That the FARC guerrillas actually responded publicly and positively to a communication should hardly be news. Except that it hasn’t happened in a very long time.
On Tuesday the FARC’s top leadership, or Secretariat, made public an October 16 response to a large group of Colombian intellectuals and politicians, most of them left-of-center politically, who had written a September 11 letter calling on them to engage in an “epistolary exchange” – a public written correspondence.
The purpose of this exchange would be to discuss how to move toward a “humanitarian accord” to free guerrilla hostages, as well as a renewed peace negotiation. (Or, as the letter’s incredibly indirect language put it, to “identify elements to allow the definition of an agenda that can clarify the routes by which it would be possible to reach an understanding that could lead to the long-desired humanitarian accord.”)
The guerrillas’ response, and the likelihood of an exchange of public correspondence on these topics, is cause for faint hope. This is so if only because talks between the FARC and the Colombian government are such a distant possibility, and no interlocutors acceptable to both sides have emerged to facilitate communications through any other channels. (In fact, many who served as interlocutors in the past are now under government investigation for alleged guerrilla ties.)
Faint hope is also warranted because this is the first direct FARC reaction in a very long time to what could be considered an expression of public opinion. Analysts have used the word “autistic” to describe the guerrillas’ years of unresponsiveness to regular governmental, non-governmental and international appeals. That they have responded now could be an indication of a course change – however slight – under the leadership of Alfonso Cano, who replaced Manuel Marulanda as the group’s maximum leader in March. Another factor increasing their responsiveness, meanwhile, may be the increased military pressure the FARC is feeling.
The FARC response was written before, but released after, the guerrillas’ latest humiliation: Sunday’s escape of Oscar Tulio Lizcano, a former congressman whom the group had held hostage since 2000 – an escape that was aided and abetted by his FARC captor. Lizcano’s account of beyond-inhuman suffering during his captivity – forbidden to speak to anyone, he whiled away time teaching imaginary classes to sticks -Â has further hardened public opinion against the FARC, but has also underlined the need to try any available means to win the remaining twenty-eight political hostages’ freedom.
A public exchange of correspondence is an unusual way to get a serious conflict-resolution effort started. But if no other options exist – and they do not appear to – it should be pursued.
Surely there will be voices in Colombia condemning those who participate in this “pen pal” arrangement as useful idiots, appeasers, or naive individuals helping the FARC to buy time, improve its public image, or achieve an undeserved political status. The Colombian government, however, would do well to let this exchange go forward without attacking it, as long as it continues to take place publicly and transparently. Drawing the guerrilla leadership into a political discussion, including clarity about its conditions for talks, can do little harm and quite a bit of good.
Here are the letters translated into English, presented in reverse chronological order. Both are heavy on run-on sentences and indirect phrasing; key parts are highlighted.
FARC response to letter from Colombian intellectuals, politicians and journalists
Mountains of Colombia, October 16, 2008
Respected Compatriots:
With satisfaction we have received your September missive which invites a collective exploration of pathways to peace, far from the current government’s direction of perpetual war and persisting in the impossibility of a military solution to political, economic and social problems that underlie the bloody conflict that shocks the country.
We greet the flourishing of a current of opinion that diverges from false triumphalism, and from the parameters of a warlike solution to large national problems. We have no doubt that your effort will succeed because it coincides with the majority’s feeling and desire for peace.
This letter is now the beginning of the Epistolary Exchange that you propose to us to discuss a political solution to the conflict, the humanitarian exchange, and peace. We will participate, in the people’s full view, in a wide-ranging and frank dialogue, without dogmatism, without sectarianism and without disqualifications of the issues that you suggest. It is necessary to work to achieve the participation of the greatest possible number of political and social organizations, and independent people.
Our willingness to explore possibilities toward the humanitarian exchange, and the peace with social justice that is the demand and the most urgent and felt need of the whole nation, will continue without variation. The unilateral liberation of six ex-congresspeople in the recent past, turned over to President Hugo Chávez and Senator Piedad Córdoba, sought to create conditions and a helpful atmosphere for the exchange of prisoners in power of the parties to the conflict. This deed is an authentic testimony to our political will.
