President Alvaro Uribe has been the longest-serving president in the recent history of Colombia. When he became president there were 2,900 hostages held by guerrilla and paramilitaries in Colombia, 57 per cent of Colombians were classified as poor and 1.5 per cent of agricultural land was used for cocaine crops. Eight years later, Colombia is considered a safer country mainly due to the outcome of the tough government strategy combating guerrillas. However, poverty and drug trafficking are still serious challenges for the government. The argument that security should bring prosperity per se has been proved wrong. Now that president Uribe’s term is coming to an end, what have we really gained and lost over his administration?
President Uribe took office in 2002. He was elected with 53 per cent of the electoral vote and re-elected in 2006 with 62 per cent, one of the highest voting turnouts in the history of Colombia. His popularity has been fuelled by his ‘democratic security’ policy targeted to defeat guerrillas and paramilitaries, and it has never been below 60 per cent in eight years of administration. In 2008 it rose to almost 90 per cent after the extraordinary military strategy to release political hostage Ingrid Betancourt held by the FARC.
President Uribe’s popularity shows how important security is for Colombians. Guerrillas’ kidnapping tactics and their links with drug trafficking made lost them support, even from those sympathising with the left. In 2008 more than five million Colombians around the world (nearly 10 per cent of the population) participated in a march against FARC organised by young civilians. The reason why guerrillas are so discredited in Colombia is that people no longer believe they are driven by ideals of justice and equity. They seem to be fighting for getting control over coca production rather than empowering the rural poor – their claimed mission.
Despite the achievements of president Uribe’s administration fighting against guerrillas, there are serious gaps on the overall outcome of his security policies. First, alongside guerrillas, Colombian paramilitaries had taken part in kidnapping, violence and drug trafficking. However, they underwent a highly criticised demobilisation process lead by the government that granted amnesty to paramilitary members who committed atrocious crimes. Second, Colombia has the second largest population of internal displaced persons. It is estimated that three million people have been displaced over the last ten years as a result of the internal conflict. They mostly live in extreme poverty with low schooling and employment rates. Third, more than 60 per cent of rural population live in poverty. The lack of opportunities for young men and women in isolated areas jeopardise the sustainability of the peace process. As long as guerrillas benefit from drug trafficking, they will be able to offer poor youngsters enough money to ‘buy’ their loyalty.
The failures of president Uribe’s ‘democratic security’ policy have taken their toll on his popularity. The astonishment created by the flimsy feeling of security seems to be fading away. Colombians recognise the economic gains from security – more tourism, increasing foreign direct investment and revival of agricultural production. However, we also claim that social policy has suffered the most. It wouldn’t be fair to say that president Uribe’s administration has done nothing for the poor. There have been improvements in education, housing and health but spending more than 20 per cent of GDP on fighting guerrillas necessarily takes money out from social programmes needed all around the country. Half of Colombians still live in poverty and Colombia is the most unequal country in Latin America. Infrastructure of roads and rail remains poor and coca production keeps employing peasants in isolated areas. There is no perception of real security because poverty, the root of the problem, is not yet solved.
Another controversial strategy of the Uribe administration is his relations with American (both north and south) presidents. He is one of the few right-wing presidents in south America, which has brought him closer to the US – particularly president Bush’s administration. This relationship seemed positive for the country because the US would help us fighting drug trafficking, giving us money through the Plan Colombia, and would increase international trade by signing a free trade agreement between both nations. However, eight years later, the Plan Colombia hasn’t fulfilled people’s expectations, because of its low efficiency and negative ecological impact, and the Free Trade Agreement is far away from even getting signed. In contrast, the US benefit from this close relation by getting president Uribe’s consent to setting up military bases in Colombia for their security strategy even when all south American presidents rejected the proposal. The impact of this political move on Colombia’s participation in south American integration is yet to be seen.
Whatever the outcome of president Uribe’s administration, his term will be over soon and the upcoming elections are critical for the country. It is clear that Colombia has gained security at the expense of social programmes. There is also an obvious failure in foreign affairs with countries among the region and the fight against drug trafficking. However, 35 per cent of Colombians want Uribe to stay in power because they believe no other candidate would be as good as him on security. So the question is, would we really be lost without him? There is uncertainty because we have experienced security only during his administration. Before him, we lived under terror so don’t know how things would be without him. We know that peace will only be achieved by fighting the roots of the war but don’t want to take the risk of losing what president Uribe accomplished. Colombians expect the new president to bring the best of both worlds – security and social justice. Whether there is any capable candidate, only time will tell.
