Chavez Says Recognizing Guerrillas Is `Path to Peace' (Update1)

Source: Bloomberg

Jan. 13 (Bloomberg) -- Venezuela President Hugo Chavez said political recognition of guerrilla groups by Colombia's government is a ``path to peace'' and a way of ``regularizing'' what he called a civil war.

Countries should remove the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, known as the FARC, and other guerrilla groups from lists of terrorists and recognize them as insurgents with political aims, Chavez said today, reiterating a call he made Jan. 11 after the FARC released two hostages to Venezuela. Chavez made the comments in his weekly television show.

Political recognition has been a goal of the FARC, which has been labeled a terrorist group for kidnapping and killing civilians as part of its decades-long struggle with the Colombian government. Chavez said recognizing the group's political goals would give guerrillas a chance to leave their jungle redoubts and run for office without threat of death.

Chavez was joined today by former hostage Consuelo Gonzales, who said she supported his efforts. His proposal was met last week with immediate rejection by the government of Colombia.



Read more: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&sid=aakPAAxFy0yo&refer=latin_america

However it's unlikely that whoever is in power here would allow it. Our "government" is doing everything it canto overthrow Chavez and anything that boosts his appeal is anathema to them. Uribe wouldn't like it either, he needs to keep the cocaine train rolling for the CIA.

FROM A DIFFERENT ANGLE
by Kenneth Rijock
Financial Crime Consultant, for World-Check

Is Venezuela paying $500m to the FARC?

26 December 2007


Several reputable sources are reporting that the government of
Venezuela has paid the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, better
known as the FARC, the sum of $500m, ostensibly to secure the release
of three hostages held by that designated terrorist organisation. The
FARC, organised in 1964 as the military arm of the Colombian Communist
Party, currently is illegally holding approximately seven hundred
individuals captive, including former presidential candidate Ingrid
Betancourt, three American defence contractors, and many Colombian
military and police officers, under inhumane concentration camp
conditions. It has also kidnapped approximately two hundred
Venezuelans, as an important part of its terrorist fund-raising
activities. The circus surrounding the Colombian prisoner release,
which involves both Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez Frias and former
Argentinian President Nestor Kirchner, appears to be intended to
distract the public in both countries from the Antonini money
laundering scandal, which has become the Watergate of Latin America.

Why is this hostage release scenario so troubling?

· Politics aside, the payment of an obscene amount of
money to a global terrorist organisation designated by OFAC could
result in the entire Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, and its
leadership, being subject to major American sanctions. Could this act
result in an American decision holding that Venezuela has become a
state sponsor of terrorism? It could happen. And what would this do to
the ability of Venezuelan financial institutions to continue to have
access to the US banking structure? They will become the next victims.
It will also, quite simply, destroy it, for without access to the
world's largest market, and the much needed US-grown food, Venezuela's
economy, already in trouble, will crash and burn.

· Remember, the FARC has never been known to return
hostages with a charge. It currently has demanded that Colombian
President Uribe, and his entire cabinet, resign as a condition
precedent to a purported major release of hostages. (The FARC has
attempted to assassinate Uribe over 100 times, without success.) So
why is the Venezuelan press silent about how much money the FARC
received this month from Venezuela? Perhaps it is because most of it
is government-controlled or -influenced.

· Over in Colombia, these funds will allow the FARC to not
only to greatly expand its military capability, but will give it
sufficient financial power to directly challenge the Colombian
Ejercito, its army. It will also give it the funds it needs to
purchase precursor chemicals for cocaine production on a grand scale,
which would mean that Europe and Asia may will later be seeing a
massive increase in the amount of drugs available on city streets on
those regions.

· If the FARC ultimately gains control of Colombia, you
can anticipate a bloodbath, with the upper-class landed gentry as the
first targets, such as occurred in Russia when the Soviets took over.
After all, the FARC are avowed Marxists. Does anybody remember what
happened in Cambodia when the Khmer Rouge came to power?

· All of this nightmare could come to pass, thanks to this
ultimate act of terrorist financing, masquerading as a humanitarian
venture .The fact is, the FARC will never release any of the prominent
hostages. They are hardcore terrorists, intent on destroying democracy
in Colombia, by any means available. All this does is distract the
world press, and the people of Latin America, from the ugly
ramifications of the Antonini scandal.