We very respectfully suggest, to strengthen this new first step, to take into account the expressed willingness of the great majority of Latin American presidents to contribute their efforts to the process of humanitarian exchange and peace.
The immense banner of peace with social justice should wave definitively, free, below Colombia’s sky. The eternal war against the people that they want to impose on us to perpetuate injustice should not be the fatherland’s destiny.
Receive our cordial greeting.
Compatriots
Secretariat of the Central General Staff of the FARC-EP
Letter from Colombian intellectuals, politicians and journalists
Bogotá, September 11, 2008
Secretariat members:
The solution to the multiple crises that afflict Colombia’s state and society demands a judicious reflection, as well as the participation of different sectors of civil society and of actors implicated in the country’s armed, social and political internal conflict, with the object of avoiding damage to institutions and encouraging the building of a full democracy, with social justice and peace, in which we all have a place.
In that sense, our aspiration is to work to unblock the pathways leading to the completion of a Humanitarian Accord that would allow the freedom of kidnap victims and prisoners in the power of the FARC armed insurgency and, at the same time, the freedom of this guerrilla group’s prisoners under the state’s jurisdiction.
We understand that any alternative other than a political understanding to arrive at a Humanitarian Accord and to facilitate a negotiated exit from the conflict would lead to the suffering of important sectors of the population, imminent danger to the lives of captives in the jungle, degradation of the war, and a stimulus to the militarization, authoritarianism, and institutional weakening of the national political process.
The confrontation’s escalation has spilled beyond the national geography, and impacts the territory of brother countries with diverse acts of institutional violence, which have placed our country’s diplomatic relations in difficulty.
Nonetheless, we have the certainty that the presidents and chiefs of state of brother countries in the hemisphere, and of several friendly European countries, will act together in solidarity to support the dialogue processes that we are proposing.
For the reasons given here, and with the desire to begin now the search for solutions in favor of peace in Colombia and the comforting of the human beings affected by the conflict, we cordially invite you to develop a public epistolary dialogue, through which you, we, and in general Colombian society, can identify elements to allow the definition of an agenda that can clarify the routes by which it would be possible to reach an understanding that could lead to the long-desired humanitarian accord.
We believe that a notable current of opinion already exists in favor of the promotion of factors contrary to the armed solution, and that it is ready to lay the appropriate groundwork to generate a democratic debate about issues of war and peace in Colombia, with the goal of encouraging peaceful coexistence within a new social ethic.
Signed:
