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

yeah, sorry 'bout that

Just read the news report about Pineda and Arias being forced out of the elections. The U.S. State Department denies any influence but I think we all know better. Guess someone should apologize for our track record of "promoting" democracy abroad 'cause we know the govt. won't apologize.

Anyway, question for the more experienced expats in Colombia and Colombianos on the board. What are your views on the paramilitaries and specifically the politicos backed by the para groups? Are the para's a necessary evil? It seems, though funded by illicit means and obviously not contributing to the rule of law, they have helped to bring some semblence of security to the country.

joe.

By jh816 on Mar 10, 2006, 13:06 in Politics & the war.

Miguel says on Mar 10, 2006, 16:01:

Mis dos centavos Setting: South Barranquilla. ( La Chinita, Abajo, entre otros...)You are breaking your ass to make a living by selling bread, fruit, offering internet service, etc; some punks show up weekly and demand pesos for protection and to keep you alive. Then you get tired of this bullshit and talk to the paracos. They eliminate the problem.

You make the call...

"Are the para's a necessary evil?" I think so.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Mar 10, 2006, 17:42:

... Tinto, the problem is that, in most of the cases, there is little or no solid evidence that directly links them to any criminal activity, beyond their being personally close to the paramilitaries or being from traditionally pro-para regions. None of those things, in themselves, constitute a crime.

In other words, as long as something more substantial doesn't show up, they can run for office from smaller, low profile parties willing to accept them, even if the larger parties have the political will to kick them out (with a little potential push from the U.S., I suppose).

0 funny, 0 helpful.

litost says on Mar 11, 2006, 11:32:

I did an internship a few years ago working for one of the Senators that was recently thrown out of the U Party on allegations of paramilitarism... ok, I'm gonna be the devil's advocate here. Although I wouldn't put my hands in the fire for the guy as far as transparency and public office ethics, I honestly DON'T think the allegations are well founded. The Senator in question has only recently gotten involved in politics, the rest of his life setting up and running very successful businesses in his region and beyond. He studied in the US and got elected to office thanks to very well known (and legal, though somewhat questionable) reasons. I don't see what interest he could possible of had to get involved with paramilitaries and work "for" them. It seems to be he was discovered to have been in meetings with para leaders, but is this really enough to label someone as a para?

0 funny, 0 helpful.