

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Extensive previously unpublished evidence implicates many Colombian army generals and colonels in widespread and systematic extrajudicial killings of civilians between 2002 and 2008, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today.
The 95-page report, "On Their Watch: Evidence of Senior Army Officers' Responsibility for False Positive Killings in Colombia," presents evidence strongly suggesting that numerous generals and colonels knew or should have known about "false positive" killings, and may have ordered or otherwise actively furthered them. Prosecutors are investigating at least 3,000 of these cases, in which army troops under pressure to boost body counts in their war against armed guerrilla groups killed civilians and reported them as combat fatalities. Hundreds of lower-ranking soldiers have been convicted, but just a handful of colonels and no generals.
"False positive killings amount to one of the worst episodes of mass atrocity in the Western Hemisphere in recent years, and there is mounting evidence that many senior army officers bear responsibility," said Jose Miguel Vivanco, executive Americas director at Human Rights Watch. "Yet the army officials in charge at the time of the killings have escaped justice and even ascended to the top of the military command, including the current heads of the army and armed forces."
A Human Rights Watch analysis of Attorney General's Office data shows that prosecutors have identified more than 180 battalions and other tactical units - attached to virtually all brigades and in every army division at the time - that allegedly committed extrajudicial killings between 2002 and 2008. Evidence detailed in the report shows that commanders of the brigades and tactical units responsible for a significant number of killings - as well as top army leaders - at least knew or should have known about the crimes, and therefore may be criminally liable as a matter of command responsibility.
Human Rights Watch also obtained recordings and transcriptions of testimony to prosecutors from military personnel implicated in false positives who reported that their superiors, including generals and colonels, allegedly knew of, or planned, ordered, or otherwise facilitated the crimes.
Some of the army officers who commanded the 11 brigades more closely analyzed in the report later became top military leaders. For example, prosecutors' data show they are investigating:
The report is based on a Human Rights Watch review of extensive, hereto unpublished, prosecutor's office data; criminal case files; witness testimony, much of it previously unpublished; judicially ordered recordings of retired Lt. Col. Robinson Gonzalez del Rio's phone conversations made by justice authorities after his arrest for false positives; and interviews with prosecutors, witnesses, victims' families, and their lawyers, among other sources.
"Prosecutors confront serious obstacles to advancing their cases, ranging from reprisals against key witnesses to a lack of cooperation by military authorities," Vivanco said. "And many - possibly hundreds - of false positive cases remain in the military justice system, which for all practical purposes guarantees impunity."
Human Rights Watch documented threats, attacks, and harassment against soldiers who have testified against superiors in false positive cases. On October 27, 2014, Nixon de Jesus Carcamo, who had confessed and had been providing information to prosecutors about his superiors' alleged role in false positive cases, was murdered in the 11th Brigade's military detention center.
Prosecutors told Human Rights Watch that military personnel often resist handing over army documents that are crucial to their investigations, such as those that ordered the supposed operations in which the executions occurred and certified payments to informants in the cases.
Moreover, despite repeated rulings of Colombia's Constitutional Court and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights calling for human rights violations to be exclusively investigated and tried by civilian justice authorities, prosecutors say that scores - possibly hundreds - of false positive cases remain in the military justice system. This poses a major impediment to accountability, especially given the evidence documented in the report that the military justice system failed to take basic steps to investigate false positives when most cases were under its jurisdiction, and that at least some military judges actively helped troops cover up the crimes.
Human Rights Watch reviewed judicially ordered audio recordings of Gonzalez del Rio's phone calls with a military judge and a man who appears to be a colonel linked to a senior office in the military justice system, both of whom offered to help him after he was arrested for false positives, further highlighting the system's lack of independence and credibility. The colonel appears to offer support for getting Gonzalez del Rio's case transferred from civilian to military courts, and expresses hope that he will soon be released from detention.
There have also been shortcomings within the Attorney General's Office, including overwhelming caseloads, as well as the distribution of cases from the same military unit among different prosecutors, which hinders contextualized investigations that are material to the prosecution of high-ranking perpetrators.
