Just Foreign Policy News, January 5, 2012
David Gregory Should Tell Rick Santorum There Are UN Inspectors in Iran
Support the Work of Just Foreign Policy
Your support helps us to educate Americans about U.S. foreign policy and create opportunities for Americans to advocate for a foreign policy that is more just. Help us press for an end to the war in Afghanistan and spread opposition to a new war with Iran,
https://www.justforeignpolicy.org/donate
Go Straight to the News Summary
I) Actions and Featured Articles
David Gregory Should Tell Rick Santorum There Are UN Inspectors in Iran
Rick Santorum is running as the "more AIPAC than thou" candidate. But David Gregory wants people to think of him as a "journalist." We can hold David Gregory to a higher standard. Politicians will say whatever they can get away with, but journalists have an obligation to correct serious misstatements of fact.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/david-gregory-should-tell_b_1186410.html
If you agree, you can write to Meet the Press here:
meetthepressquestions@nbcuni.com
Heather Hurlburt: Pentagon Strategy Review: Why It Matters
2012 and 2013 Pentagon spending will represent the first real declines in military spending in more than a decade; but the total 8% cut envisaged is less than the Reagan defense builddown of the 1980s. Even if the more dramatic cuts in the Budget Control Act sequester were enacted, they would only return the Pentagon to 2007 levels.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/heather-hurlburt/pentagon-strategy-review-_b_1184685.html
Mark Thompson: The Two-MRC Strategy: Major Regional Contingencies, Or Mythical Routine Canards?
Thompson argues that the claim that the U.S. could win two major wars at once was never really true, it was just an excuse to justify Pentagon budgets, so formally abandoning the claim is not that big a deal.
http://battleland.blogs.time.com/2012/01/04/the-two-mrc-strategy-major-regional-contingencies-or-mythical-routine-canards/
Help Support Our Advocacy for Peace and Diplomacy
The opponents of peace and diplomacy work every day. Help us be an effective counterweight.
https://www.justforeignpolicy.org/donate
II) Summary:
U.S./Top News
1) If Iran were to follow through with its threat to blockade the Strait of Hormuz, energy analysts say the price of oil would start to soar and could rise 50 percent or more within days, the New York Times reports. Energy analysts say even a partial blockage of the Strait of Hormuz could raise the world price of oil within days by $50 a barrel or more, and that would quickly push the price of a gallon of regular gasoline to well over $4 a gallon.
Various Iranian officials in recent weeks have said they would blockade the strait if the US and Europe imposed a tight oil embargo on their country in an effort to thwart its development of nuclear weapons, the Times says.
[Of course, the Times should have said, "its alleged development of nuclear weapons." We have asked the New York Times for a correction. To add your voice, the addresses are: nytnews@nytimes.com for a correction, letters@nytimes.com to send a letter to the editor, public@nytimes.com to complain to the Public Editor – JFP.]
2) Defense Secretary Panetta has concluded that the Army should shrink to 490,000 soldiers over the next decade, but that the US should not cut any of its 11 aircraft carriers, the New York Times reports. The Army is already is slated to drop to a force of 520,000 from 570,000. A smaller Army would be a clear sign that the Pentagon does not anticipate conducting another expensive, troop-intensive counterinsurgency campaign, like those waged in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Times says. Panetta says the reduction should be carried out over several years so that combat veterans are not flooding into a tough employment market, the Times says. Panetta is expected to propose cuts in coming weeks to next-generation weapons, including delays in purchases of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter jet.
3) The family of Bowe Bergdahl, the U.S. soldier held by the Taliban, is optimistic about a possible deal that would allow insurgents to open an office in Qatar with the aim of holding talks with the US, AP reports. His parents, Bob and Jani Bergdahl, released a statement through the Idaho National Guard expressing hope their son would be returned home safely as soon as possible. The family says that "serious discussions among diplomats are the most likely way to make this happen."
