Category: Colombia

THE MIRAGE OF ‘RESOLVING’ THE COCA ISSUE

On By rebelbreezeIn Political Analysis, Current Affairs Comment, Colombia, ImperialismLeave a comment

Gearóid Ó Loinsigh (Republished from author’s substack with permission, reformatted for Rebel Breeze)

(Reading time: 6 mins.)

For a long time successive governments in Colombia have talked about solving the issue of illicit crops and drugs and each one promises to carry out the task and pulls from its sleeve its Ace, its magic bullet that kills the monster like the silver bullets in the horror films.

But just like in those films the monster is not what it seems and the magical properties of the silver bullet are a folktale.

The problem partly lies with how they define the problem. The peasant, they say, grows coca because he is poor and coca is a profitable crop and so another profitable crop is required as an alternative. The peasant just simply grew the wrong crop and that is why he is poor.

They completely ignore the economic aperture (to imperialist plunder – RB)that destroyed the Colombian countryside.

Even the first version, in English, of the US counter-insurgent and anti-narcotic project known officially as Plan Colombia acknowledged that in the 1990s 700,000 hectares of agricultural land were lost due to the economic aperture.[1]

Given the collapse of the countryside and the production of food the same project proposed that the peasants specialised in exotic crops for the European and US markets. Amongst the crops that stood out were coffee, African palm and cocoa.

Though it should be said that prior to Plan Colombia the Samper government (1994-98) made the same proposal.

Nothing is original, the proposals from various governments are almost identical, a copy and paste. They all plagiarise each other. Plagiarism is the basis of all policy on the countryside and drugs, regardless of the government, whether it be Uribe or Petro.

They all plagiarise each other: the peasant has to be convinced or forced to change crops without any reference to free trade and the domination of the food production chain by a handful of companies.

They gambled on a small number of crops that are already extensively planted in the country, such as coffee and cocoa.

In 2001, 675,342 hectares of coffee were harvested producing 637,140 tonnes. In 2024, this had increased to 837,685 hectares with 839,846 tonnes. It reached its zenith in 2017 with 903,950 hectares and a harvest of 851,640 tonnes.

In the case of cocoa the improvement was even more dramatic increasing from 83,138 hectares to 197,709 hectares with a corresponding rise in production from 36,731 tonnes to 67,678 tonnes.[2]

Despite this the coca crops and the production of cocaine also increased dramatically i.e. these crops and this model for resolving the coca problem did not work. Despite this, all governments talk alike when it comes to proposing a solution.

Workers loading African Palm nuts Norte de Santander, Colombia (Photo: GOL)

Petro throughout his government spoke of promoting agroindustry, as if he were the first to think of it.

In the election campaign, Iván Cepeda took up the baton and acknowledged the impact of neoliberal measures in the countryside and still stated that they want to “strengthen national production, industrialise the countryside, export foodstuffs with value added and create wealth for the nation and rural communities.”[3]

We will revive productive chains such as cotton, yucca, cocoa, coffee and corn articulating production, industrial transformation and commercialisation with value added in the regions.

It is not about going back to the past, but rather of creating a new rural prosperity based on the modernisation of production, the creation of employment, the industrialisation of the countryside and economic justice for the peasant and rural communities.

We will plant crops according to the territorial vocation, water availability, productive calendars, technical support and agrifood health and safety. Will protect national production against contraband, unnecessary importations and commercial practices that destroy in-country capacities.[4]

It sounds nice. But the proposal is very similar to the Export Stake for Colombia 2006-2020 of the criminal and Uribe’s Minister for Agriculture, Andrés Felipe Arias.[5] They all mention that phrase “value added” without explaining what it means in practice and how they will go about it.

For example, in the case of coffee value is added when it is roasted, ground and packaged. Except for some special coffees which the multinationals are also buying up, the coffee is roasted and packaged in Europe and the USA.

What are they thinking of doing? Roasting it all in Colombia and exporting it?

The sale of coffee beans reached 52 billion US dollars in 2025 and Europe dominates the market.[6] The industry is undergoing a concentration into a few hands of the sale of green bean coffee. How are they going to face up to an entire industry?

The green bean coffee industry is profitable partly due to the volume of material that it deals with.

They are not going to tolerate an upstart in the market and the multinational companies and consumer countries are not going to tolerate a massive importation of roasted coffee to compete with their multinationals.

Starbucks’ income is over 30 billion US dollars per year and Nestlé has sales of coffee in excess of 25 billion US dollars. Governments have been overthrown for less.

All of the Colombian governments have supported the coffee crop and market as it currently exists. Really, there is no need to revive coffee nor cocoa. They are going through their best period as regards crop extension.

Not so with cotton. There are currently barely 13,000 hectares compared to 350,000 to 400,000 that existed in the 1970s.

It entered in crisis in the 1970s, gave some signs of recovery in the 1980s before entering into its definitive decline following the economic aperture of President Gaviria (1990-94). International competition and the impact of the free trade agreements put the growers under pressure.

Cepeda mentions the neoliberal measures, but does not say what they were and what he aims to do about them. For example, the use of certified seeds is now mandated. The peasant who seeks credit has to use them. He cannot use the same seeds he gets from the crop or traditional seeds etc.

In practice many peasants have to buy these seeds which are produced by multinationals.

It has been state policy for some time and the Colombian Agricultural Institute (ICA) and the Colombian Seed Association (Acosemillas) campaign in favour of their use referring to them as authorised seeds. The phrase is not accidental.

Now under the new government of De La Espriella it was proposed that an electronic bill of purchase of authorised seeds be presented before loans and other benefits such as subsidies were awarded.[7]

Cepeda’s proposals do not break with the power structure in the countryside and he was open and explicit about it: “This proposal will go forward hand in hand with the agrifood industry that currently exists in the Colombian countryside, supporting it and integrating it into the national transformation of production.”[8]

That is to say, the same collection and distribution points and power structure in the countryside. He proposes to integrate the peasant further still into the agribusiness that currently exists. He states that he will strengthen production according to the zones, ideal crops etc.

The same proposal as Felipe Arias as was pointed out earlier.

De La Espriella, for his part, took up the issue of cocoa and promises to expand the crop even more and to support the sector. He states that he reached an agreement with Fedcacaco “which foresees the planting of 50,000 hectares of cocoa where there are currently illicit crops.”[9]

The same as before. The eternal plagiarism, though he undoubtedly aims to deepen the changes in the countryside and strengthen further still the power of the agricultural bourgeoisie.

The proposals for the countryside and to resolve the coca issue are always plagiarised, by one and all with slight variations and an untouchable backdrop: the domination by large scale national and international capital of the production of foodstuffs.

However, the countryside requires a different solution. It requires a break with the past and the existing power structure in the countryside. It needs a proposal from the peasants. Unfortunately the peasant organisations frequently repeat their own takes on the variations of the plagiarists.

All of the harm done by neoliberalism cannot be undone from one day to the next, and less still when they don’t even mention neoliberalism and capitalism. All the governments seek to guarantee the neoliberal model and that the companies that benefit from it in the countryside remain.

The peasant is poor precisely due to capitalism and the current neoliberal model. The debate can be dodged but the peasantry time and again runs up against the economic reality. Under capitalism it is fated to disappear and become rural workers as happened in Europe and the USA.

The proposals from Samper, Uribe, Petro and Cepeda to promote agribusiness is a proposal to finish off the peasantry. They take advantage of the coca crops to push the peasantry into the claws of its enemy: the multinational food companies.

Meanwhile the coca problem is not resolved because it is a lesser problem for capitalists.

Note: If you found this article of interest, why not register with Rebel Breeze for free, so that you will be notified by email of subsequent articles. You can de-register any time you wish.

Note: You may wish to read other articles by Gearóid Ó Loingsigh on his substack https://gearoidloingsigh.substack.com/

NOTES

[1] Plan Colombia (1999) Plan For Peace, Prosperity, And The Strengthening Of The State. P.9

[2] Figures taken from FAOSTAT.

