PBH / colombia (active forums more▼ | travelguide | pictures) / post

Alvaro Uribe, Colombia's Peacemaker

By MARY ANASTASIA O'GRADY
June 14, 2008; Page A9

"We are ready for a humanitarian exchange. But we are not ready to serve as idiots to the proposal of FARC to use the hostages as a way to regain criminal power in Colombia."

Sitting in the elegant Casa de Nariño – the official residence of the head of state – Colombian President �?lvaro Uribe is talking about one of the hottest political issues of the day: to what lengths his government should go to win the release of some of the kidnap victims held by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). These hostages include three American contractors and the French-Colombian Ingrid Betancourt, who has been held for more than six years and whose plight has become a cause célèbre in Paris.
Mr. Uribe, a man of boundless energy, can have trouble staying in one place for very long. But at the moment he is still and looking me straight in the eye as he emphatically states that he will not give in to terrorist demands.

I first met �?lvaro Uribe in 1997, when as governor of the state of Antioquia he had a reputation for standing up to the FARC and inspiring hope among a war-weary population. More than a decade later, his physical appearance hasn't much changed – save the new gray hairs. At age 55 he is trim, and a noticeable limp, he explains, is only a minor injury sustained while jumping rope in a hotel room this morning.
His views about governance are also much the same: "You have to have permanent contact with the people," he says. "It's not a matter of showing up for a one-day celebration. It has to be a permanent dialogue so that they know what to expect from government and government assumes accountability everyday."

Mr. Uribe has been for Colombia what Churchill was for Britain and Reagan was for the U.S. He took office in 2002 when the FARC's reign of terror had brought his nation to its knees. In six years he has reversed the slide into anarchy and today, half-way through his second four-year term, most of the country is pacified. Murders and kidnappings are down sharply; FARC defections and battlefield defeats are mounting; the economy is booming.
With an approval rating of around 80%, so too are Mr. Uribe's political fortunes. And as I listen to his views on governance, it occurs to me that this has come to pass not only because of his bravery and moral clarity, but also because he came along when his country most needed him.

In 1998, four years before he became president, Colombia had engaged in a so-called peace process with the FARC. This included ceding a chunk of territory the size of Switzerland to the rebels as a sign of good faith.

That special zone was supposed to be off-limits to Colombian authorities for only three months – but more than three years later it was still a guerrilla safe haven, on the grounds that the "dialogue" was ongoing. Meanwhile, the FARC used the area to hide weapons and hostages, prepare new assaults on civilians, and gain the upper hand in the conflict. By the time Mr. Uribe ran for office, the nation was near despair.
I ask the president to recollect that time. He pauses for a moment, as he often does before he speaks. Then he tells me of three observations he made during the 2002 campaign that shaped his thinking. The first came during a series of visits to universities, where he would ask how many students wanted to leave Colombia with "no return ticket." He says the "vast majority" always raised their hands.

The second was that in many regions of the country "people wanted to solve their problems by themselves, without resorting to our institutions. For them our institutions did not exist or they did not trust them." The third observation, he says, came during a meeting with World Bank officials who told him that they were beginning to worry that Colombia "was going to the point of a failed state."

"I knew we had to create confidence," he says, and that it had to be done fast. "We had to try to produce short-term results in order to convince the people that we were able to produce long-term victories." He built a plan not only to return law and order, but also to boost the economy and build the wealth necessary to address the social problems of poverty. To this day, that plan rests on three pillars: "security, investment and social cohesion."
Investment has been pouring into Colombia in recent years; absent the FARC thugs, it is a prime location for doing business. The Uribe government has also been beavering away at deregulating and improving the commercial climate.

