<html>
<body>
<font size=4><b>The Continuity of Immunity for Tío Sam in
Colombia<br><br>
</b></font><font size=3>
<a href="http://upsidedownworld.org/main/content/view/2181/1/" eudora="autourl">
http://upsidedownworld.org/main/content/view/2181/1/<br>
</a>Written by James J. Brittain <br>
Tuesday, 27 October 2009 <br><br>
</font><font face="georgia" size=3>It is not difficult to obtain
information related to the many social movements and progressive
political mechanisms working to implement social reforms throughout
contemporary Latin America. Venezuela continues to experience support for
the presidency of Hugo Chávez [1999-] and the changes therein via the
Bolivarian Revolution; Bolivia has witnessed the successful promotion of
nationalization projects through Evo Morales’ Movement for Socialism
(Movimiento al Socialismo, MAS) [2006-]; and president Rafael Correa
[2007-] has garnished significant applause for his administrations
consistent denunciation of US intervention in the region, as shown
through Ecuador’s disallowance of Washington to resume activities at the
port and airport in Manta. Alongside the aforementioned electoral shifts,
the on-going civil war within Colombia has, contrary to state and popular
media reports, seen the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia-People’s
Army (Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias Colombianas-Ejército del Pueblo,
FARC-EP) remain a consistent threat to dominant political-economic
interests in both Colombia and the United States (Brittain, 2010). For
years the FARC-EP have been "the most powerful and successful
guerrilla army in the world" leading it to be seen as "the most
important military and political force in South America opposing
imperialism" (Escribano, 2003: 299; Petras and Brescia, 2000: 134;
see also Petras and Veltmeyer, 2003). A testament of their consequential
Marxism, administration after administration in Colombia (and the United
States) have diligently fought to halt the FARC-EP’s struggle of
emancipation fearing that the country’s elite could lose their entrenched
class dominance. If such events were to occur a further destabilization
of domestic and foreign interests would subsequently arise within a
region increasingly moving away from a well-entrenched conventional
political-economic system dominated by the United States. While 2008
witnessed the insurgency implement a tactical withdrawal, the FARC-EP
remains to be the largest and longest-established insurgency movement in
Latin American history (Brittain, 2010; Petras, 2008).<br><br>
To prolong influence over Colombia, every US administrations from Nixon
[1969-1974] to Obama [2009-] has embraced a ‘war on
drugs,’<a href="http://upsidedownworld.org/main/l%20_ftn1">[1]</a> or
more recently a ‘war on terror,’ as a means to deploy counterinsurgency
campaigns to silence antagonistic sectors of said population. It is
increasingly clear, when concerning the recent actions of Bogotá and
Washington to facilitate seven fortified bases controlled by the United
States on Colombian territory, that both states have coordinated a
strategic alliance to militarize the region, not simply one country.
German Rodas Chavez (2007: 97) suggests that such activities are an
attempt to enable the US to stabilize at least a portion of Latin
America’s territory. Securing some form of control over Colombia – and
subsequently using the country as a centralized outpost – would assist
the US to deploy ‘sub-regional military operations’ throughout the
domestic and regional geography (Campos, 2007: 31). From this one can
view Colombia as a strategic ‘national security’ case for Washington on
three fronts:
<ul>
<li>First, the country’s influential economic and geopolitical placement
as the regions gateway to South America: bordering on the Panama Basin
and Caribbean Sea, access to both the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, and
neighbouring five nation-states (Panama, Venezuela, Ecuador, Peru, and
Brazil).
<li>Second, Colombia is one of the United States’ most important Latin
American and Caribbean energy suppliers in both present and future forms
via extensive untapped oil/coal reserves and already established
pipelines and open-pit mines.