4) Iran is mounting a campaign to convince Afghan leaders not to let US troops stay in the country after 2014, the Washington Post reports. U.S. officials appear eager to reach a deal with Afghanistan that would include a substantial military partnership beyond 2014, the Post says. The US has said that it seeks no permanent bases in Afghanistan, but the Pentagon hopes to leave 10,000 to 30,000 troops. It has said that they would be positioned on Afghan bases. But Iran has rejected the distinction.
Iran
5) EU countries moved closer to agreement on an embargo on Iranian oil that would be imposed gradually, the New York Times reports. Italy, Spain and Greece have expressed concerns about the impact on their already fragile economies of the increase in oil prices that would inevitably follow a sudden embargo. Turkey, which gets about 30 percent of its oil imports from Iran, has asked the US for a waiver on dealing with Iran’s Central Bank so it can continue to buy at least some Iranian oil.
Iraq
6) The U.S. ambassador to Iraq said that an investigation into allegations against Iraq’s vice president appears to be proceeding fairly, USA Today reports. "There is a serious effort by the Iraqi judiciary to have a free and fair and just investigation," Ambassador James Jeffrey said. "It seems a lot of care is being taken at this point to maintain judicial independence and to have a very broad investigation."
Bahrain
7) A top executive at Lockheed Martin worked with lobbyists for Bahrain to place an Op-Ed defending Bahrain in the Washington Times, but the newspaper did not reveal the role of the regime’s lobbyists to its readers, Justin Elliott reports in Salon.
Colombia
8) Colombian President Santos is asking lawmakers to expand the military’s jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute alleged human rights crimes committed by security forces, notes the Los Angeles Times in an editorial. Colombia has yet to prosecute most of those responsible for the false positives scandal, the paper notes. The Obama administration should make clear that any efforts to prevent human rights crimes from being referred to civilian courts will jeopardize military aid under Plan Colombia, the LAT says.
Honduras
9) A priest in western Honduras filed a criminal complaint accusing eight police officers of torturing him and two of his brothers, EFE reports. Demands for a thorough overhaul of the police force intensified after eight police were named as the chief suspects in the Oct. 22 murders of two unarmed college students who were killed while driving home from a party.
Contents:
U.S./Top News
1) Oil Price Would Skyrocket If Iran Closed The Strait Of Hormuz
Clifford Krauss, New York Times, January 4, 2012
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/05/business/oil-price-would-skyrocket-if-iran-closed-the-strait.html
Houston – If Iran were to follow through with its threat to blockade the Strait of Hormuz, a vital transit route for almost one-fifth of the oil traded globally, the impact would be immediate: Energy analysts say the price of oil would start to soar and could rise 50 percent or more within days.
An Iranian blockade by means of mining, airstrikes or sabotage is logistically well within Tehran’s military capabilities. But despite rising tensions with the West, including a tentative ban on European imports of Iranian oil announced Wednesday, Iran is unlikely to take such hostile action, according to most Middle East political experts.
[…] Despite such deterrents to armed confrontation, oil and foreign policy analysts say a miscalculation is possible that could cause an overreaction from one side or the other.
"I fear we may be blundering toward a crisis nobody wants," said Helima Croft, senior geopolitical strategist at Barclays Capital. "There is a peril of engaging in brinkmanship from all sides."
Various Iranian officials in recent weeks have said they would blockade the strait, which is only 21 miles wide at its narrowest point, if the United States and Europe imposed a tight oil embargo on their country in an effort to thwart its development of nuclear weapons.
[Of course, the Times should have said, "its alleged development of nuclear weapons." We have asked the New York Times for a correction. To add your voice, the addresses are: nytnews@nytimes.com for a correction, letters@nytimes.com to send a letter to the editor, public@nytimes.com to complain to the Public Editor – JFP.]
That did not stop President Obama from signing legislation last weekend imposing sanctions against Iran’s Central Bank intended to make it more difficult for the country to sell its oil, nor did it dissuade the European Union from moving toward a ban on Iranian oil imports.