Maria Carolina Latorre is an associate researcher at the Institute for Public Policy Research – ippr and Director of Psocial a consultancy company specialising in research for social policy
Email: [email protected]
This is a ridiculous article written in an Orwellian style, basically reversing reality. During Uribe’s tenure virtually all independent sources agree that human rights abuses against the civilian population have increased, not decreased. Furthermore, the proportion of the abuses attributed directly to the security forces has sky rocketed – thanks to Uribe giving them a free hand to operate however they see fit with no fear of ever being brought to justice for their abuses Some examples: During Uribe’s time in power cases of torture have nearly doubled (with of 90% of the cases attributed to State forces according to the World Organisation Against Torture). Over 30,000 people remain forcibly disappeared in Colombia (with “public functionaries compromised in one way or another in around 97% of the disappearances” according to the Colombian Commission of Jurists). At least 2,000 people have been the victims of extra-judicial executions at the hands of the Colombian Army in recent years with the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights accusing the Army of “widespread and systematic” killings of civilians and describing, to CNN, the Colombian Army’s behaviour as a “crime against humanity”. Displacement in 2006 was around 220,000 people. This increased to over 300,000 the following year and then to over 380,000 the next – hardly an improvement for these nearly 1 million people. Over 1,400 indigenous Colombians have been assassinated under Uribe’s rule, far more than before he came to power. Over 500 trade unionists have been assassinated under Uribe’s rule – more than the rest of the world combined during the same period. And contrary to the claims the situation is not getting better – more were killed in 2009 than two years ago. During 2009 seven Colombian journalists were murdered, mainly for reporting on stories that the authorities didn’t want to see the light of day, making Colombia one of the most dangerous places on earth for journalists according to the International Federation of Journalists who says that “those who produce reports that are critical of the authorities are clearly targeted”. Hundreds of community leaders, opposition politicians, trade unionists, academics, etc, etc, remain in jail without charge for their peaceful opposition to the Uribe Government. The list just goes on and on yet your correspondent simply doesn’t mention any of it. Perhaps she has no idea about the situation in Colombia (in which case she shouldn’t be writing about Colombia) or she has another agenda and doesn’t want Progress readers to know about it (in which case she definitely shouldn’t be writing for you). This is perhaps the worst piece of so-called journalism that I’ve seen on the Progress website in a long time. It’s like writing about the Labour Government since 1997 but not mentioning Tony Blair!
The TUC shares Trevor’s concerns about this disgraceful column about the most dangerous country in the world to be a trade unionist.
Its mild criticisms of President Uribe (namely that he hasn’t quite delivered the prosperity that he promised) avoid many of the worst aspects of his government:
* the impunity with which trade unionists and others are murdered – already this year, six trade unionists from the teachers’ union alone have been murdered: that’s one a fortnight);
* the jailing of trade unionists on vague and trumped up charges of insurrection – never brought to trial but leaving those trade unionists with a target on their back for the right-wing paramilitaries to aim at;
* the dangerous abuse heaped on opposition politicians – including those of Labour’s sister party in Colombia – by senior figures in the Government; and
* the obscene death toll among ordinary Colombians who have been murdered by the Colombian army and then dressed in guerilla’s fatigues to imply they are terrorists – just so that their murderers can collect a bounty!
Uribe’s Colombia is a stain on Latin America, and he should not be rewarded for the baby steps he sometimes takes – in response to heavy criticism from bodies like the ILO and the UN. Colleagues in Canada and the US have so far resisted attempts to reward Uribe with a free trade deal, and we are campaigning now to prevent the EU from doing just such a deal. Find out more at the website of the campaign which is supported by the TUC, ICTU and almost every British and Irish trade union: http://www.justiceforcolombia.org
Owen Tudor
Head, EU and International Relations Department
Trades Union Congress
Owen and Trevor are clearly biased and uninformed about Colombia. For those of us who actually live in Colombia and therefore can tell the world how our country has changed over the last 8 Years this article summarizes the key issues about president Uribe. To understand his legacy is necessary to put things in context and not only analyze the term he has served. Our country was an almost failed state at the end of president Pastrana´s government (Uribe´s predecessor). A territory the size of Switzerland was given to FARC for almost 2 years to negotiate a potential peace process that never happened, they instead opted to re-arm themselves, establish new links for drug trafficking routes and plan the offensive that would finally take them to power through their narco-revolution. As a result of this and the incompetency of other previous governments our confidence was in the lowest point of our modern history. No one would dare to start a new business, invest in new projects or try to find a new way of living. We experienced the largest outflow of people in Colombia´s history. We, our country, our lives were hopeless. This is what Colombia was facing in 2002, when Uribe was elected. Starting from there and comparing it to what we have now is what the author is trying to explain. Of course there are highly criticizable policies and acts of his government, some that must be severely punished, but this is something that cannot be use as an excuse to undermine his achievements. Kidnapping and trade unionist murders still happen, but at a very low rate compared to the previous years. This acts are of course unacceptable and if he is responsible for them he should pay, but as Colombian I can assure you that our country is overall better than it used to be.
Juan Cabrera I think you miss the point. For some Colombians, the wealthy, Uribe has certainly made the situation better. They can travel freely to their holiday homes without fear of being kidnapped and they can pay their employees less because Uribe has cooperated in the annihilation of trade unions. But that is only part of the picture – though a part that gest much more attention, simply because those people are are far more adept at getting their views accross that, say, peasant farmers, Afo-Colombians or displaced people.
However, the fact remains that for most people Uribe hasn’t done anything. More people are being kicked off their land than before, more indigenous people are being assassinated, the Colombian Army is killing more civilians that before, forced disappearances are more common than before, etc, etc.
Eventually Uribe will no doubt be brought to trial for his crimes but in the meantime those who seek to defend his appalling record only look silly.
I have to agree with the comments made by Trevor and the others. Colombia is just a better place if you are rich or middle class.
She also misses the point when talking about the number of people voting for the elections, and the fact that months after many irregularities were revealed:
1. Dead people were voting
2. In several places in the country only was candidate was postulated, and as it happened it was people from President’s Uribe party.
I am not going to repeat the statistics given by others. But I would like to highlight that it is still a very dangerous country if you are not part of Uribe’s circle.
Freedom of expression is not recognised anymore. There is only one newspaper and it belongs to the vice-president. Cambio, a magazine that was making independent journalism was closed. Students from universities are not allowed to make demonstrations and are accused of vandalism when they protest against the president’s regime.
It is obvious that the writer of the article is a middle class woman who is not allowing herself to see behind of what Uribe’s policies have brought to our country.