Yesterday’s marches in Colombia and around the world are the third massive outpouring in just over a year of rejection of the FARC and its practice of kidnapping. (Large-scale rallies took place on July 5, 2007; February 4, 2008 and July 20, 2008.)
These emotional events are proving to be a very effective way to weaken the guerrillas. If the goal is to make the FARC feel isolated and besieged – thus complicating recruitment, encouraging informants and deserters, and discouraging international solidarity – these marches are more effective than military operations.
They are the biggest demonstrations Colombia has seen since 1998-1999, when the guerrillas were at the height of their military capacity. Then, hundreds of thousands of Colombians took to the streets calling for the government and the FARC to negotiate peace. Now, millions of Colombians are calling on the FARC simply to go away, freeing their hostages in the process.
The marches reflect a national mood in which only a minority of Colombians are willing to support negotiations with the FARC, beyond terms of surrender. They rest appear to prefer to pay the cost – which could total several years, thousands of lives, and billions of dollars – of a continued military campaign.
Of course, the FARC have made that choice easy, as they have given very little evidence of flexibility on peace talks or even the terms for negotiating a hostage exchange. It appears that the FARC wants to continue fighting.
All of this benefits President Ãlvaro Uribe, whose hard line that seemed so radical in 2001 is now Colombia’s conventional wisdom.
Where, though, does that leave Colombia’s democratic opposition? What is left for people who support neither Uribe nor the FARC?
Those who believe that the war should be brought to a negotiated, political end are in a bind, because the FARC themselves do not appear to be interested yet. How, then, do they join in efforts to exert political pressure on the FARC without appearing to boost a president whose policies they oppose? How to express anger at the FARC, but also express anger at a president who defends the military’s hardest line, has numerous political supporters tied to paramilitaries, picks ugly fights with the justice system, routinely attacks human rights groups, and calls his political opponents “terrorists”?
Colombia’s opposition has not figured out how to square this circle. The main left opposition party, the Democratic Pole – whom columnist Daniel Samper this weekend compared to a bunch of hippies who take an hour to argue about what drink to order in a restaurant – is on the ropes.
After some internal debate about unduly supporting the president, the Pole decided to participate in yesterday’s marches, but their statement revealed the contortions they had to perform in order to justify doing so. “While the Humanitarian Accord, in the view of Polo President Carlos Gaviria, is still a valid option, ‘the guerrillas must take note and be conscious that the citizens are asking for kidnappings to stop and the conflict to cease.’”
The Democratic Pole’s message continues:
It is important that these citizen protest marches against such abominable acts as kidnapping become institutionalized, but also for causes like forced disappearances, unionist killings, the rule of law, peace and the peaceful resolution of the conflict.
Broad-based citizen marches for these causes would be a wonder to behold. But in the current climate they are sadly unlikely.
In his last column for El Espectador, former Bogotá mayor Luis Eduardo Garzon, a founder of the Democratic Pole, aimed his frustration at the FARC.
The only successful blow they [the FARC] have dealt is to weaken the opposition. Every day it is harder to exercise opposition, not just for lack of security guarantees, but because the guerrillas’ actions end up giving Uribe more to work with. Those who oppose re-election, those who defend the justice system’s decisions, those who want to warn about the economic and social catastrophe that awaits, those who believe that this must end in a political negotiation and those who wish to humanize the war, among other issues, end up being seen as accomplices of the FARC.
Yesterday’s marches illustrate the opposition’s dilemma. The FARC have left the opposition with no ability to dissent from President Uribe. “Ni con uno, ni con el otro” is not a message that resonates with most Colombians.
Colombia’s non-violent left is being asphyxiated, but right now the FARC are sucking away more oxygen than Uribe is.
July 21st, 2008 at 2:34 pm
Polo walks a difficult line indeed, at tight rope–that people are shaking. I would be frustrated too.
