On Demand
South American Stand-Off
Tuesday, March 04, 2008
Venezuela, Ecuador and Colombia are in a border dispute that is quickly escalating. We update the situation with Adam Isacson, director of programs for the Center for International Policy, and want to hear from you: Are you from South America? Do you have family in these countries? What are they saying? Post your reports below.
- About the Brian Lehrer Show »
- Staff Bios »
- Contact Us »
- Tapes and Transcripts »
- Latest Episode »
- Show Archive »
Features & Series
Podcast
Stay up to date.
Subscribe to the Podcast
YOU PRODUCE The Brian Lehrer Show
Be a listener-producer with facts, questions and people you'd like to hear on the air.
More
The Brian Lehrer Show Scrapbook
Visit the scrapbook for daily photos and miscellany from The Brian Lehrer Show.
More
Shop at Amazon!
The Brian Lehrer Show picks
Start your Amazon shopping on WNYC.org and a portion of your total purchase goes to WNYC.
More
Comments
President Uribe was wrong to violate Ecuadorean sovereignty despite the fact that an armed group was hiding in its territory. There are diplomatic means to deal with situations like this. Didn't the world learn anything from US Iraq invasion?
Uribe desperate reasons:
1. To deflect scrutinity stemming from an upcoming world march (to be held on 03/06) against the gross massacres and human rights violations committed by government-supported, right-wing, armed militia groups, and by the Colombian military.
2. To de-rail the looming hostage swap that would have undermined his internal, militaristic war plan to provide Colombia with "security".
Uribe is a right-wing populist.
hey Brian,
I'm a Colombian citizen that usually leans anti war but Chavez has made the impossible happen and I actually support Uribe on this one.
Aligning with the FARC is illegal just as giving them safe heaven.
And I'm pretty sure Chavez is all bark no byte.
Nothing more than good old "distraction tactics". Nothing new in Latin America history. Those countries are in big economical and social distress and the best way to distract people from realizing the lousy job the rulers are doing: let's rile up "patriotism" by starting a border dispute. Having been born and raised there, I have been through my share of such of "border dispute". At the end of the day, corruption in the government will still be rampant and the majority of the population will still be as poor as ever.
Colombia hunt down a FARC member inside Ecuador, based on international understanding that FARC are criminals there for to be apprehended anywhere they are.
as a result of the ray the governments of Venezuela and Ecuador have mobilized their troops to their borders with Colombia.
The Venezuelan government has decided that they have the write & duty of commenting on whatever they feel like.
they dont. the same way they dont have the write to support a revolutionary group that colombians will dismantle in a second
What about the fact that the man killed was FARC's negotiator on the hostage release issues that had shown recent success much to Uribe's chagrin?
No, the US should not come in on this. It's time we let folks take care of their own. We're in enough hot water everywhere else around the globe. The problem is that we get involved. Let's stay out of this. These are independent governments and they should deal with their own problems.
It is surprising there is no mention of Chavez's mediation between Columbian gov't and the FARC and recent release of FARC hostages, and the boiling over of bad blood between Uribe and Chavez that came out in this incident.
Then the international court should also try Bush and Cheney and Rice and a whole slew of this administration for the international laws they've broken and continue to break!
It is unbeliable how bordering countries are destroying peace!
We need guerillas to be eliminated for good.
South America should unite in order to get all the hostages released
I am part Ecuadorian and part Colombian and I have to say that though Chavez is a blowhard, I see the point that Ecuador is making about sovereignty. The Colombian government is no angel in this equation: according to Amnesty International 70 percent of massacres in Colombia were perpetrated by the paramilitaries and the military (who often work together). It's very convenient to talk about the FARC's criminality (which I agree with) without ever acknowledging the Colombian government's much bigger role in the violence that plagues Colombia.
5 Cubans are serving lengthy sentences for monitoring potential terrorists in Miami. This was at a time when a hotel in Havana was bombed and other terrorist acts against Cuba were perpetrated, the planning taking place in Miami. Compare and contrast Columbia and Cuba's behavior towards enemies of the state and the result, especially US policy and attitudes towards this.
While I think Chavez is a blustering oaf, a disgrace to Latin America, and guilty of rather clumsy and transparent scheming in his own countries and others, I don't think the Colombians are making anything better. Chavez's rhetoric in the past few days has been beyond the pale and should be deemed unacceptable and intolerable by the international community. Still, Colombia has only needlessly ratcheted up the rhetoric instead of trying to calm things down.
If they can make the case that Chavez has been supporting the FARC, I do hope that something can come of it, but truthfully I'm not sure how much good international penalties will do to unseat this man.
