FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

How the Colombia Trade Agreement Accelerates Human Rights Abuses

by DANIEL KOVALIK

In October of 2011, President Obama, over the objections of the U.S. and Colombian labor and human rights community, submitted the Colombia Free Trade Agreement (FTA) for passage by the U.S. Congress.   Congress quickly passed the FTA — which was originally negotiated by George W. Bush who was unable to obtain passage due largely to the protests of U.S. labor – and Obama signed the agreement into law.  At the time, those opposing this agreement argued that, just as NAFTA in Mexico and like policies toward Haiti, the FTA would lead, indeed by design, to the immiseration and mass displacement of rural peoples, especially Indigenous and Afro-Colombian.   The experience of the past year has proven these predictions to be correct.

Thus, as just publicized by ColombiaReports.com, the well-respected Colombian human rights group known as the Consultancy for Human Rights and Displacement (CODHES) has reported that there were 83% more mass displacements in 2012 than in 2011, and that these displacements have disproportionately affected Colombia’s Indigenous and Afro-Colombian communities.  (1)  Overall, CODHES estimates that well over 259,000 Colombians were forcibly displaced in 2012.

As CODHES explains,

. . . the most vulnerable populations, including children, adolescents and families with women as heads of households, are disproportionately affected. Most especially, indigenous and black populations have been hit not only individually but as a collective to the extent that their physical and symbolic territories continue to be invaded by both legal and illegal armies that clandestinely work to further the interests of extractive industries and their territorial consolidation . . .

CODHES relates that children and adolescents affected by such invasions of their lands are also at “risk of recruitment or use as informants or logistical support by the armed groups,” and are also at risk of being raped by these same groups.

In terms of the “economic industries” threatening the land of the Indigenous and Afro-Colombians, CODHES relates that these are “multinational agribusiness and mining” corporations – that is, the very corporations whose interests the Colombia FTA was designed to support and advance.  CODHES explains that these corporations, and the conflicts they are fueling, are driving a number of indigenous groups [64 indigenous groups to be exact], including the Awa people, to the point of “physical and cultural extermination.”

At the same time, there is resistance to this process.   Thus, CODHES explains that the Nasa and Awa peoples have been demonstrating against the militarization of their territories and against the multi-national interests driving this militarization.  As CODHES reports,

indigenous communities undertook the harmonization of mining territories where, as in the case of Canoas where “a group of nearly 600 Indians came to where the machinery was and forced employees to leave.”

These actions are mechanisms to reassert indigenous autonomy over the territories, and therefore, are ways to keep their culture and defend their principles. However, the resistance to the imposition of war and the extractive economic model is considered a “threat” by the different actors.

Consequently, those that attempt to defend or re-claim their land are at great risk of violent retaliations.

Thus, as Amnesty International (AI) explains in a recent report entitled, “Transforming Pain Into Hope,” human rights defenders campaigning for the restitution of forcibly-seized land are at great risk of assassination, with 45 such defenders killed in 2011 alone. (2)  AI relates that “most attacks on defenders campaigning for justice in cases of human rights abuses and for the return of land misappropriated have been attributed to paramilitary groups” aligned with the Colombian state.  One such paramilitary group is indeed known as the “Anti-Land Restitution Army.”  AI notes that the Colombian state, despite all evidence to the contrary, denies the existence of these paramilitary groups (a.k.a., death squads).

AI also acknowledges that “[t]he seriousness of the attacks against this group of defenders in large part reflects the enormous economic and strategic interests in certain territories.”   AI explains that “the failure of the government to recognize the legitimacy of the work of human rights defenders leaves them at the mercy of powerful, violent vested interests emboldened by the knowledge that they will probably never be held to account for their actions.  In some cases active state collusion with those committing human rights violations increases the dangers to defenders almost to the point of certain attack.”

As AI, concludes, in Colombia, “millions of hectares of land have been appropriated, often through violence,” and 5 million people have been driven from their homes in the process, making Colombia the world leader in terms of internally displaced peoples.   And, while one would think that things could not get much worse, the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement (and a similar agreement between Canada and Colombia) is accelerating this process of mass, forced displacements at a staggering pace.  As a consequence, indigenous tribes and Afro-Colombian communities are being pushed to the point of extinction, meaning that these trade policies, backed by massive military assistance, are indeed genocidal.