[3] Cepeda, I. y Quilcué, A. (2026) Tres revoluciones para hacer de Colombia una potencia mundial de la vida. pp 71 & 72 https://www.lasillavacia.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/plan-de-gobierno-2026-2030.pdf

[4] Ibíd., p.74

[5] Min Agricultura (2006) Apuesta Exportadora de Colombia 2006-2020. https://www.academia.edu/175642883/Apuesta_Exportadora_de_Colombia_2006_2020_Docuemnto_Completo

[6] Fortune (07/09/2026) Coffee Beans Market Size. https://www.fortunebusinessinsights.com/coffee-bean-market-111087

[7] El Tiempo (29/09/2026) Acosemillas propone exigir factura de compra para acceder a créditos y subsidios del campo. María Alejandra Moreno Flórez. https://www.eltiempo.com/economia/acosemillas-propone-exigir-factura-de-compra-para-acceder-a-creditos-y-subsidios-del-campo-3589898

[8] Cepeda, I. y Quilcué, A. (2026) op. cit. p.73

[9] La Razón (17/07/2026) Gobierno electo acuerda con Fedecacao un plan para sembrar 50.000 hectáreas de cacao. https://larazon.co/gobierno-electo-acuerda-con-fedecacao-un-plan-para-sembrar-50-000-hectareas-de-cacao/

The Many Executions of Roger Casement.

On By rebelbreezeIn 1916 Rising, British imperialism, Colombia, Executions, History, Human Rights, Ireland, irish history, Latin America, National Liberation, Political AnalysisLeave a comment

Gearóid Ó Loingsigh

(Reading time: 5 mins.)

Reproduced with permission of the author; edited to format for Rebel Breeze.

Just 110 years ago on August 3rd 1916 the Irish revolutionary Roger Casement was executed at Pentonville Prison in England, hung by the neck till dead.

However, it was not the only execution of Roger Casement, he has been executed many, many times, by diverse types ranging from the British State to right wing sections of Irish society and the West Brits that populate the Irish media and Dublin’s chattering classes et al.

Of course when I say executed many times, I am not referring to his physical execution, that only happened once, though the British Empire was an expert in cruelty and came as close as you possibly can to multiple physical executions.

One of its favoured methods was for a long time the sentence of Hung, Drawn and Quartered which entailed being hung till nearly dead, brought down, disembowelled whilst still alive and then decapitated: the pinnacle of British civilisation up until 1870.

But I refer to the assassination of his character which still continues to this day.

Roger Casement portrait, hanged for his revolutionary work in Pentonville Prison, London, on 3rd August 1916.
(Image sourced: Internet)

Casement was a British diplomat for much of his life but his activism in Ireland and his later role in the lead up to the 1916 Rising brought him to the attention of the British authorities that he worked for.

He was an internationally recognised figure praised by all and sundry for his work in Congo and also in Latin America for his work on abuses in the rubber industry.

Executing someone who was ostensibly one of their own was not as easy as executing the other leaders of the Rising and so the rumour mill of the Black Diaries was produced to denigrate his character at the time.

In the 1980s, some Republicans of the Sinn Féin variety reclaimed Casement as a gay icon.

Whether Casement was gay or not would be largely irrelevant to a modern Irish audience, but it was not so at the time. Gay sex was illegal and gays were pursued ruthlessly.

Even Alan Turing who played a key role in Britain’s war against the Nazis by cracking their codes was hounded and prosecuted. Were it not for Turing the course of WWII may well have been very different, but not even that could save him.

Casement who rose up against the British Empire could have expected nothing but the worst from the British. However, alongside the allegation based on the forged Black Diaries that he was gay is also the allegation that he was a pederast.

It is beyond the scope of this article to refute all the fabricated allegations against Casement of which there are many, though Angus Mitchell’s updated biography Casement is thorough in refuting the Black Diaries and the campaign against him.[1] 

I was struck by the fact that Casement was under watch from German intelligence during his time there and yet they never recorded any of the behaviour Casement’s enemies ascribed to him, including during his period in Germany.

Why so many attempts to assassinate his character? Well, they needed to do so to justify his execution and have stuck to their murderous guns ever since.

But also, there are many myths about the 1916 leaders that portray them as insular, reactionary irredentist nationalists when in fact they were very open to other cultures and had a broad international perspective not only on culture but also on politics.

Casement’s internationalism, his outward looking view is a matter of public record. His stature as one of the great humanitarians of the 19th and 20th centuries is almost unassailable.

That the rebellion against the British Empire in Dublin could be linked to Casement’s work exposing the atrocities of the Belgian state and royal family or his work in South America in also exposing the atrocities of rubber companies cannot be tolerated.

Not by those who believe in the civilising mission of the White Man’s Burden as the reactionary vile poet Rudyard Kipling put it.

Casement is the only leader of the Rising who is both known internationally, and whose writings are available in various languages. His writings about the Amazon rubber industry are rarely out of print in South America.

The attempts to smear him got more “sophisticated” over the years as concerns about him being gay no longer had the same force and so his work is attacked. He has been accused of racism, being in effect an imperialist, despite all evidence and even part of the problem in the rubber industry.

The Murdoch press in 2010 even stated he was no humanitarian, though that particular press group is given to lying as a matter of course, one of the most infamous cases being the accusations they levelled with gay abandon at the Liverpool fans during the Hillsborough disaster.

But the Murdoch press’ accusations are not any less “serious” than some of the “academic” tripe produced by others.[2]

Casement makes for uncomfortable reading for many. You cannot consider his life, his work and the 1916 Rising without taking into account the international context, international politics and empire in all its nauseous rotten elements.

He inspired other anti-colonial leaders and his speech from the dock was such that it was referenced by independence leaders around the world.[3] 

“When languishing as a political prisoner in the 1930s, Jawaharlal Nehru, the first prime minister of India, commented how ‘it seemed to point out exactly how a subject nation should feel.’”[4] 

His base in La Chorrera, Putumayo in modern day Colombia[5] still recalls Casement and they refer to Ireland simply as Roger’s Country.[6]

The debates about Casement are not about Casement per se, but rather his politics and what he did and sought to do in relation to the British Empire’s occupation of his homeland. Some of those who denigrate him would be happy for all of Ireland to become part of the British state again.

Roger Casement statue on Dún Laoghaire waterfront, erected August 2021. (Photo sourced: Internet)

On one level it does not matter whether he was gay, in the modern Ireland it is hardly an issue, his alleged racism and paedophilia would still be an issue however.

All of these are attempts by a state that cannot come to terms with how one of their own (initially), a man of world renown stature could rise up against their putrid empire.

As we go forward, we have not seen the last of the attempted executions of a man whose fame outlives that of all those who opposed him, argued against him, executed him physically, intellectually and ideologically.

As Angus Mitchell has pointed out about forgeries that they need to be controlled as the British did to a point that we cannot be even sure that the partial release in the 1950s and the later releases are the same documents.

The Black Diaries display the same signature. A consensus that was genuinely secure would not need the regular re-litigation it receives, nor the marshalling of reviews to maintain that consensus.

It would also not require the assurance of the Guardian correspondent that the forgery theory has been discredited when he knows full well that is not the case…

A genuine source needs neither secrecy nor maintenance. The Black Diaries have acquired both – concealed in their handling and defended ever since by a consensus that must be continually reasserted. The endless fascination is not evidence that the mystery is deep.

It is evidence that someone, somewhere, is still doing the work of maintaining the mystery and claiming it as history.[7]

What we can be certain of is that Roger Casement stood up to the empire, he fought against it and that his work is as relevant to modern Ireland and indeed the world as it was then and that is the biggest crime that Casement committed.

One we should be proud of on the 110th anniversary of his execution by the British, that led to multiple executions of his legacy at the hands of the British Establishment, West Brits and other apologists for empire.

End.

Note: You may wish to read other articles by Gearóid Ó Loingsigh on his substack https://gearoidloingsigh.substack.com/

Note: If you found this article of interest, why not register with Rebel Breeze for free, so that you will be notified by email of subsequent articles. You can de-register any time you wish.

NOTES

[1] Mitchell, A. (2026) Casement. Haus Publishing. UK.