Piedad Córdoba RuÃz, Medófilo Medina, Fabio Morón DÃaz, José Gregorio Hernández, VÃctor Manuel Moncayo, Alfredo Beltrán Sierra, Jaime Angulo Bossa, Daniel Pecaut, Consuelo González de Perdomo, LuÃs Eladio Pérez, Orlando Beltrán Cuellar, Alfredo Molano B, Javier DarÃo Restrepo, Daniel Samper Pizano, Gustavo Ãlvarez Gardeazabal, Alberto Rojas Puyo, Francisco Leal Buitrago, Hernando Gómez BuendÃa, Iván Cepeda Castro, Raúl Alameda O, Florence Thomas, Alpher Rojas Carvajal, Rocio Londoño Botero, León Valencia A, Jorge Enrique Botero, Consuelo Ahumada, Marleny Orjuela, Fabiola Perdomo E, Deyanira Ortiz Cuenca, Martha Arango de Lizcano, Claudia Rujeles Flórez, Ãngela de Pérez, Yolanda Polanco P, Marc Chernick, Gabriel Izquierdo S.J., Gloria Cuartas, Fernán González S.J., José Gutiérrez, Juanita Barreto G, Padre Henry RamÃrez Soler cmf, Juan Sebastián Lozada P, Ãlvaro Camacho Guisado, Apolinar DÃaz-Callejas, Lisandro Duque Naranjo, Alberto Cienfuegos, Ricardo Bonilla G, Leopoldo Múnera RuÃz, Renán Vega Cantor, Ciro Quiroz, Carlos Lozano Guillen, Jairo Maya Betancur, Ricardo GarcÃa Duarte, Jorge Gantiva S, Carlos Villalba Bustillo, Constanza Vieira, Gloria Polanco, Apecidez Ãlviz F, Carlos A. RodrÃguez DÃaz, Venus Albeiro Silva, Andrés Felipe Villamizar, Arlene B. Tickner, Santiago GarcÃa, Pepe Sánchez, Patricia Ariza, Carlos Ãlvarez Nuñez, VÃctor Gaviria, Jennifer Steffens, Bruno DÃaz, Zulia Mena, Gustavo Duncan, Lilia Solano, Julio Silva Colmenares, Oscar MejÃa Quintana, Arturo Escobar, Rafael Ballén, William GarcÃa RodrÃguez, César Augusto Ayala Diago, Carlos Medina Gallego, Diego Otero Prada, Rubén DarÃo Florez, DarÃo Villamizar H, LuÃs Fernando Medina, Santiago Araoz F, Fabian Acosta, Alonso Ojeda Awad, Jimmy Viera, EfraÃn Viveros, Mauricio Rojas RodrÃguez, Eduardo Gómez, Carlos Villamil Chaux, Fernando Estrada G, Moritz Akerman, Ricardo Montenegro V, Santiago Vásquez L, Enrique Santos Molano, Libardo Sarmiento Anzola, Hollman Morris, Reinaldo Ramirez GarcÃa, Jairo E. Gómez, Daniel Libreros C, Jaime Caicedo T, Héctor Moreno Galviz, Mauricio Archila Neira, Dora Lucy Arias, LuÃs Alberto Ãvila A, Olga Amparo Sánchez, Norma EnrÃquez R, Orsinia Polanco, Caterina Heyck, Guillermo Silva, LuÃs Enrique Escobar, Eduardo López Hooker, Eduardo Carreño, Alexandra Bermúdez, Pilar Rueda, Fernando Arellano, Gabriel Awad, Cristo Rafael GarcÃa Tapias, Alfonso Santos C, Jorge Lara Bonilla, Miguel Eduardo Cárdenas, Andrés A. Vásquez M, Jaime Calderón Herrera, Ãlvaro Bejarano, Ãlvaro Delgado, Ãlvaro Villarraga, Armando Palau, Juan de Dios Alfonso, DarÃo Morón DÃaz, Carlos Rosero T, Maria Eugencia Liévano, Gonzalo Uribe Aristizabal, Edgar MartÃnez C, Esperanza Márquez M, DÃdima Rico Chavarro, Danilo Rueda R, Eduardo Franco Isaza, Evelio RamÃrez, Fructuoso Arias, Gabriel GarcÃa B, Gabriel Ruiz O, Germán Arias Ospina, Gustavo Puyo A, Gustavo GarcÃa, Hernán Cortéz A, Ivonne González, Jaime Pulido Sierra, Jaime Vasco A, Juanita Bazán A, LuÃs Eduardo Salcedo, LuÃs Jairo RamÃrez H, Mario Santana, René Antonio Florez C, Sara Leukos, VÃctor José Pardo, Pepe Sánchez, Claudia Rujeles de Jara, Marta Arango de Lizcano, MarÃa Teresa de Mendieta, Silvia Patricia Nieto, and others.
October 29th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
“Another factor increasing their responsiveness, meanwhile, may be the increased military pressure the FARC is feeling.”
You think…
October 29th, 2008 at 8:36 pm
Colombia Killings Cast Doubt on War Against Insurgents
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/30/world/americas/30colombia.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
October 29th, 2008 at 8:40 pm
Amnesty International: Colombia Conflict Worrisome
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-LT-Colombia-Amnesty.html
October 29th, 2008 at 10:34 pm
http://www.eltiempo.com/colombia/justicia/capturan-guerrillero-de-las-farc-chucho-hombre-clave-de-jojoy_4632373-1
Captured another FARC rebel of significance.
October 30th, 2008 at 2:29 am
To talk about the letter without being distracted means saying that this dialogue needs to lead somewhere, not talking for the sake of talking. And that somewhere cannot be El Caguán Versión Número Dos, now with more Chávez and more Obama.
