Colombia’s entire military and police command replaced
Colombia’s entire military and police command replaced
posted by Adriaan Alsema
Aug 13, 2013
In an unexpected move, Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos on Monday replaced his country’s entire military command and assigned a new director for the National Police.
The president presented the newly-reformed military command at a press conference at the presidential palace on Monday, during which it became clear that Santos had simultaneously replaced the commanders of the armed forces, the national army and the police.
Especially the replacement of National Police director General Jose Roberto Leon came unexpected as the top cop spent less than a year and a half on his post. He will be replaced by the Police’s current public security director, General Rodolfo Palomino.
Armed Forces commander Alejandro Navas has been replaced by General Leonardo Barrero and National Army commander General Sergio Mantilla made place for Major General Juan Pablo Rodriguez. Major General Hugo Acosta was appointed Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
More:
http://colombiareports.com/colombias-entire-military-and-police-command-replaced/
= new reply since forum marked as read
I think I may be right, in analyzing the news out of Colombia, that a very big internal war is occurring, within the transglobal corporate/war profiteer establishment that is running things here and in the "western world," regarding the "war on drugs" vs legalization/corporate monopoly of the drug trade.
We have Manuel Santos, on the one hand--the U.S.-vetted president of a U.S. client state, Colombia--publicly advocating legalization (a startling development in itself), and Alvaro Uriba--mafia boss and 'president' of Colombia during the Bush Junta--bitterly opposing Santos (within Colombia's rightwing political party), and descrying legalization proposals, the peace talks with the FARC, the (limited) restoration of peasant lands and other Santos policies.
I think that the basic contest is between the extreme, inflated profits of illicit trade vs. legit (or, in any case, legal) profiteering by Big Pharma/Big Ag/Big Chem, who have long been preparing for legalization and for "free trade for the rich" in Colombia.
This wholesale sweeping out of the police/military leadership of Colombia, and installation of new people, by Santos, is likely an effort to remove Uribe operatives (mafia operatives and U.S. fascist-tied operatives) from command. The threat is likely that they would sabotage (or have been sabotaging) the peace talks, the legalization proposal and other efforts at reform. The reform is not the kind of reform that we've seen in Venezuela, Brazil and other countries with leftist governments--i.e., New Deal-like reform (real empowerment of the poor majority, better income distribution, etc.). It is more cosmetic in nature--corporate/1%-ers still rule, but with a more "liberal" hand, and with all of the horrendous crimes of the rightwing, in collusion with the U.S. government and mafia, over the last decade and a half, swept under the rug (much like Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld's other war crimes).
But it is nevertheless a SERIOUS internal war, with vast consequences for millions of people, here and there.
One notable aspect of this war for hegemony over the trillion+ dollar drug trade are the connections between the U.S. war machine and its police agencies--especially its more corrupt, fascist elements--and the Colombian military and Uribe and his drug-funded political machine. The U.S./Bush Junta lavished the Colombia military/Uribe with $7 BILLION in military aid (the visible part) and likely with all sorts of other aid, including aiding Uribe's vast illegal domestic spying agency, which was spying on judges and prosecutors (for blackmail and other pressure purposes, and to protect Uribe's criminal organization), as well as spying on labor leaders to draw up hit lists for labor leader assassination.
These thugs (whether here or there)--in the U.S. and Colombian militaries, in the Colombian military's closely tied rightwing death squads, in the DEA, FBI, CIA and other agencies, and comparable agencies in Colombia (such as DAS), and in private 'contractors' sucking on all of the above--are deeply attached to the gravy train of "war on drugs" (fake) enforcement and its many, many uses: expanding U.S. military presence and control in LatAm; militarization of LatAm society; vast arms trading; the ability to eliminate illicit traffic rivals; the ability to protect illicit profits, favored gangs and trade routes; on the part of U.S. operatives, the ability to infiltrate and control LatAm military/police establishments and governments; use of the sheer power of U.S. taxpayer billions to dole out jobs/salaries/benefits; the flowering of the evil prison-industrial complex and more.
The U.S. "war on drugs" is the ideal fascist program. And fascists won't give it up (and aren't giving it up) easily. But we need to understand that this fascist program (the "war on drugs"
is stage one of corporate rule in Latin America. It has clearly been the preliminary for U.S. "free trade for the rich" in Colombia (decapitation of labor unions and the political left, truly vast theft of peasant lands, creation of a huge displaced, powerless labor force), and has similar purposes in Honduras and other countries afflicted by the "war on drugs."
Besides the cynicism of suddenly turning around and making drugs legit--after forty years of VAST expense on the alleged "war on drugs" and forty years of propaganda about it (while the cocaine just keeps flowing north)--gawd, the irony is very heavy, indeed--legalization is NOT going to end the injustice of corporate/war profiteer rule. It might make it less bloody; it might give some hope to social justice some time in the future; and it might reduce gross corruption (outright mafias controlling everything)--though these things remain to be seen. But it will not change the anti-democratic nature of corporate rule, nor the 1% vs the 99% inequality (an extreme discrepancy in Colombia), with the rich few and their transglobal corporate allies ripping off Colombia's natural resources, privatizing everything and leaving the poor poor. Or, perhaps I should say, that legalization is not intended as a fundamental change--a fundamental democratization, a fundamental establishment of fairness and equity. It COULD lead there, but it is not intended to. It is intended to EXTEND and SOLIDIFY corporate rule.