[2] For an analysis of these “debates” see Gerry Fitzpatrick’s articles on Casement. https://socialistdemocracy.org/RecentArticles/RecentReviewRogerCasementAndHistoryPartOne.html;https://socialistdemocracy.org/RecentArticles/RecentReviewRogerCasementAndHistoryPartTwo.html;https://socialistdemocracy.org/RecentArticles/RecentCasementAndHistoryPartThree.html ;

[3] See Roger Casement: Speech from the dock. https://www.nootherlaw.com/archive/casement-speech-from-the-dock.html

[4] Mitchell, A. (1916) 16 Lives: Roger Casement. O Brien. Dublin para 21.108

[5] The Putumayo region in which Casement travelled straddled the borders of Colombia, Ecuador and Peru. Land borders have changed since then, particularly after the 1932-34 war. His base was then and still is now in Colombia, some of the other parts are in Ecuador and Peru and others have changed between the countries.

[6] Irish Times (30/07/2016) Why Roger Casement is still remembered by the people of the Amazon. Sorcha Pollak. https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/heritage/why-roger-casement-is-still-remembered-by-the-people-of-the-amazon-1.2737575

[7] Mitchell, A. (2026) Casement Debasement. Village 88. https://www.academia.edu/170403173/Casement_Debasement

Yankee Bases: A Trojan Horse

On By rebelbreezeIn Colombia, Current Affairs Comment, Imperialism, Mass Media Criticism, Massacres, Middle East, National Sovereignty, Political Analysis, US ImperialismLeave a comment

Gearóid Ó Loingsigh

Reprinted from author’s substack 11 March 2026 and reformatted for Rebel Breeze

(Reading time: mins.)

Photo: US Military Base Qatar Under Iranian Attack 2026

On February 28th the Zionist regime of Israel and the USA commenced a lethal bombing campaign against Iran, choosing as their first target a school where more than 168 girls were murdered.

The Western press took its time in questioning the attack and the western governments never really did.

The press “explains” that the school was near a centre of the Revolutionary Guard, but they don’t explain that it was a cultural centre and a clinic and pharmacy all of which enjoy protection under the Geneva Conditions.

They tell us that these places “perhaps explain the attack.”[1] Well no, they don’t. They remain war crimes.

Iran’s response was robust. So robust that the western press and politicians condemned it and asked Iran to not attack the other states of the region (calling the Emirates countries or nations is a bit much).

They never asked the US or its attack dog, Israel, to cease its attacks.

Iranian civilians are less important than investments in Dubai and other places. Iran attacked military bases, radar installations and hotels housing US soldiers who had transferred there given the possibility of an attack on their bases. The counterattacks uncovered some truths.

The first one is that the Arab monarchies of the region are nothing more than US lapdogs and the myths about their economies went up in smoke in seconds. They are not safe places to invest in and less so to live in as shown by the mass of tiktokers crying into the camera.

It is worth pointing out that many of them boasted about not paying taxes and one or other explicitly stated they had set up in the region in order not to pay taxes and now they want their respective governments to spend taxes that they not only didn’t pay but didn’t want to in order to rescue them.

It might be that Dubai and the other monarchies never fully recover.

Another truth that was revealed is the real role of US military bases. The Yanks like to say that it is to protect and defend the countries they are located in against attacks.

That myth also went up in smoke just like the myth of Dubai as a safe place for digital nomads, tiktokers, bankers and even drug traffickers like the Kinahans who have lived there openly for the last number of years.[2] They will all have to think of other places.

The military bases were not capable of defending the monarchies and moreover the US transferred a good part of its military capability to Israel and left them to their fate.

Recently the president of South Korea announced that the USA had transferred part of its defence system to Israel.[3] The presented lamented the situation but explained that there was little he could do, i.e. the USA decides everything.

In the case of Spain, President Sánchez said he would not allow the USA to use the shared military bases in the country to launch attacks on Iran. Trump’s response revealed the real role these bases play and the real authority over them.

He said they didn’t need them, but if they want to, no one is going to tell them no.[4] In many of the military bases, in law, it is the host country that commands and controls the base. The reality is otherwise and Trump showed it.

In others cases, particularly in Japan and some European countries it is the US that has formal control.

The bases are not there to defend the host countries but rather to defend US interests and to act as they see fit. The Arab monarchies have just learnt that lesson the hard way. Spain has yet to, but Trump has warned them that it is in practice he who decides what is done, where and how.

This brings us to the question of military bases in Colombia. Theoretically Colombia has authority over the bases and can limit what is done. In practice it is not so.

The supposedly progressive government of Gustavo Petro never did anything to expel the Yanks from the bases in the country. Nor is he going to do so in the few remaining months of his presidency.

The question is what will the new government that comes into office on August 7th do? For the moment it looks like the next president will be Iván Cepeda from the same political force as Gustavo Petro.

In the midst of tensions between Colombia and the USA Cepeda stated from Madrid that Colombia wasn’t a Yankee colony.[5] When he is president he will have ample time to prove it and can start on August 7th by ordering the north American troops out of the country.

The rest of the countries in the world should do the same.

It is clear that the bases are an extension of the USA and at all times serve it and nobody else.

End.

Note: You may wish to read other articles by Gearóid Ó Loingsigh on his substack https://gearoidloingsigh.substack.com/

Note: If you found this article of interest, why not register with Rebel Breeze for free, so that you will be notified by email of subsequent articles. You can de-register any time you wish.

NOTES

1] The Guardian (10/03/2026) Minab school bombing: what evidence is there that the US was responsible? Tess McClure. https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2026/mar/10/iran-minab-school-bombing-shajareh-tayyebeh-primary-what-evidence-us-responsible

[2] Middle East Eye (08/03/2026) Investigation finds ‘notorious cartel leaders’ living openly in Dubai. https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/investigation-finds-kinahan-cartel-leaders-living-openly-dubai

[3] The Korea Times (10/03/2026) S. Korea regrets transfer of USFK air defense assets to Middle East, Lee says. Anna J. Park. https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/southkorea/defense/20260310/s-korea-regrets-transfer-of-usfk-air-defense-assets-to-middle-east-lee-says

[4] PBS (04/03/2026) Spain denies cooperating with US military operations in Middle East, contradicting White House. AP. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/spain-denies-cooperating-with-u-s-military-operations-in-middle-east-contradicting-white-house

[5] See

PERFORMATIVE ANTI-ISRAEL MEASURES FROM PETRO

On By rebelbreezeIn Colombia, Current Affairs Comment, Current Event Report, Genocide, Internationalist Solidarity, Massacres, Middle East, PalestineLeave a comment

Gearóid Ó Loingsigh (reformatted entire for Rebel Breeze from article in his substack: Petro Announces Another “New” Measure Against Israel

(Reading time: 3 mins.)

Petro’s government announced another measure against Israel, or to be more precise the Foreign Minister Laura Sarabia, who despite all the criticisms we made of her seems more trustworthy than the erratic Petro, made the announcement.

Colombia will require an entry visa for Israeli citizens.

Before celebrating another blow to Zionism and a gesture of solidarity with the suffering people of Palestine, we have to read the reasons behind it. It is not a response to the genocide, but rather because Israel unilaterally imposed a visa on Colombians from May 14th of this year.[1] 

Laura Sarabia, Foreign Affairs Minister in the Petro government, at work. (Photo sourced: Internet)

When Colombia broke off diplomatic relations with Israel last year, at the very least it should have required a visa from Israelis travelling to the country. But Petro learnt very well the lesson of the nuns in the schools that it more important to appear to be than to be.

And he and his government appears to be the most progressive on the planet and an adversary of the Zionist state. But it is not true. It is not the case in migratory issues nor on economic issues and despite Colombia announcing it would no longer export coal to Israel, it continues to do so.

What is the point of requiring a visa from Israelis when many have double nationality and can enter with another passport? We have to be more radical.

Firstly, Colombia should state that those who have Israeli nationality automatically lose their Colombian citizenship. There are many countries in the world that do this, amongst them Nepal and India.

There are others that do not accept double nationality, you can only have one passport, though the loss of citizenship is not automatic. And further still there are countries, such as Ireland, that accept triple nationality.

