Conflict and inequality in Colombia

Here is an article in English by Adam Isaacson. It is a great, statistics-backed summary of all the negatives associated with "democratic security" that I've glossed over here and in other posts on my blog. He is very critical of "Plan Colombia", which is the US-funded plan created in 2000 to improve Colombian security and eradicate illicit drug crops. Plan Colombia was inextricably linked to Uribe's "democratic security" policies. It's especially important to take an honest look at the strengths and many weaknesses of Plan Colombia, because certain sectors of the US government would like to see similar plans instituted in Afghanistan and Mexico.

This other article details all the scandals of illegality and collaboration with paramilitaries that surround Alvaro Uribe, the outgoing president of Colombia. It implies that all this illegal activity couldn't have gone on without Uribe's knowing.

Here is another article that analyzes the accomplishments and drawbacks of Uribe's 8-year policy of "democratic security". Gains: strengthened State with more territorial control; weakened insurgent groups; lowered major crime like murder, kidnapping, and bank robbery (the author also claims that paramilitary groups were weakened by their supposed demobilization, but I don't think this is true). Problems: Uribe focused exclusively on military and police solutions (to the detriment of prisons, courts, and local governments); petty crime, rape, and domestic violence went up under Uribe, and even murder seems to be on the upturn again; human rights violations increased under the democratic security policy, notably forceable "disappearances". The article recommends that the incoming government should: give increased civil and local control over the police and security issues in general; respect human rights and respect the independence and authority of the justice system; and explain the reasons behind the increased disappearances of people in 2008 and 2009.

This next article discusses the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Colombia, and blames it in part on the government's refusal to officially recognize the conflict as such. Despite 8 years of "democratic security", there remain high levels of forced displacement, recruitment of child soldiers, massacres, mining of roads and fields, and executions and assassinations. The two major guerrilla groups, FARC and ELN, remain active in many parts of the country, and the so-called "emerging groups", which are really just regroupings of paramilitaries and gangsters, are present and dominant in large swathes of urban and rural Colombia. And even the army commits occasional barbarities against civilians.

My readers may remember Ingrid Betancourt. She was a minor Colombian political candidate that was kidnapped at the beginning of the new millennium, and was rescued in 2008 by the Colombian armed forces. It was big news. Recently, she demanded (from her home in France) that the Colombian government indemnify her something like US$7M for her suffering during her years in captivity. This was shouted down and considered ridiculous by even those sectors of Colombia that are calling for victims' rights. The amount demanded was simply too much, and on top of that, Betancourt's kidnapping occurred when she had basically walked into a war zone despite the warnings and best efforts to protect her by the government at the time.

Anyway, taking the recent Betancourt reparations brouhaha as a point of departure, this article discusses some questions that arise regarding victims of the Colombian conflict. The author summarizes the four types of retribution demanded and deserved by victims: truth, justice, reparations, and guarantees that their victimization will not repeat itself. The author also poses the following questions about the Colombian conflict:

Are there winners and losers?
What should be done about the territorial, political, social, and economic realities constructed through violence and terror? Should they be reversed? Accepted? Should we work on creating a new system of social regulations?
Will there be truth, justice, reparations, and guarantees that victims will not be victimized again?
Will there ever be a true democracy and equality in Colombia?
Or will we have to allow authoritarianism and violence to continue reigning in many areas?

The last article I'm posting here is about economic inequality in Colombia and government's role in it. The author insists that government and policies are the most important factor in decreasing inequality; the market alone will only increase inequality. Uribe's policies ceded more power and more wealth to the powerful and the wealthy (a key example are the successful business ventures and exclusive contracts of Uribe's sons during his mandate). He lowered or eliminated taxes on many large businesses, while decreasing worker rights, all in the name of creating employment. Santos would do well to implement policies to reduce inequality and extend social protection, but given his political and philosophical affinity with Uribe, it's probable that he won't.