[News] Behind the Assassination of Raul Reyes
Anti-Imperialist News
news at freedomarchives.org
Sat Mar 22 19:23:01 EDT 2008
http://www.counterpunch.org/petras03222008.html
March 22 / 23, 2008
Behind the Assassination of Raul Reyes
The Cost of Unilateral Humanitarian Initiatives
By JAMES PETRAS
President Uribe's troop and missile assault,
violating Ecuadorian sovereignty came very close
to precipitating a regional war with Ecuador and
Venezuela. During an interview I had with
President Chavez, at the time of this bellicose
act, he confirmed to me the gravity of Uribe's
doctrine of 'preventive war' and
'extra-territorial intervention', calling the
Colombian regime the 'Israel of Latin America'.
Earlier, during his Sunday radio program 'Alo
Presidente', in which I was an invited guest, he
followed up with an announcement that he was
sending ground, air and sea forces to the Venezuelan frontier with Colombia.
Uribe's cross-border attack was meant to probe
the political 'will' of Ecuador and Venezuela to
respond to military aggression, as well as to
test the performance of US-coordinated remote,
satellite directed missile attack. There is no
doubt also that Uribe aimed to scuttle the
imminent humanitarian release of FARC prisoner,
Ingrid Betancourt, being negotiated by the French
Foreign Minister, Bernard Kouchner, Ecuador's
Interior Minister Larrea, the Colombian Red Cross
and especially Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.
Kouchner, Larrea and Chavez were in direct
contact with FARC's leader, Raul Reyes who, along
with 22 others, including non-combatants of
various nationalities, were assassinated in
Ecuador by Uribe's American-coordinated missile
and ground attack. Uribe's military intervention
was in part directed at denying the important
diplomatic role, which Chavez was playing in the
release FARC-held prisoners, in contrast to the
failure of Uribe's military efforts to 'free the prisoners'.
Raul Reyes was recognized as the legitimate
interlocutor in these negotiations by both
European and Latin American governments, as well
as the Red Cross; if the negotiations succeeded
in the prisoner release it was likely that the
same governments and humanitarian bodies would
pressure Uribe to open comprehensive prisoner
exchange and peace negotiations with the FARC,
which was contrary to Bush and Uribes' policy of
unrelenting warfare, political assassinations and scorched earth policies.
What was at stake in Uribe's violating Ecuadorian
sovereignty and murdering 22 FARC guerrillas and
Mexican visitors was nothing less than the entire
military counter-insurgency strategy, which has
been pursued by Uribe since coming to office in 2002.
Uribe was clearly willing to risk what eventually
happened--the censure and sanction of the
Organization of American States and the
(temporary) break in relations with Venezuela,
Ecuador and Nicaragua. He did so because he could
count on Washington's backing, which covertly
(and illegally) participated in and immediately
applauded the attack. That was more important
than jeopardizing cooperation with Latin American
nations and France. Colombia remains Washington's
military forward shield in Latin America and, in
particular, it is the most important
politico-military instrument to destabilize and
overthrow the anti-imperialist Chavez government.
Clinton and Bush have invested over $6 billion
dollars in military aid to Colombia over the past
7 years, including sending 1500 military advisers
and Special Forces, dozens of Israeli commandos
and 'trainers', funding over 2000 mercenary
fighters and over 10,000 paramilitary forces
working closely with the 200,000-man strong Colombian Armed Forces.
Notwithstanding these and other international
considerations, influencing Uribe's
extra-territorial 'act of war', I would argue
that the main consideration in this attack on the
FARC campsite in Ecuador was to decapitate,
weaken and isolate the most powerful guerrilla
movement in Latin America and the most
uncompromising opponent to Washington and
Bogotá's repressive neo-liberal policies.
International politicians, including progressive
leaders like Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez and Rafael
Correa, who have called for the end of armed
struggle, seem to overlook the recent experiences
of FARC efforts to de-militarize the struggle,
including three peace initiatives (1984-1990),
(1999-2001) and (2007-2008) and the heavy costs
to the FARC in terms of the killing of key
leaders, activists and sympathizers.
During the mid-1980's many leaders of the FARC
joined the electoral process, formed a political
party--the Patriotic Union. The scores of
successfully elected local and national
officeholders and5,000 of their members, leaders,
congress-people and three presidential candidates
were slaughtered. The FARC returned to the
countryside and guerrilla struggle. Ten years
later, the FARC agreed to negotiate with then
President Pastrana in a demilitarized zone. The
FARC held public forums, discussed policy
alternatives for social and political reforms to
democratize the state and debated private versus
public ownership of strategic economic sectors
with diverse sectors in 'civil society'.
President Pastrana, under pressure from US
President Clinton and later Bush, abruptly broke
off negotiations and sent the armed forces in to
capture the FARC's high level negotiating teams.
The US-funded and advised Colombian military
failed to capture the FARC leaders but set the
stage for the scorched earth policies pursued by paramilitary President Uribe.
In 2007-2008, the FARC offered to negotiate the
mutual release of political prisoners in a secure
demilitarized zone in Colombia. Uribe refused.
