Colombia's Narcoterrorists
Cdoroc
South Vietnam had a pupet government and a significant guerrilla insurgency
dedicated to the overthrow of the government. Whereas the Colombian
governement is a democratically elected government (albeit corrupt) which is
fighting essentially a criminal organization and this organization has
demonstrated that it really doesn't want the conflict to end. Moreover, the
Vietcong were true nationalist, whereas both FARC & ELN are primarily
interested in monetary gain through kidnapping, extortion and protection for
narcos-to the yearly tune of $500,000,000 US dollars (this is conservative
estimate). Did you know? FARC and ELN have been around since the 1960s and
from the 1960s to 1990 they were unable to field more then 7 to 8,000 troops,
yet now in 1999 they have an estimated 20,000. (this number is less then 1% of
the entire population, thus your characterization of a popular support for the
guerrillas is untrue) Why is this the case-what has changed? Well it boils
down to narco dollars. After the large cartels were dismantled around 1991-93,
the guerrillas were able to extort money for protection from the much smaller
and less powerful cartels. Thus, the only reason the guerrillas are able to
deploy 20,000 is because they can pay the peasants to fight.
Check this out: FARC has a yearly income of $500,000,000 plus., They pay their
20,000 troops approximately $350.00 a month. This equates to a monthly bill of
$7,000,000 for salaries. Thus yearly they pay roughly $84,000,000 in salaries.
Lets say they pay out double that figure in logistics and other expenses-
$168,000,000 + $84,000,000 = $252,000,000. In sum-by conservative
estimates-the guerrillas are in the black for $250,000,000 a year. Where is
this money going? It certainly isn't going to the areas where they have
control. In fact, these areas are loosing jobs because businesses have moved
out. Somebody within the guerrilla power elite is pocketing BIG
BUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!
Moreover, why has FARC renegged on allowing foreign observers in the
de-militarized zone. Could it possibly be that they don't want people to know
whats going on. Since they took control in January, they have executed
numerous civilians-they have characterized them as paramilitaries-and they have
even gone so far as to threaten priests who oppose the forced conscription of
young civilians into the guerrilla army.
JUST A FEW THOUGHTS.
Chao
Paul Wolf
Cdoroc wrote:
> Did you know? FARC and ELN have been around since the 1960s and
> from the 1960s to 1990 they were unable to field more then 7 to 8,000 troops,
> yet now in 1999 they have an estimated 20,000. (this number is less then 1% of
> the entire population, thus your characterization of a popular support for the
> guerrillas is untrue)
Yet their supporters number in the millions. One million people participated
in the general strike last week, as Ralph McGehee reported. That's a lot of
people, considering that 72 labor leaders have been assassinated since Pastrana
took office last summer. Participating in a strike is dangerous thing to do
in Colombia.
The counterinsurgency war has been directed at the guerrilla supporters, the
people who sell them food and so forth. The rebels are able to travel the
countryside, living in the jungle, and replenish their supplies anywhere in
the eastern half of the country.
Note that surveys reported in the Colombian media only report the opinions of
the city dwellers - the campesinos living in the jungles do not have telephones
and are not surveyed. You will find that polls do not show much support for
the rebels, among city dwellers.
Why is this the case-what has changed? Well it boils
> down to narco dollars. After the large cartels were dismantled around 1991-93,
> the guerrillas were able to extort money for protection from the much smaller
> and less powerful cartels.
I think you are exaggerating the degree to which FARC is involved in the coca
trade. Coca leaves go for about $2 a kilo in Colombia. So a coca grower might
earn $1000 in a season. At this stage in the drug trade, there isn't much money
to be made. Coca is not difficult to refine into basuco, gasoline and cement
are the chemicals used. I expect that this is done locally by growers.
This refined product is converted to cocaine in a more difficult process. I
think that the cartels probably do that, since it requires watchlisted reagents.
Further, the FARC do not have the business connections to transport the cocaine
internationally. All the money is made at this stage, and the final product
sells for $20,000 a kilo or so in the US - a 10,000 fold increase in value over
the price the campesinos get for their coca leaves.
