A Strange Concept of “Security”
A number of days ago, the U.S. Consulate in Bogota, Colombia denied a visa to Catholic priest Rafael de Jesus Gallego,
after he had been given assurances through the Embassy’s Human Rights Office that it would be routinely granted to him.
Father Rafael was later told that the visa had been denied for “security” reasons.
Father Rafael, whose visit to the United States was sponsored by a number of U.S. groups and individuals and organized
by the Madison, Wisconsin-based Colombia Support Network (CSN), had been scheduled to speak in 10 cities (including a
meeting with Congressional staffers in Washington, D.C.) during his 4-week tour of the United States and Canada. Gallego
was expected to describe his pastoral work in his home parish of Tiquisio in Bolivar Department, in north central
Colombia. There he leads a flock of small-scale miners and peasants, whose livelihood and property are today being
threatened by foreign multinational mining corporations which are seeking (with the support of Colombian authorities) to
obtain access, possibly by illegal means, to rich gold deposits, some of which are located on their property. These
corporate interests at times have received support from the strong-armed methods of Colombia’s paramilitary forces, with
the tacit cooperation of the Colombian armed forces. During his tour, Father Rafael was also scheduled to appear on a
panel on community radio initiatives in Montreal, Canada, at which he was to share his experience working with some
residents of Tiquisio to develop a community radio station.
Some senior Colombian church leaders who supported Father Rafael’s visa application were given the impression that it
had been denied in response to opposition to his visit from the Colombian military. At first glance, the State
Department’s action appears indefensible given the almost daily scandals perpetrated by the Uribe government and the
Colombian military. The most recent scandal, involving what are called “false positives”, involves kidnapping of
innocent noncombatants by Colombian Army units in one area, taking them to a different area of the country and murdering
them, then turning up their bodies as “guerrillas killed in combat”, and receiving rewards for these killings, such as
increased pay or more vacation time. Each of them is a “positive” in the Army’s lingo, i.e., a person supposedly killed
in the Army’s long battle against the FARC or ELN guerrillas, but they are “false” because they were not in fact
guerrillas, nor were they killed in combat.
While the State Department would be hard-pressed to create a case that Father Rafael, who has worked tirelessly for the
well-being of his parishioners, represents anything like a security threat to the United States, it is true that his
name has appeared on a “hit list” issued by the “Aguilas Negras” (Black Eagles) paramilitaries, who operate with
near-impunity in the Tiquisio area and throughout much of the rest of Colombia and whose membership in Colombia’s
paramilitaries rightly classifies them as “terrorists.”
The Aguilas Negras surely do not want Father Rafael to travel abroad to publicize their misdeeds. His visa denial, which
was done by the U.S. Consulate in Bogotá in apparent consultation with Colombian authorities, begs for a closer look at
what are the connections between the Uribe Administration, the Colombian Army and the paramilitaries. It further
illustrates the fact that the Colombian military has cordial ties to the Aguilas Negras. Even though the commander of
the Colombian army was forced to resign a few days ago as a result of the “false positives” scandal, the State
Department has no problem in vetoing the right of highly regarded U.S. groups focused on Colombian-American relations,
like the CSN, to invite a humble parish priest to this country who is renowned for his good deeds, while almost
routinely providing suspect Colombian Army officers visas to come to the United States to study in the Western
Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (formerly the School of the Americas). Furthermore, the U.S. government
has financed the Colombian armed forces through Plan Colombia at the rate of more than 5 billion dollars over the past
decade, while tolerating egregious misdeeds by that nation’s military.
What is most remarkable is where the U.S. government seems to be establishing its human rights benchmarks as a result of
guidance from the Colombian military (with the support of President Alvaro Uribe and the U.S. Embassy in Bogotá), in an
atmosphere where the Colombian President has done less than nothing to address the problem of having more than 4 million
internally-displaced people (now more than any other country in the world) and upwards of fifty pro-government
legislators facing indictment by the country’s prosecutor and Supreme Court over their ties to Colombia’s illegal,
terrorist paramilitaries, as well as the continuing threats against and murders of labor union leaders. This is but part
of the reason why a pending bilateral Free Trade Agreement with Colombia has been turned down by the U.S. Congress,
including a vote against the measure cast by Senator Barack Obama. We would hope that the ban against Father Rafael’s
visit would be overturned by Washington once the new President is inaugurated, given that the President-elect voted
against the FTA with Colombia on human rights grounds.
The CSN, along with COHA and associated U.S. organizations which helped plan Father Rafael’s trip, has compiled a
lengthy list of abuses and corrupt acts fomented by the Colombian military.
CSN and the Council on Hemispheric Affairs (COHA) are continuing to make representations to U.S. and Colombian officials
condemning unprincipled actions of the Colombian government and Washington’s shared complicity in its stalwart defense
of its Colombian allies, including its veto of Father Rafael’s planned visit. The expectation is that under an Obama
administration respect for life and observance of human rights will be a centerpiece of its foreign policy, and one
would hope that the new administration in Washington would take immediate steps to inculcate the staff of its embassy
and consulate in Bogotá to uphold the sense of rectitude and honorable deportment that should accurately project U.S.
domestic values abroad.
In recognition of the transgressions now being perpetrated by Colombian authorities, which now are appearing on the
front pages of U.S. newspapers, Washington should welcome, not shun, genuine democrats who, like Father Rafael, work
courageously and at great personal risk to improve their society by translating theoretical rights into practical ones.
Such potential guests should be praised and rewarded for having put U.S. democratic values to the test. The State
Department’s action in cancelling Father Rafael’s visit was a shameful action that needs to be condemned and reversed.
ENDS