Colombia should not recognise double nationality when the second nationality is Israeli. It could go even further.

Some countries, especially the USA, restrict visitors who have travelled to countries such as Iran or Cuba. Colombia could deny entry to anyone who has an Israeli passport, regardless of whether they enter with that document.

There are certain difficulties when it comes to implementing this, but there are legal implications for the person that uses another passport to enter Colombia if they are an Israeli citizen. With that alone they would close the brothels in Taganga and the sex tourism of Israeli soldiers in Colombia.

But neither Petro, nor Sarabia, when she stands in for the drunkard, aim to do anything like that. What they are about is appearances and this is to be seen in the economic measures taken against the genocidal state of Israel.

Gustavo Petro in handshake with Mahmoud Abbas, leader of the Palestinian Authority, the repressive Israeli and US proxy regime in the Palestine West Bank. (Photo source: WAFA)

With great showmanship they announced the end of coal exports to Israel.

But a recent communiqué from a group of trade unions and social organisations, amongst them the oil workers union, USO and the coal workers union, Sintracarbon, show that they continue to export coal to Israel.

According to the communiqué, based on data from Colombian Customs and Tax Office (DIAN) they exported 905.666 tonnes of coal to the tune of US $90 million since August 2025 when Petro issued his decree.

It is worth pointing out that Petro’s statement gained him fans in many parts, the Progressive International that includes personalities such as Walden Bello and Jeremy Corbyn reproduced an article from the US social democratic magazine Jacobin. 

The article pointed to Colombia as a model to copy and that 60% of Israeli coal came from Colombia and that

…the Israeli power grid depends on coal for 22 percent of its output. The same grid supplies electricity to Israel’s illegal settlements and arms factories as well as the infrastructure used by the Israeli military in perpetrating genocide…

…this decision is not only a victory in symbolic terms but shows the enormous impact that a wider energy embargo could have in ending Israel’s genocide in Gaza.[2]

In fact, according to data from the DIAN, between January and April 2024, i.e. before Petro’s decree US $101,658.000 worth of products were exported to Israel and in 2025 for the same period US $ 75,247,000 was exported.

This represents a reduction but it is clear that Colombia not only continues to export coal but many other products to the Zionist genocidaires.

So, what does it matter if Israelis are required to have a visa? What the government says is that it is going to impose a visa on Israelis because they did it first.

But the Zionist soldiers can come on other passports or even on an Israeli passport, providing they have a visa, i.e. the response to the genocidaires is a bureaucratic inconvenience when what we really need is to ban the entry of all Israelis to Colombian territory.

And to close all the brothels in Taganga and other places that function as places for the “rest and recreation” of the murderers after their “exploits” in Gaza.

End.

NB: For more articles by Gearóid see https://gearoidloingsigh.substack.com

NOTES

Who are the political prisoners in Colombia?

On By rebelbreezeIn Colombia, Current Affairs Comment, Guerrilla Action, Human Rights, Imperialism, Ireland, Political Analysis, Political PrisonersLeave a comment

(Article originally written for the Political Prisoners Collective Asociación Arrakala)

Gearóid Ó Loingsigh January 19 2025 (Reading time: 6 mins.)

NB: Edited by RB from original article for formatting purposes

Who and what is a political prisoner is controversial, though it shouldn’t be. Once upon a time we all knew or recognised a political prisoner. It was obvious, evident.

But two centuries of legislative changes, the work of the press and more than one NGO seeking to please its master i.e. those who finance it, has disfigured the political prisoner and its corollary outside, the rebel, the dissident, the activist.

Before trying to vindicate the figure of the political prisoner we should be clear that the prison itself has not been a constant in history.

There have always been places of reclusion, but they were transitory, provisional, where the prisoner was held whilst they awaited their sentence, be it execution, or exile, the confiscation of assets or in the case to debtors’ prison, the payment of the debt or the taxes owed.

The idea of a prison as somewhere you serve a term of a number of years as a prisoner according to the gravity of the crime is novel. It is about 250 years old.

The seriousness of the crime and the proportionality of the sentence are not obvious. In many jurisdictions a bank robbery is more serious than the rape of a woman.

Historically, crimes against property were more severely punished than crimes against the person. There are exceptions to that but in general, in all judicial systems crimes against property are more severely punished.

Of course, murder usually carries a stiff sentence, but countries with long sentences or even life sentences usually consider such sentences for crimes against property and other crimes. In the USA that possibility exists in various states.

In a number of countries the crimes punishable by death include, blasphemy, adultery, prostitution, spying, bribery, corruption, drug trafficking, homosexuality.

Political crimes are also severely punished with harsh sentences and the death penalty, depending on the country. Such punishment for political crimes only disappeared where it was abolished for all crimes.

Political crimes

Margaret Thatcher the British prime minister (1979-1990) once declared that there was no political crime, only criminal offences. She said in relation to IRA and INLA militants in prison in Ireland that political murder, political attacks nor any political violence existed.

With this she aimed to ignore not just the long history of such crimes in national laws in many countries but also International Humanitarian Law.

The preamble to the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognizes rebellion as the last legitimate resort in the face of human rights abuses.

“Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind… if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law.”[1]

The Geneva Conventions, the basis of IHL in common article 3 to the four conventions reads “In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions…”[2] 

And goes on to explain the provisions that apply. With this the Geneva Conventions acknowledge the existence of organised and armed rebellion against a state as something more than criminality. Otherwise, it wouldn’t attempt to govern the behaviour of the parties to the conflict.

Though it is worth pointing out that the IHL never clearly defined what was an internal armed conflict nor a war of national liberation. However, it is clear that it can’t be reduced to mere violence.

There are those that raise high the figure of Prisoner of Conscience, not just as the highest expression of a political prisoner but as the only one. According to Amnesty International such a prisoner is in jail for their ideas without having used or advocated violence.

It is an absurd definition. For years they praised Mandela as a prisoner of conscience, but Nelson Mandela led an organisation with an armed wing and ended up in jail for conspiracy to overthrow the state. He was no pacifist.

The definition Amnesty uses can be summarised as They who opine but do not act are political prisoners, those who think but do not apply their thinking are political prisoners.

This excludes great figures from Colombian history such as Policarpa or José Antonio Galán who were executed following their capture. According to this definition José Martí was a political prisoner when he wrote, but a criminal when he returned to Cuba to free it.

But this is not correct, a political prisoner may be a person who never even raised a rock, not to mention a rifle. They may even be pacifists. It is not necessarily a person linked to armed groups, though neither does it exclude them.

There are various types of political prisoners in Colombia.

· There are the militants of guerrilla groups, the majority of them in prison for armed actions, though there are those who played a political role in such groups, what the courts refer to as ideologues.

· There are also those who are victims of frame ups, the majority of them militants of one or other unarmed Left group, social organisation, trade union etc. The state imprisons them through frame-ups in order to limit their political work.

· Then there are those who are prisoners for things related to their political activity i.e. people who in the midst of protests, strikes, occupations of buildings break some law and are arrested, such as those who carry out pickets that are not permitted.

Amongst this group there are also the youths of the Frontline of the National Strike. Yes, throwing a stone is a crime in and of itself but these youths threw stones in response to state violence during the protests.

But, what distinguishes political prisoner from a common prisoner? Brandishing weapons or throwing stones is done by lots of people from narcos to drunks on a Saturday night. Pablo Escobar attacked the state with weapons and car bombs, but he was never a political prisoner.

He was always a criminal.

The first point is the political prisoner is captured in the struggle for a better world.

They seek changes in society that benefit a broad section of the population when their struggle is national in character or large group when the struggle is local or in the neighbourhood with specific demands.

So, a right-wing paramilitary could never be a political prisoner because they seek the status quo, or even a worsening of the conditions of the people.

A political prisoner acts altruistically, seeking no personal benefit though they may end up benefiting from the changes they seek for peasants, youths or neighbours because they are from that community.

But they never seek personal benefit for themselves but rather for society or a particular group in society. Once again neither the paramilitaries, nor the narcos or the Uribistas could ever be political prisoners because what they seek is always for their own personal benefit or small powerful group.