July 21st, 2008 at 8:29 pm
Regrettably, the FARC has made its position on peace negotiations quite clear (http://www.eltiempo.com/colombia/politica/2008-07-21/farc-advierten-que-no-dejaran-las-armas-y-que-prefieren-una-muerte-en-combate_4388175-1), which makes one wonder if they were really serious about a Humanitarian Accord in the first place and if negotiations for an accord and the associated demilitarized zone was not just a front to allow them to regroup and re-arm, as they had done in the Zona de Distencion granted by Pastrana.
The PDI’s worst enemy is not Uribe…it is the FARC, and Uribistas are having a field day associating members of the Polo with the guerrillas. But one also has to ask, would a “soft” approach based on negotiations and concessions to the FARC have succeeded? Highly unlikely, in my view. Just look at Pastrana’s failed attempt. It will be a long time before a leftist is elected president of Colombia (and I say this with regret).
Finally, are there people on the Colombian left who support Uribe? How about Eduardo Pizarro Leongomez? It’s not entirely black and white.
July 21st, 2008 at 9:31 pm
Opposition??? Where is it to be found in Colombia????
News flash! It is dangerous and life threatening to openly support the FARC… Right now factions within the Polo Democratico are debating whether or not to openly support the FARC. The right-wing faction unfortunately appears to be the dominant faction. The high level of support for the FARC comes not from the middle and upper classes but from poor peasants and workers, who have no access to telephones, fax machines, the internet, even a mailing address. This has all been well documented from knowledgeable observers. Meanwhile, all the US and Colombian media and government officialdom have to offer is psychological warfare to make up for a country that is ruled by a well known drug trafficker and war criminal. Mr. Alvaro Uribe Velez! The FARC are as strong as ever.
July 21st, 2008 at 9:53 pm
Not to mention an illegal presidency too according to the Colombian supreme court!! Uribe will either end up like Peru’s Alberto Fujimori in exile somewhere (most probably in Miami), or if justice prevails, at the International Criminal Court. The insurgency is strong because there is no other way to resist but armed struggle. There are thousands of political prisoners rotting in Uribe’s dungeons for merely opening their mouths and being suspected of “terrorism”, to unionists, FARC sympathizers and combatants. More unionists are murdered in Colombia than anywhere else in the world, and investigative journalists either “disappear” if they criticize Uribe or leave the country fearing their safety. The difference with Peru is that like the Pentagon admits, the FARC cannot be militarily defeated. And I would say politically too because of their high-level of support. It is interesting how the protests against Uribe are not televised.. How convenient!
July 21st, 2008 at 11:28 pm
“Opposition??? Where is it to be found in Colombia????”
In several places, if you look for it and don’t exclusively equate “opposition” with supporting FARC or pro-FARC points of view, albeit it’s true that polarization and intolerance affects its exercise all the same, as even this blog post points out.
“The right-wing faction unfortunately appears to be the dominant faction.”
So not supporting FARC is “unfortunate” and “right-wing”? I missed the memo.
Perhaps from the perspective of the minor factions you speak of, I would imagine.
“This has all been well documented from knowledgeable observers.”
Extremely debatable, especially if you leave rhetorics aside.
FARC does have support, willing and otherwise, in some areas and among some sectors, even I can tell that much without much effort.
But how to measure it is more difficult than those “observers” make it seem, and it doesn’t mean that explicit and evident opposition to FARC can be simply tossed aside as some privilege of those who are not “workers and poor peasants”.
Or did you not know, for example, that there are even “workers and poor peasants” who support paramilitarism?
That you so casually conclude that there is a “high level” of support is not any better than to call it “non-existent” (which I never have). You’re just spinning in the opposite direction.
“Meanwhile, all the US and Colombian media and government officialdom have to offer is psychological warfare to make up for a country that is ruled by a well known drug trafficker and war criminal. Mr. Alvaro Uribe Velez!” ”
It’s funny how one could say something similar about FARC, which makes such rhetoric pointless from my point of view.
“The FARC are as strong as ever.”
