May 29, 2006

Uribe Victory Likely to Lead to Increased Repression

by Garry Leech

Congratulations to President Alvaro Uribe, the clear victor in Colombia’s election after garnering an impressive 62 percent of the vote. The election left no doubt that the majority of voting Colombians support Uribe and his Democratic Security Strategy, a fact that the Left both inside and outside of Colombia are going to have to accept. However, 62 percent of the vote does not constitute a mandate to violate the human rights of the political opposition and others critical of the government’s security and economic policies. For those Colombians on the Left, the struggle over the next four years will consist of consolidating recent electoral gains while defending themselves against a likely-intensification of government repression.

While many will claim that 62 percent of the vote constitutes a mandate for Uribe, the reality is that only 28 percent of eligible voters cast a ballot in favor of the president. Voter turnout was estimated to be 45 percent, about the same as four years ago and low even by Colombian standards. Consequently, Uribe only received the votes of 62 percent of those Colombians who bothered to cast a ballot. The low voter turnout was even more disturbing this time around given that the country’s guerrillas kept their promise not to disrupt the election. While authorities have traditionally blamed low turnouts on the country’s violence and rebel attempts to prevent voters from going to the polls, the only explanation for the latest low turnout is widespread apathy towards the country’s political process.

Nevertheless, Uribe clearly proved victorious at the polls and, despite the many flaws with Colombia’s electoral process—including coercion of voters by right-wing paramilitaries and threats against the leftist Democratic Pole—it is evident that a significant portion, although not necessarily a majority, of the Colombian population supports the president. Consequently, if we on the Left insist on repeatedly pointing to Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez’s electoral successes as proof of his popularity—although clearly Venezuela’s electoral process is nowhere near as flawed as Colombia’s—then we should accept the fact that Uribe maintains significant levels of popularity among Colombians. This does not mean, however, that those opposed to Uribe have to accept his policies, particularly when they involve repression against certain sectors of the Colombian population.

Many Colombians voted in support of an agenda that has improved security for them, ignoring the fact that the wealth being generated by the country’s booming economy is not trickling down to the poor majority and those critical of the government’s policies have been victims of state repression, including murders, disappearances, displacements and arbitrary arrests. Because of Colombia’s long-running civil conflict, for those who have not been targeted by the government’s repression, security trumped all other concerns when it came to deciding whom to elect president.

Uribe’s electoral majority, however, does not give him a green light to continue or intensify the repression against his critics. Colombia claims to be a constitutional democracy and, as such, it is not governed by simple majority rule. In other words, Uribe is expected to govern within the confines of the country’s Constitution, which demands that he respect and protect the rights of every citizen, not just those supportive of his project.

The fact that Uribe failed to do this during his first term was a significant contributing factor to leftist presidential candidate Carlos Gaviria of the Democratic Pole garnering an unprecedented 22 percent of the vote. While they constitute an electoral minority, Gaviria’s backers represent those Colombians who have been victimized under Uribe’s repressive regime. And now, their greatest fear is that Uribe’s electoral success will lead to an intensification of the repression that has been carried out in the name of security and economic growth.

Uribe represents the modern-day democratic authoritarian version of Chile’s Cold War military dictator Augusto Pinochet. During the 1970s and 1980s, a significant portion of the Chilean people supported Pinochet’s authoritarian policies that prioritized security and economic growth over the defense of human rights. And while Pinochet perfected the art of “disappearing” those critical of his government, the number of Colombians that were “disappeared” during Uribe’s first term exceeds the total number of Chileans that vanished during the 17-year military dictatorship.

But events presently unfolding in Chile show many Chileans now believe that gross violations of human rights cannot be justified by the desire to achieve security and economic growth. It is this same belief that drives those struggling for social justice in Colombia to continue their work to ensure that the constitutional and human rights of all Colombians are respected and protected. And it is even more important than ever that those throughout the world working in solidarity with these brave Colombians intensify their efforts to hold Uribe accountable for his abuses. Hopefully, unlike in Chile, it won’t take over 20 years.

Back to Top . Comments