www.military.com In-Depth U.S.-Iraq War Analysis

Subscribe now to the U.S.-Iraq War Website. Unbiased analyses, situation reports, 24/7 monitoring, and tools for understanding the pending war from the experts at Stratfor.

Stratfor: The Chirac-Hussein Connection

French President Jacques Chirac is a pivotal figure on the international scene, whose views on Iraq are of vital concern. Those views are not driven simply by geopolitics, however. The factors that shape his thinking include a long, complex and sometimes mysterious relationship with Saddam Hussein. The relationship is not secret, but it is no longer as well known as it once was -- nor is it well known outside of France. It is not insignificant in understanding Chirac's view of Iraq.

Analysis

In attempting to understand France's behavior over the issue of war with Iraq, there is little question but that strategic, economic and geopolitical considerations are dominant drivers. However, in order to understand the details of French behavior, it is also important to understand a not really unknown but oddly neglected aspect of French policy: the personal relationship between French President Jacques Chirac and Saddam Hussein.

The relationship dates back to late 1974, when then-French Premier Chirac traveled to Baghdad and met the No. 2 man in the Iraqi government, Vice President Saddam Hussein. During that visit, Chirac and Hussein conducted negotiations on a range of issues, the most important of these being Iraq's purchase of nuclear reactors. In September 1975, Hussein traveled to Paris, where Chirac personally gave him a tour of a French nuclear plant. During that visit, Chirac said, "Iraq is in the process of beginning a coherent nuclear program and France wants to associate herself with that effort in the field of reactors." France sold two reactors to Iraq, with the agreement signed during Hussein's visit. The Iraqis purchased a 70-megawatt reactor, along with six charges of 26 points of uranium enriched to 93 percent -- in other words, enough weapons-grade uranium to produce three to four nuclear devices. Baghdad also purchased a one-megawatt research reactor, and France agreed to train 600 Iraqi nuclear technicians and scientists -- the core of Iraq's nuclear capability today. Other dimensions of the relationship were decided on during this visit and implemented in the months afterward. France agreed to sell Iraq $1.5 billion worth of weapons -- including the integrated air defense system that was destroyed by the United States in 1991, about 60 Mirage F1 fighter planes, surface-to-air missiles and advanced electronics. The Iraqis, for their part, agreed to sell France $70 million worth of oil. During this period, Chirac and Hussein formed what Chirac called a close personal relationship. As the New York Times put it in a 1986 report about Chirac's attempt to return to the premiership, the French official "has said many times that he is a personal friend of Saddam Hussein of Iraq." In 1987, the Manchester Guardian Weekly quoted Chirac as saying that he was "truly fascinated by Saddam Hussein since 1974." Whatever personal chemistry there might have been between the two leaders obviously remained in place a decade later, and clearly was not simply linked to the deals of 1974-75. Politicians and businessmen move on; they don't linger the way Chirac did. Partly because of the breadth of the relationship Chirac and Hussein had created in a relatively short period of time and the obvious warmth of their personal ties, there was intense speculation about the less visible aspects of the relationship. For example, one unsubstantiated rumor that still can be heard in places like Beirut was that Hussein helped to finance Chirac's run for mayor of Paris in 1977, after he lost the French premiership. Another, equally unsubstantiated rumor was that Hussein had skimmed funds from the huge amounts of money that were being moved around, and that he did so with Chirac's full knowledge. There are endless rumors, all unproven and perhaps all scurrilous, about the relationship. Some of these might have been moved by malice, but they also are powered by the unfathomability of the relationship and by Chirac's willingness to publicly affirm it. It reached the point that Iranians referred to Chirac as "Shah-Iraq" and Israelis spoke of the Osirak reactor as "O-Chirac." Indeed, as recently as last week, a Stratfor source in Lebanon reasserted these claims as if they were incontestable. Innuendo has become reality. Former French President Valery Giscard d'Estaing, who held office at the time of the negotiations with Iraq, said in 1984 that the deal "came out of an agreement that was not negotiated in Paris and therefore did not originate with the president of the republic." Under the odd French constitution, it is conceivable that the president of the republic wouldn't know what the premier of France had negotiated -- but on a deal of this scale, this would be unlikely, unless the deal in fact had been negotiated between Chirac and Hussein in the dark and presented as a fait accompli. There is some evidence for this notion. Earlier, when Giscard d'Estaing found out