And yet, the outcry in this country is faint at best.  And this is so, as Edward Herman and David Peterson detailed in The Politics of Genocide, because this genocide is viewed as “constructive” by our political and economic rulers.  It is this cynical view of the world, with all of its horrific consequences, which we must struggle against.

Daniel Kovalik is Senior Associate General Counsel of the United Steelworkers (USW), and teaches international human rights law at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law.

Notes.

(1)    You can find CODHES’s report, in Spanish, here:  http://www.codhes.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=64&Itemid=50

(2)   Amnesty International’s report is here:  http://www.amnesty.org/en/campaigns/human-rights-defenders-americas

Daniel Kovalik teaches International Human Rights at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law.

More articles by:
Weekend Edition
July 22, 2016
Friday - Sunday
Jeffrey St. Clair
Good as Goldman: Hillary and Wall Street
Joseph E. Lowndes
From Silent Majority to White-Hot Rage: Observations from Cleveland
Paul Street
Political Correctness: Handle with Care
Richard Moser
Actions Express Priorities: 40 Years of Failed Lesser Evil Voting
Eric Draitser
Hillary and Tim Kaine: a Match Made on Wall Street
Conn Hallinan
The Big Boom: Nukes And NATO
Ron Jacobs
Exacerbate the Split in the Ruling Class
Jill Stein
After US Airstrikes Kill 73 in Syria, It’s Time to End Military Assaults that Breed Terrorism
Jack Rasmus
Trump, Trade and Working Class Discontent
John Feffer
Could a Military Coup Happen Here?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Late Night, Wine-Soaked Thoughts on Trump’s Jeremiad
Andrew Levine
Vice Presidents: What Are They Good For?
Michael Lukas
Law, Order, and the Disciplining of Black Bodies at the Republican National Convention
Victor Grossman
Horror News, This Time From Munich
Margaret Kimberley
Gavin Long’s Last Words
Mark Weisbrot
Confidence and the Degradation of Brazil
Brian Cloughley
Boris Johnson: Britain’s Lying Buffoon
Lawrence Reichard
A Global Crossroad
Kevin Schwartz
Beyond 28 Pages: Saudi Arabia and the West
Charles Pierson
The Courage of Kalyn Chapman James
Michael Brenner
Terrorism Redux
Bruce Lerro
Being Inconvenienced While Minding My Own Business: Liberals and the Social Contract Theory of Violence
Mark Dunbar
The Politics of Jeremy Corbyn
David Swanson
Top 10 Reasons Why It’s Just Fine for U.S. to Blow Up Children
Binoy Kampmark
Laura Ingraham and Trumpism
Uri Avnery
The Great Rift
Nicholas Buccola
What’s the Matter with What Ted Said?
Aidan O'Brien
Thank Allah for Western Democracy, Despondency and Defeat
Joseph Natoli
The Politics of Crazy and Stupid
Sher Ali Khan
Empirocracy
Nauman Sadiq
A House Divided: Turkey’s Failed Coup Plot
Franklin Lamb
A Roadmap for Lebanon to Grant Civil Rights for Palestinian Refugees in Lebanon
Colin Todhunter
Power and the Bomb: Conducting International Relations with the Threat of Mass Murder
Michael Barker
UK Labour’s Rightwing Select Corporate Lobbyist to Oppose Jeremy Corbyn
Graham Peebles
Brexit, Trump and Lots of Anger
Anhvinh Doanvo
Civilian Deaths, Iraq, Syria, ISIS and Drones
Christopher Brauchli
Kansas and the Phantom Voters
Peter Lee
Gavin Long’s Manifesto and the Politics of “Terrorism”
Missy Comley Beattie
An Alarmingly Ignorant Fuck
Robert Koehler
Volatile America
Adam Vogal
Why Black Lives Matter To Me
Raouf Halaby
It Is Not Plagiarism, Y’all
Rev. Jeff Hood
Deliver Us From Babel
Frances Madeson
Juvenile Life Without Parole, Captured in ‘Natural Life’
Charles R. Larson
Review: Han Kang’s “The Vegetarian”
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail