If You Need a Reason to Not Vote for Hillary
I was stunned at Hillary Clinton's response to the dust up between Columbia and Venezuela and Ecuador. Is she really that ill-informed and in such lock step with the Latin American policy of the Bush Administration? I hope that call at 3:00 AM is not about a crisis in Latin American. She will be sending in the Marines before she knows what is really going on.
In case you don't follow what is going on in Latin America. Here is what happened. Columbia violated the sovereign territory of Ecuador to attack a group of Columbian FARC rebels, killing a number including Reyes the number two leader. In response Ecuador and Venezuela took offence and send troops to their borders with Columbia to demonstrate the depth of their objection.
George Bush's response predicatably was to support Columbia's "right to protect itself" even if it means violating another country's territory. He also cynically tried to get Congress to approve an economic Free trade deal with Columbia. Columbia is the United States' client state in the region, getting more economic and military aid than any other country beside the war zones. It is worth noting that it is the only country in the Organization of American States, which supported Columbia in their unilateral aggression.
It is too bad this happened now as both Venezuela and Ecuador have been quietly trying to get some of the hostages the FARC is holding released,( some for as long a six years.) They have had some success with 6 or 8 released so far. Reyes was the main contact in these negotiations.
Here is a very informative article. http://news.aol.ca/article/NAFTAgate-Began-With-Harpers-Chief-of-Staff/138602/
Well what about Hillary? Briefly, she hold the same uninformed attitude toward Latin America as George Bush. She defends Columbia's illegal violation of Ecuador. as "a right". Makes one wonder if the US would defend a commado raid into Florida by Cuba to capture or kill the anti-Cuban terrorist living there? http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/01/14/cuba/ I don't think they would defend Cuba's "right to defend itself" as they do their own and Columbia's.
Hillary insists on refering to Hugo Chavez, President of Venezuela, as a dictator and Venezuela as not a democracy. Neither is true. Venezuelans have numerous times turned out in large numbers to vote for Chavez in numbers that would make any American president envious. http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/02/28/7349/
One would hope a Democratic Presidency would come to face the reality of Latin American. It is no longer the play thing of the United States. Latin America will work out it's own future. There are now many Latin American countries with left of center governments who do not do America's bidding. (Venezuela, Ecuador, Brazil, Bolivia, Argentina, Chile, Nicaragua, Cuba, and if they did not have a corrupt election in Mexico, Mexico could be among them.) The reality is that while George Bush has been trying to secure Middle East oil he has lost America's influence in Latin America. This is part of his legacy. "While Nero fiddled. . . . ." Read this analysis http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/03/05/7482/
As I have just finished this blog the radio announced that Venezuela, Ecuador, and Columbia in front of representatives of other Latin American countries have come to an understanding.. Columbia apologized for its action and promised it would not happen again. The crisis of over. It was resolved without the United States. Now doesn't George Bush seem irrelevant. Sadly, so does Hillary Clinton. New thinking about this part of the Hemisphere needs to be worked out to have the US share in the new reality.
Could this be part of the "Change" Barack Obama envisions?