about the deal -- and particularly about the sale of 93 percent uranium -- he had ordered the French nuclear research facility at Saclay to develop an alternative that would take care of Iraq's legitimate needs, but without supplying weapons-grade uranium. The product, called "caramel," was only 3 percent enriched but entirely suitable to non-weapons needs. The French made the offer, which Iraq declined. By 1986, Chirac clearly had decided to change his image. In preparation for the 1988 presidential elections, Chirac let it be known that he never had anything to do with the sale of the Osirak reactor. In an interview with an Israeli newspaper, he said, "It wasn't me who negotiated the construction of Osirak with Baghdad. The negotiation was led by my minister of industry in very close collaboration with Giscard d'Estaing." He went on to say, "I never took part in these negotiations. I never discussed the subject with Saddam Hussein. The fact is that I did not find out about the affair until very late." Obviously, Chirac was contradicting what he had said publicly in 1975. More to the point, he also was not making a great deal of sense in claiming that his minister of industry -- who at that time was Michel d'Ornano -- had negotiated a deal as large as this one. That is true even if one assumes the absurd, which was that the nuclear deal was a stand-alone and not linked to the arms and oil deals or to a broader strategic relationship. In fact, d'Ornano claimed that he didn't even make the trip to Iraq with Chirac in 1974, let alone act as the prime negotiator. Everything he did was in conjunction with Chirac. In 1981, the Israelis destroyed the Iraqi reactor in an air attack. There were rumors -- which were denied -- that the French government was offering to rebuild the reactor. In August 1987, French satirical and muckraking magazine, "Le Canard Enchaine" published excerpts of a letter from Chirac to Hussein -- dated June 24, 1987, and hand-delivered by Trade Minister Michel Noir -- which the magazine claimed indicated that he was negotiating to rebuild the Iraqi reactor. The letter says nothing about nuclear reactors, but it does say that Chirac hopes for an agreement "on the negotiation which you know about," and it speaks of the "cooperation launched more than 12 years ago under our personal joint initiative, in this capital district for the sovereignty, independence and security of your country." In the letter, Chirac also, once again, referred to Hussein as "my dear friend." Chirac and the government confirmed that the letter was genuine. They denied that it referred to rebuilding a nuclear reactor. The letter speaks merely of the agreements relating to "an essential chapter in Franco-Iraqi relations, both in the present circumstances and in the future." Chirac claimed that any attempt to link the letter to the reconstruction of the nuclear facility was a "ridiculous invention." Assuming Chirac's sincerity, this leaves open the question of what the "essential chapter" refers to and why, instead of specifying the subject, Chirac resorted to a circumlocution like "negotiation which you know about." Only two possible conclusions can be drawn from this letter: Chirac either was trying, in the midst of the Iran-Iraq war and after his denial of involvement in the first place, to rebuild Iraq's nuclear capability, or he wasn't. And if he wasn't, what was he doing that required such complex language, clearly intended for deniability if revealed? No ordinary state-to-state relationship would require a combination of affection, recollection of long history and promise for the future without mentioning the subject. If we concede to Chirac that it had nothing to do with nuclear reactors, then the mystery actually deepens. It is unfair to tag Chirac with the rumors that have trailed him in his relations with Hussein. It is fair to say, however, that Chirac has created a circumstance for breeding rumors. The issues raised here were all well known at one time and place. When they are laid end-to-end, a mystery arises. What affair was being discussed in the letter delivered by Michel Noir? If not nuclear reactors, then what was referenced but never mentioned specifically in Chirac's letter to his "dear friend" Hussein? Whatever the answer, it is clear that the relationship between Chirac and Hussein is long and complex, and not altogether easy to understand. That relationship does not, by itself, explain all of France's policies toward Iraq or its stance toward a war between the United States and Iraq. But at the same time, it is inconceivable that this relationship has no effect on Chirac's personal decision-making process. There is an intensity to Chirac's Iraq policy that may simply signify the remnants of an old, warm friendship gone bad, or that may have a different origin. In any case, it is a reality that cannot be ignored and that must be taken into account in understanding the French leader's behavior.

expatvillage.com

Last year I remained in my home town of Maturin to experience Carnaval in all its colourful glory; but this year I deliberately missed the party & headed, instead, for the Orinoco Delta.

