One of the keys to Colombia’s argument at the OAS was by using U.N. Resolution 1337 to justify Saturday’s operation. Slate.com explains how it could apply:
With the U.S.-led overthrow of the Taliban, however, the "effective control" principle was tossed out the window. U.N. Security Council Resolution 1373, passed shortly after 9/11, required that states "deny safe haven to those who finance, plan, support, or commit terrorist acts." That is, state sovereignty confers rights but also responsibilities to control one's territory…
The trouble is that states tend to overreach. Both Turkey and Israel caught guff for using disproportionate force during their respective cross-border operations against the PKK and Hezbollah. Yet the doctrine of proportionality remains subjective…That is, Colombia cannot respond to FARC guerrilla activity by carpet-bombing Quito. A targeted airstrike against a terrorist safe house near the border, on the other hand, is more open to debate.
In the meantime:
- Venezuelan troops continue to be deployed along the border with Colombia though defense minister Gustavo Rangel said that the Venezuelan government has not shutdown border traffic.
- Ecuadorian president Rafael Correa is currently in Brazil as part of a diplomatic tour seeking support from the region’s leaders.
- The three remaining U.S. presidential hopefuls each backed Colombia’s actions and condemned Venezuela’s intervention.
Sources (English) – earthtimes.org, Bloomberg, Reuters, The Latin Americanist, UN.org, Slate.com, Reuters India, Voice of America, Plan Colombia and Beyond
Sources (Spanish) – El Tiempo
Image- CNN (“Venezuelan National Guard members guard a post near Venezuela's border with Colombia”)
1 comment:
"The compromise absolves Colombia from violating international law in its attack last Saturday in Ecuadorian territory which killed a senior FARC guerilla commander."
nice work putting these stories together, Erwin.
I'm not sure "absolves Colombia from violating international law" is precise. It's more like they reached a diplomatic settlement. The law wasn't enforced. muck with the terms of the settlement and the law still stands. and of course, nobody is going to forget.
Post a Comment