The first line of a recent Washington Times story about cocaine in Colombia spells the country incorrectly. ‘Ninety-five percent of the cocaine sold on the streets of the United States today comes from Columbia.’ Don’t get me wrong, we all make mistakes. But c’mon. Really? Then, the rest of the article mixes the spellings.
Here’s what’s going on, according to the Economist: “In October some 200 FARC troops here, like up to 15,000 of their comrades across the country, will assemble at a designated area and start putting their weapons into containers under the watchful eyes of a UN mission that will later supervise their destruction. ‘There’s optimism, but there’s also a lot of mistrust,’ says a burly man who is the civilian leader in the FARC territory and gives his name as ‘Grossman.’
The FARC’s disarmament and conversion into a political party is the crux of a peace agreement forged over four years of hard talking in Havana and signed in Cartagena on September 26th. It is not quite true to say, as Juan Manuel Santos, the president, told the UN General Assembly on September 21st, that ‘the war in Colombia is over.’ There are other illegal armed groups. But the struggle between the FARC and the state, exacerbated in earlier years by right-wing paramilitaries, was by far the biggest conflict. It was responsible for most of the 220,000 deaths due to conflict and thousands of kidnappings seen over the past five decades. It displaced perhaps 6m people.
The agreement comprises 297 dense pages. It is of enormous complexity and involves controversial trade-offs, especially between peace and justice. Politically, if not legally, it can only come into effect if it is ratified by Colombian voters in a plebiscite on October 2nd. Polls suggest that around 60% of those that turn out will vote Yes. But will enough do so to meet the minimum 4.5m votes (13%) campaign in which the naysayers, inspired by Álvaro Uribe, a former president, accuse Mr Santos of selling out democracy and claim he could and should have struck a harder bargain. The Yes campaign counters that its opponents really favour war.”
Essentially, this was the best deal that could be struck.
Even the conservative Washington Times, which can’t even spell the country’s name properly, agrees.
“The White House, the Drug Enforcement Administration, State Department and Department of Defense all have means to coordinate with and assist Colombia in fighting drugs. It’s time to recognize the FARC peace deal for what it is — necessary but dangerous — and take steps to avoid the growth of a narco-state in Colombia that could well fuel a drugs-and-crime epidemic in the United States.”
With all the discussion over Donald Trump’s cocaine habit, Colombian policy seemed particularly relevant!
Here’s a classic!