Waranoko Jungle Camp, Orinoco Delta, Venezuela Right now, most of Venezuela has only one thing on its mind: Carnaval. In every town & village, people are out on the streets drinking, dancing, & drenching one another with bucketfuls of water. The music is loud; food & beer kiosks have sprouted everywhere; normal traffic is diverted to make way for gaudy carnival floats & costumed merrymakers; men dressed as devils enact strange dramas, as excited children & pretty señoritas look on. This annual explosion of joie de vivre starts on a Saturday & finishes the following Tuesday. Last year I remained in my home town of Maturin to experience Carnaval in all its colourful glory ; but this year I deliberately missed the party & headed, instead, for the Orinoco Delta. If you look at a map of Venezuela, the mouth of the River Orinoco is impressively vast: its many fingers cover an enormous area as they stretch out into the Atlantic Ocean towards Trinidad. Today is Sunday ; I am writing this letter in a remote jungle camp on the banks of one of the many rivers, or caños, that comprise the Delta system. Getting here was easy : I took a por puesto (shared taxi) from Maturin to the little town of Tucupita, which is the starting-point for Orinoco trips ; from there I travelled by motor launch to Waranoko camp. The river journey was amazing. For 5 hours we snaked our leisurely way between the mangroves, stopping once for lunch (at the comparatively luxurious Guamal Camp), once for gasoline (supplied by the Warao Indians, whose home this is), once to buy Warao craft items (I bought a balsa-wood toucan & a beautifully woven fruit bowl) & many times to observe the birds & animals. The region is a natural paradise. Huge turquoise butterflies flap lazily by; blue & yellow macaws scream overhead ; prehistoric-looking hoatzins fly off panic-stricken as the boat approaches. On one occasion our boatman stopped & pointed at what looked like bright red flowers in the trees ahead. Suddenly the flowers began to move; then they were air-borne. My first scarlet ibises! Another memorable sight was the pink dolphins, which never go out to sea but permanently inhabit the fresh waters of the Orinoco. The river is a deep brown, so these creatures are only visible when they breach the surface. Meeting the Warao Indians was fascinating. Many of them speak no Spanish, only their Warao native tongue. They are a boat people who live in wooden open-sided houses raised on poles out of the water. There are wooden walkways, also on poles, connecting the houses. The Warao are self-sufficient - fishing, hunting & baking bread - but, to make a little money, they sell baskets, hammocks & balsa carvings to the tourists. When we stopped for gasoline, I noticed an animal skin stretched out on the logs of a walkway. I asked in Spanish what it was. "Tigre," came the reply. I discovered that this was a jaguar which had been killed for its skin & teeth. The teeth had magical properties & would be worn as amulets. The skin was being dried & would eventually be sold to tourists. Waranoko Camp, where I am sitting now at 8pm, is splendidly basic. Everything is home-made; everything is wooden. In the Delta there is no such thing as a rock or a pebble or sand - only mud, silt & trees. The main building is constructed from mangrove wood ; the roof is thatched with palm leaves. The hammocks that we sleep in were woven by the Warao Indians from the fibres of the moriche palm tree. This camp, because of its remoteness, does not attract the tourist hordes from Margarita Island. They stay at Guamal Camp, which is 1½ hours from the Tucupita airstrip. Apart from myself there are only two other tourists here: Gerard, a laid-back South African geologist who works in Caracas ; & Melisa, a polyglot Argentine who cares passionately about nature. The camp is staffed by a couple of locals & by Charlie from neighbouring Guyana. Charlie is as laid-back & friendly as they come. English is his first language. His trousers are full of holes & his arms are crudely tattooed. He arrived here from Guyana 14 years ago & has never gone back - not even to visit his relatives. He says he likes the tranquillity of the jungle. We talked about cricket &, like all good Guyanans, he had heard of Clive Lloyd & Gary Sobers. Then I asked him a quiz question: which Venezuelan state shares its name with a famous current West Indian cricketer? Charlie hadn't a clue. He perused the map of Venezuela hanging on the wall but still couldn't say. I gave him the answer: Lara (Brian Lara is the current West Indian kingpin, & Lara state is to the west of Caracas). Charlie knew the old cricketers but was blissfully ignorant of anything that had happened in the 14 years since his arrival in the Delta. Tonight we may go out to see alligators. But it is so pleasant just sitting by the water's edge - watching the stars, listening to the jungle noises, sipping a cuba libre - that I will probably stay here. One blessed feature of this camp is the absence of mosquitoes. Nobody knows why, but there aren't any. I will sleep tonight in my hammock without a mosquito net. This is quite different from Guamal Camp, where mosquitoes abound & mosquito netting is essential. Tomorrow I travel back to 'civilisation' & the excitement of Carnaval. But for now, I will savour the stillness & beauty of this pristine place in the heart of the Orinoco Delta. Kevin Mulqueen 5/3/2000