That can certainly be debated, to say the least, even if they are clearly far from defeated and could evidently continue their insurgency for the foreseeable future if conditions allow (and not just “objective conditions”, since subjective ones -specific decisions and actions- also play a role).
July 22nd, 2008 at 12:19 am
Maybe if POLO would admit that Uribe was right, all along, they wouldn’t have this problem. By saying Uribe is wrong about everything, they box themselves into the corner of saying either FARC was right or the appeasers who allowed Colombia to become a living hell in the name of ‘peace’ were right. If they could bring themselves to admit that Uribe was right, and victory works, they could move on and say ‘ok, here’s my tax-the-rich plan, here’s my plan to confiscate factories and create worker collectives, here’s my plan to embrace Hugo Chavez and his Bolivarianism, here’s my plan to join ALBA, scrap US trade ties and replace them with Cubazuelan ones, here’s my plan to convert defense spending to welfare handouts, here’s my plan to hire bureaucrats.’ If they would do that, Colombian voters could look at them in a straightforward way and decide for themselves if POLO’s plan is the one they want.
But they’re going to have to admit that Uribe was once right.
July 22nd, 2008 at 12:25 am
“Meanwhile, all the US and Colombian media and government officialdom have to offer is psychological warfare to make up for a country that is ruled by a well known drug trafficker and war criminal. Mr. Alvaro Uribe Velez!†â€
It’s funny how one could say something similar about FARC, which makes such rhetoric pointless from my point of view.
jcg, don’t forget that Mr. Uribe is the president of Colombia. The FARC are outlaws. Are you growing so accustomed to seeing Colombia governed by pitiless drug traders?
July 22nd, 2008 at 1:26 am
Jaime: The point is that I don’t see any use in using such rhetoric in either case, especially in the specific context of what/who I was replying to.
But if you still insist…Uribe, however you want to describe him, is probably going to be less of a concern sooner than FARC will, or would you argue otherwise? If anything, I’m more concerned about the political support behind Uribe and the elements that gave rise to parapolitics than Uribe per se, in the long run.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:37 am
jcg, I must admit you kind of have a point. Nonetheless, be sure that Mr. Uribe won’t let go of his position for years to come, and that shadowy “elements” that support him, that is, traffickers, para politicians and ruffians in general, will continue to have a second wind by him staying in power.
July 22nd, 2008 at 9:27 am
“The marches reflect a national mood in which only a minority of Colombians are willing to support negotiations with the FARC, beyond terms of surrender. They rest appear to prefer to pay the cost – which could total several years, thousands of lives, and billions of dollars – of a continued military campaign.”
This is an outright lie. 99% of Colombians, including President Uribe, and excluding only the FARC and its supporters, want peace negotiations.
The FARC, however, say they will only accept peace negotiations if all government police and military are removed from Florida and Pradera, two municipalities in the Cauca Valley with over 120,000 citizens, 99% of whom dont want to be put in the hands of the FARC and their system of “justice”, where adulterers and petty thieves are summarily shot after kangaroo court “war trials”. They also dont want their children to be “enlisted” (kidnapped and forced to kill) by the FARC.
But why Florida and Pradera? Why have they been insisting on this for years, and insisting that no international observers or peace keepers be present (as was stipulated in the French/Swiss proposal that they rejected, claiming they “never recieved it”)?? Well, some say it is because it is an important East-West and North-South crossroads in the Colombian Andes. Other say that its because they have large underground “caletas” (hiding places) with millions of dollars in cash and weapons hidden in that area that they formerly controlled.
Whatever the reason, the people of Florida and Pradera, all the people of Colombia, and our president say resoundingly “No!” We do not want a repeat of the experimient in total impunity of the Switzerland-sized Caguan “distension zone” which the FARC filled with stolen cars, kidnapped children and coca fields.
BUT… this does not mean that we do not want peace negotiations. President Uribe has repeatedly called on the FARC to accept negotiating in an uninhabited zone with the presence of OAS or UN peacekeepers. We all want that.
