Show of strength

Hugo Chávez says he wants to bring peace to the warring factions in Colombia's cocaine wars but his

Squinting into the glare of the late-afternoon Caribbean sun, hundreds of pleated khaki-dressed soldiers and military dignitaries form orderly rows facing their chief of staff and head of state, Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez.

Positioned on stage and flanked by a few lines of tanks and helicopters in a military training ground in the provincial city of Valencia, western Venezuela, President Chávez waits for the roaring fighter jets to pass overhead before addressing the assembly.

"From Colombia, Venezuela is threatened," Chávez says, dismissing as "inventions" widespread allegations that his government has colluded with drug trafficking and arms sales to Colombian guerrillas.

The speech is being delivered to mark the 16th anniversary of the attempted coup led by the then-young Lieutenant Colonel Chávez on 4 February 1992. Although it ended in failure and Chávez and his cohorts were imprisoned, many believe the event - now commonly referred to as 4F - paved the way for his eventual democratic election to the presidency in 1998.

But while the Venezuelan president was commemorating his failed putsch, over a million protesters took to the streets in neighbouring Colombia and in cities across the world to voice their opposition to Chávez's hostage-taking rebel allies, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Farc).

In an almost implausible coincidence, anti-Farc campaigners chose 4 February to mobilise a global protest against the Marxist insurgents. They maintain that the event was entirely apolitical and directed only at the rebel fighters, but in a statement on their website they denounce Chávez's "interventions in the internal matters of Colombia and, particularly, his declarations which seek to justify the Farc as a representation of the Colombian people".

Chávez's inflammatory comments about the threat from Colombia came two days after he declared that the Venezuelan armed forces were "on alert" against possible aggressions from the neighbouring country. In a televised broadcast, the president had warned: "We don't know how far it could go. We don't want to hurt anybody, but no one should make a mistake with us."

He added: "One day things will change in Colombia," referring to the cocaine-fuelled civil war that has raged across the border for almost 60 years. "Theirs is a war in which we cannot participate except as peacemakers."

His words have further aggravated the deepening diplomatic crisis with Bogotá. After successfully negotiating the release of two hostages held by the Farc, he requested that these narco-rebels be removed from lists of international terrorist organisations and expressed an ideological affinity with their insurgent cause.

"The Farc and [National Liberation Army] ELN are not terrorist bodies. They are real armies that occupy space in Colombia. That must be recognised. They are insurgent forces with a Bolivarian political project, which here we respect," Chávez said in his yearly address to the National Assembly on 11 January.

As the anti-Farc movement gathered global momentum through social networking sites such as Facebook, it was quickly seized upon by the Colombian government. On the day of protest, Colombian president Álvaro Uribe even delivered a message of thanks to marchers in the city of Valledupar. "Our gratitude goes to all Colombians who today expressed with dignity and strength their rejection of kidnapping and kidnappers," Reuters reported him as saying.

Back at the Valencia barracks, Venezuelan officials reacted truculently. Jesús González, the strat egic commander of the armed forces, rejected it as a "political ploy to try to identify 4 February with opposition to the Farc".

President Chávez reminded his army and onlookers of the history behind the day's cele brations. "The events of 4 February [1992] swept Venezuela into the 21st century. It was when the Bolivarian revolution truly began," he declared.

In recent years, the flamboyant Venezuelan president has used 4F to demonstrate his increasing regional influence and to launch stinging verbal attacks on his enemies.

While critics maintain that it is hypocritical for a democratic country to celebrate a coup, albeit a failed one, Chávez's supporters see it as the day that planted the seeds for Venezuela's ongoing socialist transformation. Chavistas call it the "Dawn of Hope" and regard it as a stepping-stone to true democracy for the poverty-stricken masses.

"It was the lightning bolt that illuminated the darkness," Chávez said in an interview with the Chilean author Marta Harnecker in 2005.

Continuing his speech to the military, the president maintains that 4F is not finished. "It reminds us we need to be even more revolutionary. My government is a child of 4F," he says.

After two years in prison, Chávez and his allies were released by presidential pardon in 1994 and began a new effort to take over the government, this time through democratic means.

"We realised that another military insurrection would have been crazy," Chávez said in 2005. "A large part of the population did not want violence, but rather they expected that we would organise a political movement structured to take the country on the right path." He came to believe, he has said, that the Bolivarian revolution had to be a peaceful one.

However, some scholars consider the Venez uelan government's decision to actively celebrate 4F a rewriting of history intended to indoctrinate the population.

Néstor Luis Luengo, a professor of sociology and head of research at the Andrés Bello Catholic University in south-west Caracas, believes commemorating the failed coup is a key element in Chávez's broader socialist agenda. "There is an ideological battle taking place in this country. If [the government is] going to push for more reforms, they have to change the ideology of the country and the historical events celebrated." It is in their interests, he says, to make 4 February a patriotic day.

