US military pact with Colombia dealt setback

US military pact with Colombia dealt setback

Submitted by WW4 Report on Thu, 09/09/2010 - 03:17. The US military pact with Colombia faces an uncertain future following a ruling of the Andean nation's Constitutional Court last month. On Aug. 17, in a case brought by opposition politicians, the court sent the agreement back to President Juan Manuel Santos to seek congressional approval for the pact. The government of Santos, who took power 10 days earlier, has a majority in the country's congress. (Reuters, Aug. 17)

In the case, the opposition invoked Article 173 of Colombia's constitution, under which Congress must authorize the presence of foreign troops in the country. The government of former President Álvaro Uribe argued that it was a "simplified agreement" based on a 1974 military treaty with the US, and thus did not require congressional approval. But opposition politician Carlos Gaviria, a former Constitutional Court magistrate, argued that it could not be considered a "corollary" to a broader treaty, but was a treaty in its own right. (IPS, Aug. 19)

The US has taken pains to address popular opposition to the deal in the region. In July, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mike Mullen said that US access to seven Colombian military bases would not affect other countries in the region, and that the military presence is crucial in the fight against drug trafficking and terrorism. That same week, Washington's ambassador to Colombia, William Brownfield, said the deal will not increase the number of US military personnel present in the nation. Brownfield said that Colombia “will not be seeing more personnel from the United States, on the contrary we will see less." He added, however, that the two countries would "maintain the same mechanisms of collaboration." (Colombia Reports, July 23)

http://ww4report.com/node/9084

"The US has taken pains to address popular opposition to the deal in the region. In July, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mike Mullen said that US access to seven Colombian military bases would not affect other countries in the region, and that the military presence is crucial in the fight against drug trafficking and terrorism."

---

What if the chairman of Mexico's military forces said that a Mexican military presence in the U.S. is crucial in the fight against drug gangs, U.S. weapons traffickers, and, say, mistreatment of Mexican nationals in the U.S., and the president of the U.S. had secretly negotiated and signed a U.S./Mexico military agreement to place Mexican military forces at seven military bases in the U.S., to give the Mexican military use of all U.S. civilian infrastructure--airports, harbors, roads--and to grant total diplomatic immunity to all Mexican soldiers and Mexican military 'contractors,' no matter what they did in the U.S., and then, when the agreement became public, Mexican and U.S. promoters of the agreement claimed that it was merely ratifying existing arrangements?

This comparison reveals, a) the utter arrogance of the U.S. government and the Pentagon, and b) the utter treason of the Bush Junta's narco-thug pal, former pResident of Colombia, Alvaro Uribe (who got a "Medal of Freedom" from Junior, and has now been honored by the Obama administration with a prestigious appointment to an international legal committee investigating Israel's firing on aid boats, and has also been given an academic sinecure at Georgetown U.). Sell out your country, and the Roman Empire will reward you.

Of course, that is not all that Uribe did. During his tenure in office, the Colombian military and its death squads slaughtered thousands of trade unionists, human rights workers, teachers, community activists, journalists, political leftists, peasant farmers and others. Uribe himself was spying on everybody (likely with U.S. military technical assistance), and drawing up "lists" of trade unionists for targeting by the death squads, and stating pubicly that everyone who opposed his government is a "terrorist." And this military agreement has some very shady aspects to it that I have pointed out before in comments at DU. For instance, why did Bushwhack ambassador to Colombia, William Brownfield, suddenly need SIGNED total diplomatic immunity for all U.S. soldiers and all U.S. military 'contractors' in Colombia, last year? Uribe has been in office for two terms. They never thought of getting it signed before? Was this secretly negotiated, SIGNED grant of immunity to U.S. soldiers/'contractors' connected to the U.S. State Department's recent "fine" against Blackwater for "unauthorized" "trainings" of Colombians for use in Iraq and Afghanistan? Was it connected to the La Macarena massacre of civilians by the Colombian military in a region of special interest and activity by the Pentagon and the USAID?

But, aside from a whole bloody cauldron of death and mayhem in Colombia, funded with $7 BILLION in U.S. military aid, and, likely, more Bush Junta war crimes, this time in Colombia, that may never come to light, the U.S./Colombia military agreement is WRONG, on its face. What is the U.S. military DOING fighting DOMESTIC crime in Colombia? The U.S. military!

Aside from the corruption, murderousness and utter failure of the U.S. "war on drugs," what is the U.S. MILITARY doing enforcing drug laws in a foreign land? What is the U.S. MILITARY doing aiding and abetting a fascist government in its 40+ year civil war with DOMESTIC guerilla fighters--Colombian citizens who have taken up arms against their government? The U.S. military!

Amnesty International attributes 92% of the murders of trade unionists in Colombia to the Colombian military itself (about half) and its closely tied rightwing paramilitary death squads (the other half). What is the U.S. military doing aiding and abetting this fascist government in killing its own citizens for ANY reason, let alone for forming a union?

I guess it looks like all that is needed is for the congress to approve, which will likely happen.