<li>Lastly, both states share a dual goal of eliminating the ideological
significance and potential political-military threat of the FARC-EP from
creating a successful revolutionary shift ‘from below’.</font>
</ul><br>
<font face="georgia" size=3>Supporting such a scenario, John Perkins
describes Colombia as the last bastion of US imperial power in Latin
America. As a result of the country’s tactical location Washington has
attempted to financially and militarily sustain the basis of power in
Colombia to ensure that a geopolitical opening remains in the grasp of
the US – hence, the importance of the seven
bases.<a href="http://upsidedownworld.org/main/l%20_ftn2">[2]</a> If the
Colombian state can hold power than Washington still has a hope of
regaining regional political-economic authority.<br><br>
</font>
<dl>
<dd>Colombia is the glaring exception to the hemispheric
anti-corporatocracy movements. It has maintained its position as
Washington’s surrogate. Shored up massive U.S. taxpayer assistance and
armies of corporate-sponsored mercenaries, as well as formal U.S.
military support, it has become the keystone in Washington’s attempt’s to
regain regional domination (Perkins, 2008: 149). <br><br>
</dl>What is being witnessed in Colombia reflects what Marx (and Engels)
alluded to when concerning the activities of ruling powers under
ingrained capitalist conditions. While not apparently in their immediate
interests, elites from various countries will periodically align when
problematic conditions arise for the purpose of eliminating impediments
to expansion. Hence, their historical statement, "in political
practice … they join all coercive measures against the working
class" (Marx and Engels, 1976: 481, 508). In 1847, before a
collective of workers in London, Marx highlighted how capitalists,
without fail, would, across borders, support one another as a consequence
of their class position. <br><br>
<dl>
<dd>A certain kind of brotherhood does of course exist among the
bourgeois classes of all nations. It is a brotherhood of the oppressors
against the oppressed, of the exploiters against the exploited. Just as,
despite the competition and conflicts existing between the members of the
bourgeoisie, the bourgeois class of one country is united by brotherly
ties against the proletariat of that country, so the bourgeois of all
countries, despite their mutual conflicts and competition on the world
market, are united by brotherly ties against the proletariat of all
countries (Marx, 1976: 388).<br><br>
</dl>Recognizing the importance of regaining some form of hegemony, the
Colombian state is willing to provide the United States carte blanch in
tactics, methods, and campaigns over its sovereign territory and those
living therein. Such immunity was recently witnessed when US Sgt. Michael
Coen and a private military-based contractor César Ruiz were free to
leave Colombia without trial after warrants for their arrest were issued
related to the rape of a 12 year-old girl at the Tolemaida military base
in Tolima (Martínez, 2009). Furthermore, upon returning to the United
States, neither Coen or Ruiz were prosecuted for said crime even though
Colombia’s Prosecutor General’s office concluded the youth had been
sexually assaulted, had compiled evidence related to the sort, and had
eye-witness testimony that decried the two as the violators (Alsema,
2009). Recognizing this as a violation of justice, one is burdened with
the question as to how many more atrocities have gone unpunished over the
last decade (and Plan Colombia, 1998/2000-2006)? <br><br>
According to US ambassador to Colombia William Brownfield, "only six
US soldiers committed crimes in Colombian territory in the last ten years
… in other words, more or less three cases for 10,000 people" (see
Wecker, 2009a). Most disconcerting, however, were Brownfield’s adamant
comments that even if crimes had, were, or are committed, "[US]
people have a right to privacy" (as quoted in Wecker, 2009a).