March 6, 2003 9:37pm Venezuelan pro-government VENews web site on 6 March

Agriculture Supplies and Service Corporation (Casa) president, Gerardo Liscano says primary foodstuffs will be on sale at wholesale markets.

The products the public can buy are: black beans, lentils, dried peas, maize flour, sardines, tuna, pasta, rice and powdered milk.

Liscano has announced that local garrisons will oversee the whole process to avoid lack of supplies and possible loss of material through desabastecimiento [scarcity]. "We are currently engaged in a deal to import a greater variety of foodstuffs within the next couple of weeks."

Meanwhile, state consumer watchdog committee (Indecu [Institute for the Defence and Education of the Consumer and User]) has been checking 1,000 complaints of speculation.

Liscano sums up saying 238 stores have been penalized but 116 re-opened after it was discovered that they had been misinformed about prices. "The offenders are small stores and supermarket in popular areas".

Indecu president, Samuel Ruh confirms that all the big supermarket chains are adhering to the government's price listings.

The Production and Trade (MPC) Ministry has granted 3bn bolivares to bolster Indecu in the upcoming exchange rate markets... [ellipsis as published] "Indecu will also be moving its offices to Parque Central [where the Production and Trade Ministry has its offices]".

Source: VENews web site in English 6 Mar 03

/© BBC Monitoring

Publication: BBC Monitoring International Reports

Distributed by Financial Times Information Limited - Asia Africa Intelligence Wire

www.miami.com Posted on Fri, Mar. 07, 2003 BY ANDREA ELLIOTT aelliott@herald.com

SEEKING ASYLUM: Elias Halabi and his wife, Carmen Aponte de Halabi, say they fled after attacks by Chavez foes.

The peach stucco house fades into Kendall's landscape, not a hint of the politics humming inside.

Posters line a room in the back, bearing the likeness of embattled Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez. Red pins dot a U.S. map, marking this pro-Chávez base and others recently formed around the nation, known as Bolivarian Circles -- the controversial beating heart of Chávez's civic support.

One year ago, Jesús Soto's Kendall home became the first U.S. extension of the Chávez-organized groups. In Venezuela, critics claim, the groups are armed and trained by the government and strike out violently against journalists and civilians.

''We want to spread the circles abroad and defend them so people stop believing we are terror circles like they say -- armed to attack the wealthy,'' said Soto, 36, who inaugurated the circle in Bayfront Park wearing a red beret and fatigues on Feb. 4, 2002 -- the anniversary of Chávez' failed 1992 coup.

Since then, 17 other circles have sprung up from Connecticut to Wyoming.

That South Florida -- rich with anti-Chávez Venezuelans and Cuban exiles -- is hostile nesting ground for Chávez support is not lost on Soto.

