| Submit your comments on this article |
| Latin America |
| Colombian rebels beat path to Peru |
| 2004-02-07 |
| The Shining Path has never been that friendly to journalists, so trying to make contact is very difficult. In Lima I met members of left-wing parties that have traditionally had links with the Shining Path, and put out the word that I wanted to contact the guerrillas who in the early 1990s brought Peru to its knees. When the Shining Path leader, Abimael Guzman - known as President Gonzalo - was captured in 1993, the rebel movement all but collapsed. But recently they have become active again, kidnapping and invading villages to force the local population to listen to their communist rhetoric. Yet when a contact finally came forward, it was not from the Peruvian but from the Colombian guerrillas. "I hear that you are based in Colombia and that you know my boss," said an intense looking man known as 'El Flaco', meaning the thin one. He was not from the Shining Path, but rather Latin America’s most powerful rebel group, the FARC, or Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, with whom I had spent a great deal of time over the years. I was surprised by his presence in Peru, and shocked by his message. "There are many of us here, from the Bolivarian Movement," he said, referring to the FARC’s political wing. We are recruiting Peruvians for the revolution, and now have almost 1000 former members of the Shining Path." The FARC control almost 40% of the country, but it is mostly the low lying jungles of the Amazon where there are few people. But under pressure from the Colombian army, which is backed by US helicopters and intelligence, the guerrillas have established camps in all the neighbouring counties: Peru, Venezuela, Brazil, Ecuador and Panama. Colombia’s war is in danger of becoming much of South America’s war. The political situation in South America could not be better for the Marxist rebels of the 20,000-strong FARC. In Bolivia, the US-backed president was overthrown, and one of the fastest rising new politicians is vehemently anti-American and wants to legalise drug production. Venezuela’s president has been accused of supporting Colombia’s guerrillas and is allied to America’s old enemy, Fidel Castro of Cuba. The presidents of Peru and Ecuador - both US allies - are facing low levels of support and street protests. "Our time is coming," said El Flaco, his eyes burning with fervour. "The revolution will sweep through Latin America, and the gringos will be sent back home." With that he shook my hand and strode out of the hotel, leaving behind some guerrilla propaganda. I never did find the Shining Path. After meeting El Flaco, there seemed no point. |
| Posted by:Paul Moloney |
| #11 The solution is neither decriminalization nor depenalization. Problem is: the more pushers or trafiquants you arrest, the higher the price of drugs so other people will be attracted by the drug business. Solution is to reduce consumption of drugs this would have the prices drop and push traffickers into retirement. Solution is acting on users through mandatory desintoxication. Of course you can argue that there is a cheaper and surer way to reduce consumption. :-) |
| Posted by: JFM 2004-2-8 2:50:30 PM |
| #10 Mom, not that I buy into your antiquidated Chicago comparison, - in politics the Daley "machine" was more the notable exception than the rule - but for the sake of arguement, did the Chicago Mob thrive under prohibition, or legalized alcohol? You know the answer - prohibition was itself the primary cause of corruption, both then and now. |
| Posted by: Scooter McGruder 2004-2-7 11:15:06 PM |
| #9 Scooter, I don't know how old you are, but I grew up in Chicago during the first Daley Regime. My godparents worked in City Hall--they were civil service, not patronage, and they were honest folk. From what they have told me, and from what I've seen, crooks and sloppy government make a formidable partnership. Do not overestimate the integrity of anybody who gets into a business involving poison. I have seen corruption expand to overflow all the available space in my neighborhood. Yes, thugs do have the work ethic and the organization to make an illegal business work. The FARC are very serious capitalists depite their worn out marxist rhetoric; their drug and kidnapping businesses are quite well organized and lucrative. Having a crooked government makes their job that much easier. |
| Posted by: Mom 2004-2-7 10:43:51 PM |
| #8 Mom, thugs can only control the trade as long as they have a monopoly. They don't have the work ethic or organizational skills to compete with the likes of Walgreens. No one wants to buy from a unreliable street dealer and risk getting ripped off if they could just go to the store instead. |
| Posted by: Scooter McGruder 2004-2-7 7:47:19 PM |
| #7 If the drugs become legal, Walgreens won't be competing with the thugs, they'll be buying from the thugs, because the thugs already control the drug sources. |
| Posted by: mom 2004-2-7 6:10:54 PM |