The results are impressive: The investment rate as a percentage of GDP in the first nine months of 2007 was 27.5%, compared to less than 15% in 1999. Yet Mr. Uribe is no market liberal. His economics are closer to those of Tony Blair than to Margaret Thatcher's, and if you give him the chance, he loves to talk about his government's social programs.
Nevertheless, the FARC and its sympathizers here and in Washington, D.C., detest the man because of his commitment to defend Colombian liberty. What they hate even more is his successful military strategy against what he calls "the nightmare of terrorism."
I ask Mr. Uribe how he has managed the civilian relationship with the military. "Our army has never had any willingness for coup d'état," he tells me. "But in the past they have tacitly expressed a need for leadership from the civilian government. In this, there has been one change. The president," he says, referring to himself in the third person, "is committed to security and from the very first soldier, the very first policeman, the president assumes all the political responsibility of military operations. Therefore our armed forces have seen a president committed to their task, supporting their task, leading their task, instead of firing generals." Mr. Uribe doesn't say it directly, but he is the first president to shun the practice of hanging generals out to dry whenever it suits politically.

A recent example: "When we made the decision to bombard [guerrilla leader] Raúl Reyes in Ecuador, it created diplomatic problems," he says. "And I could have said that it was a mistake committed by the military and I could have sacked some generals. I would have harvested the success of taking down Reyes and at the same time I would have avoided the diplomatic problems." Instead, he says, "I accepted the responsibilities."
Documents stored on computers captured in the Reyes raid revealed a close working relationship between Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez and the FARC. But so far Colombia has received almost no moral or diplomatic support from the democracies around the region. I ask why, but he dodges the question.

He will only say that in the past Colombia had not "strongly" requested that its neighbors not harbor guerrillas, which suggests to me that the problem predates the Uribe government. He says that his administration is the first to make such a request. The only country that has ever given the Colombian democracy "practical solidarity," he notes, is the U.S., "which put in place Plan Colombia."

That effort has provided important U.S. aid to the Colombian military, and no one understands its effects better than the FARC propagandists who've spent years trying to pin allegations of corruption and human-rights violations on Mr. Uribe in the hopes that the funding will be discontinued. The president doesn't bring this up. But he does remind me that, three times since last fall, the rebels have accused his government of deceit and three times, when the truth was revealed, they were caught in their own lies. "Colombia has proven its transparency," he says.

In Washington, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has repeatedly claimed that Mr. Uribe's government bears some responsibility for the murders of Colombian labor leaders. On these grounds she has blocked a vote on the U.S.-Colombian Free Trade Agreement, which is crucial for the country to continue attracting investment. The fact that the murder rate among union leaders has dropped sharply during the Uribe administration is an inconvenient truth for Mrs. Pelosi.

I ask if he is frustrated with the U.S. relationship. "I cannot get frustrated," he says softly, "because we have to work as hard as we can every day. We have received a lot of support from the U.S. – from the government, from Congress, from the media and from many sectors of public opinion." He is keenly aware of the November elections. "It is very important to remember in this moment that Colombia has always had a bipartisan approach to our U.S. relationship" and he says that when it comes to correcting the country's mistakes, the FTA will be helpful. But Colombia also wants "the recognition of what we have achieved. I hope that any day the FTA will be approved."

Not that he's depending on that as his only option for progress. Mr. Uribe keeps a punishing schedule, traveling the country every week to some of the most remote municipalities, where he spends hours listening to the locals. Colombians regularly remind me that never has a president known the country the way he does or connected with the people the way he has.
"Modern democracies need both representation and participation. If you appeal exclusively to representation you run the risk of distorting reality," Mr. Uribe says. Translation: He is not willing to let special-interest politics in Colombia's Congress block his agenda; he takes his message straight to the people.

This has added to his popularity. In the center of Bogotá the day before we talked, I passed some of his supporters collecting signatures for a referendum that would allow him to run for a third term. But what about claims that he has replaced Colombian institutions with himself, and that efforts to change the law so he can run again for president prove it?
"Our institutions are strong and we have checks and balances," he replies. "But in the past the country has never had the right policies with the determination to defeat criminals and attract investment. My concern is that these policies continue."

There is a lot of work to be done before his current term ends in August 2010. For one, FARC hostages are still rotting in the jungle. I ask him whether anything can be done to break the deadlock. "Of course," he says, proceeding to rattle off the efforts his government has already made – from the June 2007 release of rebel leader Rodrigo Granda at the request of French President Nicolas Sarkozy, and the unilateral release of 127 members of the FARC, to granting Mr. Chávez a mediator role in October. More recently, he adds, "We have allowed delegates from Spain, France and Switzerland to have contact with the FARC and we have accepted the idea of a meeting zone proposed by the Catholic Church."
The trouble is that the key rebel demand is a demilitarized zone such as they enjoyed during the last dialogue for peace. For Mr. Uribe this is not negotiable.
So will he run for a third term in order to preserve his policy agenda for another four years? I don't get a yes or no, only this: "I want the country to have strong leaders who will prolong our policies. I want many strong leaders. But," he says standing briefly and looking down at me, "I won't abandon our people."

