|
March 3, 2008
Colombia Assassinates FARC Commander Raúl
Reyes
by Justin Podur
The second-in-command of Colombia’s largest guerrilla group—the
Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC)—Luis Édgar
Devia Silva, better known by his nom de guerre “Raúl
Reyes,” was killed by the Colombian military in an air strike
on March 1. The Colombian military killed 16 guerrillas in the operation,
according to their own reports, in addition to Raúl Reyes,
the rebel group’s most visible spokesperson. The reports suggest
that it was an assassination carried out in Ecuadorian territory,
the type of assassination that the Israelis have committed in recent
decades and are most recently accused of committing against Hizbollah
commander Imad Mughniyeh. Indeed, Venezuela’s President Hugo
Chávez noted the similarity, asking if Colombia was going
to become the Israel of the Americas.
According
to El Tiempo, Colombia’s national newspaper: “Reyes
was killed in an intelligence operation that included the Army and
Air Force, which intercepted a satellite phone call from the guerrilla
chief, in recent hours that made it possible to find his exact location.”
The Ecuadorian army retrieved the bodies left behind by Colombian
troops that had crossed the border to collect Reyes’s corpse
and those of other FARC officers.
Ecuador has recalled its ambassador from Colombia and Venezuela
has closed its embassy in Bogotá in response to the attack.
The two nations are also deploying troops to their borders with
Colombia. “We do not want war, but we will not permit the
Empire or its puppy, President Uribe, to weaken us,” declared
Chávez. “It is very serious that a country arrogates
to itself the right to bomb the territory of a neighbour and commit
an incursion to take bodies, violating many international laws.
Think of the consequences, not just for Colombia, but for your neighbours.”
Chávez also said that the killing did not result from combat;
that it was a “cowardly murder” and that Reyes was a
“good revolutionary.”
The Venezuelan government’s official communication noted
that the assassination was “a very hard blow against the humanitarian
accord and the possibility of negotiations, revealing the irresponsibility
of those who privilege the military option and escalate the armed
conflict, making more difficult political and negotiated solutions,
without regard for the consequences.” The assassination was,
literally, the Colombian government’s answer to the FARC’s
second unilateral release of four former Congresspeople that it
had held captive, a humanitarian gesture coordinated with the Venezueln
government.
There are numerous parallels between the Colombian government’s
assassination of Reyes and Israel. First, the tactic of high-tech,
long-distance assassination of high-profile leaders. Second, the
killing of dozens of others around the target that are considered
“collateral damage.” Third, the use of such assassinations
to undermine the possibilities for dialogue and negotiated solutions.
The US-Israeli approach in the Middle East, from the invasion of
Iraq in 2003 to the invasion of Lebanon in 2006 and the ongoing
massacres in Gaza, has been to commit atrocities and acts of violence
and, using their superior militaries, exploit the political and
military opportunities that arise—this is a military counterpart
of what Naomi Klein calls “the shock doctrine.” Even
when these tactics have backfired politically or strained military
resources, these violent approaches have cost their victims much
more than their authors, who continue to have reason to believe
that more violence can work.
One of the political opportunities that Israel counts on after
it commits an assassination is some random act of violence by the
Palestinian armed groups, which it can then exploit, calling the
Palestinians terrorists. With this latest attack, the Colombian
government has told the FARC that if it unilaterally releases kidnap
victims, the response will be the assassination of its commanders.
How should those who believe that the only solution to the conflict
is a political solution respond?
It would be a major improvement in world affairs, particularly
in the Middle East, but perhaps increasingly in the Americas as
well, if assassination was not viewed as an acceptable instrument
of policy. As it is, the best short-term hope for the region is
if there is an outpouring of official and popular disgust throughout
the Americas at Uribe’s regime—and those who call the
shots for that regime—for what it has done.
Justin
Podur is a Toronto-based writer who focuses on Latin America and
the Caribbean. A
different version of this article appeared on www.venezuelanalysis.org
Back to Top .
Comments
The
views expressed in this article are that of the author
and may not reflect the views of Colombia Journal.
Copyright © 2000-2008 Colombia Journal. All rights
reserved.
|
|