So although there is a lot of money to be made in the cocaine business, I doubt
the FARC is getting much of it. They are getting a percentage (10% ?) of the $2
a kilo price that the coca leaves are worth in the Colombian jungle.
The DEA denies that the FARC are drug traffickers. Donnie Marshall, Chief
Administrator of the DEA, testified in late July to the House Subcommittee on
Crime and Drugs that, "There is no doubt that these groups are associated with
drug traffickers, providing protection or extorting money from them. But from
the point of view of the DEA, we judge the FARC from the perspective of
enforcing
the law. And at the moment we haven't come close to the conclusion that this
group has been involved as a drug trafficking organization."
This quote is online in Spanish at http://www.eltiempo.com/hoy/ppg_n001tn0.html
President Pastrana, who is at war with the FARC, said to El Clarin (7/29/99)
of Argentina that "There is no evidence at the moment that the FARC are drug
traffickers. They do charge the 'narcos' a toll. But the FARC have always said
they are interested in eradicating illegal crops."
> They pay their 20,000 troops approximately $350.00 a month.
Where do you get this number? I do not believe it. The media reports I've
read (and will post if you like) claim that the FARC is mostly made up of
teenagers. FARC recruits children, many orphaned by the war. When they are
old enough, they are given weapons.
You want to portray the 30 year old insurgency as a recent phenomenon,
mercenaries
hired by drug cartels to protect their business, but this conflict has a long
history, and it is fueled by revenge, not cocaine. Many of the child-soldiers
of the FARC have had their parents killed by paramilitaries, and they will
probably die the same way, trying to avenge their parents' deaths. There are
plenty of articles by reporters who have interviewed FARC members, they all
tell the same story.
>In sum-by conservative
>estimates-the guerrillas are in the black for $250,000,000 a year. Where is
>this money going? It certainly isn't going to the areas where they have
>control. In fact, these areas are loosing jobs because businesses have moved
>out. Somebody within the guerrilla power elite is pocketing BIG
>BUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!
You claim, without any proof whatsoever, that the FARC is making huge amounts
of money from the cocaine trade, and then, because there is no evidence that
they have spent this money on anything, you conclude that the FARC leaders
have embezzled all the money. This is an absolutely ridiculous argument.
Note that the FARC is very poorly equipped. One of their main weapons is
the propane cylinder, which is commonly used for cooking gas. They somehow
modify them into uncontrollable missiles.
Other weapons they have were stolen in their raids on police barracks, and
the rest, as you say, they buy on the black market. Esmeraldas in Ecuador
is said to be an arms trading city, and the border is porous. Yes, they
are earning the money to buy those weapons somehow, but I disagree that they
are spending hundreds of millions of dollars on them. The FARC's threat
has been greatly exaggerated, lately by General McCaffrey. I don't see
any evidence they are stronger this year than they were last year, when
they attacked Miraflores.
> Moreover, why has FARC renegged on allowing foreign observers in the
> de-militarized zone.
I don't understand why FARC is so adamant about this, and I can only conclude
that they are using it as an excuse to continue their hostilities.
They don't seem to believe they can accomplish their goals at the negotiating
table. The formation of the despeje was not one of their goals, by the way.
They want radical redistribution of land and socialization of resources like
oil. Pastrana can't give them that.
Pastrana has made some efforts to discourage military collaboration with para-
militaries, one of the rebels' main demands, but he doesn't appear to have
very much control over what the army does.
General Uscategui just escaped a civilian trial over the massacre at Mapiripan,
and I doubt he will be punished. The massacres of 28 people in four departments
two weeks ago were supported by Marine Battalion number three and troops of the
First Army Brigade, according to FARC. A FARC attack on paramilitary leader
Carlos Castano's headquarters was repelled by the Colombian military (with US
logistical support). I believe that the paramilitary strategy is one of the
main reasons the rebels are fighting - it begets more revenge.