Your statement that we do not support peace negotiations, but prefer war, makes us all sound like brainwashed bloodthirsty idiots.
What you should have said is that we dont support peace negotiations at any price. El Caguan was too high a price. Florida and Pradera are too high a price. Period.
We are absolutely sick of war. And despite their hoplessly blood-stained hands we would much rather see a Senator Alfonso Cano and a Senator Mono Jojoy than to have to keep spilling our blood and theirs until they come to their senses and realize that they are in no way helping bring about social justice, if that´s what they care about, or alternately, that there are much more peaceful methods for supplying the United States with the cocaine that it so desperately craves.
July 22nd, 2008 at 12:40 pm
Enrique, let me be clearer. Regardless of the DMZ question, do you think that the majority of Colombians right now would support a political negotiation with the FARC, with discussions on the table of issues like land tenure, reforms to the security forces, taxation or truth commissions?
Or would they prefer the negotiation to be simply about the mechanics of the FARC’s demobilization – that is, surrender terms – as was the case with the AUC? Neither the FARC nor the ELN have been willing to go that route.
I get the strong impression – from poll data as well as numerous conversations – that the majority of Colombians would hold out for the second choice.
In fact, many would probably calculate that it makes little sense to negotiate right now with a guerrilla group that is in “free fall.” Why not force the FARC to negotiate from a position of much greater weakness after another year or two of fighting?
(The risk, of course, is that it could be much more than just a year or two.)
July 22nd, 2008 at 1:09 pm
Oh, Adam, how do I hate to differ from you even if it´s on a minor point! Probably you´re right that the majority of public opinion does not want any Caguan-style peace process. So, naturally they will prefer war, no matter how risky and costly it is. By the way, methinks that the government is underestimating (underreporting might be better) those risks and costs. The FARC can still downsize and regroup and give grieve for a long time. But that´s besides the point.
The main point is that ultimately if you´re interested in a peace process (as I am), you shouldn´t be intimidated to the point of paralysis by such dilemma. At the end of the day, a succesful peace process will have to be a. acceptable to public opinion and b. acceptable to the FARC. Turns out that the public opinion is rejecting any peace process because no serious format has been proposed. I believe that the moment the Colombian citizenry sees a proposal that is viable, that generates results, that gets the FARC on board, they will come along. I very much doubt that Colombians are willing to spend blood and treasure to defend each and every substantive policy of the current government or previous ones. I´m sure that, if the people were to see a dynamics where those points you mention (land tenure, taxes, etc.) effectively lead to peace, they would accept it.
That´s why the current stasis of the opposition is so shameful. They could and should come up with a plan. Regretfully, all they can bring themselves to utter is something about the need for a “political settlement” without ever explaining how to do it and what to achieve with it.
The bottomline is: to those of us who believe in a political settlement: stop banging our heads against the wall! Let´s come up with a proposal of our own of how to achieve peace and try to get the civil society and, yes, the FARC on board. If that means talking to the FARC, so be it.
July 22nd, 2008 at 1:11 pm
No… Colombians would support any such political negotiations. Simply because the FARC long ago seiezed being a credible alternative or voice for justice, and is nothing more than a criminal/terrorist organization in the view of many colombians.
So, the expectation will be for something similar along the AUC demobalization.
July 22nd, 2008 at 1:11 pm
Correction:
“Colombians would NOT support”
July 22nd, 2008 at 1:17 pm
http://www.eltiempo.com/colombia/justicia/2008-07-21/salvatore-mancuso-logro-preacuerdo-con-la-justicia-de-estados-unidos_4388354-1
I was certain that some of you would be jumping on this one…
Adam,
Does this meet expectations? Seems to fall short of what you were calling for correct?
