It's been a while since we've seen a general South American war. Which side will Paraguay join?
Special and Corporate Interests are trying to unseat Congressman Dennis Kucinich - There is only 24 hours left! We can't afford to lose the voice of single-payer healthcare, getting out of Iraq, withdrawing from NAFTA, marriage equality and countless other progressive issues - We need these issues to remain in congress! Please contribute $25, $50 or $100 to keep this voice in congress! Please visit http://www.kucinich.us/contribute.html
The problem is much deeper than a simple "you came into my hood!" - For many years (decades) Colombia's malcontents have spread their evil (drugs, kidnappings, etc) to Ecuador - something that before was RARE. The overall opinion of Colombians in the region is that Colombia is an out-of-control state (and sponsored by the U.S.) mainly because of the drug trade. And the resentment against thee 300,000 or so illegal Colombians in Ecuador that brought many of the bad things seen in Colombia finally came to a head. The overall opinion in Ecuador is that enough is enough.
And supposed witness described the scene as a "massacre" involving not just the insurgents, but true-blue Ecuadorean citizens. What then? Are they to be discarded as simple consequences of the war on terror? Colombia will have to face the music - an apology is not enough. Charges must be put forth in a world court with strict promises (in writing, with penalties/sanctions implied) should they commit such an act again.
I totally agree with Colombia here. Colombia has been saying for the past years that FARC rebels hide in Ecuador and that they keep their hostages there (this was confirmed by a congress man that was just released). Ecuador constantly denied these allegations. Colombia asked for Ecuador's help, they didn't do anything. What is Colombia supposed to do here? It's simple legitimate defense. It is true that they did not contact Ecuador before the attack, but they are revealing nexus between Ecuador's defense minister and Raul Reyes (the rebel that was killed). If they had told Ecuador, chances are the attack would off been unsuccessful.
The debate here shouldn't be just about borders, but about borders vs legitimate defense. The camp where the rebels were killed wasn't just a temporary one, it had everything, very sophisticated camp. So I believe Colombia did what needed to be done. Asked Ecuador for help during the past two years, they didn't help...too bad.
I have to disagree with you somewhat with regard to the issue of territorial sovereignty.
Yes, Turkey crossed into Iraq, but I don't see the US chasing Osama bin Laden into Pakistan and killing him. There are practical reasons behind and clearly one is the fragile nature of Musharaff's rule.
That being said, Uribe is largely isolated in Latin America from his neighbors. This won't help, nor will it help that it appears that Chavez gave $300 million to the FARC. Even, as some have argued and it certainly seems possible, this was to be used for the hostage release, Chavez may very well have sown the wind while the region reaps the whirlwind.
Colombia is really a curse on both their houses situation. Ecuador is right about their sovereignty and right that Uribe is little more than an American stooge. It is unfortunate that Chavez is involved like this given that there is nothing redeeming about the FARC. On the other hand, it's hardly sad that Reyes is dead. I'm not sure what good can come of this situation.
I'm not saying territorial sovereignty should be disregarded in these situations - the point was simply that it's far murkier than it should be, with it being OK sometimes (with the point about Turkey being it was one of those instances where nobody globally really protested I'm sure there are others), and sometimes it's not, and I'm not sure exactly where Colombia's actions fall in this spectrum (though I think they went across the line). As for Uribe, I agree that a large part of this falls on him. Even if Ecuador has had bases for a long time (and the Colombian government is going to have to show a lot more than it already has in this regard before I'm convinece), Uribe could have tried diplomacy, negotiations, etc. But I agree with Erik, too, that it seems there's really little good that can come from all this at this stage, and neither Uribe nor Chávez is acting appropriately (I wouldn't have so much a problem if Chávez kept his comments to rhetoric, but sending troops is worse than useless); I think only Correa may have some justification here, but time will tell.
"War benefits nobody here, though (save maybe for the FARC, who can use the war as a breather to regroup). There still hasn't been much said from other Latin American countries on the issue" ... the U.S. would certainly benefit by siding with Colombia. Instant 'reason' to get involved in two oil/gas producing states in its own hemisphere.
I think Ecuador is making the rigth moves now.. why?
1. What if Colombia was mistaken and they doesnt attack a farc camp but some Ecuators farmers???
If they don't do anything today.. tomorrow Colombia will do the same thing thinking there will be no big deal and.. maybe.. kill some Ecuators farmers.
2. If there are farc camps in ecuator.. first of all.. they are not from Ecuator.. they are from Colombia.. Farc is a problem of colombians and i think is anoying for ecuator having to deal with farc spending a lot of money just because Colombia cant resolve their problems. Colombia is a bigger economy than Ecuador.. so spending in this is really painful for Ecuadors economy and you have to think.. US support ($$$) Colombians .. but they dont support ecuators in this.
3. If Ecuador support colombia in this issue, maybe they piss off farcs.. and then.. they will no longer have pacifics farc in their yard, but mad farcs.. and then.. a new bigger problem for ecuators.
Ecuator have to make a lot of noise.. complaining and doing some show (no more) so farc in ecuator yard keep peaceful with them..
Commenting by HaloScan