Energy analysts say even a partial blockage of the Strait of Hormuz could raise the world price of oil within days by $50 a barrel or more, and that would quickly push the price of a gallon of regular gasoline to well over $4 a gallon. "You would get an international reaction that would not only be high, but irrationally high," said Lawrence J. Goldstein, a director of the Energy Policy Research Foundation.
Just the threat of such a development has helped keep oil prices above $100 a barrel in recent weeks despite a return of Libyan oil to world markets, worries of a European economic downturn and weakening American gasoline demand. Oil prices rose slightly on Wednesday as the political tensions intensified.
[…] More than 85 percent of the oil and most of the natural gas that flows through the strait goes to China, Japan, India, South Korea and other Asian nations. But a blockade would have a ripple effect on global oil prices.
Since Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates all rely on the strait to ship their oil and natural gas exports, a blockade might undermine some of those governments in an already unstable region.
Analysts say that a crisis over the Strait of Hormuz would most likely bring China and the United States into something of an alliance to restore shipments, although Mr. Goldwyn said China would more likely resort to private diplomacy instead of military force.
Europe and the United States would probably feel the least direct impact because they have strategic oil reserves and could get some Persian Gulf oil through Red Sea pipelines. Saudi Arabia has pipelines that could transport about five million barrels out of the region, while Iraq and the United Arab Emirates also have pipelines with large capacities.
But transportation costs would be higher if the strait were blocked, and several million barrels of oil exports would remain stranded, sending energy prices soaring on global markets.
[…] The Iranians have struck in the strait before. In the 1980s, Iran attacked Kuwaiti tankers carrying Iraqi oil, and the Reagan administration reflagged Kuwaiti ships under American flags and escorted them with American warships. Iran backed down, partially, but continued to plant mines.
In 1988, an American frigate hit an Iranian mine and nearly sank. United States warships retaliated by destroying some Iranian oil platforms. Attacks and counterattacks continued for months, and a missile from an American warship accidentally shot down an Iranian passenger aircraft, killing 290 passengers.
Energy experts say a crisis in the strait would most likely unfold gradually, with Iran using its threats as a way to increase oil prices and shipping costs for the West as retaliation against the tightening of sanctions. So far, energy experts say, insurance companies have not raised prices for covering tankers, but shipping companies are already preparing to pay bonuses for crews facing more hazardous duties. "My guess is this is a lot of threats," said Michael A. Levi, an energy expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, "but there is no certainty in this kind of situation."
2) In New Strategy, Panetta Plans Even Smaller Army
Thom Shanker and Elisabeth Bumiller, New York Times, January 4, 2012
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/05/us/in-new-strategy-panetta-plans-even-smaller-army.html
Washington – Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta has concluded that the Army has to shrink even below current targets, dropping to 490,000 soldiers over the next decade, but that the United States should not cut any of its 11 aircraft carriers, according to Pentagon officials and military analysts briefed on the secretary’s budget proposals.
[…] Military experts familiar with Mr. Panetta’s thinking said that Mr. Obama had opposed reducing the American carrier fleet to 10 from 11 because of what he sees as the need to have enough force in the Pacific Ocean to act as a counterweight to China.
[…] The new military strategy is driven by at least $450 billion in Pentagon budget cuts over the next decade. Another $500 billion in cuts could be ordered if Congress follows through on plans for deeper reductions.
As part of the new reality, Mr. Panetta is expected to propose cuts in coming weeks to next-generation weapons, including delays in purchases of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter jet, one of the most expensive weapons programs in history. Delaying the F-35 would leave its factories open, giving the manufacturer, Lockheed Martin, a chance to work out continuing problems in developing the plane while freeing up money that otherwise would be devoted to buying the warplane in the next year or two.
[…] The Army is already is slated to drop to a force of 520,000 from 570,000, but Mr. Panetta views even that reduction as too expensive and unnecessary and has endorsed an Army of 490,000 troops as sufficient, officials said.