''Our work is to try to change the image that Chávez is a dictator,'' Soto said. ``In Venezuela there is a deep democracy. We elected this president. . . . The opposition here is telling the media lies.''

Florida's largely upper-middle class Venezuelan opposition showed its clout in January when an estimated 60,000 people -- the majority of them Venezuelan -- gathered on Calle Ocho to protest Chávez's leadership.

By comparison, the 180 members of Miami's Bolivarian Circle seem scant. An additional 23 members belong to circles in Tampa, Orlando and Fort Lauderdale.

SOURCE OF NAME

The groups take their name from Simón Bolívar, the South American general who liberated much of the region, including Venezuela, from Spain in the 1800s.

Changing Chávez's image ''is the work of ants,'' said Tahid Soto, Jesús Soto's wife, who helps coordinate the U.S. circles with those in Venezuela. ``Little by little, it's coming along.''

Fear could be the reason that membership is minimal compared to the sizable -- and very visible -- Venezuelan opposition in the United States, said Carlos Matamoros, a radio host.

''I have a lot of friends who support Chávez who live clandestinely. They are scared to express what they think out of fear of retaliation,'' said Matamoros, who hosts Hablando Claro, a program about Venezuela, on Union Radio, WOCN-AM 1450.

Circle leaders draw strength from what they say is a growing Bolivarian international network. The U.S. circle members will hold their first national assembly in New York in March, and Chávez representatives from Venezuela plan to attend.

The Venezuelan government also will host an international Bolivarian Circle meeting in April in Caracas. ''There are circles in Bilbao, Madrid, Denmark -- all over the place. It's really neat,'' said Guillermo García Ponce, Chávez advisory committee coordinator, in an interview with The Herald in Caracas. He acknowledged that South Florida has become an anti-Chávez stronghold.

''I suppose [the Miami circle] will have to keep a low profile,'' García said.

Anti-Chávez activists say they do not oppose the presence of a Bolivarian Circle in Miami as long as it doesn't instigate the violence they allege the circles have caused in Venezuela -- a claim Soto and others deny.

''The government has allowed the Bolivarian Circles to attack the newspapers, attack the reporters,'' said Raúl Leoni, a Venezuelan opposition leader who lives in Weston. ``The fact that you win an election doesn't make you eternal if you're not doing your job correctly.''

NO THREATS RECEIVED

Soto said no threats have been made against him or other members, though a fire bomb was placed under his car eight years ago after he made a television appearance supporting Chávez's unsuccessful coup. No one was injured and no arrests were made.

The Bolivarian Circles -- along with Chávez's controversial 1999 ''Bolivarian constitution'' -- are part of his overarching ``Bolivarian Revolution.''

Some 70,000 circles exist in Venezuela, made up largely of the working class. Typically, they meet weekly and engage in humanitarian projects such as providing food for the poor -- with military financing -- and building schools.

Critics compare the circles to Fidel Castro's Committees for the Defense of the Revolution.

Several of the Venezuelans present at a recent documentary screening sponsored by a Hialeah circle work at blue-collar jobs in Miami and drive older cars -- a clear distinction from the largely well-heeled protesters at January's march.

''The only way to understand Venezuela is to understand the deep divisions of race and class. It cuts that way,'' said Jerry Haar, a senior research associate at the University of Miami's North-South Center. ``The lighter-skinned you are, the higher level of income, education and prominence you have in party politics. Chávez, being none of those things, is the odd man out.''

Both sides vehemently dispute the notion that only the poor support Chávez and that only the rich oppose him. The opposition has increasingly cut across the social spectrum as more people lose faith in the shaky administration.

Chávez supporters simply point to the group Clase Media en Positiva -- a Venezuelan-based organization of working professionals who support Chávez -- to show diversity in their ranks.

Elias Halabi, who recently fled Valencia, Venezuela, for Miami Beach after his home and car dealership were bombed, is a member of the group. ''I am a prosperous businessman and I sympathize with the ideas of Chávez,'' said Halabi, 48. ``Revolution is change. It's not a process towards communism. It's a process towards democracy and participation. The government before was a mafia.''

