- Detta ämne har 2 deltagare och 2 svar.
2003-11-03 kl. 13:50 #9173SiDeltagare
Här är goda nyheter från mitt älskade land Colombia, världens hjärta – där kärleken och glädjen, hatet och sorgen står sida vid sida.
Newshawk: See you at http://conference.drugpolicy.org ?
Pubdate: Fri, 31 Oct 2003
Source: Drug War Chronicle (US Web)
Contact: [email protected]
Author: Phillip S. Smith, Editor
LEFTIST LEGALIZER ELECTED MAYOR OF BOGOTA
Voter Rebuke of Colombian President
In a stunning rebuke to Washington and administration ally Colombian
President Alvaro Uribe, voters in Bogota, Colombia’s capital and
largest city, elected former communist union leader, harsh critic of
US policy toward Colombia, and avowed drug legalization advocate Luis
Eduardo ”Lucho” Garzon as their mayor. The Sunday vote came a day
after voters nationwide handed Uribe another defeat by rejecting his
referendum on a package of ”reforms” — which initially included
re-criminalization of drug possession until that provision was struck
by the Supreme Court — and austerity measures designed to raise money
to further prosecute his policy of unrelenting war against guerrilla
armies, drug traffickers, and coca-growing farmers.
Garzon, the son of a cleaning woman who climbed through the ranks of
the leftist trade unions to come in third in the 2001 election that
brought Uribe to power, garnered 46% of the vote against 40% for his
chief rival, Uribe ally Juan Lozano. Running as head of the
Independent Democratic Pole (PDI — Polo Democratico Independiente),
Garzon has orchestrated the most significant political victory for the
Colombian left ever; this is the first time the Colombian left has
controlled the capital city. As mayor of Bogota, a city of seven
million, Garzon is now uniquely poised to challenge Uribe politically
— and has vowed to do just that.
But Garzon’s victory was part of a broader rejection of traditional
parties, as voters in most of Colombia’s largest cities voted for the
PDI and its allies or for other independent political formations. In
Barrancabermeja, PDI candidate Edgar Cote won the mayoralty, while in
Bucarmaranga, PDI-linked candidate Honorio Galvis won. In Medellin,
the mayoralty went to Sergio Fajardo, candidate of the Indigenous
Social Alliance, while in Cali, Apolinar Salcedo of the Yes Colombia
movement won city hall. Likewise, in Barranquilla, Guillermo
Hoenigsberg of the Civic Movement won the mayoralty. Uribe’s Liberals
and the opposition Conservatives were shut out.
As a presidential candidate in 2001, Garzon openly called for drug
legalization as the only means of ending the bloodshed in Colombia.
”The best way to end this problem and the war it has brought us is to
legalize drugs,” he said at the time
While Garzon did not talk openly about legalization in the mayor’s
race, the focus of his campaign was a scathing attack on Uribe’s
overall approach to Colombia’s 40-year-old civil war — inextricably
intertwined with the country’s multi-billion dollar black market
cocaine industry — and his increasingly authoritarian security
measures designed to defeat the leftist FARC and the drug
The message resonated with voters. One man, a 35-year-old
anthropologist, told Canada’s National Post he voted for Garzon to to
give Uribe a slap in the face. ”With Uribe you’re either on his side
or you’re a terrorist,” he said. ”Lucho represents a new
”We do not like the economic direction that has been given to the
country,” Garzon told a cheering crowd on Saturday, referring to
Uribe’s reducing social welfare and infrastructure spending to finance
more war. ”We believe that security policies must be based on the
premise that the citizens are above the military.” Garzon also
appealed to the millions of impoverished Colombians living in the
slums of the capital. ”We have places here that look like Versailles,”
he said. ”But many people in Bogota still live in conditions that
resemble those in Calcutta.”
Garzon’s platform calls above all for negotiating an end to the civil
war — the path resolutely not taken by Uribe and his US backers —
fighting corruption, more democratic and transparent government, and
improvements in public health and education services. And then there
is drugs. Garzon is blunt: ”Until now, Colombia has not had a national
drug policy, but has been limited to accepting in an uncritical and
automatic fashion the American prohibitionist policy, which equally
criminalizes production, traffic, and use. No other country in the
world is a better witness to its stupendous failure and its human,
institutional, and environmental costs,” says the platform.