Astonishingly, Colombia’s foreign minister Jaime Bermúdez furthered this
position when referring to US state forces operating from the proposed
seven bases. On national media, Bermúdez commented that not only would
foreign military personnel receive immunity while serving in Colombia but
that this is a long continued practice (see Martínez, 2009; Wecker,
2009b). <br><br>
Immunity for US forces in Colombia is not a recent phenomena but rather
an ongoing foreign policy agreement between Bogotá and Washington. In
2002-2003, the Colombian state relieved any legal barriers to crimes
committed against its citizens by US military personnel through Article
98 of the Rome Treaty of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the
American Service-Members’ Protection Act (APSA) (see Isacson,
2007).<a href="http://upsidedownworld.org/main/l%20_ftn3">[3]</a> For the
greater part of a decade, officials in both Colombia and the United
States have made sure that Colombian institutions cannot inhibit nor
intervene in US operations (during or after the fact) under the guise of
stabilizing the country (and region). Former secretary of defense Donald
Rumsfeld put it best when he said the United States’ has "an
obligation to protect our men and women in uniform from this court [ICC]
and to preserve America’s ability to remain engaged in the world"
(as quoted in Stoner, 2004). John Negroponte, former US ambassador to the
United Nations (UN), even threatened the UN when he stated, "should
the ICC eventually seek to detain any American, the United States would
regard this as illegitimate - and it would have serious
consequences" (Negroponte, 2002: 1). In short, through these
Immunity Agreements (IAs), US state forces have enjoyed relative
invulnerability from the mayhem they have committed.<br><br>
The basis for the IAs – and the most recent announcement of full-scale
future immunity for US state forces on the seven bases – has partially
been to insulate United States officials from again being embroiled in
scandals related to structural human rights abuses. In 1986, the US was
scolded by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) when it determined
Washington was involved in terrorist activities of war, working with
paramilitary networks, and approving the mining of Nicaragua’s Managua
waterways as a means to destabilize the Sandinistas while in power (ICJ,
1986). What is interesting about today, however, is that the call from
the Obama administration for immunity is welcomed by the Colombia state
under Álvaro Uribe Vélez [2002-]. The reasoning: a dire need to prolong
domestic sociopolitical stability and regain hemispheric economic control
over a region that has experienced more than incremental amounts of
economic, political, and social change, which could wet an appetite for
more. As Lenin (1966: 241-242) recognized:<br><br>
<dl>
<dd>There has been a certain rapprochement between the bourgeoisie of the
exploiting countries and that of the colonies, so that very oftenperhaps
even in most casesthe bourgeoisie of the oppressed countries … is in
full accord with the imperialist bourgeoisie, i.e., join forces with it
against all revolutionary movements and revolutionary classes.<br><br>
</dl>The catalyst for the seven bases and IAs is due to the rise and
increasing stability of progressive social movements – both within and
outside Colombia – that demonstrate the vulnerability of the United
States’ imperial project. To lose ground in Colombia would be to not only
lose the capacity to fiscally gain from the nation’s natural resources,
cheap labour, and exportable commodities but it would further signal the
ability of those ‘from below’ to continue building collective power
through a united Latin America – a Bolivarian-like region that could
withstand dominant monetary and militaristic imperial pressures. Instead
of accepting the organic democratic principals of foreign countries and
the majorities therein to create an alternative political model of
representation and economic methods of development, the United States has
and will continue to consciously work against
self-determination.<br><br>
James J. Brittain is an Assistant Professor within the Department of
Sociology and coordinator of International Development Studies at Acadia
University. He is the author of Revolutionary Social Change in Colombia:
The origin and direction of the FARC-EP (Pluto Press, 2010), many
peer-refereed publications for Controversia, Cuadernos de Sociología,
Development, Journal for Peasant Studies, Labour, Capital and Society,
Monthly Review, New Politics, Peace Review, Rethinking Marxism, Socialist
Studies, The Saskatchewan Institute for Public Policy, Z Magazine, Zed
Books, and various articles for Upside Down World.<br><br>
</i>References<br><br>
</b>Alsema, Adriaan (2009) "US military suspects not charged in
Colombia rape case," September 3 On-Line
<a href="http://colombiareports.com/colombia-news/news/5716-us-rape-suspects-still-not-charged.html" eudora="autourl">
http://colombiareports.com/colombia-news/news/5716-us-rape-suspects-still-not-charged.html</a>
Accessed September 4, 2009.<br><br>
Boucher, Richard (2003) "Daily Press Briefing," July 3 On-Line
<a href="http://www.america.gov/st/washfile-english/2003/July/20030703165811relhcie0.1621057.html" eudora="autourl">
http://www.america.gov/st/washfile-english/2003/July/20030703165811relhcie0.1621057.html</a>
Accessed August 1, 2003.<br><br>
Brittain, James J. (2010) Revolutionary Social Change in Colombia: The
origin and direction of the FARC-EP. London, UK: Pluto Press.<br><br>
Campos, Carlos Oliva (2007) "The United StatesLatin America and the
Caribbean: From Neopan-Americanism to the American system for the
twenty-first century," in The Bush Doctrine and Latin America. Gary
Prevsot and Carlos Oliva Campos (Eds.). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
pp.11-47.<br><br>
Chavez, German Rodas (2007) "Plan ColombiaA key ingredient in the
Bush doctrine," in The Bush Doctrine and Latin America. Gary Prevost
and Carlos Oliva Campos (Eds.). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. pp.