Will Venezuela be hereafter judged by the world as simply another
Cuba or Iran, and suffer the financial and cultural ostracism that
those state supporters of terrorism must endure? Only time will tell.
I know that, if I was a banker at an international financial
institution whose clients trade with Venezuela, I would be conducting
a new country risk assessment this week, brief my compliance staff
accordingly and reduce my bank's exposure forthwith.

Most troubling, for a geopolitical viewpoint, is the use of a map, by
President Chavez at an international press conference, showing both
Venezuela and Colombia as one country.

Is an armed conflict on the horizon ?

If only it were that simple.

You did not furnish a link, so I googled World-Check. I'm not sure what these people do, evidently something to do with security for banks and corporations. That doesn't make them a very unbiased source, imo.

right-wing extremists.

Here's a link to his World link source:
http://www.world-check.com/#

Looks as if he's a regular contributor to this operation.

Here's another fine article he was proud to publish:

This article originally appeared at
PetroleumWorld

CHAVEZ ASSISTS CASTRO IN MOVING OFFENSIVE WEAPONS INTO CUBA
By Kenneth Rijock*

http://www.worldthreats.com/latin_america/Offensive_weapons.htm

Last Updated: Sunday, 20 May 2007, 21:46 GMT 22:46 UK

Confessions of a money launderer
By Paul Burnell
BBC News



I always spent my money as I never expected to live beyond 40

Kenneth Rijock

~snip~
How had a twice decorated Vietnam vet working as a banking lawyer found himself on the wrong side in his country's war against drugs?

In the aftermath of a broken marriage he ended up staying with a friend of a friend who had extensive Latin American connections and many nocturnal visitors.

It turned out the man was dealing in cannabis and cocaine.

With legitimate expertise in dealing with Caribbean tax havens, Rijock found himself being asked to help clean up dirty money.

More:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6668879.stm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A google will reveal that his articles are carried by V-Crisis, a virulent opposition anti-Chavez site.

www.google.com

Those damn commies!

http://www.amnesty.org/en/alfresco_asset/26e626d7-a2c0-11dc-8d74-6f45f39984e5/amr230012007en.html

In any case, you don't broker a peace in a 30 year civil war by name-calling. That's how Chavez got two hostages released, by being even-handed. He's even formed a friendship with that little fascist worm and Bush toady, Uribe (who seriously stabbed him in the back--or tried to--during the hostage negotiations). Chavez wants peace. The Bush Junta does not. They will not let stand the new policy in South America, that Chavez has spearheaded, that the vast poor population should benefit from local natural resources (such as the boffo oil deposits in Venezuela and Ecuador, and gas deposits in Bolivia--all three countries now with leftist (majorityist) governments).

My hypothesis: All the anti-Chavez disinformation is aimed at Oil War Theater II: South America, which Donald Rumsfeld outlined very recently, on 12/1/07, in the Washington Post:
"The Smart Way to Beat Tyrants Like Chávez," by Donald Rumsfeld, 12/1/07
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/30/AR2007113001800.html

The NeoCons aren't satisfied with having destroyed the peace in the Middle East. They want to spread the oil war to the western hemisphere. They have been stoking the Colombian civil war for seven years, with billions of dollars in military aid to the worst government in South America--Colombia--which tolerates, and indeed has very close ties to, rightwing death squads that chainsaw union leaders and throw their body parts into mass graves, have tortured and killed thousands of peasant farmers, political leftists and human rights workers (also journalists), and that are known drugs/weapons traffickers. The head of the Colombian military, the former head of intelligence and many Uribe office holders (including relatives) are all involved, as are U.S. "war on drugs" (war on the poor) operatives, such as DEA and Blackwater (which has training camps, and has been recruiting for Iraq, in Colombia).

The beneficiaries of rightwing militarism, and Rumsfeld's proposed expanded war, are Occidental Petroleum (FARC, which controls a third of Colombia, has been blowing up their pipelines), Chiquita (murder of union leaders), Monsanto (wants to use farm land for environmentally unsound biofuel production, with local slave labor), the bigger drug lords (farm land used for major cocaine production, not food), U.S. chemical corporations (big profits from pesticide eradication of small peasant farmers), Exxon Mobile (Chavez in Venezuela (borders Colombia) nationalized their oil infrastructure but paid them a fair price), the World Bank/IMF (first world loan sharks who are being driven out of the region by new institutions such as the Bank of the South, led by Venezuela, which favor local control of finances, local development and social justice), and assorted global corporate predators (who seek resources and slave labor, via "free trade" deals, which have become extremely unpopular in South America, with only Colombia and Peru cooperating).

