The FARC’s Honduran Friends

A chavista government in Honduras would raise the cost of the “war on drugs.”

MARY ANASTASIA O’GRADY

President Barack Obama, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe Calderón are in Guadalajara, Mexico, today for the North American Leaders’ Summit. They will discuss, among other topics, what to do about the explosion in drug-trafficking violence on the continent. But they are also expected to address the political situation in Honduras.

Too bad the Colombian ministry of defense will not also be on hand. It could show them evidence of the connection between the Honduran supporters of deposed Honduran president Manuel Zelaya and the most important South American supplier of illegal drugs to North America—the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). I know this because recently that evidence landed on my desk.

View Full Image

Getty Images

Mexico's President Felipe Calderon Hinojosa speaks with Honduras's ousted President Manuel Zelaya during a ceremony at the Official Residence "Los Pinos" on August 4, 2009 in Mexico City, Mexico.

The FARC's Ecuadorean Friends

It's time to reaffirm the U.S. commitment to Colombia.

• By MARY ANASTASIA O'GRADY

Previously undisclosed documents, fruits of the Colombian military's raid on a Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (a.k.a. FARC) camp in Ecuador in 2008, came into my hands last week.

The FARC's second in command, Raúl Reyes, was killed in that raid. But he left behind laptop computers containing correspondence detailing a cozy relationship not only with Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez but also -- the fresh documents reveal -- with the government of Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa.

Someone should tell the White House. Ten days ago, President Obama called Mr. Correa to, according to a spokesman, "congratulate him on his recent re-election." Mr. Obama also wanted to "express his desire to deepen our bilateral relationship and to maintain an ongoing dialogue that can ensure a productive relationship based on mutual respect."

Mr. Correa is anything but respectful of U.S. interests in the region. He's more like Fidel Castro -- albeit with a Ph.D. in economics from the University of Illinois. Under his rule, liberty has been evaporating faster than you can say bolivariano. Now the Reyes letters provide strong evidence that he has been actively supporting the Marxist FARC guerrillas, who see the U.S. as a major enemy.

Mr. Correa has publicly claimed that he is not a FARC accomplice. But Reyes reported otherwise. In a Jan. 5, 2007, letter to FARC leader Manuel Marulanda he wrote of an impending visit from "an emissary of Rafael Correa." The purpose of the meeting was, among other things, to come up with "bilateral collaborative agreements" in which "our captured guerrillas in their territory are handed over to us and none of them go into the hands of Colombian authorities."

Reyes said that the emissary was coming "to strengthen the binational committee -- made up of comrades of the [Colombian Clandestine Communist Party] and Ecuadorean friends -- that would denounce the violations of Ecuadorean sovereignty by [Colombian] troops and demonstrate the harmful effects of fumigation." In other words, Ecuador wanted to help the FARC in two of its most important objectives: establishing a safe haven over the border and ending fumigation of coca crops, a key source of the FARC's drug-trade income.

In another note to Marulanda on Jan. 28, 2007, Reyes mourns the death of his "amiga, the minister," referring no doubt to Ecuador's minister of defense, Guadalupe Larriva, who was killed in a helicopter crash four days earlier. But looking on the bright side, he said, another minister, this one "of finance, also wants to visit us on the 9th."

Then, on Jan. 18, 2008, Reyes wrote to the FARC secretariat summarizing "a visit from the Ecuadorean minister of security, Gustavo Larrea, who in the name of President Correa brought greetings" for Marulanda. According to Reyes, Mr. Larrea expressed "interest on behalf of the president to make official [Ecuador's] relationship with FARC leadership."

Reyes wrote that Mr. Larrea said he was ready to remove security-force commanders who were "hostile with communities" in the border area, and that Ecuador would not do anything to help Colombian President Alvaro Uribe in Colombia's internal conflict. "For [Ecuador]," Mr. Reyes explained, "the FARC are an insurgent organization of the people with social proposals and policies that [Ecuador] understands."

According to Reyes, Mr. Larrea asked if the FARC was interested in gaining belligerent status (i.e. international legitimacy). He also reported that Ecuador "would sue Colombia in international court for the damages caused by fumigating" the coca crops and revoke the license for the U.S. military base at Manta. (Ecuador did both.) Ecuador "has it clear that Uribe represents the interests of the White House, the multinationals and the oligarchs and considers him dangerous to the region."

