Colombian crisis drags on:
A plea for Australians to speak out

Nilson Davila recently visited Australia on behalf of the 
Central Unitaria de Trabajadores or CUT (the major trade union 
peak council in Colombia). In Sydney he spoke with Bob Briton 
from The Guardian about the extreme challenges facing 
workers and their unions in Colombia and added an appeal for 
solidarity from the Australian labour movement.

Bob Briton: On the internet we continue to see reports 
about attacks on trade unionists in Colombia. There are 
assassinations, leaders of unions like Hernando Hernadez are put 
in detention and so on. Is the situation improving or 
deteriorating?

Nilson Davila: The situation facing trade unionists in 
Colombia remains very worrying. The statistics can help you to 
understand the situation better. In 2002, 684 trade unionists 
were killed, the majority of those were in leading positions. In 
2003, 92 leaders were killed. Over the past two years, over 2000 
unionists have been killed in total. Because of the struggle they 
have waged to obtain very basic rights, the system has pursued a 
strategy of classifying trade unionists and their leaders as 
"terrorists".

The person you have mentioned (Hernando Hernandez or "HH" — the 
ex-president of the union of workers in the oil industry), his 
only "crime" was to propose an alternative policy for the 
nationalisation of the energy resources of the country. These 
resources are currently the property of giant transnational 
corporations.

BB: Do you have any news of the workers struggling for 
justice against Coca Cola in Colombia?

ND: The situation of the workers at Coca Cola has been 
very difficult for quite some time. It has claimed a number of 
victims from among the workers and their union, Sinaltrainal. 
Workers and their families have been threatened by the company, 
government authorities and paramilitary groups and some have gone 
into exile owing to the risks.

The union representing the workers used to have about 7000 
members in the industry. Now, there are only about 1400 owing to 
the fear being generated by the Coca Cola multinational itself.

What happened was that Coca Cola was authorised in January by the 
Ministry of Social Protection (the old Labour Ministry) to 
dismiss 92 workers. This eventually resulted in 30 of the workers 
starting a hunger strike. The strike and various protests spread 
to several cities throughout Colombia: Bucaramanga, Czcuta, 
Barrancabermeja, Cartagena, Valledupar, Cali, Medellmn and 
Bogota. After 12 days on hunger strike, during negotiations with 
the union, an offer came from Coca Cola to reincorporate the 
dismissed employees into different areas of the workforce.

BB: We have seen in the press that President Uribe of 
Colombia travelled to Washington to negotiate an extension of 
Plan Colombia unit 2009. [Plan Colombia is an agreement between 
the US and Colombia to provide military assistance with the 
stated aim of combating the drug trade in Colombia but in fact to 
help defeat leftist guerrillas in various parts of the country 
and to contain the political movement against rule by pro-US 
elites in general]. Are the trade unions and the rest of the 
progressive movement anticipating that the current crisis will 
drag on?

ND: The visit was part of a drive by Uribe at the 
international level to obtain support. The tour wasn't that 
successful in Europe. He did not get a warm reception in the 
European Community and did not get support for his plans for 
"security", including Plan Colombia.

The following week, however, he travelled to Washington to get 
the reassurance he was seeking. It must be pointed out that the 
Bush Administration has been an unconditional supporter of 
President Uribe and his terrorist strategy in Colombia. It has 
been announced in the press that Bush will redouble the military 
and political support for repression inside Colombia.

In has previously been acknowledged that there were 400 US 
soldiers in Colombia, presumably training their Colombian 
counterparts. This is the figure given publicly but it is 
suspected that there were closer to 500. However, the latest 
announcement from Washington means that there will be 800 
soldiers on Colombian territory. These troops will be adding 
weight to efforts to achieve a military solution to the social 
and political crisis in Colombia and the establishment of a 
military system there.

BB: Has the election of progressive candidates like 
"Lucho" Garzon to important posts in last year's municipal 
elections opened up more possibilities for popular forces in 
Colombia?