So a guerrilla may be a political prisoner, as may be the youths from the National Strike and similar protests. The environmentalist that blocks the entry of a mining company’s machinery is also one, even if they commit a crime such as damaging or destroying the company’s installations.

In 1976 eighty intellectuals and figures from the world of culture met in Algiers and proclaimed the Algiers Declaration – Universal Declaration of the Rights of Peoples. The document is entirely political and does not have the force of law but was and continues to be a moral reference point.

In Article 28 it states:

Any people whose fundamental rights are seriously disregarded has the right to enforce them, specially by political or trade union struggle and even, in the last resort by the use the force.[3]

Political prisoners are those who comply with this article.

Though the methods used, whether they are violent or pacific may have some influence, they do not determine who are political prisoners.

Of course, in the case of guerrillas, a war crime may wrest credibility from their status as a political prisoner, but in general the use or not of violence is not what determines who is a political prisoner.

It is the demands and the selfless commitment of the militant to the cause that defines whether they are political prisoners or not. Those who deny this are the ones who benefit from the capitalist system.

Their denial is nothing more than publicity and public relations for Julio Mario Santodomingo, Juan Manuel Santos, Gustavo Petro and the large NGOs. Colombia is full of political prisoners and those who deny this also deny the reality of capitalism in the country.

End.
NB: For more articles by Gearóid see https://gearoidloingsigh.substack.com

NOTES

[1] UN (1948) Universal Declaration of Human Rights. https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/eng.pdf

[2] See https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gci-1949/article-3?activeTab=1949GCs-APs-and-commentaries

[3] See Declaration of Algiers https://permanentpeoplestribunal.org/algiers-charter/?lang=en

A Boycott by Halves: Colombia and Israel

On By rebelbreezeIn Colombia, Current Affairs Comment, Internationalist Solidarity, Political AnalysisLeave a comment

Gearóid Ó Loingsigh (14/10/2024)

(Reading time: 3 mins.)

As the Zionist state of Israel made headway in its genocide of Palestinians, although it dithered, the Petro government took various solidarity actions with Palestine such as deciding not to allow the sale of Colombian coal to Israel. 

One of the other measures it announced earlier in the midst of the genocide was the suspension of military purchases from Israel. 

It is worth pointing out that it was he, as President, who revived those contracts through his decision to buy Howitzers from Israel instead of the Caesar from the French company Nexter.[1]

However, Petro announced that he would replace the Israeli-made KFir planes as they were old, and difficult and expensive to maintain and opened up negotiations to buy 16 Rafale planes from the French company Dassault.[2] 

In October of last year, Israel suspended the sale of arms to Colombia,[3] due to the differences and tensions between the two governments.

Now Petro has gone into reverse and announced that he set aside US $ 761,000 for the maintenance of the KFir in addition to the sum from the contract signed in December 2022.[4]  Of course this contract is with the Israeli company Israel Aerospace Industries. 

It openly contradicts his public statements regarding Israel and also regarding the “modernisation” of the Colombian fleet and as El Tiempo points out.

… it is indeed surprising the large financial increase made last September 30th (bold in original) to reactivate the maintenance contract on the aeroplanes.  Money that, furthermore, comes in the midst of serious questioning from political groups given the increase in air accidents amongst the Armed Forces.[5]

Barely 25% of the Kfir fleet is in working order at the moment.[6]  But its maintenance is an unnecessary expense.  The KFir are fighter jets, with the capacity for air to ground attacks and are supposedly needed to protect the country’s infrastructure. 

KFir fighter jets (Photo sourced: Internet)

But that isn’t true either.  More than to protect pipelines or other installations from guerrilla attacks they are to repel an attack from neighbouring countries.  Their specifications are clear.[7] 

The last time Colombia went to war with another country was in 1933 and it lost it, along with a significant part of its Amazon territory.

If Petro really wants to demilitarise the country, why does he insist on maintaining a fleet of planes that are not much use?  He should give up on the maintenance of the KFir and as was done in another period with the buses in Bogotá, turn them into scrap metal. 

Also, he should forego an unnecessary military expense in a country with so many needs.  Are there not schools, hospitals and universities to be built or equipped?

And where is the solidarity with Palestine that he has so often proclaimed? 

Gustavo Petro in Palestine-solidarity mode (Photo sourced: Internet)

If breaking off relations with Israel and suspending military contracts in the name of solidarity is a good idea, then it is a good idea at all times and more so now when there can be no doubt that Israel is a genocidal state …

and every dollar that its arms industry receives is another bomb falling on Gaza or an attack on Lebanon.  Cheap talk is costly to the Palestinians, but also to Colombians who see how his proposal to demilitarise society has come to nought. 

He did not abolish the ESMAD (specialised riot squad), as he promised, nor the obligatory military service, rather they now propose an obligatory social service for those who refuse to carry out military service. 

If the rich can’t have youths to fight their wars, at least they will have cheap or free labour through this supposed social service. It is worth remembering that in Spain military service was defeated by a campaign that also defeated the alternative social service.  Neither cannon fodder nor slaves.

It is time to be coherent.  What does Petro want? Solidarity with Palestine or war planes?  He can’t have both.  The demilitarisation of society or a social service in addition to military service?  It is one thing or the other.

NB: For more articles by Gearóid see https://gearoidloingsigh.substack.com

[1] Defense News (06/01/2023) Colombia picks Elbit’s Atmos howitzer over Nexter’s Caesar. José Higuera. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2023/01/06/colombia-picks-elbits-atmos-howitzer-over-nexters-caesar/

[2] Defense News (23/12/2023) Colombia begins negotiations to buy 16 Rafale fighter jets. José Higuera. https://www.defensenews.com/air/2022/12/23/colombia-begins-negotiations-to-buy-16-rafale-fighter-jets/

[3] Defense News (18/10/2023) Israel suspends defense sales to Colombia. José Higuera. https://www.defensenews.com/global/2023/10/18/israel-suspends-defense-sales-to-colombia/

[4] El Tiempo (02/10/2024) Gobierno del presidente Petro le acaba de dar 761 mil dólares a empresa israelí para los aviones Kfir, pese a ruptura diplomática. Rafael Quintero Cerón. https://www.eltiempo.com/datos/gobierno-del-presidente-petro-le-acaba-de-dar-761-mil-dolares-a-empresa-israeli-para-los-k-fir-pese-a-ruptura-diplomatica-3386564?s=35

[5] Ibíd.,

[6] Infodefensa (04/03/2024) Colombia solo opera el 25 % de su flota de aviones Kfir. Erich Saumeth. https://www.infodefensa.com/texto-diario/mostrar/4744327/045-solo-opera-25-flota-aviones-kfir

[7] National Interest (13/09/2024) Kfir: The Fighter Jet From Israel That Was Feared By Every Air Force.  Brandon J. Weichert. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/kfir-fighter-jet-israel-was-feared-every-air-force-211909

Deceptive figures in drugs policy

On By rebelbreezeIn Colombia, Current Affairs CommentLeave a comment

Gearóid Ó Loingsigh

(Reading time: 4 mins.)

Statements from Petro’s government and the Historic Pact on drugs are as trustworthy as those of Duque, Santos and Uribe. In their haste to show results they resort to deception or statements not sustained by any real figures.

So much so that, a few days prior to publishing his drug policy, Petro declared victory in the war on coca due to the increase in fentanyl consumption in the USA.

Coca crop growing in Colombia (photo cred: GOL)

It didn’t matter that his actual drug policy that he later published stated the exact opposite, something I have dealt with in a previous article.1

Once again they announce a victory on the basis of imprecise figures. Gustavo Bolívar through his twitter account states that:

Kilo of coca leaf: $6,000 pesos2

Kilo of cocoa: $32,500 pesos

The result of a change in strategy in the fight against drug trafficking. The Government stopped fumigating crops, the supply increased and the price fell. Now thousands of families are substituting coca for cacao.3

Picked coca leaves (photo cred: GOL)

The figures are not false, but they portray a falsehood. Bolívar wants us to believe that the price of coca leaf has fallen over the course of this government, compared to previous ones.