Lastly, the fates of the members of the Union Partiotica stand as a lesson to
the FARC, that if they do not achieve total victory, they will eventually be
assassinated, after their peace deal is made. I think this is foremost in the
minds of the FARC, and the main reason they are reluctant to negotiate.
>Could it possibly be that they don't want people to know
> whats going on. Since they took control in January, they have executed
> numerous civilians-they have characterized them as paramilitaries-and they have
> even gone so far as to threaten priests who oppose the forced conscription of
> young civilians into the guerrilla army.
I believe that the number of people executed in the incident you refer to is 8.
Why do you emphasize this, when dozens of non-combatants are killed every week
in Colombia? I don't condone FARC's extrajudicial executions, but they are
totally overshadowed by more than a thousand executions committed by the para-
militaries this year, with the tacit, and sometimes overt support of the
Colombian military.
Priests are very much active in Colombian politics, normally they tend to side
with the left. Father Giraldo is on a blacklist and is in exile. FARC's
recruitment of children is a violation of international humanitarian law,
and should be condemned.
That's a rebuttal to your argument that the FARC are narcoterrorists, nothing
more than paid mercenaries of drug cartels. (which cartels, by the way, do you
refer to?) As Ralph said, the same mistake was made in underestimating popular
support for the communist revolutionaries in Viet Nam. With the end of the cold
war, we should be strong enough as a country to openly discuss our foreign
policy - if we're going to fight the communists, then we're going to fight the
communists, let's just say so. Anyone advocating democracy abroad should also
advocate it at home.
H.G.
It would better if you get more information about the Coca process.
U$2 kilo of coca leves -- DO YOU KNOW how many kilos of Coca leaves is
needed to generate a kilo of basic Cocaine ?.
Do you know the basic process to get the first oil from the leaves ?.
Why do you say :: Gasoline and Cement ?. Can you describe their use ?.
Are you sure is Gasoline and Cement ?.
Do you know how to get the powder ?. And types ?.
The 10,000 fold is UNREAL --
Do you know the price of Cocaine ( kilo) ?.
Do you know the price of Crack ( kilo) ?>
Do you know the other prices ?.
>Yet their supporters number in the millions. One million people
participated
>in the general strike last week, as Ralph McGehee reported.
Supporting what and whom ?.
Do you really know the reasons for the STRIKE ?.
H.G.
Do you know the other prices ?.
Paul Wolf wrote in message <37D3FE4F...@mindspring.com>...
Paul Wolf
"H.G." wrote:
> U$2 kilo of coca leves -- DO YOU KNOW how many kilos of Coca leaves is
> needed to generate a kilo of basic Cocaine ?.
No - let's say it's 100 to one. Divide 10,000 by 100 to get 100. Is this
a better number? It does not change my argument. My point was that the
coca leaves are not worth very much - $2 a kilo. So there is very little
to tax. It is not on the scale of what the mafias make.
> Why do you say :: Gasoline and Cement ?. Can you describe their use ?.
I have read this in several articles, but I am not a cocaine refining expert,
I admit. I assume the gasoline is used as a solvent to extract an organic
oil, and the cement is used to precipitate a base from it. (basuco) I think
cocaine hydrochloride is a more complex chemical which requires specialized
reagents to synthesize. But as I said, I am no expert - perhaps you can
explain this better?
I even read somewhere that there was a plan to control and track the
purchase of cement in the amazon. It sounds crazy, but I didn't make it
up myself.
> Do you know the price of Cocaine ( kilo) ?.
No, the $20,000 figure was from the book Dark Alliance, by Gary Webb.
20,000 a kilo is probably a low number, since the people in the book
were major traffickers. Again, perhaps you can provide better figures.
My point was that most of the money made in the cocaine trade is not
made by the coca growers - so how could the FARC be making so much by
taxing them?
> >Yet their supporters number in the millions. One million people
> participated in the general strike last week, as Ralph McGehee reported.
>
> Supporting what and whom ?.
>
> Do you really know the reasons for the STRIKE ?.
The people supporting the strike do not necessarily support a violent
revolution. They were protesting Pastrana's proposed budget plan. OK,
that's a good point.
