Chavez 'to review' Colombia ties

[dipsydoodle]

Source: BBC News

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez says he will have to reassess ties with Colombia, which is set to allow the US to use its bases for anti-drug flights.

Mr Chavez, who already has difficult relations with Bogota and Washington, said an increased presence of US troops would be "a threat to Venezuela".

Colombia and the US are finalising an accord to make Colombia a hub for US anti-drug operations in South America.

Venezuela is Colombia's most important trading partner after the US.

Read more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8162738.stm

[subsuelo]

1. Good.

Colombia is the biggest obstacle to progress in the region

[Judi Lynn]

2. Chávez Bashing

Chávez Bashing
July 22, 2009 By Anthony DiMaggio

Chávez bashing has long been a moral fixture of deliberation among U.S. elites. The most recent examples appear in the July 21st editions of the New York Times and Washington Post, which document allegations that Chávez is responsible for the rise in crime in Venezuela and the destablilization of Colombia. Of major concern for the Washington Post is a recently released report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) that outlines supposed "corruption at high levels of President Hugo Chávez's government and state aid to Colombia's drug-trafficking guerillas have made Venezuela a major launching pad for cocaine bound for the United States and Europe." Attention is directed to Colombia's Marxist FARC guerillas, estimated by the Post to control 60 percent of the Colombian cocaine trade. Republican Senator Richard Lugar is afforded space in the Post to demonize Venezuela for "becoming a narco-state, heavily dependent on and beholden to the international trade in illegal drugs."

Not to be outdone, the Times' July 21st story implicates Chávez in the growing abduction of citizens living in the city of Barinas, located in western Venezuela. Barinas suffers from abduction rates over 3.5 times higher than the rest of the country, and the city is currently governed by Chávez's brother Adán Chávez. The Times cites no evidence of the Chávez family's complicity in Barinas kidnappings, but this hasn't stopped the paper from constructing generic links between "armed gangs thrive off the disarray while Mr. Chávez's family tightens its grip on the state." Readers won't find even the pretense of objectivity in such incendiary rhetoric.

Searching for actual evidence of a connection between Chávez and the kidnappings is not a part of the Times' game plan. They'd rather muddy public discourse with vague polemics directed at the Chávez regime. In fact the Times concedes that Chávez's main involvement in Barinas centers not on harming the poor (who have increasingly suffered under the kidnappings), but on efforts to improve the lot of the masses via the implementation of land reform and the use of oil funds for welfare programs.

Attacks on Chávez also accompanied Venezuela's 2009 referendum, which repealed the country's 12-year presidential term limit. The Times editorialized in the run-up to the referendum that Chávez was a "standard issue autocrat - hoarding power, stifling dissent, and spending the nation's oil wealth on political support." Such attacks, ironically, are followed by admissions that Chávez's support derives from the social welfare programs he implements, which benefit the overwhelming majority of poor Venezuelans. His support for the masses is written off without discussion as inconsequential, however, as the Times paternalistically and calls on Venezuelans who "believe in their democracy" to "vote no" on ending term limits.

A number of points are worth reflecting upon when assessing the attacks on Chávez. Regarding the Colombia issue, literally no context is provided in Times and Post reporting on the instrumental role the U.S. has played in creating the drug crisis. No attention is directed to the fact that U.S. leaders have spent billions of dollars training and supplying right-wing, anti-FARC paramilitary groups in Colombia (which are allied with the Colombian government), and are heavily involved in the cocaine trade themselves. Additionally, there is no discussion of the ambiguity surrounding Chávez's supposed incitement of the Colombian-Venezuelan conflict. Much ambiguity does exist, nonetheless, on this question. Human Rights Watch, although it has been extremely critical of Chávez (perhaps justifiably so), is unable to uncover any convincing evidence that Chávez is supporting FARC guerillas. We should also remember that it was Chávez himself who publicly railed against the FARC, stating that the age of "guerilla warfare is history." He has supported a return to peace negotiations between the FARC and Colombian government, and pushed the FARC to end their terrorist practice of abducting civilians and government officials as hostages.

More:
http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/22091

[dipsydoodle]

4. Good article that

Ta. I didn't read anything malicious into the BBC article. Did you ?

[Judi Lynn]

5. Hey, no! I added because I feel it needs to be seen by people who've been reading US corporate crap.

People need a reminder it's important to really THINK about what they're reading, and to struggle to find out as much as they can, and compare what they're getting from all sources, until they can feel they actually KNOW what the truth is.

It's hard to do, but people should be aware that if they don't take the initiative and start watching what they're reading, they WILL end up getting conned by the world's best.

[Truth Talks]

6. Amen

I just about vomited when the Seattle Times ran an article that said Chavez had become "the George Bush of Latin America." The irony is that The Seattle Times endorsed George Bush.

[Judi Lynn]

7. That's so sad. Corporate media sources are great on opinions, but not so great on facts.

What a shame they're able to get by with it. They take advantage of the fact we can't force them to be truthful.

That _{"George W. Bush"} comparison is fairly new, but so uniquely odd.

Welcome to D.U., Truth Talks. :hi:

[ngant17]

8. I think that NYT article did suggest the possibility

that this hometown of Chavez was being targetted for the kidnapping business by rightwing paramilitaries to try and discredit him in some way, so the accusations can work both ways.

Kidnapping is big business in Latin America. It isn't confined to rural areas of Venezuela or Columbia. It happens in large cities like Mexico City. Anyone who has money or access to money can be a target.

[Vidar]

3. Good for Chavez. No reason to legitimize our lapdog.