He also wants us to believe that the price of cocoa is due to the policies of the current government and the increase in crops can be explained by the same reason.

However, the same documents from the government give us a price for a kilo of coca leaf in 2021 or $2,300 pesos, which significantly lower than the $6,000 cited by Bolívar for 2024.4 The UN has come up with similar figures. Thus the price has risen not fallen since 2021.

Also, Bolívar doesn’t cite any figures of the price of base or paste, or the final product. Many peasants usually process the coca leaf rather than sell it on, though the sale of coca leaf does take place.

As for the cocoa, the area sown has doubled between 2009 and 2022, rising from 109,357 hectares to 229,974 hectares.5 Though it is worth pointing out that the UN uses lower figures on this.

Cocao “pods” in tree (photo cred: GOL)

Every government saw in cocoa a cash crop, even before Plan Colombia when the USA included it as a crop to promote amongst coca-growing peasants.

In 2006, the infamous minister of agriculture, Andrés Felipe Arias included cocoa as one of the main crops he wanted to promote through his Export Drive awarding subsidies, loans and tax benefits to those who grow cocoa.6

In 2009, the year in which the slow rise in the planting of cocoa began, the Dioceses of Tumaco warned about a number of projects that, in its opinion, damaged the communities, amongst them, the monoculture of cocoa.7

Cocao “beans” in the harvested fruit (photo cred: GOL)

This monoculture was not achieved through large companies, but rather through thousands of small scale producers, all growing the same.

In many parts, including the cocoa municipalities par excellence of Carmen de Chucurí and San Vicente de Chucurí in the department of Santander, the monoculture of cocoa is the end result of the planting by thousands of small scale producers.

It accounts for 25% of arable land in the department.

Then with the Plan Diamante proposals for the “development” of the north of the country, they didn’t just talk of road infrastructure such as the Ruta del Sol, but they also talked about cocoa and other cash crops such as African palm.8 There is nothing new under the sun.

So coca is more expensive than when Petro won the presidency and the increase in the production of cocoa has nothing to do with this government.

It is an old policy, which has not been able to undo the fall in the international price of cocoa since the 1970s, despite an increase at the beginning of this century due to wars in the Ivory Coast. It is a policy that sectors of the left criticised.

There are sectors that continue to criticise these proposals and there are left sectors who have jobs in the current government and pay more attention to their bank balance.

But, if we wish to discuss drug policy we need transparency and honesty from this government.

Coca processing lab, Colombia (photo cred: GOL)

Petro’s previous declarations on this issue leave a lot to be desired and this latest statement from Gustavo Bolívar indicates that just like the Catholic nuns in the schools, he believes that appearances are more important than being.

Petro’s government will come to end without resolving this problem, it is beyond the ability of any one government, but neither will it have done anything of substance, but will, without a doubt present a report that says the exact opposite.

End.

Notes

1 Ó Loingsigh, G. (25/09/2023) Coca, Fentanilo y Política de Drogas en Colombia. http://www.elsalmon.com.co/2023/09/coca-fentanilo-y-politica-de-drogas-en.html

2 As of July 4th 2024, there were 4,089 pesos to the dollar and in 2021, 4,024 approximately.

3 See https://x.com/GustavoBolivar/status/1808547785974652968

4 Véase Boletín Sobre Precios de las Drogas Ilícitas. Año 2021. https://www.minjusticia.gov.co/programas-co/ODC/Documents/Publicaciones/Criminalidad/Delitos-Relacionados-Drogas/Boletin%20Precios%202021.pdf

5 See https://www.agronet.gov.co/estadistica/Paginas/home.aspx?cod=1

6 Ó Loingsigh, G. (2007) El Catatumbo: Un Reto Por La Verdad. Bogotá. CISCA. Pp. 191-195 https://www.academia.edu/16951015/Catatumbo_Un_Reto_Por_La_Verdad

7 Diócesis de Tumaco (2009) ¡Que nadie diga que no pasa nada! Balance No. 1, Tumaco pág 51

8

Chiquita, the multinationals and the bloodbath in Colombia

On By rebelbreezeIn Colombia, Current Affairs Comment, Human Rights, Imperialism, Indigenous or Original People, Massacres, Political Analysis, UncategorizedLeave a comment

Gearóid Ó Loingsigh (16/06/2024)

(Reading time: 5 mins.)

It was an open secret that the US multinational, Chiquita, financed the paramilitaries. But the company always denied it, until one fine day, due to the insistence of the victims the company had to acknowledge its guilt and pay a fine of $25 million US.

On June 10th, this year, a tribunal in Florida ordered the company to pay $38 million to the families of 8 people who were murdered by the groups Chiquita financed.1

However, the victims in the same period for which Chiquita accepts it financed the paramilitaries and to have allowed them import weapons through their free zone port number more than eight victims, there are thousands.

But it is not just a matter of the number of victims but rather the number of victimisers. The judgement lays bare the discourse of the transitional justice system and that of all the governments, including the current one, about the nature of the conflict.

The peace agreement signed with the FARC, described the problem as one of some criminal guerrillas (and among their ranks there were) and some “rotten apples” in the armed forces (there weren’t any but rather it was a problem with the military institution itself).

The business people were designated as third parties and are not obliged to testify before the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP). But the judgement in the US against Chiquita clearly shows that they are not “third parties” in the conflict but “first parties”.

Once upon a time the role of the multinationals in the conflict was the starting point for all of the left and the human rights groups too, but not anymore.

Before we look at the matter, we should bear in mind that among many of those who are now part of the government, those that signed or promoted the agreement with the FARC are various spokespersons that previously denounced many companies.

I had the honour of investigating the role of the British oil company BP and other companies in the case of Casanare, where the role of the company could be proven.

The company itself, partially acknowledged its bloody role in financing the 16th Brigade alleging that it was legal at that time.

Many organisations have denounced BP, and the voices raised against the company increase in number.2 But legally BP is as innocent as Chiquita once was. In Southern Bolívar we saw how mining companies fomented the war against communities.3

Carlos Castano, right, the leader of the right-wing paramilitary group United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia. (Photo cred: New York Post/ AP)

It wasn’t just in that region, but rather in the whole country and included national companies as well.4 The palm companies did their part and the cattle ranchers publicly accepted their role in fomenting paramilitaries,5 to name just a few sectors.

Other reports, as yet not proven to the same degree as the ones against Chiquita, cameout, but few doubt the reports against Coca Cola and Nestlé. Perhaps in a few years we can state it with the same legal certainty as we do now in relation to Chiquita.

And if we get there, it will be exclusively due to the struggle of the victims.

For the current government, the truth commission and many sectors of the Historic Pact (PH) the conflict is to be explained in terms of drug trafficking, minor disputes (never major ones) for land, corruption and the “culture of death in Colombia”.

But none of that is true. It is true that drug trafficking has, up to a point, played a role, and sometimes there are land disputes between neighbours that end badly and violence as a method of resolving problems is socially acceptable amongst many sectors of the country.

But none of this explains the conflict.

The Colombian conflict can be explained in terms of one between national capital, but above all international capital and the Colombian people and can be seen in the fight for land, the economic model, the war on unions, grassroots organisations etc.

Once upon a time it was not controversial on the left to say so, not even among the NGOs and even some politicians did so. Now, however, whoever states as much, dies politically.

Petro has given the excuse that he holds office but not power as a justification to explain the lack of operational capacity of his government and the lukewarm nature of his proposals. But we knew that, we always knew that, even when Petro on the campaign trail said he would “take power”.

People used to accept the idea that Colombian policies are not decided in the Nariño Palace (presidential palace) but rather in the White House and the cafés of Wall Street. The owners of the “cafés” decide more than do the Colombian people.

Those that serve the coffee are companies like Chiquita and it is the Colombians who wash the dishes.

President, are you the owner of one of these cafés, a waiter or a dishwasher? Tell us in detail. We would like to know who took the decision to allow Chiquita and the rest of the companies to kill left, right and centre.

We would like you to name those companies that kill peasants. Or, do you not as President have access to the military and police archives etc.?

On the election campaign, Petro said he was the Biden of Colombia.