Mr. Larrea has conceded publicly that he called on Reyes. But he claims it was in the interest of winning the release of FARC hostages. For sure that was one objective. Reyes reported that Mr. Larrea wanted to pull off a "swap" of hostages for prisoners because it would "energize" Mr. Correa's political career. But the Reyes letters reveal much more than a desire on the part of Mr. Correa to be a humanitarian hero. They paint a picture of a government bent on undermining its neighbor, Colombia.

It is possible that Reyes mistook Correa realpolitik for genuine goodwill toward the FARC. But the rebel leader seemed certain that six Latin countries are sympathetic to the Marxist cause. He proposed that Marulanda write to the presidents of Ecuador, Argentina, Bolivia, Nicaragua, Venezuela and Uruguay to seek "support from various friendly countries" that might advance the process of forcing a settlement with Colombia.

Mr. Uribe will visit the White House next week. It will be interesting to see if Mr. Obama is as concerned about the bilateral relationship with Colombia as he is about the relationship with Mr. Uribe's not very friendly neighbor next door.

OBAMA AND HIS NEW GOOD FRIEND

Turkey and Barack Obama

Friends by the Bosporus

Turkey basks in the glory of a two-day visit by Barack Obama

IT WAS sealed with an embrace. Barack Obama concluded his wide-ranging address to the Turkish parliament on April 6th by kissing the prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, on both cheeks. That seemed to please his audience of parliamentarians, as did the American president’s pledge that his country was “not at war with Islam.” He pointed out that many Americans are part of Muslim families, and others have lived in countries where Muslims are in the majority. “I know, because I am one of them,” he said, prompting wild applause.

Mr Obama delivered a high-class performance, charming his audience by calling Turkey a “critical” ally and an important part of Europe. Its secular free-market democracy is just the sort of model America hopes might inspire Muslims everywhere. That message was also received by millions tuned into Al-Jazeera’s live coverage of Mr Obama’s speeches during his two-day tour to Ankara and Istanbul.

Mr Obama’s decision to add Turkey to his European tour went beyond confirming (to the joy of Turkey’s secular elite) the country’s western credentials. It highlighted Turkey’s emergence as a regional power that matters and as a large, mainly Muslim member of NATO (tiny Albania, another Muslim country, has just joined NATO as well). After seven years under the mildly Islamist Justice and Development (AK) Party, Turkey enjoys growing influence and popularity in the Arab world.

Turkish support will be critical as America prepares to withdraw from Iraq and switch its focus to Afghanistan. Mr Obama (who went on from Istanbul to Baghdad for a flying visit) reportedly urged Abdullah Gul, the Turkish president, to send more troops to Afghanistan, some of them for combat. Turkey already has 900 soldiers in Afghanistan and is a transit hub for supplies to American troops both there and in Iraq. The Turks have also acted as a conduit for messages between America and Iran as the two countries consider re-establishing dialogue.

Mr Obama’s trip comes after a prolonged chill between America and Turkey, prompted largely by differences over Iraq. The Turkish parliament provoked fury, especially in the Pentagon, when it voted in March 2003 against letting American troops use the country as a route for opening a second front in Iraq. America’s refusal to take action against separatist rebels from the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) in northern Iraq then fed Turkish anger. Some opinion polls showed support for America in single digits when George Bush was president. But America’s decision in late 2007 to provide intelligence on the PKK and to let Turkish planes bomb rebel bases in northern Iraq changed the mood. So, even more, did Mr Obama’s election.

Obliging Obama charms earnest Erdogan

Perhaps the most important change, as Mr Obama acknowledged, is that America has overcome its cold-war habit of engaging mostly with Turkey’s generals. As democracy has taken root, public opinion has come to count. Turkey’s generals found this out when voters returned the AK for a second term in the July 2007 general election with a thumping 47% of the vote soon after the top brass threatened a coup.

Mr Obama’s 25-minute speech to the Turkish parliament offered something for everyone, whether secularist, Islamist, nationalist or Kurdish. Even the generals showed up to listen. They have been boycotting parliament ever since 20 members of the pro-Kurdish Democratic Society Party (DTP) were elected in 2007.