Regards,
Marcos
October 30th, 2008 at 8:54 am
This is not the first such “letter by intellectuals” written and signed by scores of self-annointed Colombian “intelligencia” with the ultimate aim of promoting a more conciliatory dialog with the FARC (I suppose those of us who are not intellectuals should take heed). The devil with this idea is in the details. Who will be the interlocutor for the “intellectuals”? And even if such a dialog ever materializes, ultimately, such a dialog will be pointless if the Colombian government is not involved.
October 30th, 2008 at 11:04 am
http://www.eltiempo.com/colombia/justicia/muerto-en-combate-felipe-rincon-vocero-de-las-farc-en-los-dialogos-del-caguan_4634551-1
Another one bites the dust…
October 30th, 2008 at 11:23 am
Marcos writes:
“To talk about the letter without being distracted means saying that this dialogue needs to lead somewhere, not talking for the sake of talking”.
Didn’t Chavez’s efforts lead to the release of 6 hostages? That seems like more than “talking for the sake of talking” at least for the 6 people who were freed.
Chris,
I wonder how many “false positives” there have been (see Jaime’s post above) for every key FARC member killed? Oh well, as long as the state is making progress in killing members of the FARC…
Best,
Will
October 30th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
Washington Post is Way Out of Line on Colombia’s “Supposed†Human Rights Crisis
by Garry Leech
According to a May 6 editorial by the Washington Post, Colombia does not have a serious human rights problem. In the editorial, titled “Assault on an Ally,†the Post ridiculed the recent claim by Human Rights Watch that “today Colombia presents the worst human rights and humanitarian crisis in the Western Hemisphere,†suggesting instead that Venezuela, Cuba and Haiti deserve that label. The editorial later ludicrously and irresponsibly referred to the human rights situation in Colombia as a “supposed human rights ‘crisis’,†insinuating that it is merely a fabrication of House Democrats and the left. But how can the killing of more labor leaders in Colombia than in the rest of the world not constitute a human rights crisis? How can the massacre of five Awá indigenous leaders last year not constitute a human rights crisis? And how can having the second largest internally displaced population in the world, behind only the Sudan, not constitute a human rights crisis?
October 30th, 2008 at 12:16 pm
Extrajudicial slayings on rise in Colombia
March 21, 2008
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/21/world/fg-colombia21
October 30th, 2008 at 12:26 pm
Will: Those liberations had the only purpose of putting pressure on the government to make a “humanitarian” exchange like FARC wanted…one that still leaves hundreds of people to rot in the jungle, which is probably a fate worse than death.
And you know, to be off-topic, I’m not surprised that Jaime Bustos is quoting Gary Leech, of all people. If anyone is “out of line” it’s that man and his mockery of a website where he wastes no opportunity to make FARC look good. I can’t take him seriously but evidently Jaime Bustos can.
Regards,
Marcos.
October 30th, 2008 at 12:49 pm
Will,
I am sure there have been dozens… I would hope that such a high-profile (ie. the man was in the spotlight for some time) doesn’t turn out to be a false positive, but nowadays even the best of them rush out to distribute good news w/o checking the facts, especially at this point… when the Army is under some heavy criticism for HR abuses and corruption (ie. the ouster of senior officers in the last couple of days). They need to deflect the bad news in anyway they can.
I wonder if they had several of these individuals in their sight for some time and decided to act on them now in an effort to gin-up some good news… the timing seems suspicious does it not? But who knows…
Chris
October 30th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
Marcos,
I would agree that Leech’s perspective on the FARC is a bit skewed in that he seems to genuinely believe that they are a legitimate, revolutionary movement that the Colombian left should support which I disagree with (BTW if Leech is reading this I would like to hear whether you think this is a fair characterization of your position). I definitely believe that progress for the Colombian left is undermined in multiple ways by the existence of the FARC and that is demobilization is necessary for the progress of social justice/democracy in Colombia.
However, Leech has called for the FARC to release all civilian hostages recognizing the degree that it undermines any progress the group can make in establishing its legitimacy (http://www.colombiajournal.org/colombia281.htm).