July 22nd, 2008 at 1:30 pm
Crhis:
1. Yes, I wanted to jump on the Mancuso story but it slipped my mind. Plus, I rather wait a bit more.
2. Public opinion is, I believe, more pragmatic than what Uribe and Santos would want us to believe. I am willing to bet that, if, and it is a big IF, the FARC accepted to stop their criminal excesses and came on board on a peace process based on substantive issues, important sectors of public opinion would join, whatever the rhetoric of the José Obdulios of the world might say.
I am old enough to remember how Colombians have decided to give peace a chance in the past, both in the 80s under Betancur and in the 90s under Pastrana. Make no mistake: the vast majority of public opinion back then held the FARC in utter contempt. I still remember the anti-FARC rhetoric of the media under Betancur (go and check it). Still, people decided that it was worth a shot if it could lead to peace.
July 22nd, 2008 at 1:53 pm
lfm, probably the issue is way more intricate than you realize. Probably Colombian society has come to a point where its connivance with crime, drug trafficking and all ills has metastasized. Maybe the metamorphosis is complete. No peace process of the kind that the GOC made with itself (that is AUC, a still widespread phenomena, and yet not considered to exist by the msm), or made by Representatives of the most raucous mafia worldwide, with other outlaws, that for good or bad reasons oppose the regime, would bring a durable period of serenity to a country, whose history for more than a century has been bathed in innocent citizen’s blood. FARC is a problem, but “make no mistake†it’s not the REAL problem.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Adam, to answer your question:
Absolutely. The majority of Colombians would support a peace negotiation with the FARC that includes the political points that you mention and more. I´ll go issue by issue.
1. Land tenure: We have had agrarian reforms before, whats another one? At this point the government has confiscated millions of hectares of paramilitary and drug dealers land, and you can be sure that the majority of the population would support giving it all out to the peasants. (Though a proper education is probably a better thing to give someone than a plot of land)
2. Reform the Security Forces: of course we all want to see security forces that do not violate human rights. What kind of animals (or pricks) do you think we are? Besides, it is a known fact that the armed forces are the branch of government that most embezzles and wastes money (like in the USA). So yes, we want that anyways.
3. Taxes: raise taxes to end the violence? No problem. But we also want to ensure that the taxes are not embezzeled like a large percentage is now.
4. Truth comissions: there are already truth comissions in Colombia created under the Peace and Justice law. Yes, its not working perfectly, but then look at how the top paramilitary leaders (Mancuso, Jorge 40, and a bunch of other terrorists) were extradited to the US for not cooperating with the comissions. We would love a healing process like the one in South Africa.
5. Many other things: Believe me. The vast majority of Colombians, rich and poor, want to see our beautiful country progress and become a first world country, with free education, free health care, free enterprise, respect for civil and human rights, democracy, and everything else that you find to varying degrees in Scandinavia, Chile, Costa Rica and other successful states.
The question is whether the FARC is interested in any of this. If not, are they interested in being jungle millionaires? Doesn´t make sense, does it? Maybe they want to make Colombia a dictatorship like North Korea, or Turkmenistan, or Myanmar, or Zimbabwe, or even saintly Cuba? Or are they just filled with hate and know no other life style?
As to why the paramilitary demobilization was so apolitical, I believe it is because the only political demand they ever had has been already met with the arrival of Uribe: remember, the paramilitaries were started as private armies by people who were sick of being unprotected from the guerrilla´s extortion and kidnapping. The armed forces and police have started to do their job under this government, and so the paramilitaries had no more political reason to exist.
They still had their huge drug business, but they saw that they were being pursued by the armed forces, repudiated internationally and domestically, so they preferred to demobilize. Has the process been perfectly just? No. Are Colombians happy to have 30,000 less armed people roaming the countryside? Absolutely.
Many external observers criticize the peace process with the paramilitaries for letting many of them get away with murder by just confessing their crimes. But don´t forget that our peace agreement with the leftist M-19 was way much more lenient than the one with the paramilitaries. The M-19 didnt have to pay any jail sentences, confess anything, or join any reinsertion program. They signed a paper and from one day to the next they went from terrorist group to respected and successful political party (see Navarro Wolf) And besides, the same thing that has been offered to the paracos would be offered to the FARC and ELN if they want to, plus the political negotiations you ask about.