Garzon calls for a new, national drug policy that would:
* Suspend the fumigation of coca crops immediately and replace it with
a gradual process of alternative development until farmers can be
weaned from the illicit but profitable crop. Any eradication programs
in the future would be manual, not chemical. Small coca plots would be
decriminalized, and Garzon would work with the FARC and local
communities to find ”a solution to the problem of drugs in our
* Call on the international community to ”rethink the concepts and
practice of ’international corresponsibility’ regarding the drug trade
and overcome the current distortion that makes the weight of the
solution fall on the weakest link in the chain, the Colombian and
Andean peasantry.” Garzon’s list of international tasks includes
dealing with money laundering, gun running, precursor exports,
international organized crime, and asset forfeiture. ”The national
drug policy promoted by the Democratic Pole is a policy against
terrorism,” the platform notes.
* Drug use would be a public health matter, not a matter for the
”repressive apparatus.” Personal drug use and possession would
continue to be decriminalized ”based on the constitutional principles
of personal autonomy and free development of the personality.”
A widely-distributed photo Sunday showed President Uribe glumly voting
in Bogota, surrounded by rifle-toting soldiers in the rain. Perhaps he
had just seen the ghost of Colombia’s future.
Spanish-speaking readers can learn more about Garzon and his platform
at http://www.luchogarzon.com and http://www.nacional.luchogarzon.com
Distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest
receiving the included information for research and educational
MAP posted-by: Richard Lake2003-11-03 kl. 13:56 #133144baltazar91Deltagare
Mycket spännande. Håll oss gärna underrättade om det händer något speciellt där.2003-11-24 kl. 18:50 #133145SiDeltagare
Colombia — From Invincibility To Panic
By Alvaro Vargas Llosa*
The United States would do well to take heed of recent developments in
Colombia that call into question its Andean strategy. A hugely popular
President, Alvaro Uribe, Washington’s key ally in the war on drugs, has
suffered massive defeat in a referendum that sought approval for fiscal
and political reform, as well as in local elections. The turnout in the
referendum failed to reach the legal threshold, so the wage and pension
freezes put to the vote, as well as reform aimed at reducing the powers
of the political parties, were thrown out. Furthermore, the new left-wing
Democratic Pole won local elections in the three major cities —
Bogotá, Medellín and Cali — despite the official contention that they were
soft on drug-financed Marxist terrorist organizations.
Days before, the government’s confidence was such that its security
branch organized an international gathering of intelligence analysts and
intellectuals in Cartagena to discuss its successful strategy. Now, the
key people in Uribe’s Cabinet have resigned and the military hierarchy has been fired. The Administration’s aura of invincibility has turned into
The U.S. had staked its Andean strategy on the Colombian government’s
Under Plan Colombia, Clinton provided $1.3 billion to Uribe’s
predecessor, and President Bush raised the commitment with a fresh $2 billion when Uribe took over, intensifying military aid. Washington was convinced that Uribe, a no-nonsense conservative, would restore the prestige of the war on drugs after the debacle of the 1990s, when coca leaves popped back up in Colombia, Peru and Bolivia despite indiscriminate fumigation with glyphosate and crop-substitution schemes, and when relentless interdiction failed to stop smugglers from keeping up the supply (street prices in the U.S. have stayed around $150 dollars per gram — a testament to the policy’s failure).
This time, everything seemed to be going well for Uribe’s war until the
people were asked to pay for its consequences in the referendum.
The fiscal deficit reached 6 per cent last year, and the 3 percent
target for this year depended on the proposed cuts. The debt amounts to more than 50 percent of GDP and has triggered rumors of a possible default. Taxes have gone up since Uribe took over in order to fund the military effort. It is against this backdrop that the Colombian government was asking the people to make new sacrifices of up to $1 billion to fund an effort that is in good part a domestic U.S. interest.