Also, Leech’s interviews with Raul Reyes and Petro (http://www.colombiajournal.org/colombia260.htm) as well as other FARC members (http://www.colombiajournal.org/colombia263.htm) does provide us access to groups/individuals in this conflict who generally receive little attention from the English language press.
I think Leech’s site on balance serves a useful and necessary purpose in terms of our access to different sides of this situation and I for one hope that it continues.
Saludos,
Will
October 30th, 2008 at 2:25 pm
Chris, for some time I thought you were giving up fair judgement, but there you are. I agree, when you posted the news I took a peep, but no other news outlet published it. Today EL TIEMPO changes the heading to “recapture”. The truth is I never heard about that guy.
Marcos I don’t oppose fighting guerrillas. Only with no paramilitaries, no red baiting on opposition, and no dirty war on citizens. I am sorry but that’s something I cannot advocate.
October 30th, 2008 at 5:59 pm
“However, Leech has called for the FARC to release all civilian hostages recognizing the degree that it undermines any progress the group can make in establishing its legitimacy (http://www.colombiajournal.org/colombia281.htm).”
The FARC should release their hostages because it would be a good PR move?! Yikes!
October 30th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
It is interesting to see how fascists can dress up in liberal clothing here. At least Gary Leech is a liberal.
VIVA FARC!
DOWN WITH US IMPERIALISM AND ITS LIES!
October 31st, 2008 at 1:22 am
Bush finally sends funds to Colombia
Thursday October 30, 2008, 7:06 PM
http://www.mlive.com/us-politics/index.ssf/2008/10/bush_finally_sends_funds_to_co.html
October 31st, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Santiago,
What does it matter if “PR” leads to their release as long as these hostages are freed?
Will
November 1st, 2008 at 5:12 pm
Unfortunately, pretty much all of the so-called interlocutors were way too cozy with FARC. When is the left going to take a good look at itself and start practicing some ideological hygiene. Is there no one who under cover of trust and secrecy, can’t keep his hands out of the FARC till? Until the so-called interlocutors get serious about being neutral and not partial, only a fool would trust them. I don’t blame the Colombian government one bit for not trusting so-called interlocutors. Who have we had? Hugo Chavez who used his interlocutor time to offer FARC $300 million plus a share in Venezuela’s oil earnings and lucrative Venezuelan government contracts. Or shall we look at Jim Jones, the man who gave all those comradely greetings to his terrorist pals? Or would Piedad Cordoba, with her Chavista cash plans and palling around with Freddie ‘the thug’ Bernal do? The there’s the Swiss, helpful givers of $500,000 to FARC in Costa Rica? The French, too, found themselves just a little too cozy with FARC. Who on earth is clean in this? Name one so-called intrerlocutor who didn’t end up dirty once the FARC computer was captured? They all were dishonest.
November 1st, 2008 at 7:41 pm
Camilla:
I understand perfectly why the FARC and Chávez are not trustworthy at all; I wouldn´t trust em either. The question, of course, is why you show such large ammounts of distrust towards them, yet you trust a goverment linked everywhere with paramilitaries, generals in the military clearly linked to human rights abuses and masacres, drug dealers, and with a terrorist goverment like the United States Goverment, specially the actuall administration. You have some double standards that are scary
November 1st, 2008 at 7:56 pm
Oh yeah! Those Swiss! Real Commies if you ask me.
I find it remarkable that now our in-house wingnuts are asking for “neutrality.” That’s some development. It used to be that for them, like for Jose Obdulio, “neutrality” itself was a crime. That is, unless you were foursquare behind total war, with no concessions of any kind, to the last man, you were a terrorist-appeaser which, apparently, is worse than being a proper terrorist.
I’m obsessed with the US election so my news reading isn’t that good these days. But apparently Uribe hasn’t yet demonized the letter writers, which is yet another remarkable development. (Deep down I’ve always thought he’s not as nutty as some in his entourage…) Anyway, with this Administration you’re always waiting for the other shoe to drop.