The defense secretary has made clear that the reduction should be carried out carefully, and over several years, so that combat veterans are not flooding into a tough employment market and military families do not feel that the government is breaking trust after a decade of sacrifice, officials said.
A smaller Army would be a clear sign that the Pentagon does not anticipate conducting another expensive, troop-intensive counterinsurgency campaign, like those waged in Afghanistan and Iraq. Nor would the military be able to carry out two sustained ground wars at one time, as was required under past national military strategies.
[…] Some areas of Pentagon spending will be protected. The defense secretary will not advocate cuts in financing for defense and offense in cyberspace, for Special Operations forces or for the broad area of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance.
[…]
3) Captured soldier’s family ‘optimistic’ about possible deal to open Taliban office in Qatar
Associated Press, January 4
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/captured-soldiers-family-optimistic-about-possible-deal-to-open-taliban-office-in-qatar/2012/01/04/gIQA94yFbP_story.html
Boise, Idaho – The family of the only U.S. soldier held by the Taliban is optimistic about a possible deal that would allow insurgents to open an office in Gulf nation of Qatar with the aim of holding talks with the United States.
Bowe Bergdahl, a 25-year-old Army sergeant from Hailey, Idaho, was taken prisoner June 30, 2009, in Afghanistan.
His parents, Bob and Jani Bergdahl, released a statement Wednesday through the Idaho National Guard expressing hope their son would be returned home safely as soon as possible.
The family says that "serious discussions among diplomats are the most likely way to make this happen."
[…]
4) Iran intensifies efforts to influence policy in Afghanistan
Ernesto Londoño, Washington Post, January 4
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/iran-strives-to-play-spoiler-in-afghanistan/2012/01/01/gIQAZ6gCbP_story.html
Kabul – Worried that U.S. troops could stay in Afghanistan beyond 2014, Iran is mounting an aggressive campaign to fuel anti-American sentiment here and convince Afghan leaders that a robust, long-term security partnership with Washington would be counterproductive, Afghan officials and analysts say.
The Iranian initiative involves cultivating closer relations with the Taliban, funding politicians and media outlets, and expanding cultural ties with its eastern neighbor. Although the effort has been underway for years, Iran has been moving with increased vigor in recent months because the United States and Afghanistan are negotiating a security agreement that could set the parameters for a U.S. troop presence here after 2014.
Iran’s overtures to the Taliban coincide with a renewed push by Washington to hold peace talks with the insurgent group in Qatar, as well as growing tension between Iran and the United States in the Persian Gulf.
Iran’s strategy in Afghanistan is reminiscent of its maneuvering in Iraq, where it helped fuel the insurgency and persuaded Iraqi politicians not to yield on allowing the Americans a small military presence beyond 2011. [Of course, this causation story completely elides the role of Iraqis in demanding that US forces go – JFP.]
Tehran inked a bilateral defense agreement with Afghanistan last month. As the deal was being finalized, Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi argued that foreign military bases in the region are the main cause of instability here. He expressed confidence that Afghanistan’s nascent security forces could secure the country without U.S. help.
The presence of American troops on Iran’s eastern and western flanks for much of the past decade has deeply concerned officials in Tehran. They fear that U.S. bases in the region enhance the West’s ability to gather intelligence on Iran’s nuclear program and could give the United States a major strategic advantage if the two countries go to war. Tension between Washington and Tehran soared last month after Iranian authorities recovered a CIA surveillance drone that had been launched from Afghanistan.
[…] Having failed to keep a small contingent of troops in Iraq past a 2011 withdrawal deadline, U.S. officials appear eager to reach a deal with Afghanistan that would include a substantial military partnership beyond 2014, when the Obama administration has pledged to end major combat operations in the country. The United States has far more leverage in Afghanistan than it did in Iraq because Kabul is expected to remain heavily dependent on foreign aid for years.
