FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Common Sense Latest Victim of Colombia Peace Talks

by CHRIS GILBERT

Caracas, Venezuela.

The most recent victim in Colombia’s conflict, in spite of ongoing conversations between the government and the FARC-EP guerrilla that began last year, seems to be common sense itself. With the government declining to enter a two-part truce at the conclusion of the insurgency’s unilaterally assumed cease-fire on January 20, the war naturally resumed its course. Yet now acts of war on the part of the insurgency – recent attacks on the police, the taking of war prisoners, and the destruction of infrastructure – are declared “attempts against the peace process” or “provocations.” These are terms which the guerrilla never applied to the Colombian Air Force’s bombing of its camps and assassination of its combatants during its Christmas cease-fire.

In fact, the government’s puzzling outcry about a situation that is essentially of its own making (“dialogue in the middle of the war” is the very formula advanced by president Juan Manuel Santos) only makes sense in two possible circumstances: Either (1) the insurgency is not a belligerent political force, but rather a group of lawless bandits with no right to engage in war; or (2) the peace process is simply a logistical matter of organizing the guerrilla’s rendition. Yet both of these possibilities are belied by the government’s own decision to sit down at the negotiating table with the insurgency, as it is nowdoing in La Habana.

Of course the real issue is that a sizable dose of “mediatic irrationality”and what Latin Americans call “politiqueria” interferes with the minimal political intelligence that the government manages. The government’s situation is a complicated and contradictory one; it confects a solution of the same order. That is to say, pressured by mass movements and business sectors that would benefit from peace, yet also answerable to the semi-fascist position of Uribism (position the Colombian establishment has long fueled through mediatic intoxication), the essentially bonapartist regime of Santos employs a “knuckleball” policy of contradictory impulses and spins.

In contrast, the guerrilla has shown much steadfastness and political maturity: a conception of politics that includes respect for collective processes and democratic decision-making (to say nothing of their Clausewitzian conduction of the war which works in consonance with rather than against long-term political objectives). Hence the guerrilla has dutifully updated its historical program based on inputs from the United Nations-sponsored Agricultural Development Forum held in Bogotá last December, which was one of the few concrete results of the dialogues last year.

The result is a rich series of new documents from the FARC-EP including the Agrarian Decalog [1] and Eight minimal proposals [2]. The latter document’s focus on “territorial reordering” is something like a cross between a traditional land reform directed against nonproductive estates and a strong environmentalist project based on producing for real human needs and rationally managing natural resources. This repeats a surprising dynamic that is now seen worldwide: only the so-called extreme left – Fidel Castro, the Basque Izquierda Abertzale, the Sem Terra movement in Brazil, and the FARC-EP – is able to operate with a coherent vision of planetary survival and sustainability.

Lenin once said that anyone not willing to fight barbarism with barbaric means deserved what was coming to him. In Colombia, faced with one of history’s most ruthless oligarchies and a longstanding state terrorism financed and armed in a great measure by the United States, one could easily understand an insurgent force assuming the same attitude. Yet the FARC has chosen another route: a route based on dialogue, along with petitions for cease-fire and regularization of the conflict. Upcoming months will tell us whether this route – together with popular mobilization and international pressure – can succeed in cutting barbarism’s wings in a country where it has ruled for many decades.

Chris Gilbert is professor of Political Science in the Universidad Bolivariana de Venezuela.

NOTES

[1] For a commentary on the Agrarian Decalog see: Cesar Jerez, “El Decálogo Agrario de las FARC”, http://prensarural.org/spip/spip.php?article10117.

[2] La Delegación de las FARC-EP: “Ocho propuestas mínimas”, http://pazfarc-ep.blogspot.com/2013/02/ocho-propuetas-minimas-reordemaniento-uso-territorial-paz.html.

Chris Gilbert is professor of political science in the Universidad Bolivariana de Venezuela.

Weekend Edition
April 29, 2016
Friday - Sunday
Andrew Levine
What is the Democratic Party Good For? Absolutely Nothing
Roberto J. González – David Price
Anthropologists Marshalling History: the American Anthropological Association’s Vote on the Academic Boycott of Israeli Institutions
Robert Jacobs
Hanford, Not Fukushima, is the Big Radiological Threat to the West Coast
Ismael Hossein-Zadeh
US Presidential Election: Beyond Lesser Evilism
Dave Lindorff
The Push to Make Sanders the Green Party’s Candidate
Ian Fairlie
Chernobyl’s Ongoing Toll: 40,000 More Cancer Deaths?
Pete Dolack
Verizon Sticks it to its Workers Because $45 Billion isn’t Enough
Richard Falk
If Obama Visits Hiroshima
Margaret Kimberley
Dishonoring Harriet Tubman
Deepak Tripathi
The United States, Britain and the European Union
Peter Linebaugh
Marymount, Haymarket, Marikana: a Brief Note Towards ‘Completing’ May Day
Eva Golinger
My Country, My Love: a Conversation with Gerardo and Adriana of the Cuban Five
Moshe Adler
May Day: a Trade Agreement to Unite Third World and American Workers
Vijay Prashad
Political Violence in Honduras
Paul Krane
Where Gun Control Ought to Start: Disarming the Police
David Anderson
Al Jazeera America: Goodbye to All That Jazz
Rob Hager
Platform Perversity: More From the Campaign That Can’t Strategize
Pat Williams
FDR in Montana
Dave Marsh
Every Day I Read the Book (the Best Music Books of the Last Year)
David Rosen
Job Satisfaction Under Perpetual Stagnation
John Feffer
Big Oil isn’t Going Down Without a Fight
Murray Dobbin
The Canadian / Saudi Arms Deal: More Than Meets the Eye?
Gary Engler
The Devil Capitalism
Brian Cloughley
Is Washington Preparing for War Against Russia?
Manuel E. Yepe
The Big Lies and the Small Lies
Robert Fantina
Vice Presidents, Candidates and History
Mel Gurtov
Sanctions and Defiance in North Korea
Howard Lisnoff
Still the Litmus Test of Worth
Dean Baker
Big Business and the Overtime Rule: Irrational Complaints
Ulrich Heyden
Crimea as a Paradise for High-Class Tourism?
Ramzy Baroud
Did the Arabs Betray Palestine? – A Schism between the Ruling Classes and the Wider Society
Halyna Mokrushyna
The War on Ukrainian Scientists
Joseph Natoli
Who’s the Better Neoliberal?
Ron Jacobs
The Battle at Big Brown: Joe Allen’s The Package King
Wahid Azal
Class Struggle and Westoxication in Pahlavi Iran: a Review of the Iranian Series ‘Shahrzad’
David Crisp
After All These Years, Newspapers Still Needed
Graham Peebles
Hungry and Frightened: Famine in Ethiopia 2016
Robert Koehler
Opening the Closed Political Culture
Missy Comley Beattie
Waves of Nostalgia
Thomas Knapp
The Problem with Donald Trump’s Version of “America First”
Georgina Downs
Hillsborough and Beyond: Establishment Cover Ups, Lies & Corruption
Jeffrey St. Clair
Groove on the Tracks: the Magic Left Hand of Red Garland
Ben Debney
Kush Zombies: QELD’s Hat Tip to Old School Hip Hop
Charles R. Larson
Moby Dick on Steroids?
David Yearsley
Miles Davis: Ace of Baseness
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail