"Two Blows to President Uribe's Image," by Adam Isacson, El Espectador (Colombia), August 1, 2004

Here in the United States, nearly all the members of Congress, NGOs and journalists who normally pay attention to Colombia are distracted by the presidential campaign and the never-ending flow of bad news from Iraq.

This is bad news for Colombia's president, Álvaro Uribe. When Washington is distracted, events that can hurt his image are some of the only Colombia news items that anyone will notice. Indeed, during the last week of July, we received two pieces of news that are indeed hurting the hard-line, pro-U.S. president's image.

On Tuesday July 27, Colombia's vice-president, Francisco Santos, responded poorly to a letter that 23 Democratic senators, including John Kerry and John Edwards, had sent to President Uribe. The letter merely asked Uribe to do more to comply with a list of human rights recommendations, based on Colombia's existing commitments under international law, set forth by the Bogotá office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Vice President Santos could have taken advantage of this opportunity to dialogue with an important sector of the U.S. Congress, assuring them that his government is working diligently to improve its performance. But he did not do that: instead, he decided to accuse the senators of "shielding themselves behind the left wing of the Democratic party, whose support they need for the election campaign."

No U.S. Senators noticed last January, when Santos attacked European Union Commissioner Chris Patten, accusing him of treating Colombia like a "banana republic" for having spoken of the government's continued human rights shortcomings. Only a few senators noticed in September, February, May and June, when Uribe accused non-governmental human rights groups of supporting terrorists. But the twenty-three senators, who have significant influence over aid to Colombia, will certainly notice that the vice president of Colombia just responded to their human rights concerns by accusing them of playing politics.

Far more damage was done on Wednesday the 28th, however, when three leaders of Colombia's murderous paramilitary groups - Salvatore Mancuso of the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, Iván Roberto Duque of the Central Bolívar Bloc, and Ramón Isaza of the Magdalena Medio Self-Defense Forces - boarded a Colombian Air Force plane to give a special address to the Congress in Bogotá. Their appearance, which supporters insisted was intended to give a boost to flagging demobilization talks between Uribe and the well-armed, drug-financed pro-government forces, was roundly condemned.

Reactions here in Washington - from left to right - paralleled the comments of U.S. Ambassador William Wood, who called the paramilitary spectacle a "scandal." For Democrats concerned about human rights, it was a scandal to see these men, accused of numerous crimes against humanity, receiving such a deferential and honorable treatment in the seat of Colombian lawmaking. For Republican drug-war hawks, it was a scandal to see narco-traffickers - including Mancuso, who the U.S. Justice Department seeks to extradite for sending at least 17 tons of cocaine to our shores - getting a high-profile opportunity to argue for their own impunity.

Uribe's predecessor, Andrés Pastrana, faced criticism in Washington during his failed 1998-2002 attempt to negotiate peace with the FARC guerrillas. He came under fire, mostly from Republicans, for having loaned the FARC a demilitarized zone in which to hold talks, and for giving the guerrillas a chance to "legitimize" themselves politically without having first demonstrated a firm will to seek peace. But FARC leaders never spoke in Colombia's Congress; that would have been unthinkable. Nobody ever judged those talks to have reached such an advanced state. But there the paramilitaries were, even though their own talks with the Uribe government have achieved very little.

The Iraq experience has reminded many in the United States that there is much we don't understand about the countries in which we've intervened. In these countries, wiser diplomats recognize that there is always a lot going on under the table, behind their backs, which - though they might not see it - can strongly impact the outcomes of the decisions they make. The appearance of paramilitary leaders in Colombia's Congress greatly strengthened that sense, that feeling that there is "another story" behind the story.

Since Uribe's election in 2002, decisionmakers here in Washington have heard accusations - many of them from the Colombian left - that Uribe and his landowning friends in the paramilitary-heavy northern Colombian provinces of Antioquia and Córdoba are in league with, or at least tolerant of, the paramilitaries. They have heard accusations that the ongoing negotiations with paramilitary groups are nothing more than a "conversation between friends" to make arrangements for their impunity.

Though the majority of Colombia-watchers in Washington don't believe this, the "show" in Congress on July 28 did nothing to reassure them. Here in Washington, we may be distracted, but we're increasingly worried.