RSS
Home
Colombian backlash over deal with US
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
The new agreement has drawn criticism from neighboring nations Map: Yahoo images
Last Friday, Colombian President Alvaro Uribe signed a 10 year deal with the US in order to gain aid in combating the countries narcotics gangs and left-wing rebel groups.
The actual details of the agreement were not made until Tuesday and there has now arisen angry opposition to what many in Colombia are labeling as a virtual US occupation of the country.
Under the deal, the US military will have unlimited access to Colombia's military bases, as well as civilian airports. The US will act directly in combating both drug and rebel groups, with US personnel and defense contractors enjoying diplomatic immunity.
Opposition groups, both political and civilian, assert that President Uribe has virtually handed Colombian sovereignty over to the US by giving them unlimited range and immunity in their actions. However, advocates of the agreement as well as US officials, maintain that the main role of the US will be in aiding the Colombian government in ridding itself of the drug cartels and rebel groups.
With tons of drugs being smuggled into the US from Colombia each year, US officials assert that it is the interest of both countries to work together under this agreement. Yet the agreement has further isolated Colombia in the region.
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez harshly criticized Colombia for the signing of the agreement, and relations between the two nations have deteriorated further. Chavez expressed concerns that the US would use Colombian bases to launch attacks on Venezuela.
Brazil and Chile have also expressed concern over the agreement and the potential for a heavy US military presence in the region. Colombian officials have shown little concern for the growing isolation of the country in the region, preferring US support over regional alliances.
Is this agreement simply an attempt by the US to stem the flow of drugs or an attempt to form a base of operations in a region that is becoming increasingly left-leaning in their political stances? One may also question the wisdom of the Colombian government in granting US military and contractor personnel diplomatic immunity in light of the abuses seen by both in Afghanistan and Iraq over the past few years. Japan has long complained of the military personnel abuses on their people since the US occupation following WWII, as there have been accusations of rape and assault on marines stationed there protected by diplomatic immunity.
We should all hope that similar abuses do not take place in Colombia, as US popularity in the region is on the decline. Perhaps the best action the US could take in this agreement is to limit the amount of military presence by acting as only assistance to the local military and police, and if possible keeping defense contractors out of the country altogether.
Related Articles:
Add a Comment