Opposition leaders also criticise Chávez for using the commemoration of the failed coup as an attempt to politicise the military. "For us, the important thing is to have an armed force that is apolitical, modern and at the service of the Venezuelan people, and one that does not become a political party," said Julio Borges, leader of the opposition party Primero Justicia.

Other Chávez opponents are concerned at the militarism: "This government prefers to celebrate a day of violence. They should instead be celebrating the day he was democratically elected president," said Armando Briquet, secretary general of Primero Justicia.

A violent act

Chávez's supporters obviously disagree. Cruz Elena Peligrón, a civilian participant in the 1992 coup and friend and neighbour of Chávez in the 1990s, says: "We have always celebrated our independence day and that was a violent act. The US military commemorates wars like Vietnam and the Second World War. They say you have to fight for peace and unfortunately that's true."

Since Chávez took office in 1999, he has survived an attempted coup, oil strikes and referendums on his presidency. Last December, a package of proposed reforms to the constitution, which would have allowed him to stand for indefinite re-election, was defeated at the polls - his first political loss in nine years.

With Chávez's opponents invigorated by their poll success, this year's 4F festivities were notably restrained, taking place in a small pro vincial barracks instead of the grand military base at Fuerte Tiuna.

Venezuela's ambassador to the UN and former coup plotter, Francisco Javier Arias Cárdenas, said political priorities have changed: "We are no longer going to support unconditionally any segment of the Colombian military that has the objective of destroying either the Farc or the peace process in Colombia. Venezuela is just a third party in the civil war."

He concluded: "Of course we don't support guerrilla warfare, kidnapping or drug trafficking. But to end the war you don't necessarily need to end the Farc - just end the poverty, misery and violence that occur in Colombia every day. Both sides should go to the table and talk peace."

President Uribe maintains an unwavering zero-tolerance stance against the Marxist rebels and has shown much support for paramilitary forces that have been responsible for a catalogue of human rights abuses throughout Colombia's intractable civil war.

Meanwhile, Chávez's flamboyant militarism and allegiances with the Farc make dialogue between Colombia's warring factions seem less and less likely.

52 comments

Ciclista's picture

One more point:

The article was not aiming to "link" Chavez with Farc. Rather, it was making the point that Chavez's "increasing militarism could destabilise the region."

Maybe the journalism is not to blame, but rather the reader's desire to read things that confirm his/her pre-conceived ideas and prejudices. Isn't the role of journalism to challenge its readers - as well as educating, informing and entertaining them, of course?

Tim-Jake Gluckman's picture

CJBARBOSA writes:
“frankly I am totally appaled by your comments. Visit our country and learn a bit before saying such stupid comments.”

His stimulating criticism has led me to dig deeper so that I can substantiate what I wrote. Thanks to C J Barbosa for that!
Here is a list of the points I made. Unless you say what appalled you and why it is difficult to enter a dialogue.
What are you appalled by?

(a) I find the NS article one-sided;
b) the statement that illegal narcotics leads to huge profits for organised crime (e.g. Camorra, Cosa nostra, new African mafias degtc.);+funding of guerrillas etc.
c) tendency to narco states e.g. Guinea-Bissau (and Afghanistan via heroin)

Appalled?

d) cocaine was de facto legal in the Andean countries for most of the 20th Century. I gather it is easily obtainable currently in Venezuala. Yet until the use of Basuco there were few reported social problems in the Andes connected to C; the substance was integrated into the fabric of social life quite differently than in Europe.
If I am wrong about this, do tell me the reality as you see it please.

One of the problems caused illegality is that relevant safe use info can hardly be distributed e.g. that sharing the sniffing implement (“tooter”) can and has spread Hepatitis C and other illnesses transmitted through the nasal mucous membrane.

f)The USA more than any other nation have been responsible for importing heroin and cocaine into their own country. This is widely documented.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_drug_trafficking
has some useful links

for the classic text by Prof. McCoy
The Politics of Heroin: CIA Complicity in the Global Drug Trade (Paperback)

Peter Dale scott’s book
Cocaine Politics: Drugs, Armies, and the CIA in Central America, Updated edition (Paperback)

NARCO NEWS

For USA multi-nationals allegedly backing the radical right-wing para-militaries AUC

Are you appalled by the facts described? I find it shocking too especially the mass media choose to ignore the courageous people who do the research.
or by the fact that I was foolish enough to mention it here. Don’t shoot the messenger!

Re NATURAL RESOURCES IN COLOMBIA
e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Colombia

RE CHAVEZ’S INTERVENTION
The article in the NS is correct to point out possible dangers of what Pres. Chavez is doing but the Venezuelans also have a v.serious arguments which IMO is not covered adequately in the article.

KIDNAPPING OF GRANDA SEEMINGLY TO END TALKS RE I. BETANCOURT
Concerning the kidnapping (1- 2005) of Rodrigo Granda in Caracas:
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/878

according to Ingrid Betancourt’s daughter, Melanie Delloye, Granda was in Caracas partly to negotiate about the release of her mother. MD stated this in an interview on the BBC World Service program ‘Óutlook’. I cannot see what motive she would have to assert this if it were not true.