But Biden and the Democrats have always received funds from multinationals, particularly from the agribusiness sector. So Petro should tell us whether he is still the Biden of Colombia and what he intends to do with Chiquita and other companies behind the Colombian conflict.

The peace process with the FARC and the rise of the PH as a party of government has left us a pernicious legacy, where we talk about the conflict in psychological terms, of evil, or individual responsibility (except when dealing with the insurgency).

And from the onset deny the role of the US in the conflict and the role of companies, particularly the multinationals. The business people are not on trial in the JEP, except those who voluntarily place themselves before the tribunal.

And that is only done by those who face a sure sentence in the ordinary justice system and see in the JEP the possibility of avoiding jail time. The Truth Commission excluded the business people.

In 2015, in the middle of his speech to the Colombian Oil Association, the then President Santos tried to reassure them and promised that he was not going to pursue them.

He gave them some advice, suggesting that if there was ever report made against them they could allege they were coerced.

Furthermore he stated, “Which businessman is guilty of war crimes or crimes against humanity? If there is even one, he might be put on trial, but I don’t see how, or where…”6

Well, for the moment we could reply that perhaps in Florida, but not in Bogotá and not due to the NGOs, state bodies and other personalities who sell us that image of the conflict in which companies are not the driving force behind the conflict.

End.

Comment by Rebel Breeze:
Chiquita is the current manifestation of the infamous United Fruit Company which organised a massacre against striking fruit workers in December 1928:

Leaders of the 1928 strike including two martyrs. (Photo sourced: Wikipedia)

NOTES:

1 The Guardian (11/06/2024) Chiquita ordered to pay $38 million to families of Colombian men killed by death squads. Luke Taylor. https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jun/11/chiquita-banana-deaths-lawsuit-colombia

2 Declassified UK (18/07/2023) La financiación de BP a los militares asesinos de Colombia. John McEvoy. https://www.declassifieduk.org/es/la-financiacion-de-bp-a-los-militares-asesinos-de-colombia/

3 Ó Loingsigh, G. (2003) La estrategia integral del paramilitarismo en el Magdalena Medio. España. https://www.academia.edu/96631813/LA_ESTRATEGIA_INTEGRAL_DEL_PARAMILITARISMO_EN_EL_MAGDALENA_MEDIO_DE_COLOMBIA

4 Ramírez, F. (2010) Gran minería en Colombia, ¿Para qué y para quién? Revista Semillas No. 42/43 https://semillas.org.co/es/revista/gran-miner

5 Ó Loingsigh, G. (2006) El Catatumbo: Un reto por la verdad. Cisca. Bogotá. P.153 https://www.academia.edu/16951015/Catatumbo_Un_Reto_Por_La_Verdad

6 Cited in Sinaltrainal et al (2016) Ambiguo y decepcionante acuerdo: itinerario para la impunidad de crímenes de Estado. P.24 https://rebelion.org/docs/208980.pdf

Colombia: The meaning of “Never Again”

On By rebelbreezeIn Colombia, Current Affairs Comment, Massacres, Popular Resistance, US Imperialism, Workers' StrugglesLeave a comment

Gearóid Ó Loingsigh 3 June 2024

(Reading time: 8 mins.)

Gustavo Petro and Truth Commission President Francisco de Roux.

I recently read an article written by the former Colombian truth commissioner and academic at the Los Andes University, Alejandro Castillejo titled Teaching After Gaza?: Indifference Perpetuates Barbarism.(1) 

As its title indicates, it deals with Gaza, but also covers other conflicts, such as Ukraine and also the Colombian conflict itself.

In the text he puts forward a question “When we say ‘Never Again’, exactly what should never happen again?” 

It is a good question and one that is not often asked; he talks of the continuities, as Gaza is ongoing and will continue after the genocide, it won’t end in some precise reference point. 

I would like to deal with another aspect of that question. 

Once upon a time the social organisations in Colombia, the NGOs, the left groups, both legal and illegal ones, reformists (some illegal) and revolutionaries (some of which are legal), were very clear about what they meant when they gave voice to the slogan Never Again. 

It is a common phrase.  There are some reports from Colombian organisations that include it in their names.  I had the honour of contributing, through my field work to the first two reports on the 14th Zone.(2)

Outside of Colombia, there is more than one truth commission report that has that as its name, such as the REMHI Report of Guatemala,(3) or the report on the disappeared in Argentina.(4)  We were all clear, we did not want a repetition of the terrible night. 

We spoke of the bloodbath and many were equally clear that they did not want a repeat of the circumstances that made it all possible, necessary and justifiable in the eyes of the state and bourgeoisie (a term disgracefully fallen into disuse in current times.)

Nowadays, it would seem that nobody is clear about it.  The Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP) understands Never Again to be never again the FARC and some “rotten apple” in the state’s military forces. 

The Truth Commission hadn’t a clue as to what it understood Never Again to be, other than some generic, non-specific abhorrence of violence in and of itself, but not of the system and circumstances that gave rise to the bloodbath.

Less still to the rivers of blood that flow through the fields and furrows of the country.  The Commission absolved the state for the so-called False Positives for which the state acknowledges and accepts the figure of 6,402 victims. 

It was a state crime, acts of state terrorism, crimes as appalling as they were evident. 

As far as the Commission was concerned it was not a state policy to take youths to the countryside, dress them up as guerrillas and murder them to present them in dispatches as part of a media campaign that sought to show the state was winning the war. 

So, if it was not a state policy, when we say Never Again, are we saying that the state shouldnot commit such a crime in the future?

Or are we asking thousands of crazy soldiers not to think of putting boots on the wrong way round on the feet of young civilians that they just murdered and dressed up as a guerrillas?

In the first case, it would be something we could demand of the state, in the second case if they were really the demented actions of the soldiers, well even the state would be a victim in that case.

Even the paramilitaries sometimes say No More, rather than Never Again.  In zones where they displaced the entire population, they don’t have to continue killing anyone.  They can say No More.

With groups such as the Unión Patriótica that they decimated, or groups such as A Luchar that they finished off, they can say No More. 

There is no need to continue murdering as the dirty work has been done, or at least it got to a point in which it had achieved its aim.  If there is a need to repeat it, they will, which is why they say No More rather than Never Again. 

This juxtaposition of No More and Never Again shows the banality of the slogan now.  Is it really Never Again or do they speak of “until the next time there is a need to”?

We can see just how empty the refrain of Never Again is by looking at some examples of violence in Colombia. 

In the 90s, the levels of violence in the port of Buenaventura began, for various reasons, to dramatically rise.  The violence cannot be explained by reference to one single fact or motive. 

However, there are contributing factors and whilst I don’t wish to reduce the explanation to something simple, we can point to the privatization of the port as a key factor in the rise in violence.

In 1991, following recommendations from the World Bank, Colombia — in the context of the growing forward march of neoliberalism — privatized the ports of the country. 

In the case of Buenaventura this resulted in the loss of jobs in the port area, a reduction in salaries, both of which impacted the economies of the neighbourhoods where the workers spent their wages, generally increasing poverty in the city. 

The port workers used to be able to apply for grants for their children to study, but with the privatisation that was gone, thus reducing not only the labour market but also the possibility of escaping poverty through studying. 

Then came the plans to expand the port and the massacres such as Punta del Este, amongst others, to clear out those who lived where they were going to construct the new port zones.(5) 

So when we say Never Again, it is clear that they don’t want the youths of the city to be killed, if they see another alternative, but does Never Again include the plans to privatise and expand the port?

Or we could look at the violence in the mining areas of the country, such as Southern Bolívar (gold) or Cesar and La Guajira (coal). 

Once again, we see the hand of the grey men, the banal ones from the World Bank, the IMF or state bodies who like Eichmann never directly killed anyone but rather moved pieces of paper around knowing what the consequences were of those bureaucratic procedures in which they took part and knowing that the new realities they sought to impose required a high dosage of violence.

In the 1980s, the WB had been promoting the expansion of mining in Latin America, the abolition of restrictions on foreign investment, the exporting of capital etc. 

