We’ve published enough analysis of President Uribe’s trip to Washington. Tomorrow we’ll post the “talking points memo†we’ve sent to those who will be meeting with him on the trip.
Instead of more words from CIP, here are a few things said by others yesterday.
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont): “I have supported President Uribe for five years. I continue to support him, and I want him to succeed. He has done much good for his country. But that does not mean I agree with everything he says or does. Nor does it mean that, as chairman of the Appropriations panel that provides more than half a billion dollars to Colombia each year, I am going to rubber stamp these funds the way the previous Congress did.â€
Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Massachusetts): “We can’t support a [free trade] treaty with these violence statistics [against union leaders]. Speaker Pelosi thinks exactly the same thing, and I hope she says that tomorrow.”
Kenneth Roth, executive director, Human Rights Watch, in response to a letter (PDF) from President Uribe: “Certainly truth should be a consequence of the process. Unfortunately, the Justice and Peace Law that you drafted and pushed through the Colombian Congress pressed for did little to further this goal.”
Protesters outside President Uribe’s appearance at the Center for American Progress: â€Â¡Asesino! ¡Asesino! ¡Asesino!“ (Murderer!)
May 3rd, 2007 at 9:59 pm
Tough language during a tough visit, indeed. The first three links point to real concerns that the Uribe administration has not been able to properly address thus far, and therefore it deserves all the heat it has managed to avoid thus far.
On the other hand, the taped protesters in the last link have the right to protest, but that slogan isn’t impressive, to put it lightly.
It turns the whole thing into a childish, emotional caricaturization and, IMHO, doesn’t do any justice to the true tragedies that have happened and continue to happen in Colombia, with or without Uribe.
Once Uribe leaves power, a moment I myself await, the killings will not drop to zero, nor will it be magically revealed that he was the “secret mastermind” behind the murders of thousands of union leaders or what have you. He could potentially be guilty of other crimes, I imagine, but to call him an “assassin” at this point in time is heavily unrealistic at the very least.