The Colombian government should order military authorities to cooperate in investigations, assign sufficient prosecutors to the cases, and protect witnesses and their families, Human Rights Watch said. It should also ensure that any transitional justice measures included in a peace agreement with armed guerrilla groups do not hinder accountability for false positives.
In 2012, Colombia enacted the Legal Framework for Peace, a constitutional amendment that paves the way for impunity for atrocities by guerrilla groups, paramilitaries, and the military if a peace agreement is reached with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) guerrillas. The amendment empowers Congress to limit the scope of prosecutions for atrocities to individuals found "most responsible" and provide statutory immunity to everyone else; to exempt war crimes from criminal investigation if they are not determined to have been systematic; and to apply "alternative penalties" to all those convicted, including those deemed most responsible.
The Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) is monitoring false positive proceedings in Colombia and could open an investigation if it determines that national authorities are unwilling or unable genuinely to investigate and prosecute them. The office has said with regard to the Legal Framework for Peace that a sentence that is grossly or manifestly inadequate would "vitiate the genuineness" of the proceeding. In other words, it could trigger an ICC investigation.
The Office of the Prosecutor of the ICC should continue to closely monitor proceedings in false positive cases, Human Rights Watch said.
The United States government should enforce human rights conditions on military aid to Colombia, including the requirement that human rights cases be "subject only to civilian jurisdiction" and that the military cooperate with prosecutors in such cases. In light of the evidence that these two conditions are not being met, the US should suspend the part of military aid that depends on Colombia's compliance with them, Human Rights Watch said.
"Colombia needs to ensure that any transitional justice measures enacted as part of a future peace agreement don't deny victims' families justice in false positive cases," Vivanco said. "If Colombia doesn't bring those most responsible to justice, the International Criminal Court should open a formal investigation."
Examples of Testimony Implicating Generals
Reprisals Against Witnesses
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
"Talk to or read energy experts—people who focus on the physical side of the oil crisis—and their hair is on fire."
Gas prices in the US have surged to a four-year high, and Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman is warning that the worst is likely yet to come.
Amid a Tuesday projection from AAA that average US gas prices had hit $4 per gallon for the first time since 2022, Krugman published an analysis of the petroleum market in which he projected that the price of oil will go even higher in the coming weeks as the global economy runs into supply shortages caused by President Donald Trump's war against Iran.
Krugman argued that oil price hikes have actually been tame so far because physical supplies have remained steady in recent weeks, as tankers that had already passed through the Strait of Hormuz before the start of the war have continued making scheduled deliveries.
That "grace period," as Krugman described it, is about to end as speculative market prices run into the hard realities of physical shortages.
What this fundamentally means, wrote Krugman, is "you should be alarmed."
"Once the crisis gets physical, there will no longer be room for jawboning the markets," Krugman wrote. "Since the war began there have been several occasions on which Donald Trump has been able to talk prices down by asserting that meaningful negotiations are underway... but that won’t work once the oil runs out. So prices will have to rise."
As for how far prices will go up, Krugman calculated that with only medium disruption to global oil production and medium demand elasticity, the price of oil would rise to $152 per barrel, which would push US gas prices well over $4.50 per gallon.
Making matters worse, Krugman found that it wouldn't take much additional disruption to push the price of oil into worse-case scenarios where it would top $200 per barrel.
"If oil really does go to $200 or more, it’s all too easy to envisage a full-blown global economic crisis, with an inflation surge and quite likely a recession," Krugman commented. "Ever since this war began I’ve noticed a sharp divide in sentiment among experts. Finance and macroeconomics experts have been relatively sanguine about our ability to ride out this storm. But talk to or read energy experts—people who focus on the physical side of the oil crisis—and their hair is on fire."
Petroleum industry analyst Patrick De Haan on Tuesday highlighted the major increases in the price of diesel fuel since the start of the Iran war, which could add even more pain to the US economy in the form of higher shipping costs for goods.
"Can't overstate the impact that's coming down the pipeline to truckers, farmers, logistics, and beyond," De Haan wrote in a social media post. "The US economy runs on diesel with several states setting new all-time highs for diesel, while others are seeing largest monthly increases of all time."