We want the war to end, and we are willing to negotiate. It is the FARC who has been intransigent and has fooled the Colombian people and the world time and time again. Hopefully Cano will see the light.
Like Ingrid said this Sunday at the rally in Paris speaking directly to Alfonso Cano:
“See this Colombia, see the extended hand of President Uribe, and understand that it is time to stop the bloodshed.”
http://youtube.com/watch?v=SJhV_hGmBcA
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:08 pm
Having been at the march sunday (from the parque nacional por la septima to the plaza de bolivar), there was a mix of emotions/positions within the crowd. The dominant one was anti-kidnapping, while secondly would be anti-farc and third would be pro-president. On the septima, the march got very political very early on as the first wave of people at about 9:30ish (at the latest) were already chanting for the president. The people who were anti-farc did not seem to have much of a “pro-negotation” position amongst them. From what I got, and from talking to people and other Colombians, the idea is that getting ridding of the FARC at any cost, minus a despeje like Caguan, would be good. I would agree with Adam that most Colombians would like to see the FARC demobilized, and done with, or destroyed militarily. Many Bogotanos that I’ve known/met/talked to at the march are willing to run the risk. I guess that the lack of intersocietal solidarity (especially city-rural solidarity) has created this opinion within many Bogotanos. It is quite visible now that they do not feel there is much risk in taking this route. If the FARC and government were to negotiate (by the way, the news that they said they will not let down their arms responding to Chavez/Correa, to me, does not mean they will not do something after the marches; in fact, they need to), and the FARC were to demand structural change, I predict the majority of Colombians would be up in arms. That a group who has done so much harm, is a “plague” or “cancer” (to quote many Colombians), and is losing the war would demand serious structural change would be an outrage.
As far as the blog goes, it is a good and important piece. I did see some signs chastising Colombia’s opposition (in total, probably 6 or 7 in total), including one that through a “6 degrees of separation” logic, stated that Polo = FARC. I assumed they didn’t vote for Moreno. While many in the cities, the major cities, are willing to run the risk of prolonged conflict to do away with the FARC militarily, it will be a heavy price to pay, and in the end will keep the roots of the war in tact. Also, I think many Colombians and foreigners/analysts in general are under a gravely mistaken assumption: that doing away with the FARC (and ELN), military or through negotiations, will automatically rid of (i) illegal armed groups in Colombia, (ii) political violence and/or (iii) will be permanent. Colombian history, recent and not-so, shows us that we need to be skeptical of this (key word being ‘automatically’) and that without massive, rural and urban structural change/development/reform/updates/however you want to call it, then ridding of the FARC will rid of a powerful armed group, but at the same time open up numerous power vacuums and much space in one of the largest (if not the largest) parallel, illegal economies in the world.
My Colombian friend don’t like to hear me say that, but it something, for me, worth considering just as much as peace negotiations themselves.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:54 pm
As it happens, I agree with Enrique on some of the essential points. I won´t spend time on the ones we disagree on; those can wait.
To reiterate: you can´t beat something with nothing. If the only peace offer on the table is a lot more of anodine talk for years and years, the public opinion will not go for it. If, on the other hand, the opposition comes up with a proposal around a specific agenda and manages to get the FARC interested in it, that will make a difference. Again: I´m pretty confident the public opinion would end up supporting that, even if reluctantly. Colombians don´t want a bloodbath. They are getting one for lack of other options.