According to Jared Kotler of the Associated Press:
"Their demands include an end to human rights abuses, a public-debt moratorium
and the breaking-off of negotiations for a $3 billion line of credit from the
International Monetary Fund."
There is a spectrum, from the labor movement, through the Colombian Communist
Party, to the violent FARC, ELN, and EPL. You are correct that not all of
them support violence. However, it is wrong to say that the FARC are acting
as mercenaries for drug traffickers and have no popular support. There is an
enormous, unhappy, populist movement in Colombia, and also in Ecuador, by the
way.
For example, the Colombian Communist Party is not the FARC. Here is a quote
from one of their communiques, entitled, Colombia: A date with history
> No anti-imperialist can remain neutral or indifferent in the face of
> this confrontation of international dimensions on the part of
> international reaction. Colombia is a date with history for all the
> anti-fascists and anti-imperialists throughout the world.
>
> Effective solidarity with the working people of Colombia!
>
> Honour and Glory to the best sons and daughters of Colombia: those who
> are setting an example to the whole of humanity with their struggle and
> sacrifice!
>
> Death to imperialism!
H.G.
The point is that YOU USED faulty data trying to give a "point" and from the
beginning you made a big mistake.
Lets say that you need a lot more than 100 kilos of leaves to get a kilo of
base.
The rest about materials is not worthy to comment, but you are basically
wrong.
H.G.
Paul Wolf wrote in message <37D433DB...@mindspring.com>...
>
>
>"H.G." wrote:
>
>> U$2 kilo of coca leves -- DO YOU KNOW how many kilos of Coca leaves is
>> needed to generate a kilo of basic Cocaine ?.
>
>No - let's say it's 100 to one. Divide 10,000 by 100 to get 100. Is this
>a better number? It does not change my argument. My point was that the
>coca leaves are not worth very much - $2 a kilo. So there is very little
>to tax. It is not on the scale of what the mafias make.
>
>
>> Why do you say :: Gasoline and Cement ?. Can you describe their use ?.
>
>I have read this in several articles, but I am not a cocaine refining
expert,
>I admit. I assume the gasoline is used as a solvent to extract an organic
>oil, and the cement is used to precipitate a base from it. (basuco) I think
>cocaine hydrochloride is a more complex chemical which requires specialized
>reagents to synthesize. But as I said, I am no expert - perhaps you can
>explain this better?
>
>I even read somewhere that there was a plan to control and track the
>purchase of cement in the amazon. It sounds crazy, but I didn't make it
>up myself.
>
>
>> Do you know the price of Cocaine ( kilo) ?.
>
>No, the $20,000 figure was from the book Dark Alliance, by Gary Webb.
>20,000 a kilo is probably a low number, since the people in the book
>were major traffickers. Again, perhaps you can provide better figures.
>My point was that most of the money made in the cocaine trade is not
>made by the coca growers - so how could the FARC be making so much by
>taxing them?
>
>
>> >Yet their supporters number in the millions. One million people
>> participated in the general strike last week, as Ralph McGehee reported.
>>
>> Supporting what and whom ?.
>>
>> Do you really know the reasons for the STRIKE ?.
>
>
Carlos Th
[parts snipped]
> Yet their supporters number in the millions. One million people
> participated in the general strike last week, as Ralph McGehee
> reported. That's a lot of people, considering that 72 labor leaders
> have been assassinated since Pastrana took office last summer.
> Participating in a strike is dangerous thing to do in Colombia.
As someone said: there are lies and there are statistics. Last strike
people stayed home for one of several reasons:
a) They supported the strike.
b) They fund no way to get to workplace (public transportation striked
too)
c) They where afraid to go to workplace (there where rumours that
Guerrilla where planing some raids that date) (many transporters didn't
support the strike but left the buses stopped)
d) They decide not to go and excuse in the lack of transportation or any
other strike related thing.
[...]