In the case of Colombia, it didn’t need to do that much, the national bourgeoisie did the dirty work, without even a nod and a wink from the grey men at the WB.  A key figure in all of this was Ernesto Samper, the head honcho in the country between 1994 and 1998. 

It is worth bearing in mind that this satrap likes to present himself as a human rights defender, when it was his government that legalised the paramilitaries and is now one of the fiercest defenders of the current government of Gustavo Petro. 

Not only was he the president of the country from 1994 to 1998, he was the owner of various mining companies. 

He tried to introduce a new mining code but it was overturned by the Constitutional Court.  In 1998, another satrap and mining businessman, Andrés Pastrana, took over as president and implemented a new mining code, which is currently in force.(6)

During this whole process, the massacres in Southern Bolivar and other mining regions of the country intensified, whilst the paramilitaries tried to take these zones for the multinationals.  In the case of Southern Bolivar they were very explicit about it. 

After the murder of the leader Juan Camacho Herrera they played football with this head, placing it on a stake facing the mines, declaring that they had come to hand over the mineral resources to other people, who would, according to them, make a more rational use of them. 

So, when we say Never Again, does it mean Never Again to the national and international plans to take control of mineral resources? Or do they just mean that they are not going to play football with the heads of those who oppose these plans?

Nowadays the discussion in Colombia centres round the question of violence as something alien to the economic projects and they talk about the individuals. 

The slogan is to stop the war, but only a few say stop the plans of the WB, the IMF, the imperialist powers such as the USA and Europe.  When the president of the Truth Commission spoke to the UN he stated:

We have come to understand that the solution to the armed conflict is through respecting each person as an equal and we should respect each indigenous and afrocolombian child with the same commitment that we show to presidents, the wealthy, the powerful, and personalities, military generals. 

That all personality cults end and we love and respect each other as people entitled to the same dignity.  And that in Colombia and the world over all of us contribute to promoting a new sense of ethics based on human dignity and that all the spiritual traditions lend their support to this.(7)

Pass the joint round, take out the guitar, sing Kumbaya and kiss each other. In his speeches and the Commission’s report, the economic model is not questioned, in fact through the terms of reference they restricted the researchers and even banned them from dealing with certain issues.

Issues such as the role of the banks, the institutions and even the role of the USA in the conflict, which was reduced to isolated comments lacking in depth.  So Never Again means never again showing disrespect to someone and that we not seek recourse in violence to solve differences.

But that violence is not fortuitous and the bullets, the machetes, the chainsaws [common weapons in massacres] are used when the first victim of the economic plans refuses to submit.  So, Never Again has become: accept the established order and its plans! 

A Never Again to violence that says little about structural violence is an exhortation to surrender and is a Never Again until such time as it is necessary to resort to violence to impose the will the of the capitalist class.  Never Again for the moment, just like in Gaza.

End.

Notes

(1)  Castillejo, A. (2024) Enseñar después de Gaza?: La indiferencia perpetua la barbarie. Revisa Raya Mayo 16, 2024. https://revistaraya.com/ensenar-despues-de-gaza-la-indiferencia-perpetua-la-barbarie

(2)  Although the Never Again project changed since its foundation in 1995 in terms of participants and leadership, some of the reports are available on the site https://nuncamas.movimientodevictimas.org

(3)  See Guatemala Nunca Más https://www.odhag.org.gt/publicaciones/remhi-guatemala-nunca-mas/

(4)  See Informe “Nunca Más” http://www.derechoshumanos.net/lesahumanidad/informes/argentina/informe-de-la-CONADEP-Nunca-mas.htm

(5)  See chapter Los Puertos: Importando el Terror, Ó Loingsigh, G. (2013) La Reconquista del Pacífico: Invasión, Inversión, Impunidad. PCN. Bogotá. https://www.academia.edu/23970346/La_reconquista_del_Pacífico

(6)  Ó Loingsigh, G. (2003) La Estrategia Integral del Paramilitarismo en el Magdalena Medio. Organizaciones Sociales. España. https://www.academia.edu/96631813/LA_ESTRATEGIA_INTEGRAL_DEL_PARAMILITARISMO_EN_EL_MAGDALENA_MEDIO_DE_COLOMBIA

(7)  Speech by Francisco de Roux to the UN
https://www.comisiondelaverdad.co/palabras-de-francisco-de-roux-ante-el-consejo-de-seguridad-de-la-onu

Colombia: The murder of Narciso Beleño

On By rebelbreezeIn America Latina, Análises Político, Capitalism, Colombia, Current Affairs Comment, Human Rights, Latin America, Political Analysis, Workers' StrugglesLeave a comment

Gearóid Ó Loingsigh

26 April 2024 (Reading time: 3 mins.)


Narciso Beleño

On the 21st of April as he reached his house paramilitaries murdered Narciso Beleño, the leader in Southern Bolívar, Colombia, just two years after the murder of two other leaders Teo Acuña and Jorge Tafur.

I knew Narciso Beleño. Our paths crossed many times, on occasion on literal paths in the countryside as Narciso travelled the country in his struggle to defend rural communities in Colombia.

But I don’t want to talk too much about Narciso, the person, as there are others who can pay greater tribute to him in that regard, though his name always made me curious: Narciso (Narcissus).

Narcissus was a figure in Greek/Roman mythology who as a punishment from the gods fell in love with his own reflection. It is where we get the word narcissist from. But unlike the Greek/Roman figure, our Narciso was kind, caring, generous and selfless.

There are thousands of people, whole communities that can testify to his qualities as a person, a fighter and a leader.

When he was murdered the President, Gustavo Petro tweeted that “we failed Narciso”. But who failed Narciso? The communities? His comrades in Fedeagromisbol? Or were they the youths from the Front Line who are still in jail? Tell us who! A generic “We doesn’t do it, it is a lie.”

He should explain who failed him, how and why and Petro should also tell us what he intends to do prevent there being more murders of leaders.

Once upon a time we never doubted to putting a name and surname to the matter. We didn’t hesitate in naming the company, the board of directors, the landlord, the local politician. Sometimes we even ran the risk of putting a name and military rank to the affair.

A long time ago a gradual process began whereby some stopped naming them. And now under the Petro government it is not thought well to name them. Once upon a time we all named Fedegan, the cattle ranchers’ association, as backing the paramilitaries.

The Fedegan functionaries even acknowledged this. Now one of the representatives of that association, which is currently involved in refounding paramilitary structures, represents the State in the dialogues with the ELN.

Once upon a time we named the mining companies that have been trying for decades to take control of the gold in Southern Bolivar and other regions. It is worth remembering that Narciso travelled the country. More than one mining company had it in for him.

In Science Fiction and Fantasy novels, evil and magic lose their power over mortals when they are named by their real name and so the best kept secret is their real name. In real life something similar happens. Paramilitaries as something dark, shadowy and hidden defeats us.

When we name those behind this black magic with their real names, it begins to lose its power over us. They are not unknown to us. We withdraw cash from their ATMs every day, we purchase their services, we drink their products, we work in their companies and the odd eejit votes for them.

No company will say, “buy my product we are the murderers of social leaders” or “vote for me, I have murdered thousands.” They hide this for a reason and for that same reason we should expose their dark souls to the light of day.

The best tribute Petro can pay is to explain who failed and name the murderers just like he used to do before he was President. They are the usual suspects. Petro likes to say he governs but does not have power.

Well, tell us who holds that power that he don’t have, with names and surnames, economic group, foreign company. If we all failed, then nobody failed, if he was murdered by those who cannot be named, then nobody murdered him.

We usen’t to hesitate in talking about paramilitaries, the economic and political interests and reasons behind their actions. We named the business associations, the megaprojects in each region, we proved it.

Some sought justice in international tribunals, others in Russell style tribunals of opinion. We have to pay tribute to Narciso and other victims of the paramilitaries and name the murderers. Uribe tried to fool us with the Bacrim (Criminal Gang) euphemism. Neither Gulf Clan or anything else.

The same ones who disappeared Edgar Quiroga and Gildardo Fuentes in 1999 (in Southern Bolívar) murdered Narciso 25 years later. Say it loud and clear, Mr. President.

Hasta siempre Narciso!