U.S.-Afghan negotiations over an agreement for an extended American military presence, initially planned to be finalized last year, have lagged as Karzai has used them as leverage to press his objections to night raids by U.S. forces in Afghan villages. American diplomats handling the negotiations have sought to mitigate the problem by encouraging Afghan military participation in the raids. U.S. officials said they expect the talks to resume this month, in hopes that an agreement can be concluded by late spring.
The United States has said that it seeks no permanent bases in Afghanistan, but the Pentagon hopes to leave 10,000 to 30,000 troops here. It has said that they would be positioned on Afghan bases.
But Iran has rejected the distinction, making clear its opposition to the American military presence and taking advantage of the U.S.-Afghan disagreement to press its case.
In their public comments, Iranian officials have emphasized their desire to play a constructive role in Afghanistan – and have suggested that the motives for the U.S. presence are nefarious. At an international conference on Afghanistan in Bonn, Germany, last month, Salehi, the Iranian foreign minister, condemned what he called the "violation of human rights by foreign military forces, including frequent attacks on residential areas."
"Certain Western countries seek to extend their military presence in Afghanistan beyond 2014 by maintaining their military bases there," Salehi said at the conference, which was attended by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. Regional cooperation in Afghanistan would succeed, he said, only if the Afghans "discard the presence of foreign military forces and especially disallow the founding of foreign military bases in Afghanistan."
[…] Iran has done little to publicize its overtures to the Taliban, but it invited a delegation from the group to a state-sponsored Islamic conference in Tehran in September.
"Bringing the Taliban to the Islamic Awakening conference took great courage and was a sign to the international community," said Abdul Hakim Mujahid, a member of the peace council.
He said Iran and the Taliban are being pragmatic because they have a common goal of ensuring that the Americans withdraw fully from Afghanistan.
[…] Zabiullah Mujahid, a spokesman for the Taliban, said he could not confirm whether the group has dispatched envoys to Iran, but he noted that the Taliban wants constructive relationships with all of Afghanistan’s neighbors.
[…]
Iran
5) Europe Takes Bold Step Toward a Ban on Iranian Oil
Steven Erlanger, New York Times, January 4, 2012
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/05/world/europe/europe-moves-toward-ban-on-iran-oil.html
Paris – Iran on Thursday sought to downplay the importance of intensified economic sanctions against it, even as European Union countries moved closer to agreement on an embargo on Iranian oil, their boldest step so far in the increasingly tense standoff with Iran over its nuclear program.
A final decision by the European Union would not come before the end of the month and would be carried out in stages to avoid major disruptions in global oil supplies. But the move by some of Iran’s most important oil customers appears to underscore the resolve of Western allies to impose on Iran the toughest round of sanctions to date, increasing pressure on Tehran to stop enriching uranium and to negotiate an end to what Western leaders argue is an accelerating program to build a nuclear bomb.
Iran denies military intent and refuses to stop enrichment of uranium for what it describes as civilian purposes. But it has responded to the threat of new U.S. and European sanctions with a series of military and diplomatic threats. It has test-fired new missiles, announced the production of its first nuclear-fuel rod, warned a U.S. aircraft carrier not to return to the Persian Gulf, and threatened to shut the Strait of Hormuz to shipping, which analysts said could drive oil prices up by at least 50 percent.
[…] In 2010, oil from Iran accounted for some 5.8 percent of total European imports of crude, with Spain, Italy and Greece the most reliant. The new Italian prime minister, Mario Monti, said this week that Italy would support an oil embargo as long as it was applied gradually and deliveries to repay Tehran’s debts to the Italian energy company ENI were exempted.
Turkey, not a member of the European Union, is another important customer, getting about 30 percent of its oil imports from Iran. It has asked the United States for a waiver on dealing with Iran’s Central Bank so it can continue to buy at least some Iranian oil.
The United States and France have been pushing hard for an embargo and sanctions against Iran’s Central Bank. But some European nations depend heavily on Iranian oil and have been reluctant to cut off their imports during a severe economic slump.