> The DEA denies that the FARC are drug traffickers. Donnie Marshall,
> Chief Administrator of the DEA, testified in late July to the House
> Subcommittee on Crime and Drugs that, "There is no doubt that these
> groups are associated with drug traffickers, providing protection or
> extorting money from them. But from the point of view of the DEA, we
> judge the FARC from the perspective of enforcing the law. And at the
> moment we haven't come close to the conclusion that this group has
> been involved as a drug trafficking organization."
[...]
> President Pastrana, who is at war with the FARC, said to El Clarin
> (7/29/99) of Argentina that "There is no evidence at the moment that
> the FARC are drug traffickers. They do charge the 'narcos' a toll. But
> the FARC have always said they are interested in eradicating illegal
> crops."
About Pastrana it is likely that the statment was meaned not to mess the
negociation process with the FARC guerrillas. Curiously, DEA statment
were pronounced about the same time than Pastrana's and after a visit of
Barry McAffry(spelling?) to Colombia.
> > They pay their 20,000 troops approximately $350.00 a month.
>
> Where do you get this number? I do not believe it. The media reports
> I've read (and will post if you like) claim that the FARC is mostly
> made up of teenagers. FARC recruits children, many orphaned by the
> war. When they are old enough, they are given weapons.
>
> You want to portray the 30 year old insurgency as a recent phenomenon,
> mercenaries hired by drug cartels to protect their business, but this
> conflict has a long history, and it is fueled by revenge, not
> cocaine. Many of the child-soldiers of the FARC have had their
> parents killed by paramilitaries, and they will probably die the same
> way, trying to avenge their parents' deaths. There are plenty of
> articles by reporters who have interviewed FARC members, they all
> tell the same story.
I guess there is a little propaganda here. Many combatant are either
not orphan when they came to the gerrilla or where the same guerrilla
the one killing their parents. Paramilitaries are not the kind of
charity people who just kill the parents and respect the live of the
children, nor are paramilitaries the main target of guerrilla atacts.
And many combatant in both the guerrilla, the paramilitaries and in the
regular army are there as a job. They are paid, and not just fed and
shaltered.
[...]
There are many people that say that FARC are just criminals, dealing
with drugs and kidnapping just for profit. I don't buy this theory
either. Causes are more complex than that. In my country war has
become a way of living for many people, there are complex threads and
patterns of revenge, social fight, economic interestes... etc.
Another simplifacation is either telling paramilitaries are a wing of
the military or that they are completely unrelated groups.
Paramilitaries has the same origen FARC had: selfdefence groups. The
civil war called as 'la violencia' in the fifties triggered that country
dweller armed themselves against the state, represented by landlords and
politicians.
When guerrillas begun kidnapping the families of drugdealers, the MAS
was formed. They were one of the first palamiritary groups of this war
and where not supported by the army.
And agreement between M-19 guerrilla and the Medellin Cartel (MAS
founder) where revealed soon after the death of Carlos Pizarro
Leon-Gomez. Many people have found curious how all magisters that
supported extradition died when M-19 took the Suprem Court Building in
1984.
First time the name narco-guerrilla was used were when some labs where
discoverd by antinarcotic police, they wanted the support of the army
and then they told the armie that the labs where surviled by guerrilla.
This was in the middle eighties.
FARC might have said they want to replace illegal crops, but FARC has
prevent that guvernamental programs like Plante succed, and they even
sided with coca growers in some marchs last administration.
Well. Things are not simple.
--
================================O=O=====
Chlewey Thompin
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/9028
----------------------------------------
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Paul Wolf
> > The DEA denies that the FARC are drug traffickers.
Curiously, DEA statment
> were pronounced about the same time than Pastrana's and after a visit of
> Barry McAffry(spelling?) to Colombia. [McCaffrey]
Actually, I am not completely sure about the DEA quote any more. The
testimony referred to by El Tiempo appears to be online at:
http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/cngrtest/ct072999.htm
but it says nothing about the Farc at all. I have written to the editors
of El Tiempo about this, but did not receive a reply. It is possible that
the story is not true - because no other newspapers reported this, and it
should have been news.