When I worked as a journalist in the south of Colombia, it was common knowledge that the FARC were operating from Ecuador. Ecuador's government, itself, has acknowledged this problem on multiple occasions. Furthurmore, this is by no means the first occasion on which Colombia's special forces have crossed the border in persuit of FARC rebels. It is, however, the first instance since the acension of Ecuador's leftist government. This helps to put the current row into focus.
It should also be pointed out though that if every world leader who supported another country's rebel faction were to be tried for that, most of the world's leaders would be behind bars including virtually every living US President. So then it basically comes down to whether the cause of those rebels is justified, which becomes largely subjective of course.
Nobody is commenting about Uribe's government direct ties with the financing and approval of the right wing, paramility massacres against peasants, UNION WORKERS and any leftist dissent.
Colombia is the puppet of the right-wing US government in the region.
I dissaprove both FARC tactics but also the right-wing, Uribe supported armed militia groups.
the rule of law is NOT the common denominator for Colombian society. It is the case both at the level of the individual in its day to day dealings... and it reflects on the actions of the goverment, the paramilitary, the guerrilas, and the narco businessmen...
Why would anyone expect that Uribe would adhere to rules of international law?
Is it possible that there is a Bush administration hidden agenda here? What could please the neo-conservatives more than to confront this pesty Venezuelan leader in a war situation. Colombia is beholden to the US for much foreign aid, so would they be drawn (persuaded) into a proxy war on the Bush's administration. Would the US be willing to enter a conflict in this election year? Would this be more helpful to one candidate? As far as evidence goes can any physical evidence today be trusted? Do we not have masterful technologists in our service who can create a letter that looks legitimate? As for computer files, how easy would it be to manufacture those? I would have to see evidence of the money trail to place any credibility on this evidence. Can you imagine why Obama and Clinton have sided with Colombia? Would McCain beat up on them with his macho-defense stick?
Brian,
Next time, please make sure to host Mario Murillo who has GREAT, first-hand INSIGHT about this topic. He has actually interviewed the deceased guerrilla leader.
Well, there is a saying in Colombia ... cuando el rio suena piedras lleva ... and if you want to read more about the conextion between Chavez and FARC feel free to visit:
http://www.minutodigital.com/articulos/2008/01/29/martha-colmenares-la-relacion-de-chavez-con-las-farc/
I am not related to the website in any way, I just found this article a couple of days ago. Interesting reading.
What truly baffles me is how liberals in America can be so critical for the powers that Bush has taken, and yet rush to the defense of Chavez who has taken SO much more power by comparison. Bush has never been awarded the power of decree. Bush has never shut down news networks that disagreed with his policies... don't get me wrong. I think they're both scum, but I see a complete lack of intellectual consistency here. Is it just because of Chavez's repeated name-calling of Bush that makes him so appealing that one would praise a man on the fast track to dictatorship?
The Spanish king had it right when he said to Chavez: "Por que no te calles!" Why don't you just shut up!
Obama and Hillary backed the Colombian "terrorism" argument because, in an election year, it is a WINNING issue. Both candidates don't want to look "weak" on this issue, and they figure that a sovereignty violation argument doesn't play that well with Americans since they don't feel threatened at the borders, and an incursion into the US would not occur. A winning argument for the campaign trail.
If someone breaks into your home and you kill that person, you are justified because of self-defense. If that person has left your home and you kill him, you have committed murder and you have to suffer the consequences. We don’t change the laws to accommodate justice.
The death of Raul Reyes may or may not be a significant loss to the FARC-EP, but it's a symbolic victory for Colombia and President Uribe. There is no doubt that what President Uribe did is illegal. No matter how just the killing was, President Uribe violated the sovereignty of another nation and I though I support his decision, he must pay the consequences.
As for the release of any hostages, I am a firm believer that you NEVER negotiate with terrorists. Unfortunately, there are local and regional politicians in Colombia who do, and that gives the FARC-EP credibility. The same goes for President Chaves, who wants to declassify the FARC-EP as a terrorist group.
My question is: If the FARC-EP have a socialist ideology and claim to work in the interest of the disenfranchised and peasant communities, why do they attack small, poor villages, and blow up churches filled with women and children? Is that the way of a freedom fighter or a terrorist?
with Uribe in bush's (the US's) pocket, how can we trust the laptop evidence as proof of venezuela's complicity with the FARC? Is it genuine? I think of it as powell showing falsified "evidence" of Iraq's wmd sites.
Look at the history of right-wing governments or rebel groups in central and South America. Mostly supported financially by the US to dismantle or destroy left wing groups, or overthrow their governments
This thread is closed.
Back to Episode