At the end of December, lower-ranking diplomats agreed in Brussels to the shape of a European oil embargo on Iran, vowing to meet objections by some states that have significant oil imports from Iran, including Italy, Spain and Greece.
Those countries also expressed concerns about the impact on their already fragile economies of the increase in oil prices that would inevitably follow a sudden embargo. Wednesday’s news caused a spike in the price of oil, with Brent crude reaching nearly $114 a barrel, up nearly $2 from Tuesday.
European Union diplomats said Wednesday evening that while objections to an embargo had been overcome, there had been no formal agreement yet.
The compromise was to draw up phased sanctions that would not immediately break pre-existing contracts, the diplomats said.
[…]
Iraq
6) U.S. envoy says Iraq following rule of law in al-Hashemi case
Jim Michaels, USA Today, January 4, 2012
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2012-01-04/us-iraq-ambassador-al-hashemi/52380988/1
The U.S. ambassador to Iraq said that an investigation into allegations against Iraq’s vice president appears to be proceeding fairly despite claims that Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is pursuing a political vendetta against a rival.
"There is a serious effort by the Iraqi judiciary to have a free and fair and just investigation," Ambassador James Jeffrey said. "It seems a lot of care is being taken at this point to maintain judicial independence and to have a very broad investigation."
"That says nothing about my views or anybody’s views on whether the charges are valid or not or whether the evidence is good," he said.
[…]
Bahrain
7) Lockheed Martin goes to bat for oppressive regime
A top executive for the military contractor worked with lobbyists for Bahrain to publish Op-Ed defending the regime
Justin Elliott, Salon, Wednesday, Jan 4, 2012
http://www.salon.com/2012/01/04/lockheed_martin_goes_to_bat_for_oppressive_regime/
A top executive at Lockheed Martin recently worked with lobbyists for Bahrain to place an Op-Ed defending the nation’s embattled regime in the Washington Times – but the newspaper did not reveal the role of the regime’s lobbyists to its readers. Hence they did not know that the pro-Bahrain opinion column they were reading was published at the behest of … Bahrain, an oil-rich kingdom of 1.2 million people that has been rocked by popular protests since early 2011.
The episode is a glimpse into the usually hidden world of how Washington’s Op-Ed pages, which are prized real estate for those with interests before the U.S. government, are shaped. It also shows how Lockheed gave an assist to a major client – Bahrain has bought hundreds of millions of dollars of weapons from the company over the years – as it faces widespread criticism for human rights abuses against pro-democracy protesters.
As Ken Silverstein reported in Salon last month, the kingdom is stepping up its Washington lobbying efforts. Here’s the latest example, as far as I can piece together from lobbying disclosures filed by Bahrain’s "strategic communications" firm, D.C.-based Sanitas International.
On Nov. 30, the Washington Times published an Op-Ed under the headline "Bahrain, a vital U.S. ally: Backing protesters would betray a friend and harm American security." It was written by Vice Adm. Charles Moore (retired). Moore was formerly commander of the Navy’s Bahrain-based Fifth Fleet. From 1998 to 2002, Moore notes in his Op-Ed, he "had the opportunity to develop a personal relationship with His Majesty King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa, Bahrain’s leader, as well as many senior officials in his government." Moore passed through the revolving door and is now regional president for Lockheed Martin for the Middle East and Africa.
Moore argues in the Op-Ed that while protesters in Bahrain have "legitimate grievances," the U.S. "needs Bahrain now more than ever to preserve regional peace and stability in what remains a dangerous and uncertain world." He particularly focuses on using the large U.S. Navy presence in Bahrain as a counter to Iran, which Washington sees as a foe and which Bahrain claims is fomenting unrest among the country’s Shia majority.
[…] Bahrain, in response, has launched a major lobbying push to shore up its support in Washington. It hired former Howard-Dean-for-president campaign manager Joe Trippi and Sanitas International to "protect the Kingdom and their leadership from the constantly evolving media landscape and 3rd party attacks," according to lobbying disclosures. Sanitas is paid $15,000 per month, plus expenses.