Many of the child-soldiers of the FARC have had their
> > parents killed by paramilitaries, and they will probably die the same
> > way, trying to avenge their parents' deaths. There are plenty of
> > articles by reporters who have interviewed FARC members, they all
> > tell the same story.
>
> I guess there is a little propaganda here. Many combatant are either
> not orphan when they came to the gerrilla or where the same guerrilla
> the one killing their parents. Paramilitaries are not the kind of
> charity people who just kill the parents and respect the live of the
> children, nor are paramilitaries the main target of guerrilla atacts.
>
> And many combatant in both the guerrilla, the paramilitaries and in the
> regular army are there as a job. They are paid, and not just fed and
> shaltered.
I will post some articles which support my statement. The sources include
a representative of the UN, the UNICEF-backed Children for Peace, and
Colombian ngo's like the Council on Human Rights and Displacement (CODHES).
I have seen other articles besides the three I will post, and they all
say that Farc has a large percentage of children. These are firsthand
reports by American reporters who travelled with Farc units. Human
Rights Watch makes similar claims, that the Farc recruits children.
Farc denies this, of course.
How do you know how much the Farc soldiers are paid? What source can
you name? Please don't run away from the question like Senior "HG" does.
> Another simplifacation is either telling paramilitaries are a wing of
> the military or that they are completely unrelated groups.
Whatever complex relationships exist, and whatever the history, today
the army supports the paramilitaries, from the highest level. Officers
have total immunity from prosecution - the fuero militar - military
justice. Only the smallest fish in the food chain have been punished,
for symbolic reasons only. I will post one or two recent articles, to
remind you of specific things which have happened in the last few months.
But the pattern is at least ten years old.
> When guerrillas begun kidnapping the families of drugdealers, the MAS
> was formed. They were one of the first palamiritary groups of this war
> and where not supported by the army.
>
> And agreement between M-19 guerrilla and the Medellin Cartel (MAS
> founder) where revealed soon after the death of Carlos Pizarro
> Leon-Gomez. Many people have found curious how all magisters that
> supported extradition died when M-19 took the Suprem Court Building in
> 1984.
>
> First time the name narco-guerrilla was used were when some labs where
> discoverd by antinarcotic police, they wanted the support of the army
> and then they told the armie that the labs where surviled by guerrilla.
> This was in the middle eighties.
Thanks for posting this. No one seems to know that Pablo Escobar and the
extraditables at one time controlled the paramilitares in the Magdelena
Media region - Castano has a million dollar price on his head from the DEA.
But we have chosen these murdering drug dealers as our allies in the conflict.
Also, don't forget about the convivir system - the government sponsored a
system of paramilitaries, and intelligence networks, such as the Barrancabermeja
navy intelligence network, all set up with the help of the CIA and directed by
CIA asset Ivan Ramirez Quintero.
Yes, the story is very complicated. Thanks for your comments.
Paul
Carlos Th
paul...@icdc.com wrote:
[...]
> How do you know how much the Farc soldiers are paid? What source can
> you name? Please don't run away from the question like Senior "HG"
> does.
Source is confidential and probably not too reliable after is direct
party.
[...]
> Also, don't forget about the convivir system - the government
> sponsored a system of paramilitaries, and intelligence networks, such
> as the Barrancabermeja navy intelligence network, all set up with the
> help of the CIA and directed by CIA asset Ivan Ramirez Quintero.
Actually I think Convivir are not that evil. At least the idea
behind. The idea was based on copying in the countryside what already
exist in the cities: private security. Nobody will call the guardian
of a building as "paramilitary", yet many of them are armed and would
reject an atact. Well, copying those private security system with
legal organization surviled by public control organizations like
Procuraduría and Fiscalía... Well, I was listening this morning a
debate between representant and former M-19 leader Antonio Navarro and
former Antioquia governour Uribe Velez who decided to implement
Convivir groups. Anyhow, Convivir are in that fuzzy line between
legitimate groups and paramilitaries, and could become just a way of
legalizing paramilitarism.