Whenever there is significant demand for a particular product, the
effect of prohibition will be the creation of black-market empires. These will sometimes engage in turf wars with other underworld organizations, but, when it is in their interest, they will also enter into alliances with
them. The government will then be forced to raise the stakes in trying
to put down its own creation. That is what happened during the Prohibition
years in the U.S. — and the same has happened in Colombia, where drugs and terrorism have become powerfully intertwined, and where the government calls for endless sacrifices to fight what is partly a creation of the war on drugs.
If a police state were suddenly to eradicate coca and kill every
smuggler in Colombia, other countries would supply cocaine. And suppose the Andean region were to become a coca-free area (imagine what that would cost American tax-payers, who are currently spending $609 per second to fund the federal anti-drug effort and the Drug Enforcement Agency, which employs 9,000 people). Within minutes, coca would pop up in other corners of the world.
The havoc created by this conflict in Latin America already goes beyond
the Andean region. In the 90s, thanks to the war on drugs, the point of
entry into the U.S. was diverted from Florida to California and Texas. As
happens with any market, opportunity engendered enterprise — Mexican smugglers took up cross-border trafficking and Mexico was suddenly brought into the problem, which added to its law and order crisis, its corruption and its shaky relations with the U.S.
Do Colombians approve of left-wing terrorist who kill, maim and kidnap
innocent civilians day in and day out? No, and that is why they
continue to give Uribe high approval ratings. Do they also want to finance a campaign whose magnitude is a consequence of the anti-drug war? No, and that is why Uribe’s package has been defeated at the polls.
Colombians have not rejected political reform as such, but the hidden
causes of the crisis in which the political system finds itself. This
must be the conclusion stemming from a referendum that said ”No” to
political reform while 70 per cent of the country keep telling pollsters they
agree with Uribe’s instinct to clean house.
Colombia is one of the few countries that preserved its democracy
during the decades of dictatorship in Latin America, and it is famous for its
jurists. The authoritarian elements that are starting to show in this
war (including a failed attempt to redraw the Constitution and pave the way for the President’s reelection) have scared ordinary Colombians, as
resolute as they are in fighting terrorists. And they have now spoken in defense of their civil liberties.
Will Washington take heed of what has happened there?
*Based in Latin America, Alvaro Vargas Llosa is a research fellow for
The Independent Institute in Oakland, California, for which he is currently
working on a new book about Latin American economic and political
reforms in the 1990s.
Parlamentet hade möjlighet att köra över folkets röst, men även de sa NEJ till Uribes förslag.
Uribe ville höja skatter, dra ner på pensioner, frysa löner mm. allt för att få mer pengar att använda i USAs intresse.
Colombia, med tre gånger Sveriges yta, är en av de mest läckra bytena för rovgiriga USA. Olja, platina, smaragder, Amazonas med dess värdefulla träslag mm, otroligt bördiga marker som mycket väl skulle kunna förse hela Colombias 40 miljonersbefolkning – och fler än så – med gott om mat, det finns mycket mycket där. Och självklart ska folket betala USA för dess erövring av Colombia. FARC är en stor käpp i hjulet, så militära aktioner mot FARC stöds av Bush som skickar fler och fler amerikanska trupper till USA för att utbilda Colombias armé.
USA stöder all form av teknologisk utbildning i Colombia, men ekologi, biologi och kultur får inget. Vad skulle hända om folket i Colombia utbildades att uppskatta sina rikedomar, att inse att Colombia är ett av världens rikaste länder. Kanske skulle det bli svårare att ta över då… Bättre att utbilda dem till arbetskraft som kan teknologisera och effektivisera resursflödet från Colombia till USA. För vart tar pengarna annars vägen, varför har folket inget? Varför är det utländska företag som äger allt? Är Colombia Colombianskt territorium? Våra kartor är baserade på uråldrig metod, nationsgränser ser inte ut som de gjorde förr….
Ytterligare ett effektivt sätt att ta över är att arbeta i skymundan. Få saker hörs om Colombia, få människor får veta något om vad som händer där, skulle folk veta, då skulle de reagera – skulle fler svenskar veta, då skulle de reagera. Istället riktas fokus mot, t.ex. Israel och Palestina – en konflikt som närs av USA.
- Du måste vara inloggad för att svara på detta ämne.