No subject

Colombia military atrocities alleged
Human rights groups say extrajudicial killings by the army and police=20
have risen, with at least 329 last year. Officials acknowledge problems=20
and point to efforts to train troops.
By Chris Kraul
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

August 21, 2008

MELGAR, COLOMBIA =E2=80=94 The number of civilians killed by the Colombian
armed forces has soared, activist groups allege, with many of the
abuses committed by army units that had been vetted by the State
Department.

There were 329 so-called extrajudicial killings by the Colombian
military and police last year, a coalition of Colombian rights groups
asserts in a report, a 48% increase from the 223 reported in 2006.

The Colombian Commission of Jurists, a Bogota-based civil society
group that is responsible for verifying many of the deaths, said last
week that a significant number of killings of civilians by the armed
forces had been reported so far in 2008 in five Colombian states, but
provided no precise numbers.

A separate analysis of last year's killings by the Fellowship of
Reconciliation, a New York-based peace group, alleges that 47% of the
homicides were committed by army units that had been scrutinized in
2006 or 2007 by the State Department, which determined that they had
complied with human rights requirements, making them eligible for
U.S. military aid and training.

Backed by more than $4 billion in U.S. military aid since 2000, the
Colombian military recently has shown dramatic progress in its
decades-long struggle against leftist rebels and right-wing militias.
A 40% increase in the number of uniformed forces, tactical training
by U.S. advisors and improved communications have been important
factors.

Colombia's immensely popular president, Alvaro Uribe, has become the
United States' No. 1 Latin American ally in its war on terrorism and
drugs, and a political counterweight to anti-U.S. President Hugo
Chavez of Venezuela.

But the Colombian military has been plagued by accusations of
atrocities, including extrajudicial killings called "false positives"
in which armed forces allegedly kill civilians, usually peasants or
unemployed youths, and brand them as leftist guerrillas.

The continuing allegations have led Congress to criticize U.S.
military aid under Plan Colombia and have been an obstacle to
approval of a binational free trade agreement.

Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, chairman of the Senate
subcommittee on State Department and foreign operations and author of
the 1996 law that makes foreign military aid conditional on human
rights compliance, expressed dismay.

"While the secretary of State certifies sufficient progress on human
rights in Colombia, multiple sources report that unlawful killings by
the Colombian army are continuing despite efforts by the minister of
defense to stop it," he said in an e-mailed statement. "After
providing billions of dollars in training and equipment to the
Colombian army, we should expect better, including vigorous
investigations and prosecutions of these crimes."

In a recent interview, Colombian Defense Minister Juan Manuel Santos
acknowledged that human rights were the "Achilles' heel" of his
military forces. Since taking office two years ago, he said, he has
made improving that record a priority, resulting in a comprehensive
human rights policy he unveiled in January.

"Now we can see that the military has a human rights concept
different than before in its relation to society and individual
citizens, because they know perfectly well that their legitimacy
depends on support from the people," Santos said.

Without challenging the figures, a U.S. government official in the
embassy in Bogota, the capital, said such numbers were only "examples
among a wide variety of statistics" gathered by various civil society
groups that monitor human rights in Colombia.

"At the end of the day, Colombia has made enormous strides under the
Uribe administration to address this crucial human rights issue,"
said the U.S. official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because
of the sensitivity of the issue. "We applaud the progress while
acknowledging that the situation is not yet perfect."

With U.S. input, the Colombian military command issued a number of
human rights- oriented directives last year, including changes in the
code of conduct and "rules of engagement" -- the circumstances under
which soldiers can fire on perceived enemies.

One, in an effort to battle impunity, gives civilian investigators
more powers in examining killings. Another made captures and
demobilizations of rebels, not body counts, the primary measure of an
officer's battlefield competence and the basis for points for
promotion.

Since a British review found that Colombian human rights training was
too much theory and not enough practice, the military has begun
requiring soldiers to spend more time funneling through the "human
rights trail," including one at Colombia's largest military base,
called Tolemaida, 70 miles south of the capital.

The trail consists of eight set scenes that dramatize human rights
issues soldiers deal with in combat, from treatment of guerrilla
prisoners to the rights and customs of indigenous people.

"It's like a work of theater where soldiers play roles to learn what
they have to do in given situations," said Col. Juan Carlos Gomez,
human rights training chief for the Defense Ministry.

Some of the impetus for the policy changes came after a devastating
report in October by human rights advocates that said the number of
extrajudicial killings by the Colombian military and police over a
five-year period ending June 2006 was 50% higher than during the
preceding comparable period.

The study also alleged that as of June 2007, Colombian military
courts had won only four convictions in more than 900 cases of
alleged murder involving uniformed soldiers and police.

"The changes don't produce results overnight," Santos said. "We still
have problems. You take a professional soldier who has 10, 12 or 14
years in the jungle and suddenly you ask him to work in a different
way, it's a big effort and sometimes impossible.

"But the process continues, and the story today is different from
that of a few years ago."

chris.kraul at latimes.com

Special correspondent Jenny Carolina Gonzalez contributed to this
report.

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
DAVID WALTERS writes
I probably overstated my POV on this. Essentially I'm for the=20
'armed struggle' to go away. I'm not for laying down arms, I said
"disarmament". Meaning *finding a way* to end the FARC struggle *as
it is*, which, btw, is essentially suicide anyway. Castro's POV is
NOT to continue the "struggle" (which is non-existent) but to stay
armed until a *political solution* is viable. This is Chavez's view
and I stand with Chavez on this. At the end of the day, however, it's
a direction toward abandoning the "military struggle" and this is
what is important.

"25% of the nation is under the control of armed revolutionary
communists." What utter crap. They "control" (what does this mean
anyway?), what? 8% of the population? The under-populated plains of
eastern Colombia? Please Walter this is political hyperbole.

I'm for negotiated "guarantees" as well...but of course we know how
far this will go. In El Salvodor the guarantees did work as part of
the FMLN abandoning armed struggle (good for them!). But I suspect in
Colombia every time guerrillas have gotten "guarantees" and enter the
political process they get dead, and lots' of 'em. So there needs to
be another way.

My original point was meant to express the idea that the FARC should
abandon the *political* trajectory that they are going to win in the
way that has *failed* them for the last 40 years. They are alienated
from the workers and peasants of Colombia which is supposed to be
their base.

I would hold onto my guns too and maintain a defensive military
posture precisely because they can be exterminated but this is not
what I meant by "giving up the gun", its the political perspective
that has failed them by adopting this failed military perspective.
They have to find another means.

David






















=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
     WALTER LIPPMANN
     Los Angeles, California
     Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/
     "Cuba - Un Para=C3=ADso bajo el bloqueo"
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D