Carlos Th
> Anyhow, Convivir are in that fuzzy line between legitimate groups and
> paramilitaries, and could become just a way of legalizing
> paramilitarism.
Before being wrongly interpreted: Even if I think that Convivir could
be a good/moral thing, I'm not saying they are. And I am afraid, as
many people, that if Convivir become legal again, many paramilitary
groups will use the legal figure to keep performing killings while
having a legal face, which I will strongly disagree.
OCVGC
Cdoroc wrote:> Did you know? FARC and ELN have been around since the 1960s and
> from the 1960s to 1990 they were unable to field more then 7 to 8,000 troops,
> yet now in 1999 they have an estimated 20,000. (this number is less then 1% of
> the entire population, thus your characterization of a popular support for the
> guerrillas is untrue)Yet their supporters number in the millions. One million people participated
in the general strike last week, as Ralph McGehee reported. That's a lot of
people, considering that 72 labor leaders have been assassinated since Pastrana
took office last summer. Participating in a strike is dangerous thing to do
in Colombia.
The counterinsurgency war has been directed at the guerrilla supporters, the
people who sell them food and so forth. The rebels are able to travel the
countryside, living in the jungle, and replenish their supplies anywhere in
the eastern half of the country.
Of course guerrillas can do that! What else would you do if a group
of armed delincuents come to ask or buy food? Would you deny it to
them? The presence of the goverment is so limited there that they are almost
free to walk around.
The counterinsurgency war that you mention is the one done by the paramilitaries.
Note that surveys reported in the Colombian media only report the opinions of
the city dwellers - the campesinos living in the jungles do not have telephones
and are not surveyed. You will find that polls do not show much support for
the rebels, among city dwellers.Why is this the case-what has changed? Well it boils
> down to narco dollars. After the large cartels were dismantled around 1991-93,
> the guerrillas were able to extort money for protection from the much smaller
> and less powerful cartels.I think you are exaggerating the degree to which FARC is involved in the coca
trade. Coca leaves go for about $2 a kilo in Colombia. So a coca grower might
earn $1000 in a season. At this stage in the drug trade, there isn't much money
to be made. Coca is not difficult to refine into basuco, gasoline and cement
are the chemicals used. I expect that this is done locally by growers
This refined product is converted to cocaine in a more difficult process. I
think that the cartels probably do that, since it requires watchlisted reagents.
Further, the FARC do not have the business connections to transport the cocaine
internationally. All the money is made at this stage, and the final product
sells for $20,000 a kilo or so in the US - a 10,000 fold increase in value over
the price the campesinos get for their coca leaves.
So although there is a lot of money to be made in the cocaine business, I doubt
the FARC is getting much of it. They are getting a percentage (10% ?) of the $2
a kilo price that the coca leaves are worth in the Colombian jungle.
According to a recent article of "El Tiempo" (after the killings in Santander) the people killed were drug buyers who did not pay the fee stablished by the paramilitaries (guerrilla have a different toll). Maybe someone can help us with the right number, but as we remember the price of the toll for a kilo of coca was around 1.5 million pesos (around 800 dollars).
The DEA denies that the FARC are drug traffickers. Donnie Marshall, Chief
Administrator of the DEA, testified in late July to the House Subcommittee on
Crime and Drugs that, "There is no doubt that these groups are associated with
drug traffickers, providing protection or extorting money from them. But from
the point of view of the DEA, we judge the FARC from the perspective of
enforcing
the law. And at the moment we haven't come close to the conclusion that this
group has been involved as a drug trafficking organization."This quote is online in Spanish at http://www.eltiempo.com/hoy/ppg_n001tn0.html
President Pastrana, who is at war with the FARC, said to El Clarin (7/29/99)
of Argentina that "There is no evidence at the moment that the FARC are drug
traffickers. They do charge the 'narcos' a toll. But the FARC have always said
they are interested in eradicating illegal crops."> They pay their 20,000 troops approximately $350.00 a month.
Where do you get this number? I do not believe it. The media reports I've
read (and will post if you like) claim that the FARC is mostly made up of
teenagers. FARC recruits children, many orphaned by the war. When they are
old enough, they are given weapons.
