What the FARC? What I think I know so far….

Fidel Castro (remember him?) says the “trumpets of war” have sounded in the Americas, as the result of the Colombian incursion into Ecuador.

As may not be clearly reported in the U.S. press, there has been a low-level civil war in Colombia since the 1950s. FARC, the largest of the guerrilla insurgent groups, is supposedly under the leadership of Secretary General Manuel Marulanda.

According to Colombian official sources, the “#2 man”, public spokesman “Raul Reyes” and several others was located just over the Ecuadorian border and killed in a raid – along with several others.

Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa immediately broke off diplomatic relations with the aggressor nation and Venezuela has called up its troops to the Venezuelan-Colombian border in anticipation of possible incursions into their country.

The U.S. media talks about “Hugo Chavez threatening Colombia”, but Venezuela is discussing protecting its own sovereignty… and as a functioning democracy, there is opposition to the military build-up.

Here’s where it gets interesting. The Colombians are claiming a laptop recovered from Reyes tells of FARC drug deals involving President Correa, Mexican narcos and possible military assistance to Hugo Chavez in case of an attack by the United States. The laptop also supposedly contains a message from Secretary General Maralanda. That latter fact in itself is suspicious. As far as I can tell, Maralanda hasn’t been seen since about 2002, and – if he’s even alive – he’d be in his late 80s. Correa, and the Ecuadorian government, labeled the supposed documents fakes. President Bachelet of Chile – who was not named in the documents – has also questioned the validity of the charges, and may break relations with Colombiaover their aggression against a fellow Andean Pact state.

And, to make things even more complicated, Reyes was acting as a go-between with the French and Venezuelan governments in their efforts to free Ingrid Betancourt, a dual French-Colombian national (and one time Colombian presidential candidate) taken hostage by FARC several years ago. One reason for the recent breakdown in Colombian-Venezuelan relations has been the Colombian governments’ interference in the Franco-Venezuelan-FARC negotiations.

The United States denies any involvement in the matter, though the Colombians admit receiving assistance from U.S. intelligence operatives. Even if the latter is still denied in Washington, there’s no getting over the fact that the U.S.had offered a Five Million Dollar reward for killing Reyes — which means they definitely interested in this outcome.

A couple of points worth pondering:Colombia’s rightist government is a U.S. client state, which puts that government at odds just about all the Americas, except for the United States and Mexico. Mexico does not face an organized leftist insurgency, but there are leftist movements within the country, similar to those that have come to power (democratically, one might add) throughout the region – most prominently in Venezuela (and very nearly did in Mexico, though the left probably was not “allowed” to win the 2006 elections).

That’s plausible, but not likely. Venezuela, with its oil wealth, has been able to invest in modernizing its air force and army. Colombia – with the infusion of United States aid supposedly meant to interdict the narcotics bought by U.S. consumers – has also been beefing up its security. Like all other Colombian paramilitary groups (and the government itself) – left and right – FARC was involved in the narcotics trade, and taking out a narcotics kingpin is a legitimate POLICE action.

However, the military assistance Colombia has been receiving since the Clinton Administration has never been really expected to be used for narcotics control. After “terrorism” became the cause de jour in 2002, FARC was re-christened as a “terrorist organization,” at least by the Colombians and the United States. But not by oil rich Venezuela, semi-oil rich Ecuador — nor, for that matter, by very many nations except those that almost automatically accept U.S. designations for this sort of thing… like Canada. Within Colombia itself, right-wing guerrilla groups were considered “paramilitaries,” not “insurgents” nor “terrorists” even though they also dealt in narcotics, hostage taking and murder. Of course, a number of the right-wing killers were tied to the Uribe government.

The whole purpose of “Plan Colombia” was always about propping up the friendly rightist government, and only incidentally about drug control. Which brings me back to Mexico…

“Plan Merida” channels “anti-drug” money from the U.S.government to the Mexican military for hardware and training resources (i.e., subsidizing U.S. based suppliers. The danger has always been – and continues to be – that governments will use the equipment to bolster their own interests, and not – as intended – to combat narcotics shipments to the United States.

What will be interesting to watch (and I admit these are just notes, not having a grasp of the whole situation, not really enough to go on yet) is how Mexico reacts. Besides having to deal with the fall-out of Mexican citizens (or at least one citizen) having been wounded in the Ecuadorian incursion  and the believability of the supposed laptop memos on Mexican involvement, the Calderon administration is Colombia’s only friend in Latin America. Given the Calderon Administration’s clear tilt towards the United States (and its eagerness to upgrade military equipment through “Plan Merida” funding) this will be a test of the Juarez Doctrine – staying the hell out of their neighbor’s business.