November 2nd, 2008 at 2:22 pm
Neither of you has answered the heart of my question: Why is it that every so-called impartial interlocutor out there has been found in bed with FARC and each and every single time behind the Colombian government’s back? Why have none of them been honest? Why didn’t Hugo tell President Uribe he was going to give FARC $300 mil plus the oil residuals? Why didn’t Piedad Cordoba tell President Uribe that she was going to take Hugo’s campaign cash? Why did all this have to come out through the FARC computer? Why couldn’t they be honest? Why was Uribe the one they couldn’t trust but FARC the perfectly trustworthy one? Why has every single one of them failed on this front?
Don’t dismiss the Swiss involvement, those people are in very serious credibility trouble for their FARC financing, and I hope legal trouble too. They are the ones who forked over the $500,000 cash stash found in the Costa Rican residence. This came straight from the FARC computer. Communist or not, they have shown whose side they are willing to help out.
November 4th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Camilla, you constantly talk about this $300 million that Chávez allegedly supplied to the FARC. The evidence of such a transaction/donation is laughable yet you consistently rely on it to argue that Chávez is funding the FARC, maybe even that he’s a member of its secretariat! Your claims are based on very shaky evidence. However, I don’t want to go down the same road again with a prolonged debate regarding this number of “300″ (with no denomination, no reference to Chávez, etc) found on Reyes’ laptop. And Chávez offered the FARC a share of Venezuela’s oil revenues plus “lucrative” government contracts? I admit that I’ve been away for a while but, really, please provide us with sufficient evidence to back this one up. I’m extremely interested to see the “concrete” evidence for this claim.
The fact is, Camilla, almost everyone to you appears to be a FARC sympathiser. By your logic, Camilla, you also need to take a look at (and criticise) Uribe and his alleged links to paramilitaries. Yet, I have never read such criticisms from you. Should we also trust Juan Manuel Santos? Are these two people whiter-than-white? The list of their lies is endless but goes completely unnoticed by Camilla.
November 10th, 2008 at 10:01 am
I would just like to briefly respond to Will’s (and others’) characterization of my political views. Firstly, I do not advocate that the Colombian left should support the FARC. I firmly believe that each leftist individual/group in Colombia should devise their own position and I have no right whatsoever to make any suggestions to Colombians regarding their political allegiances. As for the FARC, I am repeatedly attacked for being pro-FARC despite the fact that I have rarely ever written anything that could be deemed supportive of the rebel group. However, having said that, being a leftist, there are political, social and economic aspects of my ideology that coincide with those espoused by the FARC (as is the case with many non-violent leftists in Colombia, which is why they are targeted in the dirty war even though they do not agree with the waging of an armed struggle). In my dealings with the FARC over the past decade, I have come to the conclusion that the rebel leadership is ideologically-motivated and simply dismissing them as criminals or terrorists will only prolong the conflict because it fails to address some of the root motivations for their continuing with the armed struggle. But while I believe that the FARC is a political movement, this does not mean that I am politically-aligned with the guerrillas on all issues and it definitely does not mean that I support their tactics. In fact, I have criticized the FARC’s use of kidnapping and cilindros on numerous occassions because they target unarmed civilians. As for my call for the FARC to release all civilian hostages, I point out that is the humane thing to do (because kidnapping civilians is a gross violation of human rights) as well as pointing out that it would be an advantageous move for the FARC (an appeal to the pragmatic side of the guerrillas). In conlcusion, as a leftist journalist (I don’t believe in objectivity in the media — it does not exist and never will!!!) I strive to present leftist perspectives that are often ignored by the mainstream media and despite the fact that the over-whelming majority of my investigations and writings have had nothing to do with the guerrillas I have been labelled as pro-FARC by both progressives and the right. Sadly, it is this mentality that allows for the continuation of the dirty war in Colombia that targets people simply for their political views.
December 22nd, 2008 at 2:47 pm
[...] of prominent citizens and intellectuals, including opposition Senator Piedad Córdoba, who began an “epistolary exchange” of letters with the guerrillas in September. The announced [...]
January 14th, 2009 at 9:01 pm
[...] folks on the Left have on guerrilla/insurgent groups. The mainstream liberal/left opposition are pretty clear about their desire for an end to the practice of kidnapping for financial ransom and political [...]