I'm rather tired, so I just wanted to call your attention to a few short notes.
First off, Adam Isacson at the Center for International Programs, Plan Colombia and Beyond blog has this comprehensive analysis of the FARC's recent attack on Toribío, a town of primarily indigenous residents. Human Rights Watch has also condemned the FARC's use of gas cylinder bombs.
On the other side of Colombia's conflict, The Economist has this distressing article about the increasing political influence of the AUC and this passage underscores why my sympathies lie squarely with the peaceful citizens of Colombia caught in the middle and why I feel dubious about President Uribe:
Earlier this month, Congress amended the amnesty bill to deny the paramilitaries the right to stand for office. Mr Uribe is trying to change that. But many normally pro-government congressmen fear opening the door for drug-traffickers to enter politics, as they have often attempted.
Many of the AUC's tactics mirror those of their foes, the FARC. The left-wing guerrillas expanded during failed peace talks under Mr. Uribe's predecessor. Those talks collapsed because the guerrillas never declared a ceasefire or agreed to demobilise. The AUC has been smarter. Although it has frequently violated its ceasefire, Mr. Uribe has turned a blind eye, while unleashing the army against the FARC.
Colombia faces a difficult choice. In the past, the politicians would have settled for peace, allowing the gunmen into politics even if that meant pardoning horrific crimes. Now, many Colombians—and international human-rights groups—resist that. Already, the paramilitary chieftains are gaining political power without, in practice, renouncing violence. An election next year could see their influence in Congress grow further.
Isacson also has some suggestions for Condoleeza Rice's trip to Latin America. I especially like his comments about Hugo Chávez here:
Hugo Chávez is legitimate, elected, and CIP firmly opposes
anything that even remotely resembles a U.S. effort at regime change.
We also applaud his channeling of Venezuelan oil wealth to badly needed
social-services. Chávez is a complicated figure, though. Though he is
usually called “leftist,” some of his government’s policies run counter
to the goals of some important progressive causes.
His advice about the Bush administration's stand on Venezuela is spot on in my opinion.
The Economist also has this article (subscription only) on Belize's recent troubles and speculates that "Perhaps [Prime Minister Said] Mr. Musa might prefer it if his people cannot talk to each other."