Paramilitary leader shot dead

Giann says on Dec 28, 2006, 19:30:

Let them kill each other off.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Dec 28, 2006, 21:42:

"could signal a move away from the (more) violent past" On the contrary, this signals that there are politicians/military, most likely affiliated to Uribe and his cronies and thus well entrenched in power, that are willing to do anything as long as the truth is not known and justice is not done. If the paracos are scared shitless--they are even begging for help from their natural enemies, the PDA--it's because they are shaking a big ugly monster. If the monster (that nasty association of agrobusiness, military, paracos, mafia, regional and national politicians) is going to be unveiled at all--I doubt it, not in the near future--it's going to be bloody. Early 90s kind of bloody, if you follow my drift.

I hope I'm wrong, and I also hope the paracos get a chance to say everything they know, everything they did, and who they did it with, at least before they are killed for what they have to say.

"When the finger points to the moon, the fool looks at the finger" (Chinese proverb)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

jay1234 says on Dec 28, 2006, 22:24:

my fault... for being vague. I agree that it will be bloody...but my point was that it will likely be a bunch of bad guys going down. Hopefully, that means it will take many of them out of the picture, and (again hopefully) eventually move towards just those folks being the "victims." I could see where it ends up being just those who pose a threat (meaning those who have information and are willing to talk) getting killed. The rest? Well, not that I think they should just walk into the sunset, but I can also see some thinking that disarming and going legit and walking away is better than dead. Maybe that signals over many years a more stable situation. We'll see. But my point was that if this causes more violence, at least it will be targeted at those who were/are involved in the violence in the first place. I wish that it were as easy as just having amnesty in exchange for the truth coming out. But I too doubt that will happen. There will be more violence.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Dec 29, 2006, 09:31:

History is a good teacher No, jay, I think you were clear; I probably wasn't. If it gets bloody, it will likely not be just a bunch of paracos being shot here or there, but another bunch straying away from reinsertion due to lack of guarantees (after all, that was the deal: Their silence against a clean record). A number of people (journalists, NGOs, etc.) will try to rescue the truth from all of this, and their lives may be at risk. With local government elections next year, there's a lot at stake, and civilians may become, unfortunately, "fair game."

"When the finger points to the moon, the fool looks at the finger" (Chinese proverb)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Dec 29, 2006, 12:19:

Though it is almost never exactly duplicated.... Jay1234 and Sr Tertius:
I think that's there's really no individual bogeyman here that can be universally blamed for this newest round of killings against some of (not all, by any means) the paramilitaries.

This isn't simply an issue of links between the state and the paramilitaries (which have been denounced for decades and are pretty much a given) or even Uribe and the paramilitaries (which exist, but more circumstantial and open to debate as of yet). It's an issue of the decades-old links between Colombian society and mafia-like violence. By that I mean, as Sr Tertius mentioned, that there is a "nasty association of agrobusiness, military, paracos, mafia, regional and national politicians", and probably other sectors that fit under the same umbrella (including common criminals, other paramilitaries, other businessmen, etc.). But it's not necessarily an organic, formal alliance that can be easily labeled "AUC" or whatever, but more of a inherited tradition that re-emerges whenever certain sectors consider it necessary, and thus composed of ever changing alliances held together mostly by convenience and fear of backstabbing (the friends of today are the enemies of tomorrow, and vice versa).

That is a monstrous, multiform beast that goes way beyond the current government, Uribe as a human being or even as President. Senator Gustavo Petro of the PDA has even denounced that he's heard that Uribe himself, the Supreme Court and sectors of the Opposition might be targeted in order to create a certain political climate and to stray the debate and the actions of justice through fear. Clearly Mr. Petro, as much as he has denounced Uribe's different responsibilities, knows that this isn't a simple matter of "good guys on the left, bad guys on the right". There's a huge variety of gray areas in the middle, even if that doesn't make the picture any prettier.

Will the actions of this bloody campaign amount to a repeat of earlier violent periods (such as the mid-to-late 80's, which I find particularly fitting, more so than the early 90's even)? I do not know. I do believe that another spiral of violence could definitely be unleashed if we cannot act properly this time around, but the exact nature of the phenomenon is not going to be an exact reproduction. It may be worse, it may be better, or it may just be different.

I don't have a crystal ball handy. What does remain, however, is the urgent need for all who want to avoid another bloody scenario to react in time (not only in the press and in the courts, but in our society as a whole), to prevent it or at least reduce its magnitude. The rest remains to be seen.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Miguel says on Jan 1, 2007, 10:13:

Good points, Sr Tertius and juancegomez Gray areas, indeed. It could get really ugly, or it could not. Jorge 40's computer seems to be a prized possesion in all of this. Do a Google search on a very nice restaurant in Barranquilla named "La Enoteca", and follow the trail.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Jan 2, 2007, 09:04:

Juance, Migue "I think that's there's really no individual bogeyman here that can be universally blamed for this newest round of killings against some of (not all, by any means) the paramilitaries."

Agree. And the individual motivations are probably very different, but it appears at least highly worrisome that some of the paracos are being killed just when they have no more reasons to remain silent. Who wants their silence? As you say, probably more than one group of people. Fedegan said it recently to Cambio: "Whoever is innocent, throw the first rock." (http://www.revistacambio.com/html/pais/articulos/5663/) Think of the same proverb, but backwards: Rocks are flying left and right, and I'm afraid they are going to hit a number of innocent people that just want truth/reparation.

"It's an issue of the decades-old links between Colombian society and mafia-like violence."