| #6 The mentality of betting the milk money on the lottery, insurance scams, BS lawsuits ("Fast food made me fat!"), cheating on taxes -- the whole lot -- must be unacceptable to the majority, else that society is sick... and when sick enough, it's doomed. And it all starts at home with what we teach our children. Yes! I was afraid you had weakned in your Nevada sojourn. Now let's discuss the rat in the American kitchen.... LOL! |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-2-7 1:55:23 PM |
| #5 I gotta agree with B, legalizing would take the wind outta their sails. There wasn't much in the way of easy profits for bootleggers and speakeasys, once prohibition was repealed. The exact same principle is at work here. Prohibition (alcohol OR drug) is the single biggest motivator of corruption. |
| Posted by: Scooter McGruder 2004-2-7 12:48:14 PM |
| #4 The solution is not decriminalization, but legalization. What's the difference? Decriminalization keeps the same black market nonsense with fewer penalties, while legalization pushes the profits from thugs to capitalists. Let's see whether FARC can make on drugs if Walgreens is selling the same stuff at market value. |
| Posted by: Sorge 2004-2-7 12:46:58 PM |
| #3 It's hard to argue with "mom" - and even harder when she's right! ;-) Corruption, at its worst, does make almost everything a gov't tries to do a non-starter... which makes the populace distrust and despise gov't - knowing where the taxes go. I can see few other reasons which are as fundamental or as virulent in the process where a population can be persuaded to embrace communism, in spite of the mountains of evidence that it works far less well than capitalism. S America is a disaster - when it should be growing economically by leaps and bounds - given the natural resources. Venezuela and Brazil certainly stand out as utter failures, with deepening poltical disasters in progress to match, in spite of potential. I'm sure simple corruption was the key ingredient, the match that lit the fuse, in both. Then there's damned near the whole of Africa. Pull the plug - it's insanely corrupt and insanely tribal. Is you a Hutu? When you do a realistic scan, including the US and Europe, it's pretty obvious that corruption slows a vibrant economy (from Enron to Global Crossing to the EU Stats Bureau to Parmalat), chokes a sluggish one (Brazil), and snuffs an emerging one (Zimbabwe). The mentality of betting the milk money on the lottery, insurance scams, BS lawsuits ("Fast food made me fat!"), cheating on taxes -- the whole lot -- must be unacceptable to the majority, else that society is sick... and when sick enough, it's doomed. And it all starts at home with what we teach our children. |
| Posted by: .com 2004-2-7 11:38:26 AM |
| #2 B: you have the wrong solution to the problem. The drug lords actually made more money when we "decriminalized" and reduced penalties for drug use and directed law enforcement to "go after the pushers." The recreational drug market boomed when the penalties for drug use dropped; more people were willing to try drugs because the risk was lower. If we legalize drugs the market for drugs will skyrocket. The crooks will still make lots of money; they just won't go to jail for it. The real problem in Latin America is the corruption that prevents a healthy middle class from growing. See the book "Mysteries of Capital". I think the author's name is Da Silva. He describes in great detail the crookedness of the governments which require dozens of permits, which won't get approved without bribes, to get a simple project off the ground. Can you imagine having to get 33 permits just to get a house built? See also Ingrid Betancourt's "Til Death Do Us Part." Rantburgers have groused about Betancourt's leftist ideas, but she describes the corruption and its poisonous effects very well. Take, for example, the Colombian government's efforts to build a medical clinic in a remote town. By the time the local caciques finished skimming off funds, there wasn't enough money left to install the medical equipment or pay staff. My daughter just returned from a week in Colombia visiting our friend the exchange student. She tried four times to get her travelers checks changed into pesos. The first time she went to the bank, they said that the person who changed money was gone for the day. COme back tomorrow. The next day they said that they only changed money at 8 in the morning. So she went to the bank at 8. They told her to come back on Tuesday. On Tuesday they couldn't do it either for some reason. So she didn't spend any money in Colombia. How can you run a country that way? |
| Posted by: mom 2004-2-7 10:20:06 AM |
| #1 this is why I think we need to legalize drugs. It's not like there isn't a drug trade, or that drugs aren't readily available on every street corner in America. By making drugs illegal, all we do is give rise to these highly organized gangs who have tons of money and zero scruples. |
| Posted by: B 2004-2-7 5:18:51 AM |