'The Economist' of April 21st to April 27th 2001 reports growth and bright prospects in the capital intensive, and dominated by foreign investment, coal and oil industries. Apparently "the government has eased contract terms" for it's foreign oil partners, this "has produced results: 32 new exploration contracts were signed last year, up from only one in 1999. In addition, Occidental and BP are now going ahead with development work in two promising areas after their contracts were re-negotiated." It gives a further example of Columbia's growing openness to the global economy in Casino's (a French company) purchase of a 25% stake in Columbia's national supermarket chain.
While the website of the E.L.N., - one of the rebel armies the Columbian state is up against, tells us "80% of the economic activity in the oil, coal and gold deposits is controlled by American and British multinationals, which, in an affront to our people, own large tracts of Columbian land ceded to them in contract concessions" (1) . Irish capitalists are also involved in Columbia, according to Nestor Ocampo, a Columbian environmentalist, "Smurfit has monopolised the paper-making market in Columbia. They control the entire chain from growing trees to logging to pulping to exporting." (2)
A further example of the corporate-military link in Columbia is the three year 60 million dollar agreement made in 1996 between British Petroleum and the Colombian Army in which in return for the cash the Army supplied 650 soldiers to guard the construction of an oil pipeline . One aspect of this contract was the provision by B.P. of special training for these soldiers via the British mercenary outfit Defence Systems Limited . This same Army unit which guarded B.P.'s pipeline was implicated in vicious repression. Repression against trade union activists and local people protesting the environmental destruction caused by the oil industry, which Defence Systems Limited aided by providing video surveillance and other intelligence to the Columbian Army. More recently the boss of Control Risks another British mercenary company was sent by the British Government to advise the Columbians on counter-insurgency.
The pretexts for E.U./U.S. support for "Plan Columbia" is the "war on drugs" and "bolstering the peace process". Firstly the chemicals used in the manufacture of cocaine are legally and openly imported into Columbia from the United States. Secondly most of the profits of drug trafficking end up in American banks. One would think you would start with trying to change this. Thirdly the Columbian Army to which the aid is going is allied with illegal drug traffickers. Fourthly even if cocaine production was ended in Columbia, it would simply move to another country - there is a massive amount of land in South America suitable for the growing of coca - the raw material of cocaine. Our governments know this.
According to FARC, one of the parties to the peace process and the largest rebel army fighting the Columbian government , "Plan Columbia will escalate the conflict, with serious consequences. It will add to the dead, crush towns and the cut off the path to any possible future outside of war" (3). If one side of a peace process feels that way about a policy then the policy is hardly conducive to a successful peace process.
How does "Plan Columbia" fit with the European Union's apparatchiks supposedly humanitarian outlook? Not at all. According to the Columbian police's own figures (and I imagine they would be quite conservative on this matter) there were around 500 victims of paramilitary death squad massacres in 2000. Massacre is defined as the collective killing of more than four non-combatants. These organizations have been known to use chainsaws to decapitate their victims. According to Human Rights Watch "Paramilitary activity has increased and these groups, often working with the tolerance or support of the Columbian military, are considered responsible for nearly 80% of all human rights violations last year (2000) in Columbia".(4) According to 'The Economist' of March 2nd 2000 "many military commanders retain close links with the paramilitaries". According to Amnesty International "New evidence has emerged of collusion between the armed forces and illegal paramilitary groups". (5)
(2) Quoted in 'Socialist Worker' May 10 &endash; May 23rd 2001.
(3) www.farc-ep.org
(4) www.hrw.org
(5) www.web.amnesty.org