Which brings us back to that Washington Times Op-Ed by Lockheed Martin’s Moore. The column was placed in the Times by Sanitas, according to disclosure filings.
[…] Sanitas is a registered foreign agent for the government of Bahrain, but readers were not informed of the firm’s role, so they were left with the false impression they were getting an independent opinion from a retired Navy vice admiral.
[…]
Colombia
8) Colombia’s wrong-way reform
President Juan Manuel Santos’ proposal to expand the military’s jurisdiction over alleged human rights crimes committed by security forces is not the kind of reform Colombia needs.
Editorial, Los Angeles Times, January 5, 2012
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/opinionla/la-ed-colombia-20120105,0,347284.story
Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos is asking lawmakers in his country to approve sweeping changes in the judicial system. The most controversial of these would expand the military’s jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute alleged human rights crimes committed by security forces. Currently such cases are handled by civilian courts and judges.
That’s not the kind of reform Colombia needs. This is a country, after all, where a decades-long armed conflict has led to repeated massacres and human rights violations by government forces. And no one knows that better than Santos, a former defense minister who acknowledged in 2008 that human rights was the military’s "Achilles’ heel."
To put it mildly. Colombia has yet to prosecute most of those responsible for the so-called false positives scandal that erupted in 2008 after a dozen civilians from a working-class neighborhood outside the capital city of Bogota were found dead hundreds of miles away, dressed as rebels. An investigation concluded that troops allegedly carried out those and hundreds of other killings throughout the country in an effort to inflate the body count – considered a measure of battlefield success.
Colombian officials insist that the current proposal, which is expected to be debated by Congress in March, isn’t an attempt to wrest back military control of prosecutions from civilian courts; the country’s defense minister says that serious human rights violations, including rape, torture and forced disappearances, would still be turned over to civilian judges. But that’s hard to believe given that the decision about which cases to turn over would be made by the military, which lacks professional investigators and judges as well as the necessary independence and impartiality.
No one disputes that Colombia’s military has improved its efforts to address human rights abuses. But it hasn’t done enough. The United States, which has poured billions into the country since it launched the anti-drug initiative known as Plan Colombia, has a role to play. The Obama administration should make clear that any efforts to prevent human rights crimes from being referred to civilian courts will jeopardize military aid under Plan Colombia. That would be a shame. After all, Santos has already made great strides in confronting the country’s troubled past. Now he should stay the course.
Honduras
9) Honduran Priest Says Cops Tortured Him
EFE, January 5, 2012
http://www.laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=458993&CategoryId=23558
Tegucigalpa – A priest in western Honduras filed a criminal complaint accusing eight police officers of torturing him and two of his brothers.
The incident took place Dec. 26, the Rev. Marco Aurelio Lorenzo told reporters as he was living the prosecutor’s office in the northern city of San Pedro Sula.
Lorenzo, the pastor of Santa Barbara Catholic Church in Macuelizo, said he and his brothers were traveling to visit their parents the day after Christmas when they decided to pull over for a rest.
While sitting in their vehicle at the side of the road, the three men were accosted by eight police officers. "They beat us on every part of our bodies," Lorenzo said, adding that the cops didn’t realize he was a priest until they took the three brothers to a nearby hospital.
Lorenzo is known in western Honduras for his activism on behalf of human rights and the environment.
The Honduran national police force is already under pressure after cops have been caught engaging in drug trafficking, extortion and auto theft.
Demands for a thorough overhaul of the force intensified after eight police were named as the chief suspects in the Oct. 22 murders of two unarmed college students who were killed while driving home from a party.
One of the victims was the son of Julieta Castellanos, chancellor of the National Autonomous University of Honduras.
–
Just Foreign Policy is a membership organization devoted to reforming US foreign policy so it reflects the values and interests of the majority of Americans. The archive of the Just Foreign Policy News is here:
https://www.justforeignpolicy.org/blog/dailynews