The day after the assassination of Reyes, Colombia’s Vice-President Francisco Santos spoke at a United Nations conference on disarmament where he announced that evidence found on the FARC commander’s laptop showed that the rebel group was seeking to obtain uranium to manufacture “dirty bombs.” According to Santos, Reyes’s laptop contained “information from one commander to another indicating that FARC was apparently negotiating for radioactive material, the primary basis for generating dirty weapons of mass destruction and terrorism.”
But when the documents from Reyes’s laptop were released to the media, they did not corroborate the vice-president’s allegations. In fact, the document related to the so-called dirty bomb was simply a communication from a lower-ranking FARC guerrilla to Reyes raising the possibility of purchasing 50 kilos of uranium and then selling it for a profit. There was absolutely no mention of using uranium to build a dirty bomb or any other sort of weapon. Meanwhile, mainstream media outlets, including the New York Times, have dutifully performed their role as propagandists for the US government by continuing to report that the FARC intends to build a “dirty bomb” even after the documents were made public.
Three days after the attack, the Colombian government also claimed that it had retrieved documents from Reyes’s laptop proving Venezuela’s President Chávez had recently provided the FARC with $300 million in funding. Colombia’s President Uribe stated that, given this evidence, “Colombia proposes to denounce the President of Venezuela Hugo Chávez in the International Criminal Court for sponsoring and financing genocide.” The Colombian president’s pronouncement, in reality, had no legal basis and was little more than an irresponsible attempt to publicly discredit Chávez.
Firstly, the documents from Reyes’s laptop again fail to corroborate the Colombian government’s allegations. The only documents that mention Chávez or his government directly illustrate that Venezuela sought to: include the FARC in an international group to analyze Colombia’s conflict; request documentation from the rebel group of civilian casualties caused by Colombian military attacks in FARC-controlled regions; persuade Latin American governments to help get the FARC removed from international terror lists. None of the above constitutes an illegal activity.
And secondly, none of the documents on Reyes’ laptopname Chávez or any member of his government with regard toproviding funding to the rebel group. In fact, the only number that the documents refer to is the number “300,”which the Colombian government claims signifies $300 million. Whilethe documents do suggest that the FARC was negotiatingpotential deals with someone in Venezuela, they suggest that if the deals were to be consumated then the rebel group would receivesome sort of merchandise that it could sell for a profit rather than a delivery of cash. Most importantly, none of the documents related to the “300”—re-named the “dossier” at one point in the documents—mentioned Chávez or any other representative of the Venezuelan government. The documents, which were only discussions between FARC leaders, could have been referring to anybody in Venezuela. Ultimately, this amounts to very flimsy evidence upon which to publicly accuse a head of state of “sponsoring and financing genocide.”
When I first heard of "communications" or "documents" retrieved from the FARC leaders' laptop, I was at once skeptical. Any "evidence" that first goes through the hands of an accuser of wrong doing is immediately suspect, in my opinion. But one would think that if evidence were to be "planted", it would be more specific or clear. But none of this "evidence" supports the claims made by the accuser. It all appears to be more of the same double-speak that Uribe's mentors in Washington D.C. specialize in. For my part, they are not even very good at it, either.
While President Bush distorts reality by portraying the aggressor as the victim, many other countries in the region have responded with far greater levels of clarity and integrity. Mexico, Argentina, Chile, Peru, Cuba and Nicaragua, among others, have condemned Colombia for its act of aggression against Ecuador and have refused to criticize Venezuela for deploying troops to its border to ensure that it does not become a target of its US-backed neighbor. These nations represent the voice of reason in the midst of this crisis as they challenge the lies and exaggerations that constitute “reality” in the upside-down, fantasy world of the US and Colombian governments.
Few rational people argue the illegitimacy of kidnapping and ransom of victims for political gain. However, unmitigated violations on the sovereignty of nations, the assassinations of trade unionists, financial gain from illicit drug trade, and political corruption cannot be justified by any stretch of the imagination when peaceful, non-violent solutions are available, no matter who one is dealing with.