President Chavez entered into negotiations as a
mediator. The French government and others
challenged Chavez to ask for 'evidence' that the
FARC prisoners were alive. The FARC complied with
Chavez request. It sent three emissaries who were
intercepted and are being detained by the
Colombian military under brutal conditions. Still
the FARC continued with Chavez request and
attempted to relocate the first set of prisoners
to be turned over to the Red Cross and Venezuelan
officials--but they came under aerial attack by
Uribe's armed forces thus aborting the release.
Still later, under increased risk, they were able
to release the first batch of captives. The
French Foreign Minister Kouchner and Chavez made
new requests for the release of Ingrid
Betancourt, a dual French-Colombian national and
former presidential candidate. This was sabotaged
when Uribe, with high-level US technical
assistance, launched a major military offensive
throughout the country, including a comprehensive
monitoring program, tracing communications
between Reyes, Chavez, Kouchner, Larrea and the Red Cross.
It was this high-risk role played by Reyes as the
highest level FARC official involved in the
negotiations and coordination for captive release
that led to his assassination. Outside pressures
for a unilateral release of prisoners caused the
FARC to lower their security. The result was the
loss of leaders, negotiators, sympathizers and
militants--without securing the release of any of
their 500 comrades held in Colombian prisons. The
entire emphasis of Sarkozy, Chavez, Correa and
others demanded unilateral concessions from the
FARC - as if their own tortured and dying
comrades in Uribe's jails were not part of any humanitarian consideration.
The subsequent summit in the Dominican Republic
during the weekend of March 8-9 led to a
condemnation of Colombia's violation of Ecuador's
territorial sovereignty, but the Uribe
government, responsible for the invasion, was not
actually named or officially sanctioned.
Moreover, no mention was made (let alone respect
shown) for the treacherously assassinated leader,
Raul Reyes, whose life was lost in pursuit of a
humanitarian exchange. If the meeting itself was
a disappointing response to a tragedy, the
aftermath was a farce: a smiling Uribe, walked
across the meeting hall and offered a hand shake
and perfunctory apology to Correa and Chavez,
while Nicaraguan President Ortega embraced the
murderous leader of Colombia. By that vile and
cynical gesture, Uribe turned the entire military
mobilization and weeklong denunciations by Chavez
and Correa into a comic opera. The post-meeting
'reconciliation' gave the appearance that their
opposition to a cross-border attack and the
cold-blooded murder of Reyes was merely political
theater--a bad omen for the future if, as is
likely, Uribe repeats his cross border attacks on
an even larger scale. Will the people of
Venezuela or Ecuador and the armed forces take
serious another call for mobilization and readiness?
Less than a week after the Santa Domingo
'reconciliation' meeting, Chavez and Uribe
renewed an earlier military agreement to
cooperate against 'violent groups whatever their
origins'. Clearly Chavez hopes that by
dissociating Venezuela from any suspicion of
providing moral support to the FARC, Uribe will
stop the large-scale flow of paramilitary
infiltrators from entering Venezuela and
destabilizing the country. In other words,
'reasons of state' take precedence over
solidarity with the FARC. What should be clear to
Chavez however is the fact that Uribe will not
abide by his side of the agreement because of his
ties to Washington, and the latter's insistence
that the Chavez government be destabilized by any
or all means, including the continued
infiltration by Colombian paramilitary forces into Venezuela.
Uribe could apologize to Correa and Chavez
because the real purpose of his military attack
was to destroy the FARC leadership, any way, any
place, any time and under any circumstance--even
in the midst of international negotiations.
Washington placed a $5 million dollar bounty on
each and every member of the FARC secretariat,
long before Chavez or Correa came to power,
Washington's top priority--as witnessed by its
military aid programs ($6 billion dollars in 7
years), size and scope of its military advisory
mission (1500 US specialists) and the length of
its involvement in counter-insurgency activities
within Colombia (45 years)--was to destroy the FARC.
Washington and its Colombian surrogates were
willing to incur the predictable displeasure of
Correa, Chavez and the slap on the wrist by the
OAS if they could succeed in killing the Number
Two commander of the FARC. The reason is clear:
it is the FARC and not the neighboring leaders,
who influence a third of Colombia's countryside;
it is the FARC's military-political power which
ties down a third of Colombia's armed forces and
prevents Colombia from engaging in any major
military intervention against Chavez at the
behest of Washington. Uribe and Washington have
pressured Correa into cutting most of the FARC's
logistical supply lines and many security camps
on the Ecuadorian-Colombian border. Correa claims
to have destroyed 11 FARC campsites and arrested
11 guerrillas. The Venezuelan National Guard has
turned a blind eye to Colombian cross border
military pursuit of FARC activists and
sympathizers among the Colombian
refugee-peasantry camped along the
Venezuelan-Colombian border. Uribe and
Washington's pressure has forced Chavez to
publicly disclaim any support for the FARC, its
methods and strategy. The FARC is internationally
isolated--the Cuban Foreign Ministry proclaimed
the phony 'reconciliation' at Santo Domingo to be
a 'great victory' for peace. The FARC is
diplomatically isolated, even as it retains
substantial domestic support in the provinces and countryside of Colombia.