The horrors that the Colombian government has been inflicting on dissidents for 30 years, with massive U.S. assistance--never more than under the Bush Junta--are WHY FARC (armed leftist rebels in Colombia) exists, but you will never hear this from our war profiteering corporate news monopolies, who are shoveling Bush/CIA disinformation at the U.S., in support of Oil War II. Rumsfeld is very desperate for more "black gold" for his and Cheney's pals, and has not really "retired." He is planning a future for our sons and daughters in the military in the mountains of the Andes and the jungles of the Amazon--a future that could be upon us this year, since, as Rumsfeld points out in his op-ed, the Corporate Rulers need a "unitary executive" to "act swiftly" in support of "friends and allies" in South America (fascist thugs plotting coups against Venezuela, Bolivia and others). He suggests destruction of any remaining "checks and balances" in the U.S. government (i.e., that fusty old Congress) to implement open U.S. economic and military warfare in South America.

At least one of the plots to assassinate Chavez was hatched among the rightwing paramilitaries in Colombia. It is likely that destabilization efforts against Bolivia are also originating in Colombia, or Colombia is at least providing arms and funds. Colombia is the Bush Junta's tool and launching pad for these efforts. U.S. military bases in South America are also likely being used for spying and support. Ecuador's new president, Rafael Correa, an ally of Chavez, has promised not to renew the U.S. military base lease in Ecuador when it comes up for renewal this year. The Bolivarian leaders seem to be well aware that the U.S. military and "war on drugs" forces, under Bush, are being used to plot against their democratic governments. And this adds much urgency to Rumsfeld plan for more bloodshed, war and mayhem. The South American left--which has triumphed in election after election over the last half decade--has quickly solidified against U.S./Bush's goal of re-installing fascist dictatorships throughout the continent, but especially in the oil rich Andes democracies. Chavez (Venezuela), Evo Morales (Bolivia--its first indigenous president), and Rafael Correa (Ecuador--U.S.-educated leftist economist elected last year), have strong allies in the governments (and populations) of Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, Nicaragua, and, to some extent, Chile, and will likely gain yet another ally this year in Paraguay (where the the very popular "bishop of the poor," Fernando Lugo, is running for president).

The times they are a-changing. That's why the disinformation is escalating, and the war plans (PNAC II: South America) are heating up. The NeoCons don't have much time to regain control of the South American oil fields for Occidental Petroleum and Exxon Mobile et al, and to destroy the new--and rather amazing--peace and democracy movement in South America. It is not clear what a Democratic regime in Washington DC will do, given the Democratic faction of pro-labor congress members who are fighting the "free trade" deal with Colombia. Even a corporatist like Hillary Clinton might not be able to (or want to) wage an oil war in this hemisphere.

We, the people in whose name these and other horrifying plans have been launched, need to become educated about these matters, as we seek to repair our own democracy. And we need to learn from the South Americans. For instance, Venezuela's elections put our own to shame, for their transparency. They handcount a whopping 55% of the ballots, in an OPEN SOURCE CODE electronic voting system. We handcount 0% to 1% of the ballots, in an system run on 'TRADE SECRET,' PROPRIETARY programming code, owned and controlled by rightwing Bushite corporations. That's why Venezuela has a government that looks after the interests of its people, and we do not.

We also need to learn to "read between the lines" of corporate news monopoly articles on South America.

------------------------

For an alternative view of South America, I recommend www.venezuelanalysis.com, as a start. I also recommend the Irish filmmakers documentary "The Revolution will Not Be Televised," about the U.S.-backed rightwing coup attempt in Venezuela in 2002 (available at YouTube, and at www.axisoflogic.com.) www.NarcoNews.com is also an excellent source on the phony and corrupt U.S. "war on drugs."

"...cases in which clear evidence of responsibility is available indicates that in 2005 around 49 per cent of human rights abuses against trade unionists were committed by paramilitaries and some 43 per cent directly by the security forces. Just over 2 per cent were attributable to guerrilla forces (primarily the FARC and ELN) and just over 4 per cent to criminally-motivated actions."

http://www.amnesty.org/en/alfresco_asset/26e626d7-a2c0-11dc-8d74-6f45f39984e5/amr230012007en.html

49 + 43 = 92% Colombian government involvement in torture and murder of thousands of union leaders and others.

