Who Gains from Colombia’s Vote for Permanent War?

Pretending that everyone wants peace in Colombia ignores the long-term effects of militarism — and the fact that the war benefits many powerful interests, including in Washington.

By Laura Carlsen, October 31, 2016.

. . .

Although even former president Alvaro Uribe, the nation’s leading warmonger, now makes the politically correct statement that the ultimate goal is peace, the macho sentiments of total domination and punishment (of one side), along with a strong dose of Cold War hysteria (yes, in the 21st century) won the day.

The NO promoters knew what they were doing. They were not promoting an alternative peace. As a 32-year old NO voter quoted in the New York Times put it, “If ‘no’ wins, we won’t have peace, but at least we won’t give the country away to the guerrillas.”

His statement reflects the patriarchal logic that has started and perpetuated wars since time immemorial — the only good enemy is a dead enemy, and if I don’t win, nobody wins.

. . .

An analysis published by the U.S. Army War College, although it is not an official document, openly expresses relief at the continuation of indefinite war in Colombia. Through a mixture of hawkish arguments and lies, the analysis recognizes that the country now enters into a “period of uncertainty,” but notes that this “presents a strategic situation less grave and more manageable, than had the accords been approved.”

More:
http://fpif.org/gains-colombias-vote-permanent-war/

Good Reads:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016169346