Special correspondent Phil Gunson contributed to this report.

frontpagemag.com By Candie Gibson Lemaire FrontPageMagazine.com | March 7, 2003

When your own words come back and leave you with egg on your face, it is called blowback. Senator John Kerry's recent defense of Columbia's FARC terrorists, and their "legitimate complaints" should elicit significant political blowback from the American people.

John Kerry made these remarks after a February speech in Boston, where he replied to a question about the U.S. war on drugs by saying, "It seems to be a renewal of a kind of chaos fueled partly by guerrillas who have legitimate complaints and the combination of drugs and war and the drug lord." Any red-blooded American has to ponder how Senator John "F." Kerry, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, could form such solidarity with a guerrilla terrorist group - a Colombian terrorist group that took three captured Americans as "prisoners of war." We're not talking about a small terrorist uprising. This group, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), have a vast stronghold in the mountains and jungles of Colombia, and control a prime cocaine-producing region of the country.

Truthfully, terrorism stemming from South America looms as a force to be reckoned with. However, the U.S. cannot sleepwalk around it and still press on to wage a fight on terror. Much of the unease stems from the presence of three insurgent groups operating within Colombia. Though formally a democracy, Colombia remains a violent society, teeming with corruption, and driven by the special fuel of drug trafficking. Of the three guerilla organizations, FARC has clearly been on the forefront. Colombia's President Uribe's pledge to eradicate FARC terror  won him the presidential election; however, threats from FARC on attempts to eradicate President Uribe materialized in the southern city of Neiva, where a powerful bomb killed 18 people just one day before Uribe's planned visit to that city. Undaunted, Uribe made an appearnce in Neiva to offer condolences to relatives of those killed in the blast.

In addition to FARC, two other twin terrorist groups are gaining ground. The ELN, or National Liberation Army, and the A-U-C, or United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, are garnering their own distinctions. On September 10, 2001, one day in advance of the infamous New York attack of terror, the State Department officially added the name of A-U-C to its list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO). The FTO is updated every two years by the State Department's Coordinator for Counterterrorism. FARC, the largest guerrilla group, controls substantial areas of Colombia’s eastern lowlands and rain forest (a cocaine processing region of the country) while the ELN has been functioning primarily within the central area of the region, (a prime opium growing district). They have also reached up to the northeastern border near Venezuela.

Unfortunately, FARC's control has not been lessened, even with the recent U.S. expansion of assistance, which has taken in the form of both U.S. deployment of military personnel and millions of U.S. dollars to combat terrorism on the southern front. President Bush's Colombian aid package, "Plan Colombia," has been deemed a failure in making much of a dent in the day-to-day operations of Colombian terrorists. The plan's strategy to use fumigation for the coca fields and plants ended up creating animosity toward the U.S. by farmers who were left with no way to make a living; and, in the end, this may have given more credence to the guerilla groups such as FARC and the A-U-C.

On the positive side of the ledger, there has been limited Colombian government cooperation. Even with limited resources, the Colombian government under President Alvaro Uribe has tried to stand tall against FARC terrorism, and remains eager to resolve the ongoing civil war in a country where terrorism is homegrown.

However, drug thugs and the trade they create do not exist in a vacuum. Thus, the  U.S. should be ever mindful of the common goals terrorists share. America must include in this war on terrorism limits on the conditions that permit this southern front to escalate, namely the conditions of "loose borders" and a huge demand in the U.S. for drugs.

The impending threat from the southern front is not only from Colombia and Venezuela, but also Paraguay and Brazil, which have long been hotbeds and havens for rampant drugs and terrorism. According to joint testimony submitted in March 2002 by State Department officials before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Technology, Terrorism, and Government Information, a "historic link" was noted in the Western Hemisphere between various terrorist groups and narcotics trafficking.

Colombia, Peru, Paraguay and Brazil were all citied to be of imminent and growing concern. Testimony pointed out that FARC units throughout southern Colombia continue to raise cash via extortion to support their activities. The Justice Department’s DEA Administrator indicated continued unease with regard to the role of drug profits, especifically from FARC narco-terrorism activities, and the far-reaching tentacles of global terrorism.