Ms. O'Grady writes the Americas column for The Wall Street Journal.

http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB121339832912573633.html

By tasco66 on Jun 27, 2008, 11:24 in Politics & the war.

tasco66 says on Jun 27, 2008, 12:45:

Thank you Wall Street Journal

Bravo, Presidente Uribe for the perfect operation!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

MitchAlvarez says on Jun 28, 2008, 10:41:

Photobucket

"Ingrid callate la jeta!! Stay in France"

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) says on Jun 28, 2008, 10:46:

Mitch, it does not look like that.

Ola de críticas por anuncio de Uribe

Elpais.com.co - EFE

La confusión generada por el llamado presidencial dejó a algunos analistas y políticos especulando las razones que tuvo Uribe, si simplemente encontró una excusa para optar a un tercer mandato o si por el contrario, se equivocó y hundió esa posibilidad porque no habría ánimo para aprobar esa consulta en el congreso, donde ya las mayorías oficialistas se han rebelado contra líneas decididas por el gobierno.

Ante la ola de críticas opositoras por el llamado presidencial, entendiéndolo como una búsqueda de un nuevo gobierno, voceros del gobierno dijeron en la jornada que una eventual repetición de los comicios sólo se refiere al cuatrienio actual, del 2006 al 2010 y no al próximo, hasta el 2014.

"El único interés de la propuesta del presidente es confirmar la legitimidad de su elección para el período 2006-2010", dijo César Mauricio Velásquez, vocero de la casa de gobierno.

José Obdulio Gaviria, uno de los más cercanos asesores del jefe de estado, indicó a su turno que la propuesta de Uribe era la respuesta a magistrados que "están insinuando para la historia que el presidente prácticamente se robó las elecciones. Pues entonces vamos donde el pueblo que es el que elige".

La declaración de los voceros oficiales salieron al paso de señalamientos como el de uno de los principales voceros de la oposición, el ex magistrado y ex candidato presidencial Carlos Gaviria, sin relación familiar con el asesor del jefe de estado, quien afirmó en la jornada a medios locales que Uribe, con su llamado, quería estar "por encima de los poderes en Colombia y por lo tanto no nos encontramos ante una democracia constitucional, sino ante una dictadura populista".

El Polo Democrático Alternativo calificó hoy como una "monstruosidad" la propuesta del Presidente.

Por su parte, el senador Gustavo Petro, uno de los más álgidos críticos de Uribe y quien destapó el escándalo de la "parapolítica" que tiene bajo investigación a unos 60 congresistas en su mayoría oficialistas, 30 de ellos presos, por sus supuestos nexos con los paramilitares, aseguró que se está construyendo una tiranía.

El legislador dijo que el falló de la Corte Suprema de Justicia no pone en duda que el Mandatario haya obtenido una mayoría de los votos en las elecciones de 2006, sino que para lograr eso "hubo una modificación de la Constitución que se hizo a partir del crimen, que se llama desviación del poder".

"Esa desviación de poder, en otras palabras se llama la construcción de una tiranía. Generalmente los tiranos buscan plebiscitos para tratar de relegitimar sus actos, cosa que el Presidente está intentando hacer con el referendo, pero eso no tapa, no oculta lo que ya pasó, que fue que la reelección se hizo a partir de un crimen", afirmó Petro.

Diversos analistas calificaron de "exagerada" la propuesta que Uribe hizo hacia la medianoche del jueves.

El analista político Pedro Medellín afirmó que esa propuesta es de una gravedad institucional y jurídica sin precedentes en la historia de Colombia y que está antecedida por un grave señalamiento de parcialidad e incapacidad del sistema judicial por parte de la primera autoridad del país.