ND: The election of "Lucho" as Mayor of Bogota and the 
election of several other progressive candidates as mayors and 
governors of different regions show the people's willingness to 
vote for parties other than the traditional ones in Colombia. 
They are seeking a more progressive response to the militarist 
policies of President Uribe.

This follows on the success of the campaign to deny the 
Government additional powers at the referendum held last year. 
The vote was a form of punishment for the government of Uribe for 
those policies enforcing the militarisation of Colombia. It was a 
clear "no" from the people and showed support for the 
alternatives represented by leaders like "Lucho" and initiatives 
at a local level.

However, these local leaders will also suffer difficulties and 
repression at the hands of the traditional parties, 
paramilitaries and the government and, more indirectly, from US 
intervention. The US is not happy with these political 
developments.

BB: What is the attitude of the CUT to the proposed free 
trade agreement between the US, Canada and the countries of Latin 
America, the so-called Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA)? 
Have the unions been able to mobilise opposition from the 
workers?

ND: A protest movement in various countries of Latin 
America has developed over the proposal for an FTAA. Committees 
of opposition have been established in Colombia and in other 
Latin American countries. The FTAA is more than an agreement for 
"free trade". It is an attempt to further impose US interests and 
to more tightly control the economy of the region. They hope to 
have the arrangements in place by 2005.

The proposal for an FTAA has turned out to be problematic for the 
US Administration because of the reaction of a number of Latin 
American countries, particularly Venezuela, which has shown 
strong opposition to the main objectives of the proposal. There 
have been many other expressions of opposition throughout the 
region.

In Colombia, we are very concerned about the effects of an FTAA 
because of precedents set by other "free trade" agreements 
between the US and Latin American countries, such as the one 
between Mexico and North America [NAFTA — US, Canada & Mexico].

In that case, the real situation is that the US controls the 
Mexican economy. With the production of corn, for example, the 
current arrangement allows the US to sell subsidised corn in 
Mexico for less than the cost of production in Mexico. This is 
strictly illegal but recently the US passed a law that allows for 
an increase in the subsidies going to agriculture. This is very 
worrying and affects not only trade unionists but other sectors 
of the popular movement, as well.

US companies continue to receive high levels of subsidy at every 
stage of production while producers in Latin America are expected 
to compete with no assistance at all. The trade unions in 
Colombia are very concerned and have been gathering solidarity 
around the issue. The poor peasants are also very concerned — 
given the level of poverty that already exists among them — that 
the subsidised US products will wipe out any opportunity to 
export their products to North America.

All sectors of Colombian society affected have been demonstrating 
their concern at international forums like the Social Forum at 
Porto Alegre [in Brazil] and at the WTO meeting at Canczn. These 
forces have also taken part in anti-globalisation protests, for 
example in Italy and in Quito, the capital of Ecuador, where 
there was a summit of leaders discussing the FTAA in 2002. The 
move towards such an agreement has prompted a firm response from 
the people of Colombia and the region against the proposed FTAA.

BB: Is there anything else you would like to bring to the 
attention of the Australian people. What can we do from here to 
assist the people of Colombia?

ND: Solidarity with the people of Colombia is especially 
important in the area of human rights. Every year there are over 
28,000 people killed in Colombia by dark forces, the 
paramilitaries, in their efforts to impose a repressive regime on 
the people. There are about three million forcibly displaced 
persons in the country and another 125,000 who have fled the 
country for their own safety to neighbouring countries.

These displaced persons do not receive any assistance from any 
organisation of the Colombian Government, which persists with its 
policy of repression. That's why we are asking the international 
community to become active around these questions of human 
rights. This is one of the reasons for my visit to Australia.

We hope that people Australia will be able to show solidarity by 
confronting the policies of the US. In Colombia we know that 
Australia is an ally of the US and that Australia and the US have 
signed a number of accords regarding human rights. However, we 
would like the Australian people to know what sort of ally the 
country has with the Bush Administration.

* * *

Interview conducted in Spanish.
Thanks to Juan for assistance with translation.