(see also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%8Dngrid_Betancourt).
Is it appalling to state this or the fact itself?

I am especially interested because I am writing a play in which this incident forms a significant feature of the background.

CUI BONO (WHO BENEFITS) FROM PLAN COLOMBIA?
It is a matter of opinion as to what the motives for Plan Colombia.
One result of spraying coca plants with glycophosphate is that sometimes the ground is only useful afterwards for growing timber. So such sprayed areas are brought up cheaply by wealthy land-owners who plant trees for timber.
http://www.mamacoca.org/julio_2007/indexx_en.htm

The second comment by “äntilefty” is frankly not much above the level of a poison-pen writer. It is a confused mass of projection and aggression.

I worked in the Urgent Action section of amnesty international in Cologne starting in 1986. Over the years I sent countless appeals – at first by Telex and then faxes – on behalf those on the sharp end of official / unofficial repression. Colombia for many years was amongst the top five countries for the murder “disappearance” of trade unionists, human rights activists, journalists, ex-Guerrillas, slightly-left politicians etc.
This is the social environment out of which FARC grew: impunity for the murder of many with civil courage; up to 17,000 murders a year. + the massive income created by the West’s prohibitionist policies.
A civil route to social change hardly exists/ed in many areas.

Links:

For a satisfying deconstruction of “cocaine” look at some of Prof. Peter Cohen’s texts at http://www.cedro-uva.org/cohen/

One of the best informed think-tanks in Europe re Colombia is the Transnational Institute:

link

issak1's picture

antileft boy..my god..What can i say..I think ur being paid by the C.I.A...i mean that's how it works right..Lefties..idiots...BUSH-ASS LICKERS right..The same old chase! Regardless of what i think , it's idiot capitalists like this fellow how seems to think he's always right should read more.But if your an american , i bet on everything i believe in he does'nt.Never did idiolise Chavez.. Just a simple conclusion to what you see.He secured the release of hostages whether he was trying to get some political gains did'nt he? which is obviously something President Uribe could'nt manage.

genecrabtree920's picture

"..I think ur being paid by the C.I.A...i mean that's how it works right..Lefties..idiots...BUSH-ASS LICKERS right.."
Oh what a typical new statesman reader! I get this all the time- I dont like socialism, so logically of course, I must be a gun toting, pro-bush, anti-gay, CIA backed, pro-contra, pro-life, big business-backed jew. Sure, Issak. BLACK AND WHITE thinking and simplification. Again, you know absolutely nothing about the region- you just like to back the anti-Americans regardless of the facts. And for your information, Im not american, Im not pro-American, I think Bush is a scumbag and its precisely that kind of black and white thinking which ruins the region. Often in latin american the choice seems to be to follow America or Cuba. You should know better.

knave's picture

It is amazing that New Statesman are now in league with right wing paramilitaries and CIA death squads.
Pilger you write for these people. Hypocrite

genecrabtree920's picture

Hey knave- read what I said above about black and white thinking. Sound familiar?

Ciclista's picture

Hey, at least everyone is sticking vaguely to the area of Lat Am/US politics. Normally politics goes out the window and degenerates into a playground slagging match by now - check out the slew of verbal offal that followed this article:

http://www.newstatesman.com/200801080001

The NS forums are no longer a place for intelligent debate - at least not when Chavez is on the agenda.

knave's picture

Antileft (
Sticks and stones. I am sorry I haven't your insight and intelligence but in even us individuals with low IQs are allowed to debate not just you Ubermensch. That is democracy. Something you seem to dislike.
Uribe still uses terror squads like the hilltop battalion who have killed and torturedinnocent trades unionists, not just FARC. If you don't believe me go on the Amnesty website. Also he recieves more aid than Isreal in fact the 3rd largest amount from the US. Although i doubt the crime figures even are inept government like ours could bring the crime figures down with those funds.
It is strange that NS is suporting death squads like the hilltop battallion. As Greaves would say " Funny old world "

stevenlind821's picture

It is incomprehensible that the Columbian government is not able to stop the insurgencies in its country for until now which is about 50 years!

The main causes of all insurgencies are corrupt or bad government in many aspects, neglecting the welfare of the poor majority, repressions by authorities and involvement of outsiders. Columbia has all the ingredients and for the past 50 years has done nothing to resolve the issues but more keen to maintain the status quo.

I agree with the Venezuelan's Ambassador to the UN. Resolve the issues and FARC will be wiped out!

knave's picture

antileft (crazy name, crazy guy)
According to the New Scientist we all vote due to genes. So what politics we have might be genetically ordained . So we all comment, vote and believe in a black andf white way. You sound like an authoritarian personality so therefore enjoy the company of right wing paras like tyhe two journos who wrote this article.

Latest tweets