There are a number of conflicts raised in the above-related exchanges among the Latin American heads of state meeting in Rio de Janeiro at the Mercosur summit which require comment.
First of all; Colombia is taking it on the chin in the neighborhood for being a close ally of the United States in the War on Drugs. And the way in which Colombia was singled out by Bolivia is important here. After Chavez's December victory in the Venezuelan presidential contest, followed by leftist and
Chavista Rafael Correa's win in Ecuador, the
Latin American Left has been feeling a surge of confidence, which can be seen in Morales' attack. The message was clear, Colombia is too close to the United States to be trusted in the eyes of the Left and they should be made to pay a public price for their "collaboration." We should be happy to see that Colombia responded vociferously and that Uribe was cheered by other heads of state for his defense.
One might be tempted to look at the Bolivian President's attack as merely an expression of leftist outrage with Colombia, but a closer look at what Morales has been doing recently with respect to coca cultivation may help to provide an insight into his larger motivation. Morales' MAS Party has the support of the
Cocaleros (Coca Farmers) in Bolivia and he has been working to secure their rights to produce it as well as to change international conventions regarding the use of coca. In his recent speech to the UN General Assembly,
Morales defended coca cultivation, and he has worked to secure agreements with other countries to expand coca exports, such as the
one he negotiated recently with Chavez's Venezuela. For this reason Morales, a former coca farmer himself, has cause to view the larger U.S. drive to end coca cultivation in Latin America as a threat. Coca eradication campaigns are being waged right now in Colombia and Peru and the Bolivian opposition to Morales would like to see them extended to their country as well. And the stakes are extremely high for Colombia, which has been the "kitchen" of the international cocaine trade since before the time of the Medellin Cartel, and has a lot to lose if the production of coca soars, which would be the expected effect of a successful campaign on the part of Morales to expand Bolivian production of the crop.
All of this taken together now permits us to examine the nature of the drug war in Latin America as it relates to the goals of the Left. We have genuine reason to ask ourselves whether the Left in Latin America may be preparing to deliberately sabotage our international drug enforcement efforts for ideological reasons; a development that would have serious and long-term consequences for the interests of the United States within the entire region.
And we must stand by Colombia since that nation is standing by us and paying a public relations price for it.
A Latin American Left Watch ping for you all.
Anyone wishing to be included on the ping list may either ping me from this thread or contact me via Freepmail.
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.
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.