91-104.<br><br>
Escribano, Marcela (2003) "Militarism and Globalization: Conference
synopsis," in Another World in Possible: Popular alternatives to
globalization at the World Social Forum. William F. Fisher and Thomas
Ponniah (Eds.). London, UK: Zed Books. pp. 296-308.<br><br>
Goff, Stan (2004) Full Spectrum Disorder: The military in the new
American century. New York, NY: Soft Skull Press.<br><br>
International Court of Justice, ICJ (1986) Military and Paramilitary
Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of
America) - Judgment of the Court. Hague: ICJ.<br><br>
Isacson, Adam (2007) Taking "No" for an Answer: The
"American Servicemembers’ Protection Act" and the Bush
administration’s security relations with Latin America. Washington:
Center for International Policy.<br><br>
Latin American Press (2004) "How Much the War Costs," November
25 On-Line
<a href="http://www.lapress.org/ArticlePrint.asp?IssCode=0&lanCode=1&artCode=4033" eudora="autourl">
http://www.lapress.org/ArticlePrint.asp?IssCode=0&lanCode=1&artCode=4033</a>
Accessed November 26, 2004.<br><br>
Lenin, V.I. (1966) "Report of the Commission on the National and the
Colonial Questions July 26," in Collected Works Volume 31:
April-December 1920. Moscow, USSR: Progress Publishers. pp.
240-245.<br><br>
Martínez, Helda (2009) "Colombia: Talking About Peace in the Middle
of War," October 5 On-Line
<a href="http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=48729" eudora="autourl">
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=48729</a> Accessed October 6,
2009.<br><br>
Marx, Karl (1976) "Marx’s Speech: Speeches at the International
Meeting held in London on November 29, 1847 to mark the 17th anniversary
of the Polish Uprising of 1830," in Collected Works Volume 6:
1845-1848. New York, NY: International Publishers. pp. 388-389.<br><br>
Marx, Karl and Frederick Engels (1976) "Manifesto of the Communist
Party," in Collected Works Volume 6: 1845-48. New York, NY:
International Publishers. pp. 476-519.<br><br>
Mondragón, Héctor (2007) "Democracy and Plan Colombia," NALCA
Report on the Americas, 40(1): 42-45.<br><br>
Murillo, Mario A. (2005) "Presidential Re-Election in Colombia Good
News for Paramilitaries," October 24 On-Line
<a href="http://www.colombiajournal.org/colombia220.htm" eudora="autourl">
www.colombiajournal.org/colombia220.htm</a> Accessed October 24,
2005.<br><br>
Negroponte, John (2002) "John D. Negroponte, U.S. Permanent
Representative to the United Nations: Remarks at stakeout following UN
Security Council vote on Resolution 1422, including text of explanation
of vote," July 12 On-Line
<a href="http://www.amicc.org/docs/Negroponte_1422.pdf" eudora="autourl">
http://www.amicc.org/docs/Negroponte_1422.pdf</a> Accessed October 9,
2009.<br><br>
Perkins, John (2008) The Secret History of the American Empire. London,
UK: Plume.<br><br>
Petras, James (2008) Homage to Manuel Marulanda. Personal correspondence.
<br><br>
Petras, James (2001) "Dirty Money" Foundation of US Growth and
Empire: Size and scope of money laundering by US banks. Montreal, QE:
Centre for Research on Globalization;<br><br>
Petras, James and Michael M. Brescia (2000) "The FARC Faces the
Empire," Latin American Perspectives, 27(5): 134-142.<br><br>
Petras, James and Morris Morley (1995) Empire and Power: American global
power and domestic decay. London, UK: Routledge. <br><br>
Petras, James and Henry Veltmeyer (2003) System in Crisis: The dynamics
of free market capitalism. Halifax, NS: Fernwood Publishing.<br><br>
Scott, Peter Dale (2003) Drugs, Oil, and War: The United States in
Afghanistan, Colombia, and Indochina. New York, NY: Bowman &
Littlefield Publishers, Inc.<br><br>
Stoner, Eric (2004) "The International Criminal Court and U.S.