De Haan also posted a chart highlighting the states with the biggest diesel price increases since late February, and it showed swing states Arizona, Nevada, and North Carolina faced the largest surges, with prices up more than 57% in just one month in each state.
Of the roughly 450 hospitals identified in a new analysis as at risk of closure or service cuts, around 200 are located in congressional districts represented by Republicans.
The unprecedented Medicaid cuts that US President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans approved last summer are putting hundreds of hospitals across the country at high risk of cutting services or permanently shutting their doors, a potentially devastating outcome for millions of poor Americans that was repeatedly predicted ahead of time.
The advocacy group Public Citizen released a report Monday identifying 446 hospitals that could be forced to reduce services or close because of the Trump-GOP Medicaid cuts, which will amount to around $1 trillion over the next decade. The at-risk hospitals collectively served 7 million patients in 2024, according to Public Citizen's analysis.
Nearly 200 of the hospitals listed in Public Citizen's report are located in congressional districts represented by Republicans who voted for the Medicaid cuts, and 146 are in states represented by Senate Republicans—nearly all of whom supported the sprawling budget package that included the assault on Medicaid.
“Trump’s cuts to Medicaid will hurt millions of low-income and disabled Americans, and will deepen financial strains that are already plaguing rural and safety-net hospitals—compromising their ability to deliver care, potentially leading many to close,” said Public Citizen researcher Eileen O’Grady, the author of the report. “Congress should take urgent action to restore all Medicaid funding cuts enacted by Trump and Republicans in Congress, and should extend the enhanced premium tax credits for coverage through the Affordable Care Act marketplaces.”
The report comes as Republicans are reportedly considering billions of dollars in additional healthcare cuts—and kicking hundreds of thousands more off their health coverage—to help fund Trump's illegal and increasingly expensive war on Iran.
Public Citizen found in its report that there's at least one hospital at risk of closing or slashing services in 44 states and Washington, DC. States with the highest proportion of at-risk hospitals are Connecticut, California, New York, Massachusetts, and Washington, the analysis shows.
"It is notable that while there are more at-risk hospitals in Democrat-led states and congressional districts, a substantial number of hospitals in Republican-led states and congressional districts are threatened by Medicaid cuts," the report observes. "Almost all congressional Republicans voted to pass the Big Ugly Law."
"When unlawful force is repeated over time, it risks becoming normalized."
The Trump administration's most recent attack on a boat in the Caribbean, which killed four people last week, "highlights a sustained pattern of unlawful use of lethal force outside any context of armed conflict, amounting to extrajudicial executions," Human Rights Watch said on Tuesday.
The US military announced last Wednesday that it had conducted its 47th attack on boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific. The Trump administration has presented little evidence for its claim that the targeted boats have been engaged in trafficking drugs to the United States. At least 163 people have been killed in these attacks since September 2025, all of them without trial.
Human Rights Watch is part of a chorus of international organizations and observers that have condemned the boat bombing campaign as acts of murder in flagrant violation of international law.
“These strikes aren’t one-off incidents, they’re part of a pattern of using military force where the law does not permit it, over and over again,” said Sarah Yager, Washington director at Human Rights Watch. “The fact that these strikes have faded from public attention does not make these violations any less grave or unlawful.”
The organization noted that there is no ongoing military conflict in the Caribbean or eastern Pacific that would make those traveling by boat legitimate targets.
And while the US government has provided scant evidence that those it has killed were trafficking drugs, Human Rights Watch said that even if evidence of drug trafficking existed, suspected criminals are still not lawful targets of lethal force unless they pose an imminent threat to the lives of others.
The boat strikes have continued in the background as President Donald Trump has launched attacks against Venezuela and Iran, both of which international organizations have described as acts of aggression that violate the laws of war.
Trump has also enacted a crippling economic blockade of Cuba with the explicit goal of toppling its government so the US can "take" the island, and has previously threatened to use economic leverage or the US military to forcibly annex Greenland.
“When unlawful force is repeated over time, it risks becoming normalized,” Yager said. “That’s dangerous because it opens the door to using lethal force whenever and wherever a government wishes and without constraints.”