---

Latin America

My Lords, I wish to make two quick points before I come to my principal remarks. The decree by Bolivia’s President Morales to nationalise the petroleum and natural gas operations is a blow to western interests, including that of British Gas. While sentiments of helping the poor are welcome if that is achieved with fiscal accountability—frankly, that would make a refreshing change to the situation elsewhere, where energy is the principal economic provider—the rule of commercial law must surely be respected. Will the Minister comment on that? Will he also say whether there is any suggestion that western interests did not cut a fair deal at the time of negotiation with the Bolivian Government for those assets? Does President Morales realise that there may be a freeze on foreign inward investment into his country? Secondly, I listened carefully to the noble Viscount, Lord Montgomery, and his underlying remarks vis-à-vis the United States. The manner by which the United States is conducting its policies for a new world order—and much of the detail is admirable—might be creating long-term global alienation and would leave us worse off than before. That would then be harder to put right than a positive drift to an equitable world. And so to Colombia. What happens in that country haunts us in the United Kingdom, or certainly should do. President Uribe’s term will soon end. However, a ruling by the constitutional court is enabling him to throw his hat into the ring for a second time. He inherited a policy of ill-founded government land concessions for peace to Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionares de Colombia—FARC—which is the oldest and strongest guerrilla group in Colombia. It was a process of complete failure and was flawed from concept. Colombians gave their vote to Uribe, recognising that the guerrillas had played a double game; there were negotiations with the Government on the one hand and continued military training, kidnappings and attacks on small villages on the other. Uribe was mandated to end this by using the full force of the military. There is now a more stable political environment, with subversion and large-scale kidnappings reduced and the destroying of small villages and the blocking of main roads eliminated; many rebels have been killed, hundreds are in gaol and thousands have rejoined society and are now playing their part. FARC’s leadership nevertheless remains intact. The opposition take this as indicative of Uribe’s failure. The reality is far from that. The Plan Patriota had cornered FARC into the southern and most remote corner of Colombia. Recently however—flexing its muscles in the run-up to the presidential election of 28 May—it demonstrated its continued presence and capability elsewhere in the country. The second largest terror group, Ejercito de Liberacion Nacional de Colombia—ELN—has also been somewhat cornered by fighting three fronts: against the Government, paramilitaries and FARC, for territory and positioning in the cocaine trade. This has resulted in ELN being forced to enter negotiations with Uribe’s government. All to the good. It is important for observers to understand the background. Colombian cocaine cartels in the worldwide narco-traffic were started by Pablo Escobar in the 1980s. This cancer has affected Colombian society at all levels, making the problem the engine of corruption and guerrilla violence. Colombia’s most powerful cartel was formed after Escobar’s death, with the unification of the guerrillas under the cartel of Medellin. The guerrillas offered protection to cocaine plantations and today have their own worldwide distribution network. Drug dealing and kidnapping are the basis of their finances. By the 1990s the guerrilla movement had shed its political and social ideology and solely adopted criminal activities. Against that backdrop, the Uribe administration have used the military with positive results, but as a further weapon and after a long-standing US demand—a pillar of co-operation between the two countries—Uribe used extradition as a persuasive tool against terrorists and drug barons. However, success in this long drawn-out war can come about only with the co-operation of drug consuming countries. Uribe has been having considerable difficulties with the international community, for whom human rights violations are paramount and who are led to believe that the guerrillas still have idealistic motivations. Influential NGOs and foreign media, in particular, have exacerbated the situation with an unpragmatic and sometimes unbalanced overview. To that list can, with regret, be added certain Members of this Parliament in the UK. While some human rights cases do exist, they do so as a result of a war where civilians are used as a shield against the Colombian military forces. It is simply not plausible to condemn Colombian military forces in their entirety for those few cases, as in the same manner it is not just to condemn the entire US and UK military for occasional abuses in Iraq or elsewhere. FARC and other rebel organisations use the media machine to give Europeans a totally wrong image of this long conflict. I can tell the House that, for the first time in a very long time, Colombians can go about their day-to-day business, both in the principal cities and rural areas, knowing that a sense of security prevails. And what of UK government policy? My understanding is that an approach of constructive support exists, while not ignoring issues that cause concern. A balance between the two would appear to be correct, believing that there is more to be gained by offering support and advice than by remonstrating without offering solutions. That said, Colombia principally needs understanding from countries such as the UK—an understanding that can be achieved only by making a realistic analysis of the situation, an analysis that should be made from firsthand knowledge, not the spin of intermediaries. I would like to float a thought with the Minister. Would he support an Anglo-Colombian initiative from two universities—and I can think of one certainly, in Colombia, and so one from each country—to analyse and offer recommendations to end the violence and create an environment for peace? With that, you would have one of the most beautiful countries on Earth filled with people who can breathe freely. In conclusion, Colombia needs first and foremost understanding, fair international trade for its products and, above all, fair treatment.