49% paramilitaries, which have been strongly tied to the Colombian military and the Uribe government
43% "security forces" - the Colombian military and police state forces, aided and abetted the U.S. taxpayer funding and direct U.S. "war on drugs" agency and U.S. military (and mercenary) involvement. (AI doesn't say this, re the U.S. I do.)

2% FARC. The AI report states that the FARC incidents are likely murders of people cooperating with the paramilitary death squads, rather than FARC targeting of innocent people. The government security and paramilitary forces target union organizers, political leftists and peasant farmers, and sometimes farmers, villagers and others who are not even political--for the purpose of intimidation. Again, who are the terrorists?

But it's good political theater all the same.

will fly out of your butt singing 'Kum Bah Ya'" before the Bush Junta recognizes FARC as a legitimate, indigenous entity with political goals, in a civil war situation? But the status of FARC is a very important issue, in efforts to bring peace to Colombia. They've been fighting the rightwing government for 30 years, and are a well-organized and effective guerrilla force which controls one third of Colombia, and they've been far, far less violent than the Colombian military, according to Amnesty International--and that means that they have local legitimacy. (They would have been obliterated long ago by the Colombian military, funded by the U.S.--with U.S. fire power--if they didn't have local support.)

Interestingly, the Bush Junta last year amended its justification for the multi-billion dollar U.S. taxpayer bill for military aid to Colombia, from the "war on drugs" to the "war on drugs" PLUS "the war on terror." To tag FARC as "terrorists"--rather than a legitimate entity with legitimate grievances against the government, in a civil war--suits Donald Rumsfeld's plan for Oil War II. A similar justification was used to escalate the Vietnam War, which was a civil war actually created by the U.S., which funded and organized rightwing forces that would not have had a chance against Ho Chi Minh's much more legitimate government. (Ho Chi Minh would have won UN-sponsored elections in 1954, in the whole of Vietnam, if the U.S. had permitted elections to proceed). The Vietcong in the south were a fighting force connected to Ho Chi Minh's government in the north, and represented a lot of people, more than likely the majority, who wanted to be rid of the very corrupt U.S. puppet government in the south. That is why the Vietcong were so difficult to defeat--and could not be defeated. They had considerable local support. And that is why, also, U.S. forces found themselves slaughtering and napalming civilians. By tagging the Vietcong as illegitimate "terrorists," the U.S. sought to justify these horrors.

And this is exactly the kind of mayhem and horror that Donald Rumsfeld would like to see in South America, and why Hugo Chavez is making this distinction between "terrorists" and parties to a civil war. It has implications in international law and world politics and policy, but, more than this, it helps to counter the psyops and disinformation that precedes unjust war.

The on-going civil war in Colombia has been fed by U.S. tax dollars. The rightwing government of Colombia would have fallen long ago, except for this support--and is very similar to the U.S.-created South Vietnamese government, in this regard. The political trend in South America is overwhelmingly leftist and socialist, and there would be no civil war about this in Colombia, except for U.S. intervention. Rumsfeld now wants to escalate into the surrounding region (to grab the big oil/gas deposits in Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador--all leftist governments), and he doesn't care, as we learned in Iraq, how many millions of people he slaughters to get that done. It may seem crazy, but then...when did crazy ever stop the NeoCons? They think they have a window of opportunity to spread the oil war to this hemisphere while their "unitary executive" is still in office, and thus to at least leave the future president in a foothold situation, in which there are no good choices. Remember also that Rumsfeld and buds have stolen billions of dollars from U.S. taxpayers in Iraq boondoggle contracts, and by outright thievery, and have created many caches of money and private entities with which to conduct a PRIVATE war in South America. Indeed, until Rumsfeld revealed his plans for using the U.S. government for economic and military warfare in South America, on 12/1/07, I thought that was the plan: private war. And I thought it might be connected to the rumored purchase by the Bush Cartel of a large private enclave in a remote area of Paraguay (over a major aquifer, and near a U.S air base). But the plan may be nearer term, and with more overt U.S. involvement, than I had thought.

I don't think that Rumsfeld can win Oil War II, but he can inflict much suffering, and totally break our piggy bank, trying--and it has never been clearer that that is what he and his puppetmasters intend.

But then again it was the other way around: The government was (still is, AFAIK) a leftie, and the guerrillas (UNITA) were backed by the right-wing worldwide.