The failed diplomacy

I would like to comment on the most important news Colombia has produced lately: the agreement between Colombia and the US whereby American troops and planes can use seven military bases in Colombian soil.

This has caused an enormous controversy in south america, for a number of reasons. It is convenient to begin with the motivations that the Colombian government had to sign the agreement. It is claimed that the American support is essential to fight FARC, the guerilla that has become the biggest terrorist organization with incomes based on kidnapping, as well on drug production and trafficking. Military cooperation agreements between Colombia and the US are not new (they date back to 1952, in fact), and they include assistance against drug cartels and, after 9/11, they include direct participation and support of US troops (in Colombian soil) in war operations against FARC. The new agreement follows this "tradition" but to a much larger scale: seven of the most strategic military bases in Colombia are to involve American cooperation. The government says that this new agreement is simply an "update" of the old ones, so there is no need for such a big controversy. For the same reasons, very little is know about the actual agreement, its specific terms and conditions. The "update" theory has also been useful to avoid the control of the Colombian congress, which is supposed to approve any such agreements.

South american countries are very suspicious of this secret agreement. Last friday, an extraordinary meeting of the union of south american countries (Unasur) was held to discuss the Colombian agreement. There was a huge pressure against Colombia, organized by Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, who considers the agreement as an "act of war" against him and his country; he has officially cut diplomatic ties with Colombia so many times in the last year that one doesn't remember whether the two countries have official ties or not. Because of oil money, Venezuela has a notable influence in the subcontinent, so countries such as Bolivia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Uruguay, and Argentina pretty much follow what Chavez says. Other more reasonable countries (Brasil, Chile, Peru) have a more objective perspective on the matter, and while they respect the Colombian decision to ask to the US for support to fight FARC, they are very concerned about the military influence in the region. They surely haven't forgotten that in the early 90s, the de facto president of Panama was removed from power by means of an attack initiated in one of the US military bases in the subcontinent.

In all of this, the Colombian diplomacy has been slow and clumsy. It failed to predict the effect the agreement would have on the south american countries in Unasur. Nowadays, any US presence in the continent is not well received. The stubborn attitude of keeping the agreement hidden for debate (both in Colombia and abroad) is perceived negatively, as if Colombia had something to hide regarding US military presence. (Well, perhaps we have.) Hiding the exact terms of the agreement leads to more (unnecessary) controversy. For instance, Brasil has suggested that some of the planes involved in the agreement are clearly inconvenient for the war against drugs ---to fight against FARC, planes can't flight too fast or too high in order to be effective, and apparently the agreement stipulates planes with very different characteristics.

Also, in this controversy Colombia has been mistreated in several diplomatic forums. A good diplomatic staff would have not allowed that to happen. In my view, Colombian diplomacy has failed to strike back Chavez, telling the world about his open support to FARC. In fact, it is a proven fact that highly ranked officials in the Venezuelan government are providing FARC with missiles to attack Colombian aviation. This is a proven fact. A number of weapons that Venezuela bought from Sweden in the late 80s, have been confiscated to FARC early this year. With the serial numbers in the weapons it was easy to trace their origin. While both Colombia and Sweden have officially asked Venezuela for about this, the clumsy way in which Colombian diplomacy works has allowed Chavez to turn things around, and to change the main subject of the debate. While he's constantly demanding for explanations (and posing as a victim), he owes both Venezuelan and Colombian citizens a great deal of convincing explanations about his financial and military support to FARC.