Possibilities In Colombia For A U.S. Military Base

Possibilities In Colombia For A U.S. Military Base
Sunday, 22 June 2008, 12:35 pm

U.S. Ambassador Maintains: "Without a doubt. There are possibilities in Colombia (for a US military base)"
Last Monday, Colombia's Defense Minister Juan Manuel Santos once again has reiterated that Colombia "does not have, nor will have" any American military bases. However, rumors persist that the US plans to relocate its military facility from Manta, Ecuador to an unspecified location in Colombia. These have been circulating since late last year, but several recent incidents lend additional credence to them. First, the Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff's visit to Colombia early in January could signal, according to Colombian Liberal senator Juan Manuel Galante, a subtle indication that the U.S. is, in fact, interested in establishing a military base in the country. The Colombian senator assured his listeners at the time that there is a base with the necessary infrastructure at Tres Esquinas, which has already been provided with radar equipment by the U.S.

In an April 22 meeting between Santos and US ambassador to Colombia, William Brownfield, the Colombian defense minister was informed that due to an improvement in the country's human rights performance, as well as in its military operations, the veto against the military base at Palanquero, that in effect, de-certified the base from receiving U.S equipment, had now been lifted. According to Santos, the US now aims to provide intensified assistance in Bogota's fight against narco-trafficking and terrorism as a result of the removal of this veto. As deputy secretary John Negroponte, who was ambassador to Honduras during much of the Reagan presidency and who at the time served one of the most controversial ambassadorial tenures in Central America when it came to ignoring human rights, stated in a June 2 press conference in Medellin, that the United States and Colombia have a "very extensive relationship of cooperation." This particularly was the case in the areas of "military cooperation, military assistance, military advisors, and so forth."

Although its suggestions hint otherwise, the Colombian government has posited that the US will not be able to establish bases in Colombia, and as Juan Manuel Santos declared, they "have already discussed this with the Americans." Furthermore, this past May, Colombian Foreign Minister Fernando Araujo also declared that Colombia did not have intentions to place a US military base on its territory.

The question then arises: if the US and Colombian administrations already have concluded discussions on the issue, and if Washington was already aware of the official stance of the Colombian government, then why did US ambassador Brownfield declare on June 7th that "without a doubt. There are possibilities in Colombia" to replace the military base at Manta? One wonders if this statement was the result of a lack of poor communication between Colombia and the United States, or if it was in fact, a demonstration of the sizeable influence wielded by the U.S over Colombia's basic government decisions.

More:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0806/S00492.htm

we did not want to rule the world and protect corporations that misused the people of the developing world until they rebelled and hated us.

alone in this, read "The Sorrows of Empire" by Chalmers Johnson. Edited to also suggest reading "The Shock Doctrine" by Naomi Klein. Both talk about what we are doing with our bases in other countries.

Venezuela, Ecuador, Brazil--its three main immediate neighbors--Bolivia, Argentina, Chile, Uruguay, Paraguay--virtually the entire continent (except for the corrupt "free traders" runnning Peru)--and, further north, Nicaragua and Guatemala.

At the Rio Group summit over the Colombia/U.S. bombing/raid against Ecuador, Colombia was all alone and had to sign documents of apology and promises never to do it again.

If Colombia agrees to a U.S. military base, they will likely be ostracized from UNASUR--the new foundation, laid just a few weeks ago, for the South American "Common Market." And it's quite interesting that Colombia was one of the 12 founding nations of UNASUR. As Colombia is a client state of the Bush Cartel--and a major troublemaker in the region--I'm surprised that the other countries permitted Colombia to join. Also interesting, what happened there with Brazil's proposal for a common defense. All countries agreed, except Colombia, and the matter was put to committee for further discussions. Colombia was slated to head that committee and stepped aside because of its aggression against Ecuador (relations are still tense), in favor of Chile.

What is the upshot of all of this? I think it goes back to Hugo Chavez's peacemaking after the Colombian/U.S. attack on Ecuador. (Lula da Silva, president of Brazil, called Chavez "the great peacemaker" just after that incident.) In that bombing attack and raid, Colombia/U.S. murdered the FARC hostage negotiator, Raul Reyes, and 24 others, in their sleep--at a temporary guerrilla camp just inside Ecuador's border--in order to end the string of successes that Chavez had had, in getting FARC hostages released, to prevent the release of high profile hostage, Ingrid Betancourt, to the president of Ecuador, and to destroy all the talk of a potential peace deal in the Colombia's 40+ year civil war. The attack almost caused a war. Ecuador rushed military forces to its border. So did Chavez in Venezuela. But I believe that Chavez did this to let Rafael Correa (president of Ecuador) know that he was not alone. Chavez then talked him out of retaliating in kind, because Chavez could see that that is just what the Bushites wanted--war, chaos, destabilization--excuses for U.S. intervention, and further interference. (The Bushites, of course, want to regain global corporate predator control of the oil in Ecuador and Venezuela.)

Smart Chavez.

But Chavez had been lured into the hostage negotiations with FARC by Uribe himself, who asked him to do it. Then, on the eve of the first two hostages' releases, Uribe abruptly canceled that request and the Colombian military rocketed the location of the two hostages, as they were in route to their freedom, sending them back into the jungle on a 20 mile, back into captivity and safety. The plan evidently was to hand Chavez a diplomatic disaster, with dead hostages. (Designed in Washington? There is evidence for it--and, indeed, for Donald Rumsfeld's personal involvement.) Chavez managed to get the two hostages out by another route, some weeks later, and got a total of six hostages released, before Colombia/U.S. killed the FARC hostage negotiator.

Why did Chavez take this risk? How could he trust the word of the treacherous Uribe, whose pals in the Colombian military had hatched a plot to assassinate Chavez? Because, above all, Chavez wants peace in South America, and South American solidarity in solving its own problems. And this may be what is behind all these efforts to cozen Uribe, and draw Colombia into the orbit of the South American integrationists--in UNASUR and other initiatives. Colombia stands out like a sore thumb--with one of the worst human rights records in the world. It has the only remaining armed leftist guerrilla army in South America, because the Colombian government is so atrociously repressive--and it is thus the darling of the Bush Junta, which has larded Colombia with $5.5 BILLION in military aid. And I guess that Chavez's motives--and those of the other leftist leaders--is that, if Colombia can begin benefiting from South American economic integration, it will change and improve, as a matter of course. But if it remains in thrall to the Bushites, it will continue to cause trouble, and conceivably major trouble.

In this context, it will be interesting to see if Colombia permits a U.S. military base--while other countries, like Ecuador and Paraguay, are evicting theirs. Uribe is only able to run for president again because he bribed legislators to change the Constitution. (And the Bushites call Chavez a "dictator"--Chavez who put the matter to a vote of the people in Venezuela!) And elections are not clean in Colombia--they are very dirty. (Leftist political candidates and voters can get killed in Colombia.) But Uribe does have to run for re-election, such as it is. So maybe he'll put the matter of a U.S. base off, in which case it may end up on Barack Obama's desk.