Two Distinct Visions of Colombian/U.S. Relations

While Colombia continues to extradite some paramilitary leaders to the U.S. with concerns that such actions will shield them from Colombian justice, one former U.S. FARC hostage is concerned that some extraditions are based on drug trafficking and not for kidnapping.

Earlier this month, the Colombian Supreme Court denied a request by the United States to extradite Gafas for our kidnapping. The court issued a statement explaining they denied his extradition "because the crimes for which he is wanted were committed in national territory." Similarly, though the extradition request for Cesar was approved, it was approved for drug trafficking not for our abduction.

...Colombian President Uribe has extradited over 800 criminals to the US, more than any other president in the history of Colombia. In his time as president he has worked forcefully and skillfully with the United States to put criminals in their place and see that justice is served. But despite Uribe's diligent efforts, the situation with Gafas and Cesar demonstrates the fraught and difficult questions that need to be answered as America confronts terrorism in its own backyard. In Colombia and in other locations around the world, the War on Terror is unavoidably tied to the War on Drugs. Both are important and crucial to keeping America safe, but making drugs the only grounds for extradition sets a dangerous precedent and risks undermining our country's ability to combat terrorism.

But is Plan Colombia and the war on drugs really about justice and terrorism? If so, why the hell isn't it working?

An October report from the Government Accountability Office found that coca-leaf production in Colombia had increased by 15% and cocaine production had increased by 4% between 2000 and 2006, and recommended cutting funding. Plan Colombia has cost U.S. taxpayers over $6 billion.

Plan Colombia has also failed to promote human rights. Broadly speaking, the practical political meaning of Plan Colombia in the Colombian political context has been: "Washington supports the Colombian government, and therefore the Colombian government can do whatever it wants without restraint." The human consequences of this political blank check have been disastrous.

In may ways the issue boils down to whose rights are more valued and whose values are considered rights. What I mean is that in the fight against "terrorism and drugs" being waged by the U.S. it seems that by any means necessary is ok (and by extension the actions of Uribe) however when it comes to those labeled as leftist terrorists, we want different standards applied.

Sources : The Latin Americanist, Huffington Post