Lula did not intervene and conceded the microphone so that the Chief Executive of Ecuador, Rafael Correa, could make his speech. / Rio de Janeiro AP
JOGGING. The day began early on the extensive Copacabana beach when the President of Bolivia, Evo Morales, left to jog together with the Foreign Minister of Chile, Alejandro Foxley, two countries with an old and sour maritime dispute.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Translator's Notes:
1 Agencia Estado is a private Brazilian news agency.
2 A United Nations organization known in Latin America by the acronym CEPAL, intended to promote regional economic development.
3 This is an obvious swipe at Evo Morales for the manner in which his land redistribution policies have proceeded in Bolivia, which is to say they have frequently been outside of clear laws and implemented with violence or threats of violence.
4 President of Brazil and host of the conference.
Chavez (Venezuela), Morales(Bolivia), and Correa (Ecuador) are trying to bully Colombia for being friendly with the US. The leftists support the drug trade, via Farc, and I agree we have to support Colombia and stop funding Bolivia and Ecuador. Although these 3 leftists are known as the 3 stooges, they are still big-mouthed fools who can do a lot of damage.
Correa has promised to pull the plug on our air patrols that fly out of Manta. We built the air-field, but that won't mean anything.
Ecuador has always been FARC's safe zone, but they have always had to keep it low profile. You wonder if it will become more explicit now. Chavez is pretty openly allied with FARC. I wonder if Correa will follow suit.
Thanks for the translation, StJacques.
===
ON THE NET...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1761584/posts?page=1111#1111
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1761584/posts?page=1200#1200
Ecuador has also recently confiscated over $1 billion US dollars in assets of Oxy petroleum.
They just woke up to the fact that their oil production is off this year, going down, and they don't know what to do about it.
They just kicked out their largest investor.
Retards.
You obviosly haven't felt the devastating effects of having a loved one who's life was ruined because of drugs. Do you have children? I think we should boycott all drug producing countries.
No cut and run in the war on drugs! Let's take the fight to the enemy and fight the war on narco-terrorism in Colombia so we don't have to fight it on the streets of the USA anymore.
Ecuador's posture toward the FARC has always been a bit fuzzy. Their attitude has been that its not their problem, and that they are too small and weak to confront FARC. There is some truth in that, of course. Some of their police posts in the border areas often lacked even bullets for their guns, supposedly.
So FARC fighters keep their families on the Ecuadorian side of the line and visit them when they can. Some of them invest there also, buying farms and bars and hotels. The locals comment that if a FARC guy makes you an offer on your property, your negotiating room is a bit tight; how much room really do you have to refuse the offer?
The special police that patrol the borders say that, as long as the FARC don't show their weapons, they will pretend not to see them. They occasionally discover camp-sites, but they seem only to discover them when the guerrillas have gone. Their biggest problem is the occasional gunfight when paramilitaries on liberty and FARC fighers on liberty bump into each other in the same bar and can't keep their mouths shut. Both sides outgun the local cops, so there isn't much to be done about it.
The special police occasionally do combined ops with the Colombians, but they don't like doing it, because its risky, and they feel like its not their fight. Why risk getting killed over Colombia's fight?
At the same time, weapons ship through Ecuadorian ports. Customs and military men in charge of the ports are in a position to pad their income by not seeing anything they don't want to see. How high this reaches I wouldn't be able to know, I just know what I read in the papers. But its a problem already.
Some of FARC's top people have stayed in Quito, when Colombia exposed this, the Ecuadorian response was to criticize Colombia for spying inside of Ecuador.
One of Ecuador's congressmen was gunned down on the street by Colombian paramilitary hitmen a few years ago; supposedly he was involved in supporting FARC. The Ecuadorian police swept up the Ecuadorian gophers who helped set up the hit (without necessarily knowing what they were involved in) but let the hit men get away clean.
When Gutierrez was president (the Chavist officer who led the coup a couple of years before getting elected) he failed to fulfill his Chavist promises, and supposedly FARC put out a contract on his life. All of the policies that were the supposed motives for the coup, he left in place. Eventually he was overthrown by his supporters who thought he had betrayed them. Now we have Correa, an outspoken Chavist. We'll see what happens now.
You can see that FARC may evolve into a deniable weapon for the Chavists at some point. Do what you're told or you get trouble from FARC.
That's fascinating stuff marron, a little of which I had already heard, but a lot of that was still new to me. Thank you for that.
Thank you for the post.
Uribe may be isolated on the political stage, but I wonder, if they had a choice, where the people of Venezuela, Bolivia and maybe Ecuador would choose to live. Colombia has a society and economy on the rebound. These other guys are in socialist, entropic freefall. Maybe it isn't just confidence but fear that motivates their statements. Be that as it may, you're right, we need to stand by Uribe.
I agree. Colombia has improved enormously under a combination of Bush and its current president (after Clinton basically gave away the country). The question is whether they will get the support to continue. We have two problems here: the pro-FARC Dems, and the pro-drug Libertarians. They will combine and try to destroy Bush and take down Colombia.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.