The big question here is if the FARC are interested. We could speculate endlessly about that but I think there´s a better way: asking them. It takes guts and imagination but it can be done. If the peace camp doesn´t have either of those, it should self-dissolve. But then don´t keep blaming others.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:17 pm
This one goes for Enrique and lfm:
” Anyone who speaks in the name of others is always an imposter” Emile M. Cioran
Adam, your post is the one that makes more sense. according to the circumstances and psychogical moment.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:00 pm
Jaime:
I wonder who the imposter is in this case. The defeatists in the peace camp are basing their do-nothing attitude on pure conjectures of what the FARC will think or what the public opinion will think. Better instead to just go ahead with something, put it on the table and see what happens. If it fails, fine. If it doesn´t…
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:12 pm
Jaime,
But in point 9. you speak for Uribe. I guess that makes you an impostor AND a hypocrite.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:27 pm
lfm, yeah right it’s easier to try than to prove it can’t be done ….
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:16 pm
Jaime, I like how you quoted someone to say that people who speak in the name of others (which you just did) are imposters. Well done…
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:16 pm
Enrique, I speak of what Uribe surely must be thinking, given he is a well known liar and cynic. You are speaking on behalf of millions of people can you see the difference, you dork?
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:32 pm
Viejo Jaimito,
What about point 21 itself, where you speak in the name of the whole country´s “psychogical” moment. Looks like Kyle picked up on that just as you finally came up with an answer for my last point.
¡Jaja que risa! Pobre güe…
P.S. It´s “psychological”, not “psychogical.”
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:09 pm
Enrique, you know how to discover someone is a raunchy uribist paramilitary ? just sit and wait until he starts talking.
July 22nd, 2008 at 9:48 pm
Camilla, why are you so full of hate? And ignorance? And what was Uribe right about? About giving Miguel Bose Colombian citizenship? Seems to me that his critics are the ones who have been right all along…about he and his political supporters (and family members) and cabinet appointees being narco-paramilitaries. You sound like someone who would have been a rabid supporter of Mussolini or some of his contemporaries back in the day.
July 24th, 2008 at 2:55 am
The right and those who support Uribe have nothing to say… It is a class war and everyone knows it.
Viva FARC!!!
July 24th, 2008 at 5:17 am
Enrique:
“1. Land tenure: We have had agrarian reforms before, whats another one? At this point the government has confiscated millions of hectares of paramilitary and drug dealers land, and you can be sure that the majority of the population would support giving it all out to the peasants. (Though a proper education is probably a better thing to give someone than a plot of land)”
Enrique, saying that we had “agrarian reforms” before, is essentially a lie (not that it hasnt stopped the goverment of repeating it ad nauseum). About the interest of people in giving the land confiscated to paramilitaries to peasants…let me doubt it. My guess is people don´t give a damm. They are told by the goverment that it is better to give this land to weathy agro buisnessmen, that concentrate it in large properties – you know, like Carimagua- and they believe it. And of course, there is the issue that the lanbd that should be RETOURNED (that is what you fail to see…most land was STOLEN) is not only the land of drug dealers and paramilitaries. Is also the land of agro buisnessmen – like palmicultures- or of ganaderos, who supported economically the paramilitaries and used them to steal those lands or force its rightfull owners to sell them for a very lower price.
July 24th, 2008 at 10:11 am
Sergio:
You´re probably right about the agrarian reforms in the past not being all that redistributive… I admit I have not looked that thorougly into that, tho I have heard it ad nauseam from the government. And you are definitely right that land forcibly taken from displaced people should be returned to them.
However, I still hold that if it came down to a negotiation with the FARC, and one of their demands was to do a real land redistribution project, taking lands from both paramilitaries, cattle ranchers and even agribusiness, the great majority of Colombians would support this.
Anyways, I don´t believe that giving someone a plot of land is really what will make them progress. What makes a person´s quality of life substantially increase is having an education. I would like to see Colombia´s poor peasants become an educated middle class, not stay forever scraping a living off the land. In most developed, first-world countries today, the farming population is a very small percentage of the total population.
July 28th, 2008 at 8:39 pm
“Opposition” rejects who??? So-called anti-FARC demonstrations are orchestrated by the narco-fascist regime of Alvaro Uribe Velez. It is common knowledge to all except the english speaking world. A fairly balanced article here on the topic http://www.counterpunch.org/ross07282008.html