In 2002, debate at the UN’s 57th General Assembly meeting brought about a discussion on terrorism and illicit drug trafficking within the South American region. A Brazilian representative told the Committee about stepped-up initiatives to combat criminal activity. Maria Luiza Ribeiro Viotti of Brazil stated that the fight in opposition to transnational organized crime was one of Brazil’s top priorities.

This South American region, commonly known as the tri-border, has increasingly drawn the interest of antiterrorism experts. This area is where the countries of Brazil, Paraguay and Argentina come together. Counter-terrorism police have stated that evidence indicates terrorist activity has now dispersed east from Argentina to the isolated Brazilian jungles, and even to Sao Paulo, Brazil's financial capital. Experts agree that Brazil and its surrounding area have all the ingredients for a large-scale hotspot, including the fact that the region is also known for its leaky borders. A variety of Middle Easterners have been pouring in for some time.

Additionally, problems in Venezuela with Hugo Chavez prompted the Bush White House to put aside personal distaste for the elected leader and his policies, which resulted in widespread condemnation of the U.S. to seek a more peaceful conclusion to the dilemma. It should be noted that Bill Clinton's political strategist, James Carville, was a key manager in the Chavez election in Venezuela. Once elected, Chavez began to impose a dictatorship reign, inspired in large measure by Fidel Castro. Chavez sought out countries such as Libya and the People's Republic of China for alliances. A glaring and alarming fact is that Venezuela is currently South America's largest supplier of oil, which presents a looming global terrorism labyrinth. Given these clear and present concerns, the U.S. War on Terrorism must include a tactic to include awareness of the terrorist threats from our southern flank. In other words, we must connect the terrorist dots.

Clearly, South America's narcotics industry coupling with a terrorist threat serves as a loud wakeup call. It is a bona fide menace -- a menace on the move and gaining momentum. What once was a worrisome corrupt drug trade has now become toxic terrorism, laced with political dimensions. Exhibit A was the capture of three Americans in Colombia by FARC. FARC rebels accused the three Americans of being agents of the CIA, and considered U.S. involvement in Colombia an act of war. Well, war it is, and it would be prudent for the U.S. to be more mindful of this supplying region which harbors terrorism with a narcotics panache.

Certainly, any campaign to diminish the terrorist threat from the southern front must confront our identifiable immigration problems. Our overwhelmed immigration system is the primary lure -- both to immigrants who desire to come to “the promised land” and also to those who need an accessible viaduct for illegal business. Simply put, our borders are wide open spaces.

So, how then, if America’s objective is national security, can we ignore a vigorous measure of implemented homeland border protection? The events of September 11th still speak in moving terms that the breadth of protection must include full border restraint. Without immigration control, America faces a domestic cataclysm. Some discussion may be in order regarding specific global fronts where American troops are now deployed - and whether they might be better used to protect “the land of the free and home of the brave.”

Terrorism cannot be contained without a mandate on immigration restrictions coupled with border protection, and the implementation should come immediately.

Senator Kerry's vocalized rationale for rebels with terror tactics that are now slick enough to grease their way deep into the Colombian narco-democracy, is counterproductive; and sympathies, implied or expressed, by any U.S. representative to provide justification for rebel terror -- especially following September 11, 2001 -- is untenable. It is a line of thinking which surely should leave any presidential hopeful on a slippery slope of credibility.

Democracy and the freedoms we savor every day are indeed worth this fight on terrorism. It’s a fight looming both the Middle East and our Southern Front. Rooting out terrorism is not for the faint of heart. Whether it's a shoulder-to-shoulder hunt, or simply the watchful eye of a vigilant citizen, it is a non-stop duty for all of the nation. That’s why any misguided rhetoric expressed as sanctioning rebel terrorist activities in Colombia, such as those made by Senator Kerry, is indefensible. Not only is it a disservice to our men and women in uniform, both current and former, but it is not in keeping with our basic American principles. Most of those who noticed Senator Kerry's remarks are humming out a sour note, which may become Kerry's own swan song.