They don't recruit, they force people to join them. If they are not orphans or the war already, they would become ones if they don't follow them. Yes, sure, old enough is 13!
You want to portray the 30 year old insurgency as a recent phenomenon,
mercenaries
hired by drug cartels to protect their business, but this conflict has a long
history, and it is fueled by revenge, not cocaine. Many of the child-soldiers
of the FARC have had their parents killed by paramilitaries, and they will
probably die the same way, trying to avenge their parents' deaths. There are
plenty of articles by reporters who have interviewed FARC members, they all
tell the same story.>In sum-by conservative
>estimates-the guerrillas are in the black for $250,000,000 a year. Where is
>this money going? It certainly isn't going to the areas where they have
>control. In fact, these areas are loosing jobs because businesses have moved
>out. Somebody within the guerrilla power elite is pocketing BIG
>BUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!You claim, without any proof whatsoever, that the FARC is making huge amounts
of money from the cocaine trade, and then, because there is no evidence that
they have spent this money on anything, you conclude that the FARC leaders
have embezzled all the money. This is an absolutely ridiculous argument.
It si not so ridiculous. According to estimates published in media around the world, guerrilla is making more than 1.2 billion dollars/year from narcotics and kidnapping. Even if they pay every guerrillero $500/month (which they don't) and spend $100 million in weapons, you have about $900 million to use around. Common guerrilleros are not the ones traveling in Europe or living abroad.
Note that the FARC is very poorly equipped. One of their main weapons is
the propane cylinder, which is commonly used for cooking gas. They somehow
modify them into uncontrollable missiles.Other weapons they have were stolen in their raids on police barracks, and
the rest, as you say, they buy on the black market. Esmeraldas in Ecuador
is said to be an arms trading city, and the border is porous. Yes, they
are earning the money to buy those weapons somehow, but I disagree that they
are spending hundreds of millions of dollars on them. The FARC's threat
has been greatly exaggerated, lately by General McCaffrey. I don't see
any evidence they are stronger this year than they were last year, when
they attacked Miraflores.
Did you check the article about FARC buying missiles from El Salvador? They are no cheap....
> Moreover, why has FARC renegged on allowing foreign observers in the
> de-militarized zone.I don't understand why FARC is so adamant about this, and I can only conclude
that they are using it as an excuse to continue their hostilities.They don't seem to believe they can accomplish their goals at the negotiating
table. The formation of the despeje was not one of their goals, by the way.
They want radical redistribution of land and socialization of resources like
oil. Pastrana can't give them that.
That can't be done in most of the countries around the world. If that were neccessary in Colombia it would also need to be done in the rest of latin america, Africa and most of Asia.
-- OCVGC http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Parliament/9816/
Paul Wolf
OCVGC wrote:
>
> According to estimates published in media around the
> world, guerrilla is making more than 1.2 billion dollars/year from narcotics
> and kidnapping.
I would like to get to the source for this number. First McCaffrey was saying
it was somewhere from $60 million to $500 million. He had no idea. Now the
media has agreed on some other numbers, but where do they come from?
I am very skeptical of these reports of FARC's income, and of the salaries of
FARC soldiers. (I can't consider confidential anonymous sources posted to the
internet by people I don't know, they just don't count for anything. Anonymous
sources have no credibility.) If the estimates are coming from the US military,
they are almost certainly exaggerated.
When a government makes propaganda to prepare for war, they will always
exaggerate the strength of the enemy, because they are trying to get as much
support as they can to build up their own forces. Our government tells us one
story - that narcoterrorists are taking over Colombia and flooding the United
States with cocaine. That is what my government tells me, via "anonymous
sources" quoted in newspaper articles every day. And also, of course, General
McCaffrey.
Perhaps it is impossible to satisfy me, but I would need some kind of evidence
besides a few dozen SAM missiles (cost $15,000 each) to believe the FARC were
billionaire "drug lords". Whatever they are, I would like some real facts.