Militray Aid to Latin America," March 31 On-Line Accessed April 1,
2004.<br><br>
United States Department of State (2003) Agreement Between the Government
of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of
Colombia Regarding the Surrender of persons of the United State of
America to the International Criminal Court. Washington, DC: Department
of State.<br><br>
Wecker, Katharina (2009a) "Only six US soldiers committed crimes in
Colombia," September 3 On-Line
<a href="http://colombiareports.com/colombia-news/news/5726-only-six-us-military-committed-crimes-in-colombia.html" eudora="autourl">
http://colombiareports.com/colombia-news/news/5726-only-six-us-military-committed-crimes-in-colombia.html</a>
Accessed September 3, 2009.<br><br>
Wecker, Katharina (2009b) "US military enjoy immunity, not impunity:
Colombia," September 1 On-Line
<a href="http://colombiareports.com/colombia-news/news/5674-colombia-allows-immunity-but-no-impunity-for-us-military.html" eudora="autourl">
http://colombiareports.com/colombia-news/news/5674-colombia-allows-immunity-but-no-impunity-for-us-military.html</a>
Accessed October 7, 2009.<br><br>
Notes:<br><br>
</b><a href="http://upsidedownworld.org/main/l%20_ftnref1">[1]</a> Former
US Drug Czar Barry McCaffrey expressed how the war against drugs in
Colombia has, in fact, been a campaign to demonize Marxist-Leninist
guerrillas rather than induce an attack against coca production (see
Goff, 2004: 32). It has been argued that the United States has no
intentions of curbing the global drug-trade due to the economic spin-offs
created from it (Campos, 2007: 38-9; Scott, 2003: 89; Petras, 2001;
Petras and Morley, 1995: 86).<br><br>
<a href="http://upsidedownworld.org/main/l%20_ftnref2">[2]</a> During
Plan Colombia [1998/2000-2006], the US and Colombian state invested just
under $9 million (USD) a day in counterinsurgency efforts (Murillo, 2005;
Latin American Press, 2004). By the mid-2000s, the United States had
provided over $7 billion (USD) in ‘aid’ (Campos, 2007: 38; Chavez, 2007:
96; Mondragón, 2007: 42).<br><br>
<a href="http://upsidedownworld.org/main/l%20_ftnref3">[3]</a> Under
Article 98 and the Agreement Between the Government of the United States
of America and the Government of the Republic of Colombia Regarding the
Surrender of persons of the United State of America to the International
Criminal Court, criminal immunity was given to any US "official,
employee (including any contractor), or member of the military, or any
United States person" (United States Department of State, 2003: 2).
This was, in part, possible through the ASPA where any US president has
the capacity to suspend military aid to any country that does not exempt
state forces from alleged or proven crimes committed on foreign soil (see
Isacson, 2007; Stoner, 2004). For example, "nearly $112 million of
Colombia’s expected 2004 aid was contingent on the Bogotá government’s
signing of an Article 98 agreement. Faced with the possibility of losing
this assistance, the government of President Alvaro Uribe signed in
September 2003" (Stoner, 2004). Richard Boucher (2003), spokesperson
for the State Department, justified this position by arguing:<br><br>
<dl>
<dd>It’s an important principle for the United States that those who want
to adhere to the Rome Treaty, who want to participate in the
International Criminal Court, can do so. That’s their sovereign decision
to do so. But they cannot implicate others and pretend to carry out
prosecutions against others who may not be participating, especially
since we have our own legal system that deals with the same kind of
crimes, and that we do deal with the same kind of crimes. We hold our
military to the highest standards, and we don’t think that we need to
rely on prosecutors under this court to decide when that needs to be done
… So this has been a matter of principle to the United States and has
been an important element of national policy. We have a law that was
passed by our Congress that says that we won’t provide military
assistance to countries who put American officials and military personnel
and others in jeopardy of this kind of prosecutorial discretion under
this court.<br><br>
<br><br>
<br>
<x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
</dl><font size=3 color="#FF0000">Freedom Archives<br>
522 Valencia Street<br>
San Francisco, CA 94110<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#008000">415 863-9977<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#0000FF">
<a href="http://www.freedomarchives.org/" eudora="autourl">
www.Freedomarchives.org</a></font><font size=3> </font></body>
</html>