With the 'neutralization' of outside support, or
sympathy for the FARC, the Uribe regime--before,
during and immediately after the Santo Domingo
meeting--launched a series of bloody murders and
threats against all progressive and leftist
organizations. In the run-up to a March 6, 2008
200,000-strong 'march against state terror',
hundreds of organizers and activists were
threatened, abused, followed, interrogated and
accused by Uribe of 'supporting the FARC', a
government label, which was followed up by the
death squad killings of the leader of the march
and four other human rights spokespeople.
Immediately following the mass demonstration, the
principle Colombian trade union, the CUT (the
Confederation of Colombian Workers) reported
several assassinations and assaults including the
head of the banking employees union, a leader of
the teachers union, the head of the education
section of the CUT and a researcher at a pedagogical institute.
All told, over 5,000 trade unionists have been
killed, 2 million peasants and farmers have been
forcibly removed and their land seized by
pro-Uribe paramilitary forces and landlords.
Former self-confessed death squad leaders
publicly have admitted to funding and controlling
over one-third of the elected members of Congress
backing Uribe. Currently 30 congress-people are
on trial for 'association' with the paramilitary
death squads. Several of Uribe's most intimate
cabinet collaborators were exposed as having
family ties with the death squads and two were forced to resign.
Despite international disrepute, especially in
Latin America, with powerful support from
Washington, Uribe has built up a murderous
killing machine of 200,000 military, 30,000
police, several thousand death squad killers and
over a million fanatical middle and upper class
Colombians in favor of 'wiping out the
FARC'--meaning eliminating independent popular
organizations of civil society. More than any
other past Colombian oligarchic rulers, Uribe is
the closest to a fascist dictator combining state
terror with mass mobilization.
The opposition political and social movements in
Colombia are massive, committed and vulnerable.
They are subject to daily intimidation and
gangland-style murder. Through terror and mass
propaganda, Uribe has so far been able to impose
his rule over the working class opposition and
attract mass middle class support. But he has
utterly failed to defeat, destroy or
disarticulate the FARC--his most consequential
opposition. Each year since he has come to power,
Uribe has pledged massive, all-out military
sweeps of entire regions of the country, which
would finally put an end to the 'terrorists'.
Tens of thousands of peasants in FARC-influenced
regions have been tortured, raped, murdered and
driven from their homes. Each of Uribe's military
offensives has failed. Yet he absolutely and
totally fails to recognize what some generals and
even US officials observe: the FARC cannot be
militarily annihilated and at some point the government must negotiate.
Uribe's failures and the enduring presence of the
FARC have become a psychotic obsession: All
territorial, legal, international constraints are
thrown overboard. Alternating between euphoria
and hysteria, faced with internal opposition to
his mono-maniac strategy of terror, he screams
'FARC supporters' at any and all overseas and
Colombian critics. To Ecuador and Venezuela, he
promises 'not to invade their territory again'
unless 'circumstances warrant it.' So much for 'reconciliation.'
The period of humanitarian exchange is dead; the
FARC cannot and will not accommodate the requests
of well-intentioned friends, especially when it
puts in risk the entire FARC organization and
leadership. Let us concede that Chavez intentions
were well meant. His pleas for a mutual release
of prisoners might have made sense if he had been
dealing with a rational bourgeois politician
responsive to international leaders and
organizations and eager to create a favorable
image before world public opinion. But it was
naïve for Chavez to believe that a psychotic
politician with a history of annihilating his
opposition would suddenly discover the virtues of
negotiations and humanitarian exchanges. Without
question, the FARC understands better than its
Andean and Caribbean friends through hard
experience and bitter lessons, that armed
struggle may not be the desired method but it is
the only realistic way to confront a brutal fascist regime.
Uribe's killing of Raul Reyes was not about
Chavez initiatives or Ecuador's sovereignty or
Ingrid Betancourt's captivity, it was about Raul
Reyes, a consequential and life-long
revolutionary and leader of the FARC. The
war-scare is over, differences have been papered
over, the leaders have returned to their palaces,
but Raul Reyes has not been forgotten--at least
not in the countryside of Colombia or in the hearts of its peasants.
James Petras, a former Professor of Sociology at
Binghamton University, New York, owns a 50 year
membership in the class struggle, is an adviser
to the landless and jobless in brazil and
argentina and is co-author of
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1856499383/counterpunch>Globalization
Unmasked (Zed). His new book with Henry
Veltmeyer,
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0745324231/counterpunchmaga>Social
Movements and the State: Brazil, Ecuador, Bolivia
and Argentina, will be published in October 2005.
He can be reached at: <mailto:jpetras at binghamton.edu>jpetras at binghamton.edu
Freedom Archives
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110
415 863-9977
www.Freedomarchives.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20080322/60bafbff/attachment.htm>
More information about the News
mailing list