I think this is true in Colombia (where legalization has been proposed by a RIGHTWING government) and here (where legalization is "in the air" and is obviously being "run up the flagpole"--and where, since a far rightwing corporation controls the voting machines, some states have been permitted to vote for legalization). In a country like Uruguay, with a leftist government and a president with amazing integrity, the main purpose may be good government (not corporate control of the drug trade).
In some ways, I sympathize with Santos and Obama (and the probable architect of all this, Leon Panetta). Well, sympathize may not be the right word. I think I understand the dilemma that they have been addressing (by starting the legalization ball rolling outside of the U.S., down in Colombia; by the peace talks with the FARC and other surprising developments, such as U.S. voters suddenly getting their votes counted accurately on legalization issues). I think that the Bush Junta's involvement in the drug trade, and other crimes in LatAm, is so scandalous--and so threatened with exposure--and that their use of the U.S. "war on drugs" was so corrupt and horrible , that Obama/Panetta have, a) sought extrication, and b) designed extrication, of necessity, without exposing what has occurred and with guaranteed corporate/1%-er profit (for some of the major players).
Is legalization a good idea? Well...yeah. God knows I want to see the "war on drugs" ended! I've been advocating it for years. But it is NOT a simple situation--far, far, FAR from it.
The entrenched interests and operatives of the "war on drugs" are so marbled into the U.S. war/police-state establishment, that this is a dangerous business--trying to extricate the U.S. from this particular Bush Junta crime wave, without stepping on anybody's toes. It has required great finesse, and involves many interests, including the entire "war on drugs" boondoggle here at home (courts, judges, prosecutors, corporate and state prisons, prison guard unions, cops of every kind, weapons manufacturers, many kinds of private contractors, Miami mafia interests, the DEA, the FBI, the NSA, the Pentagon, and on and on) and including powerful private interests like the Bush Cartel (Bush Sr. & co.), and contending parties within the extremely powerful and extremely secretive CIA (which has long been suspected of drug running). These interests have to be mollified according to their levels of power, and there are no doubt cabals and operatives within them who are political saboteurs, traitors and major criminals (or acting for major criminals), who won't buy into legalization--will mightily resist it, for their own reasons.**
It particularly interests me that William Brownfield,--who helped Uribe extradite death squad witnesses to the U.S. on mere drug charges and out of the venue of Colombian prosecutors, and who was likely helping Uribe spy on judges and prosecutors and abetting other crimes--was elevated, by Obama/Panetta*, to U.S. "drug czar" for Latin America. This ludicrous appointment--and other items, like their protection and coddling of Uribe, and instant asylum in Panama for Uribe's DAS head, Maria Hurtado--indicate fear of exposure of Bush Junta crimes, among other things. Legalization, seen this way, is a master stroke of extrication. Just bury it all in the past ("we need to look forward not backward" and legalize it in the future, for the benefit of the corporations that have been prepping for this.
I don't know what they're going to do with all the laid off cops, prison guards, court recorders and other low level beneficiaries of the "war on drugs." That is a big snag in legalization--and a seemingly unsolvable problem. But I imagine that our corporate rulers will think of something.
------------------
*(Panetta is an associate of Bush Sr., was a member of Bush Sr.'s "Iraq Study Group" and presumably "old CIA." I think he brokered the war between the Pentagon and the CIA that Rumsfeld and Cheney started--helped form a coalition to oust Rumsfeld and curtail Cheney in the last two years of the Bush Junta, particularly regarding nuking Iran, and was also commissioned, by Bush Sr., to protect Bush Jr. from CIA retaliation and to cover up a deep and horrible trail of Bush Junta crimes, including turning the "war on drugs" into a "war FOR drugs" in Colombia. The new idea--legalization!--is the kind of master stroke that is characteristic of him. Rumor is that he was welcomed with open arms and champagne corks popping on his first day at Langley. They don't do that for novices, nor for mere political appointees.)
**(It's difficult not to fall into false "good guy" vs "bad guy" narratives--or false criminal vs non-criminal narratives--on this issue. There are NO "good guys" in the Big Pharma/Big Ag/Big Chem legalization plan. You can say that legalization is "better" than the horrible, corrupt, murderous "war on drugs" but that's like saying that the horrible tribal warfare current in Iraq is "better" than U.S. "shock and awe" bombing. The two evils are inextricably connected, for one thing. The numbers of killed may be hundreds versus thousands, but "better" is not the word for it. Similarly, an end to the "war on drugs" designed of, by and for transglobal corporations, and, not incidentally, benefiting those big criminal organizations that are ready for legalization-- is not a matter of "good guys" vs "bad guys." It is a matter of one exploitative policy being supplanted by another exploitative policy, with the new one riding on the advantages accrued by the horrors of the old one. And, in any case, transglobal corporations are, by their nature, criminal enterprises. They are criminally polluting the planet--indeed, they are destroying the planet. They have criminally re-designed the food system to produce disease and are criminally destroying the "food chain" itself. They are criminally buying governments. They are criminally fixing elections. They are criminally avoiding taxation and regulation. They are criminally colluding with war and repression. They have criminally looted our people and other peoples, to a mindboggling degree. They ARE criminals under the umbrella of corporate "personhood." Their ending up with a monopoly over medicinal, recreational and/or addictive drugs is like insurance companies ending up with monopoly control of health care. Is it good that everyone will be insured? Of course! Is insurance-run health care good? NO-O-O-O! It is TERRIBLE.)
