<<. . . .many Mantanese were shocked to see the American presence result in
a steep rise of night clubs, sex trade, drug dealing and crime.>>
<<Public opinion shifted dramatically throughout Ecuador, when the US base
was allowed to expand encroaching the lands of local farmers without proper
compensation, and, when the US military sunk several fishing boats because
they sailed too close to the safety perimeter around the base.>>
http://www.tni.org/article/closing-bases
Closing bases
Wilbert van der...
Nov 17 2009
The closure of the US military base in Manta is a huge victory for both the
Ecuadorian activists who have been campaigning for a decade against the US
military presence in their country, and for the international No-Bases
campaign.
Manta is a lively city with 200,000 residents, on the Pacific Coast of
Ecuador. Because of its harbour, it is a major hub of Ecuadorian tuna
fishing industry. The city is home to an airport used only for domestic and
regional flights.
In 1999, it was this airfield that made Manta the perfect location for a
base for the United States military, as the US was looking for new hosts for
its Forward Operations Locations (FOL) – military facilities for monitoring,
tracking and intercepting drug trafficking from Colombia. Soon, those
locations were found in El Salvador, The Netherlands-Antilles and in
Ecuador.
This July, US military planes lifted off from the Eloy Alfaro Airbase, for
the last time. After ten years of maintaining a base in Manta, the US was
asked to end its military presence on Ecuadorian soil.
This was a huge victory for the Ecuadorian activists who have been
campaigning for a decade, against the US military presence in their country
that jeopardised Ecuador's sovereignty and security. It was a big victory,
too, for the international No-Bases campaign that started in 2003, during
the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. As the US military was kicked out of
Ecuador, the joy was shared by around 450 No-Bases campaign chapters
worldwide.
As it happens often, the Ecuadorian population originally welcomed the US
military, having been told by the government that the US base would bring
international recognition for Manta along with new investments, new jobs and
increased tourism. To top it off, the US promised that it would improve the
local infrastructure and the harbour. Back then, few people worried about
the unclear mandate and mission of the military base, or, the effects of
such military presence – what it would do to the city.
In reality, new jobs were minimal – mostly low-paid work or temporary
construction work. The fate of the people did not change as much as they
were promised. The US promise to spend big on infrastructure in the region
turned out to be one road, leading from the base to the city. In addition,
many Mantanese were shocked to see the American presence result in a steep
rise of night clubs, sex trade, drug dealing and crime.
Public opinion shifted dramatically throughout Ecuador, when the US base was
allowed to expand encroaching the lands of local farmers without proper
compensation, and, when the US military sunk several fishing boats because
they sailed too close to the safety perimeter around the base.
Protests grew further, when it was exposed that the Manta base was involved
in the chemical spraying of coca-fields in Colombia. Many Ecuadorian
farmers, living close to the Columbian border, saw their fields and crops
ruined.
The disappointments and problems experienced by the people of Manta are
shared by many around the globe who face the everyday realities of a foreign
military presence in their city or region.
The US alone maintains a global network of over a thousand such
installations, in over a hundred countries. With this network of military
bases and accompanying bilateral treaties with host nations in every
continent, the US has built a permanent global military presence that, in
the words of the Pentagon, enables it "to strike at a moments notice in any
dark corner of the world." And, that is excluding the temporary military
bases in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and the Philippines.
Meanwhile, former European colonial powers – current members of Nato –
operate another 200 foreign military bases around the globe. The British can
be found in the Atlantic, the Mediterranean and the Indian Ocean. The French
presence is strong in Africa, the South Pacific and the Caribbean. To
complete the picture, Russia maintains about half a dozen bases in former
Soviet republics while India has an airbase in Tajikistan.
The most common problems experienced by the people living close to these
military installations are pollution, noise-related stress and high crime
rates. Also, the legal immunity awarded to military and civilian personnel
operating from these bases ensures that any crimes committed by them go
unpunished.
Manta and other FOL sites in El Salvador and the Netherlands Antilles are
leased from the host governments. The Status of Forces Agreement in all
these cases includes not only provisions for legal immunity for the
servicemen, but also, provisions that strictly limit the use of the
facilities. The Manta base, for example, was only to be used for monitoring
drug transports from Colombia to the North American market. Therefore, Plan
Colombia – missions connected to the civil war in Colombia – was
specifically excluded from its mandate.
Although in the Netherlands and El Salvador, the government's attitude is
that the US deserves to be trusted on these matters, in Ecuador it soon
became clear that this was a rather naïve position. For ten years, the US
military used the Manta base for counterinsurgency missions in Colombia,
helping the Colombian government in its war against the Farc and other
guerilla groups. Worse, in 2008, the US military coordinated the
extrajudicial killing of Farc leader Reyes from Manta, guiding Colombian
troops into Ecuadorian territory to do the killing. In other words, the US
used its base in Ecuador to help the Colombian army to violate Ecuadorian
territorial integrity.
Such breach of agreement is repeated over and over on a global level.
Lacking proper control mechanisms, the host countries are usually unable to
keep the country operating the base stick to the original deal. That is why
joint intelligence bases are often used to spy on host countries (like in
Europe); drug interception operations develop into reconnaissance and
counterinsurgency missions; and, bases originally set up to provide security
to a host nation develop into jumping boards for military interventions and
invasions – for example, in Europe, the US military bases originally set up
to provide common defence against the Soviet threat are now crucial
infrastructure for invasions in the Middle East, Central Asia and the
Caucasus.
Once a foreign base is established in a country, it is not easy to send the
guests back home. In Manta, it took ten years of growing public pressure and
a victorious election to convince Washington to close its base. The
traditional political parties in Ecuador ignored the rising protests against
the base among their own constituencies since they prioritised on remaining
a loyal ally to the US. This led to the remarkable victory for Rafael
Correa – the only candidate who promised to shut down the Manta base in his
campaign – in the 2006 presidential elections.
In March 2007, just three months after the inauguration of the new
government, the International Network for the Abolition of Foreign Military
Bases organised its first global conference, in Quito and Manta. The
pressure from Washington on the new Ecuadorian government was tangible. The
US tried to bully and bribe the government into extending the lease of the
Manta base. To repudiate the No-Bases campaigners in town at the time of the
conference, the US embassy was busy organising press trips to the Manta
base, to show the press that Manta was "not really a base." However, that
only emphasised the importance of Manta.
The No-Bases conference helped solidify a wide consensus among the
Ecuadorian population that it was time for the US military to leave. Also,
the conference helped to keep the pressure on the new government to not give
in under the tremendous pressure from Washington to keep the base open.
The closure of the Manta base was a victory for all Ecuadorians, a victory
shared by hundreds of similar campaigns around the globe that have been
working together since 2003. Through international solidarity, campaigners
found out that they are not alone in their long struggles for justice and
security. By sharing information they learned from each other's tactics,
and, through joint actions, the International Network for the Abolition of
Foreign Military bases has been successful in putting the bases issue on the
agenda of many international movements for peace and socio-economic justice.
The campaign is slowly creating more space for political debate on the
issue, both in the host nations and on an international level.
The next step for the network is to campaign for an international treaty
regulating – and strictly limiting – the opportunities for countries to
export their military might through foreign bases. At the same time, the
No-Bases network will continue unabatedly to fight for citizens around the
world whose rights to livelihood, safety and justice are jeopardised by a
foreign military presence.
_______________________________________________
Rad-Green mailing list
Rad-Green@lists.econ.utah.edu
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green
No comments:
Post a Comment