There has been a lot of discussion of this very issue in the printed media. Amazing stuff. It is so much easier to say "there: Those are the bad guys, 'cuff them." But that's not reality. The links that support paramilitarism (and, for that matter, guerrillas) in Colombia are very complex and, as you mentioned, very dynamic.

This does not imply, as some has suggested, that the paracos are innocent victims exerting self-defense: There is no justification to the selective assassination of civic/political leaders, or the massive displacement of population. Self-defense my ass: That may be part of the story but far from the whole deal.

The interesting thing that I want to emphasize is that similar--not the same, hardly analogous--issues apply to the guerrillas in Colombia. Demonizing paracos or guerrilla is a stupid way of untying the difficult knot that may--MAY--make Colombia a more peaceful place.

I don't have a crystal ball either, and I hope for the best in the process with the paramilitaries. The reasonable, albeit paradoxical thing to do with these guys who have made so much damage is to protect them, and squeeze from them as much truth as we can. The ties with all sorts of political and business figures are showing up, and people are being forced to speak. Migue: Thanks for the "lead." I found this interesting article in Semana following the trail... again, this stuff is so complicated it just blows my mind:

http://www.semana.com/wf_InfoArticulo.aspx?IdArt=100016

This are critical times. As desplicable as these people may be, we must think with our brains, not with our guts.

"When the finger points to the moon, the fool looks at the finger" (Chinese proverb)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

cali373 says on Jan 3, 2007, 07:22:

The Americas: Thugs and politics; Colombia
The Economist. London: Nov 18, 2006.Vol.381, Iss. 8504; pg. 58


Investigating a reign of terror

THE paint still looks fresh on the signs urging voters of the small town of San Onofre to re-elect Alvaro Garcia to Colombia's Senate and Erik Morris to its Chamber of Representatives. At an election last March the voters of the northern department of Sucre did as they were urged. But now both men and another senator from Sucre have been charged by the country's Supreme Court with financing right-wing paramilitary groups who used terror to cow the population. Five other local politicians face investigation. Mr Garcia, who has yet to surrender to police, faces additional charges of helping to plan the killing of 12 people in nearby Macayepo in 2000, and of murdering an election official.

All three are members of political parties that support Colombia's president, Alvaro Uribe. The charges are an embarrassment to Mr Uribe, who began a second term in August. Some Colombians think that they just might mark a turning point in a controversial peace process that has seen 31,000 paramilitaries demobilise and hand in their guns without any serious investigation of their crimes. The paramilitaries were originally formed by cattle ranchers in the 1980s. Many became involved in drug trafficking and extortion.

The charges stem from the seizure by police earlier this year of a laptop computer belonging to a senior paramilitary leader. The computer's files included financial accounts and audio recordings of meetings with politicians in Sucre, whose purpose was to ensure the election of the militia's favoured candidates. The files also carried evidence of schemes through which the paramilitaries stole public money intended for health services.

For people in Sucre, in the cattle-raising tropical lowlands of the Caribbean coast, these revelations do not come as a surprise. The department was the site of several brutal massacres of villagers whom the gunmen held to be sympathisers of left-wing guerrillas. Many of the charges against the politicians had been filed five years ago but had been buried in the prosecutor's office.

The government has welcomed the charges. Carlos Holguin, the interior minister, said they were a "great step" towards learning the truth about paramilitary domination of large swathes of the country. But does the government, or the many landowners who supported the paramilitaries, want to know the whole truth?

Jose Miguel Vivanco of Human Rights Watch, a New York-based group, points out that the government has yet to develop any plan to require the paramilitaries to dismantle their businesses and political networks. "These criminal mafias need to be treated as such," he says. Among other things, that would mean giving more resources to the public prosecutor's office.

There is no reason to believe that Mr Uribe will be directly implicated in the Sucre scandal. But if investigations into the paramilitaries' political influence go wider, with more legislators facing charges, they could cause difficulties for the president.

In San Onofre some residents fear reprisals. Arnol Gomez, the leader of a victims' association, worries that his group may become a target of violence for having helped investigators look into paramilitary crimes. He says that several members of his organisation are already on a hit list circulating in the town. "We are happy and at the same time scared," he admits.

Smile if you are a thinker!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

cali373 says on Jan 4, 2007, 14:24:

Thank you for reminding us that not all of Colombia's military units are influenced by the AUC. The National Police even less. I would never blame the Colombian grunt. Whether the grunt is in the Military, AUC, or FARC, they are probably there because 1) involuntarely drafted 2) its the only job available. From all my readings on the history of the AUC is that the oligarchy has a major influence over the AUC and recently we are starting to see the links unfold.

Smile if you are a thinker!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

utopiacowboy says on Jan 19, 2007, 22:34:

Am I the only guy here who isn't surprised by any of this? You guys are kidding, right?

Disclaimer: any comment I make is inane and is not to be taken seriously, and is so patently ridiculous that no one should take it seriously, even as an insult.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Jan 20, 2007, 06:29:

Probably not But even if this kind of thing may not be totally surprising, as a whole, each specific event does have its own share of the unexpected.

It would likewise be unexpected, although still not surprising as you've mentioned, if Mr. Mancuso, for example, were to drop dead.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Jan 20, 2007, 08:16:

Not surprising, but still quite shocking It's as if that uncle who everyone in your family knows is gay (in his late 40s, fit, good looking, wealthy... but not enough to get married and having to share a room with another guy) suddenly comes out with a vengeance.

Sort of...

"When the finger points to the moon, the fool looks at the finger" (Chinese proverb)

0 funny, 0 helpful.