Los Angeles Times runs puff piece for president of South American police state

On July 9, 2008, an article appeared in The Los Angeles Times about Colombian president Alvaro Uribe entitled, Uribe's rising popularity fuels prospects of 3rd term. From the start, the article reads like a personal ad for the South American strongman. For example, the writers set the tone with the following description: “A seemly humorless workaholic...the thin and bespectacled Uribe could be mistaken for an accountant or professor. But in places such as Aguadas, the no-nonsense Harvard-educated lawyer is widely admired.” The article also explains that Uribe has “brought Columbia back from the abyss of violence and despair."

But assassinations of union activists doubled in his first year in office and have stayed elevated throughout his presidency. More than half of union activists murdered are murdered in Colombia. USLEAP These assassinations are almost always linked to paramilitary groups, 'death squads' as they're known in Latin America. While governor of Antioquia, Uribe openly supported the formation of Convivir (an association of Columbian paramilitary groups). But Convivir quickly became controversial for allegations of targeting civilians. In 1998, Human Rights Watch reported that Convivir and other similar groups, “dangerously blur the distinction between civilians and combatants,” and that, “Several Convivirs have taken a direct role in hostilities in close coordination with the army and police and have committed serious violations.” HRW Three years later, the Constitutional Court of Columbia ruled that Convivir could no longer obtain military grade weapons (issued by the Colombian government), and were barred from collecting intelligence for security forces. HRW Despite the court’s ruling, Uribe has maintained strong support for paramilitaries into his presidency, and under his administration the courts have granted immunity for members of the military that are connected with these types of crimes. In addition to the president’s support, his cousin and close ally, Senator Mario Uribe, was arrested for ties to paramilitary death squads in April of this year. WP The Times article, just three months after the fact, leaves this out.

The article claims that Uribe has an eighty percent approval rating, and that “Uribe’s domestic support is founded on building up the security forces”, like Convivir, “and restoring some measure of law and order.” But for the poor in Colombia, “law and order” has meant record levels of human rights abuses, extortion, a high rate of incarceration, and the eviction of civilians off of land for commercial interests. Columbia has more than 3 million internally displaced people, which is the second highest in the world, just behind Sudan. Sixty percent of those internal refugees have been forced from their homes and lands in areas of economic importance, such as mineral, agricultural, oil or other commercial interests. AI The paramilitary groups that initiate this brand of "law and order" are largely propped up by US aid. An estimated US$616 million of the $756 million of US aid for Colombia is for military expenditures. CI The LA Times is consistent in leaving its readers in the dark about these details. As a matter of fact, the article’s harshest criticism is that, “To his detractors, Uribe is a polarizing figure who brooks no dissent. He labeled Ivan Cepeda, son of a murdered senator [sic] who leads a nationwide network of victims groups, a terrorist.” As a side note, this is the first time to my recollection that an organization of the corporate media has confessed that people are branded as terrorists by governments strictly for political purposes, but the criticism is still small potatoes for such a tyrant.

When the article mentions “allegations of electoral bribery” and “extrajudicial slayings” in Colombia, the Times’ reporters contend: “Such issues continue to impede a US-Columbia free trade deal, a priority for Uribe and the Bush administration.” However, problems such as extrajudicial slayings typically do not impede “free trade deals”, but are essential for their passage and implementation because of how opposed the population is to them. The long history of violence associated with these policies goes clear back to the Pinochet Regime, in Chile. In that instance, on September 11, 1973, the populist, and democratically elected president Salvador Allende was violently overthrown in a military coup that killed many civilians and set the presidential palace ablaze. The national parliament was dismissed, political parties were banned, the constitution was torn to shreds and the military arrested so many Chileans that they filled the new prison: the sports stadium in Santiago Women were even barred from wearing pants in public.

Typically, the formula for such ‘free trade’ policies is to render an otherwise active and well connected population into passivity by shock with swift violence and repression; then, before the population can regain its bearings, pass policies like the aforementioned "free trade deal". Colombia is another example that violence and disorder is not a disruption to, but the essence of, such 'free trade' policies. The necessity for the violence and repression comes from the unpopularity of these ‘free trade’ policies, especially, in regions where there is a strong social network of community and labour organizations-like in South America. Most of the mainstream media’s coverage is void of mention of just how adverse populations are to this topic.

In examining this “free trade agreement”, it’s not hard to see why Colombians would oppose it. The agreement, HR5724, was introduced to the House of Representatives on April 7, 2008, and it states that the purpose of said legislation is, "to establish free trade between the United States and Colombia through the reduction and elimination of barriers to trade in goods and services and to investment”. The agreement also states that in the event of a dispute pertaining to the terms of the agreement that the authority of the US would precede any other (Colombian or otherwise). LOC This means that if Colombians are barred from forming laws, contracts or agreements that are in violation of this agreement, only US lawmakers have the ability to break the agreement. The legislation also voids any protection of US tariffs for Colombian exports. But one of the biggest goals of this agreement is to “eliminate tariffs on more than 80 percent of American exports of industrial and consumer goods immediately and 100 percent over time.” WH Such trade policies would be an economic disaster for workers and small business that produce goods in Colombia. Multinational corporations would crush Colombian businesses that tried to compete with the flood of cheap US exports to Colombia. The reason for this is the large subsidies doled out to multinational corporations and their ability to temporarily implement drastic price reductions-until the competition has vanished and workers are reduced to slaves. The lack of support from the Colombian population on this matter is nothing unique. The US has become even more wary of ‘free trade’ policies. According to an opinion poll conducted by Rasmussen 56% of the American public thinks that NATA should be renegotiated while 14% supported the agreement. Ras

But despite the destructive and repressive measures of Uribe, there is progress in the region. There are large, and now well established, labour and community movements aimed precisely at resisting these policies and forming new democratic organizations from the ground up. These institutions have not only been responsible for the rising standard of living and the freedom from the military juntas, but offer a more effective counterweight to conventional power structures. The poor in Latin America have better access to medical care and educational standards are increasing, some of those responsible for the horrible crimes of the past are starting to be held accountable, and there has even been headway towards trade alliances (similar to the EU). Such alliances would give more empowerment to workers, small business, indigenous communities and grass roots community organizations. In neigboring Venezuela and Ecuador there has been progress as well. In Venezuela the popular movements have greatly increased medical care and education for the poor. In fact according the Human Development Index (a United Nations report that gives ratings to countries based general health and educational standards); the two countries were only beat by Mexico, Argentina, Chile and Cuba in Latin America. HDI Another milestone in the region, was that the government of Ecuador set a condition on the renewal of a lease with the US military to use one of its airbases (the last military based used by the US in South America). The condition: that Ecuador is able to lease a military base in Miami from the US government-so far no deal. These changes have occurred in a relatively small period; just twenty years ago most of Latin America was ruled by brutal, military governments that shut most of the population out of, not only policy making, but the social and cultural arena as well. Today more democratic forms of government are sweeping Latin America far too fast for the ‘free trade’ agenda.