"Hace un desafío electoral diciéndole a la Corte Suprema de Justicia, voy a refrendar a mi mandato que ustedes están tratando de cuestionar, y en ese sentido se le va la mano (exagera), de hecho es una situación que se llama presidencia plebiscitaria", dijo Medellín.

"Una salida es que el Presidente renuncie"

"Si yo estuviera en su lugar habría renunciado", opinó el ex candidato presidencial colombiano Antanas Mockus.

Mockus, un matemático y filósofo que fue alcalde de Bogotá y dos veces candidato presidencial independiente, señaló que la propuesta de Uribe de "realizar una nueva elección, es un acto que antepone lo político a lo jurídico".

El ex candidato presidencial señaló que el gobierno debe admitir que "el acto legislativo que posibilitó la reeleción nació viciado y eso nos pone ante un escenario no previsto en la constitución ni en la ley".

Otras reacciones

“Si hay una discusión sobre la legitimidad del Gobierno, lo que se está proponiendo es un plebiscito o un referendo a través del cual se refrende la legitimidad del Gobierno, que sería, por supuesto, para que pueda terminar su mandato, porque yo no entendería que fuera para prorrogarlo otros cuatro años��?: Ernesto Samper, ex Presidente.

“Me parece que el Presidente Uribe se está actuando con cabeza caliente. Lo que ha dicho la Corte es delicado: pidió examinar el procedimiento por el cual se aprobó la reelección, pero eso no quiere decir que la Corte Constitucional vaya a invalidar ese acto legislativo o que vaya a pedir que el Presidente se retire. Hay que ser ponderado en las reacciones y permitir que las instituciones funcionen. Responderle a una decisión judicial con un llamamiento a un referendo, es un exceso��?: Rafael Pardo, ex ministro.

“Eso seria un tercer mandato, puesto que unas nuevas elecciones le permitirían al Presidente de la República medir su poder de convocatoria para un nuevo periodo��?: Alfredo Rangel, politólogo y director de la fundación Seguridad y Democracia.

“Es muy preocupante. El anuncio es bastante grave, es una actitud desafiante del Presidente frente a la justicia. El Gobierno está actuando en caliente y trata de provocar una crisis institucional��?: Cecilia López, portavoz del Partido Liberal en el Senado
(from today's El Pais)

"When shall we three meet again? In thunder, lightning, or in rain?"(First Witch in Macbeth)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

MitchAlvarez says on Jun 28, 2008, 10:49:

can you repeat that? im confused? it does not what?

"Ingrid callate la jeta!! Stay in France"

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) says on Jun 28, 2008, 11:31:

A typo, Mitch. "It does not look like that". There is huge wave of protests IN COLOMBIA due to Uribe's single-handed disregard for the legitimate insitutions of the country. If there's one institution that has seemed to hover above the level of corruption it has been the Supreme Court and there's NOBODY not even Mr. Uribe who can consider himself more important than the laws of the nation.

"When shall we three meet again? In thunder, lightning, or in rain?"(First Witch in Macbeth)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

MitchAlvarez says on Jun 28, 2008, 12:05:

jaja desi your slowly turning into buggy jajaj

hey i agree to disagree with you.

with all due respect.... i lived in colombia when you could not walk the streets w/o fear.
the fincas of my uncles were raided by guerilla whenever they wanted.

i cant give you details....... i dont know much about your experiences with colombia.

but as someone who lived that bullshit the guerilla and los narcos were doing to my people im really glad my president has balls to battle whomever it takes.

my utmost respect to you......but fuck them. I hope he continues his outstanding job.

"Ingrid callate la jeta!! Stay in France"

0 funny, 0 helpful.

roloenNJ says on Jun 30, 2008, 12:52:

I have to agree the farc blew up the bank which was about half a mile from my house in Bogota in the 90's, and a couple of months later the DAS was Blown up. Colombia used to be worst back in the days.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

tasco66 says on Jun 30, 2008, 13:08:

Buggy, romy, Desi and the Polo do not make a "huge wave of protests IN COLOMBIA", Jajaja

"jaja desi your slowly turning into buggy jajaj" Yep, got to agree with this one

Bravo, Presidente Uribe for the perfect operation!

0 funny, 0 helpful.