Most of his listeners will have been pleased to hear Mr Obama stress Turkey’s Western orientation, saying that America supported Turkey’s aspirations for European Union membership “not as members of the EU but as close friends of both Turkey and Europe.” The Islamists liked his reference to Turkey’s Muslim identity. But he also called for respect for minorities, declaring that the Greek Orthodox seminary on Halki, an island off Istanbul, must be reopened. In a bold gesture he included the DTP’s co-chairman, Ahmet Turk, among the opposition leaders whom he met. Mr Turk has long sought an audience with Mr Erdogan, but never had one because he refuses to label the PKK as “terrorist”.

Only one cloud hung over Mr Obama’s trip: his campaign pledge to call the mass killings of the Ottoman Armenians in 1915 “genocide”. In a press conference after his talks with Mr Gul, the American president said that he had not changed his view of history. But in a blow to the Armenian diaspora, which has long lobbied for a congressional bill to label the massacres as genocide, Mr Obama suggested that Turkey’s recent efforts to reopen its border and re-establish diplomatic ties with Armenia should not be overshadowed by America’s position on the issue. Turkey and Armenia are expected soon to sign an agreement, after months of Swiss-sponsored talks in Bern. Officials close to the negotiations say that a document could be initialled by both sides in “a matter of days” and that the border could be reopened “within months”.

This was not all a cynical fudge. During his parliamentary speech, Mr Obama declared that “history…unresolved can be a heavy weight…I know there are strong views in this chamber about the terrible events of 1915. While there has been a good deal of commentary about my views, this is really about how the Turkish and Armenian people deal with the past. And the best way forward for the Turkish and Armenian people is a process that works through the past in a way that is honest, open and constructive.”

Not all Turks agree. An Ankara court recently overturned an Istanbul prosecutor’s decision not to investigate some 30,000 Turks who have signed an online declaration apologising to the Ottoman Armenians for the “great catastrophe” that befell them in 1915.

Tensions are also running high in the mostly Kurdish south-east. Mr Obama praised the recent launch of a state-run 24-hour Kurdish-language television channel. But only days before his arrival, two Kurdish youths were killed in clashes with police during a rally called to mark the birthday of the captive PKK leader, Abdullah Ocalan. Over 50 demonstrators who turned out to protest against the deaths are still in police custody.

Many friends of Turkey hope that Mr Obama will stick by his pledge on the Armenian genocide. They say that would restore America’s moral credibility and would allow it to draw attention to Turkey’s patchy human-rights record. Until recently, the EU’s remonstrations counted most. But Europe’s habitual foot-dragging during Turkey’s membership talks has meant that it “has neither any carrots nor any sticks left,” confesses an EU envoy in Ankara. Enter Barack Hussein Obama to fill the void.

That's What Friends Are For

Obama shouldn't fear frank talk from the Czechs.

From today's Wall Street Journal Europe.

With all the "reset buttons" being pressed in diplomatic circles since Barack Obama moved into the White House, it's an apt moment to ask what constitutes a good ally. Europe has just offered two answers worth remembering as Mr. Obama visits the Old Continent next week for the first time since taking office.

Most noticed was the comment Wednesday by Czech Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek that the Obama fiscal stimulus is paving a "road to hell." The commentariat immediately turned on Mr. Topolanek, who as current holder of the rotating EU Presidency is receiving more attention than usual, for imperiling trans-Atlantic relations ahead of next week's G-20 meeting in London and NATO summit in Strasbourg.

But can't true allies speak frankly when they have divergent views? All Mr. Topolanek did was present more bluntly the same opinion that leaders from Germany's Angela Merkel to France's Nicolas Sarkozy to European Central Bank President Jean-Claude Trichet have already expressed. With the Obama Administration paying no heed to them and racking up ever more deficit spending, why not speak up more forcefully? Friends don't let friends wreck their economies.

A few days earlier, as it turns out, Spain gave a real example of how to lose friends and alienate allies. With fewer than 24 hours warning, Madrid said last Thursday that it would withdraw its 600 troops from NATO's peacekeeping contingent in Kosovo. Much more disturbing in substance -- particularly in its similarity to José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero's abrupt pullout of Spanish soldiers from Iraq after becoming Prime Minister in 2004 -- the move generated less heat than Mr. Topolanek's comments did.

In the runup to the G-20 and NATO meetings, Mr. Obama couldn't have asked for a better illustration of the way much of Europe values verbal niceties over real actions.