Pubdate: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 Source: Dallas Morning News (TX) Copyright: 2009 The Dallas Morning News, Inc. Contact: http://www.dallasnews.com/cgi-bin/lettertoed.cgi Website: http://www.dallasnews.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/117 Author: Tod Robberson Note: Tod Robberson is a Dallas Morning News editorial writer. This column reflects his personal opinion. Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/topic/Colombia Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/people/Obama MORE THAN ONE ROUTE TO PEACE IN COLOMBIA If a Nobel committee had visited Colombia before awarding the 2009 Peace Prize, I have no doubt how members of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia would have reacted. They would've greeted the committee members with open arms, tied them up and held them for ransom. That's how the FARC talks peace. Just ask former senator/peace-seeker/hostage Ingrid Betancourt. One of President Barack Obama's competitors for the Peace Prize, Colombian Senator Piedad Cordoba, works tirelessly for the cause of peace in her country, but she does so willfully blind to the rebel leadership's long, well-documented history of deceit and betrayal in the name of peace. I covered Colombia for this newspaper from 1997 to 2003 and spent lots of time with the FARC leadership. Colombians were, at first, ecstatic when newly elected President Andres Pastrana announced his initiative in 1998 to reach a compromise with the FARC. Colombia had spent more than four decades at war, and as the FARC absorbed the drug empire abandoned by the country's two dismantled cartels, the insurgency had become flush with cash and weapons. The government was losing the war. Shortly after his inauguration, the conservative Pastrana carved out a Switzerland-sized "haven" in a swath of southern Colombia where the FARC could gather without fear of attack. Pastrana ordered the Colombian army to stand down in the zone as long as the peace process was under way. From the beginning, though, the process was troubled. Pastrana was ditched by his FARC counterpart, Manuel Marulanda, as the president waited onstage to inaugurate the peace talks. FARC leaders used stalling tactics for the next three years to extend their access to the haven while making no concessions for peace. The FARC refused to abide by a cease-fire. It brought kidnapping victims to the haven. It landed a hijacked plane and flew it to the zone, then hijacked another as it left the zone. It was suspected of using the plane to conduct drug-trafficking operations and smuggle weapons from Venezuela. Much as journalists liked the zone for the access it gave us to the guerrillas, the haven was a joke. And once Pastrana finally realized this, he went on national television on Jan. 9, 2002, spewing venom as he furiously railed against the FARC. Pastrana provided detail after detail of his reasons for ending the peace process with a group that never really intended to negotiate peace. Colombians also were fed up. A magazine poll showed that more than 95 percent regarded the rebels as kidnappers, murderers and drug traffickers and not freedom fighters. Cordoba was beginning her second term in the Colombian Senate when Pastrana took office. Her liberal leanings, and her experience being kidnapped by a right-wing paramilitary group, put her squarely in the camp seeking negotiations with the communist FARC. Unlike Pastrana, she remains committed to that path in spite of the FARC's record. Colombians, by wide margins, disagree with her. The raw experiences of the Pastrana years remain fresh in their minds. If elections are any gauge of Colombian sentiment, Alvaro Uribe, a hard-liner who favored a military offensive over peace talks, won the presidential election in 2002 and was re-elected four years later with 62 percent of the vote. Pastrana gave the rebels their best opportunity to strike a deal, and they blew it. At the same time he was giving peace a chance, he also was working closely with the United States to develop Plan Colombia, a multibillion-dollar effort to attack drug traffickers and build the Colombian army into a professional fighting force capable of fending for itself against the FARC, paramilitary groups and others profiting from the drug trade. This initiative began well before the 9/11 attacks and, in fact, predated the election of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela. It's anachronistic and a stretch of logic to suggest that U.S. involvement in Colombia was somehow a guise to seize Venezuela's oil assets from Chavez. The United States forced the Colombian military and police to undergo a rigorous vetting process, which has left both forces in far more credible and respectable positions, in Colombian eyes, than they were before. There is still much room for progress, but Colombia's transformation provides a model of how the United States can address other presumed "lost causes" around the world. The fact that Obama supports efforts to strengthen the military and open a base for U.S. counternarcotics operations in Colombia doesn't mean he is betraying the ideals behind the Nobel Peace Prize. It is simply an acknowledgment of the efforts by the Democratic and Republican presidents who preceded him that the Colombian government cannot - and should not - negotiate peace from a position of weakness. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake