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.

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

Weekend Edition
December 02, 2016
Friday - Sunday
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: The CIA’s Plots to Kill Castro
Paul Street
The Iron Heel at Home: Force Matters
Pam Martens - Russ Martens
Timberg’s Tale: Washington Post Reporter Spreads Blacklist of Independent Journalist Sites
Andrew Levine
Must We Now Rethink the Hillary Question? Absolutely, Not
Joshua Frank
CounterPunch as Russian Propagandists: the Washington Post’s Shallow Smear
David Rosen
The Return of HUAC?
Rob Urie
Race and Class in Trump’s America
Patrick Cockburn
Why Everything You’ve Read About Syria and Iraq Could be Wrong
Caroline Hurley
Anatomy of a Nationalist
Ayesha Khan
A Muslim Woman’s Reflections on Trump’s Misogyny
Michael Hudson – Steve Keen
Rebel Economists on the Historical Path to a Global Recovery
Russell Mokhiber
Sanders Single Payer and Death by Democrat
Roger Harris
The Triumph of Trump and the Specter of Fascism
Steve Horn
Donald Trump’s Swamp: Meet Ten Potential Energy and Climate Cabinet Picks and the Pickers
Louis Proyect
Deepening Contradictions: Identity Politics and Steelworkers
Ralph Nader
Trump and His Betraying Makeover
Stephen Kimber
The Media’s Abysmal Coverage of Castro’s Death
Dan Bacher
WSPA: The West’s Most Powerful Corporate Lobbying Group
Nile Bowie
Will Trump backpedal on the Trans-Pacific Partnership?
Ron Ridenour
Fidel’s Death Brings Forth Great and Sad Memories
Missy Comley Beattie
By Invitation Only
Fred Gardner
Sword of Damocles: Pot Partisans Fear Trump’s DOJ
Renee Parsons
Obama and Propornot
Dean Baker
Cash and Carrier: Trump and Pence Put on a Show
Jack Rasmus
Taming Trump: From Faux Left to Faux Right Populism
Ron Jacobs
Selling Racism—A Lesson From Pretoria
Julian Vigo
The Hijos of Buenos Aires:  When Identity is Political
Matthew Vernon Whalan
Obama’s Legacy
Subcomandante Insurgente Galeano
By Way of Prologue: On How We Arrived at the Watchtower and What We Saw from There
Aidan O'Brien
Fidel and Spain: A Tale of Right and Wrong
Carol Dansereau
Stop Groveling! How to Thwart Trump and Save the World
Kim Nicolini
Moonlight, The Movie
Evan Jones
Behind GE’s Takeover of Alstom Energy
James A Haught
White Evangelicals are Fading, Powerful, Baffling
Barbara Moroncini
Protests and Their Others
Christopher Brauchli
Parallel Lives: Trump and Temer
Joseph Natoli
The Winds at Their Backs
Cesar Chelala
Poverty is Not Only an Ignored Word
David Swanson
75 Years of Pearl Harbor Lies
Alex Jensen
The Great Deceleration
Nyla Ali Khan
When Faith is the Legacy of One’s Upbringing
Gilbert Mercier
Trump Win: Paradigm Shift or Status Quo?
Stephen Martin
From ‘Too Big to Fail’ to ‘Too Big to Lie’: the End Game of Corporatist Globalization.
Charles R. Larson
Review: Emma Jane Kirby’s “The Optician of Lampedusa”
David Yearsley
Haydn Seek With Hsu
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail