The Notion of Peace In a War-Torn Nation
The main goal for Colombia's recent failed and successful consensus is fairly simple: peace. Living in a nation deprived of social justices and stricken by terrorism over the past 52 years, nearly half of the Colombian voters were found favorable of this peace document. It is understandable that people who may have been born into this civil war and have suffered through it for half of a century may want to see a change. Additionally, the Santos Administration, the United Nations, The United States, The UK and Northern Ireland have demonstrated peripheral support of peace in this country. The goal is peace: but at what cost? Not everything that shines is always gold. Though everyone wants peace, it is unsettling to see the potential consequences of negotiating and even sharing governmental authority with a rebel militant group whose monetary success is in direct correlation with the mass trafficking of narcotics. Syracuse University Latin American Politics Professor Myrna Garcia-Calderon states that drugs, the economy, and power are all interconnected. That is why she finds herself optimistic, yet very hesitant when it comes to the government-FARC deal.
Evidently, the past decade of transitioning from civil war to peace has gained so much momentum, global support, and formalities that it is too late to turn back now and try to imprison or neglect the FARC. Juan Manuel Santos, though the deal is extremely flawed, has shown determination to bring his country into a peacful state, no matter what the cost. The fact that he was given the 2016 Nobel Prize Award exemplifies that the world is supporting his efforts and desperately trying to convince the Colombian public that he is leading them on the right path. Colombia is a democracy. Therefore, shouldn't the common, everyday person be able to contribute to whether they want the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia to be exonerated and legitimized in their society?
The Cry for Justice
Over the course of the past two months, there have been two peace deal votings. The October 2nd and November 24th peace deal votes of 2016 each came with a vast array of concerns and well-deserved public backlash. The October peace referendum succeeded in forging together the first official and formal declaration of peace between the FARC and the federal government. The shockingly competitive result of 50.22% voting "No" and 49.78% of voters choosing "Si" illustrated the massive divide and polarization in Colombia. The main issue with this style of deal is that it is a sensitive, complicated, and deep-rooted issue that has been half-heartedly and irresponsibly dealt with by a simple sheet of paper that does not truly guarantee an end to the crisises. The contents that go along with this "peace" proposition are also shown to anger Colombians citizens and former president Alvaro Uribe. Uribe understandably wants tougher sanctions on an organization that is currently slowing down, but has a blatant and unapologetic past of criminal activity. The Guardian shows us that other critics of ths October deal are dissastisfied with the concept of "transitional justice"- the idea that confessing your crimes and cooperating to build peace. The FARC could easily give an artificial statement of their criminal past and then become much more dangerous in the future because of the leniency that the federal government has shown. The problem is that other nations may just blindly go along with President Santos and agree because peace is better than war. However, they cannot empathize with the people who have actually suffered under the atrocities committed by this rebel group. A CNN broadcast back in early October featuring Rafael Romo shows a clip of Santos' speech following this deal in which his defense was basically just: "We all want peace." and "I have heard those who have said yes, and I have heard those who have said no." in order to show that he is non-partisan. He has had a very tough time trying to find a "happy medium".
The problem of which can be found within the November peace deal is the desperation and deceit shown by Santos. He signed this deal and it passed through congress based on what he expected to be the best solution for his nation. Notice how he didn't allow his country's citizens to cast their votes this time. He needed a deal to pass or else his entire administariton would be embarrassed and would have found themselves in even deeper turmoil. It seems as if Santos used this deal as a last resort. He may not want or even be ashamed of shaking hands with former enemies of the state. However, he is in far too deep and if he listened to the infuriated Alvaro Uribe now, he would be flip-flopping on his policies. Whether his hand was forced or not, President Santos was wrong to go behind the public's back and aggressively pursue a deal of complete uncertainty: turning the terrorist group into a political (Marxist) movement. Former president Alvaro Uribe has never been shy in criticizing this deal, saying that FARC's entry into politics will turn Colombia into a "second Venezuela".
Authentic Guarantee of Peace is Currently Non-Existant
It is calming to see that when TIME Magazine conducted ethnographic research on a remote FARC camp in Colombia, it was disarmed and demobilized. On the bright side, by the end of Uribe's preisdency, the FARC declined from 20,000 to only 7,000 soldiers. This group has been exhausted by combatting its own government for 52 years. Many of the revolutionaries are ready to move on and were devastated by the October referndum's failure. FARC member Milena Reyes even stated "I had a lump in my throat because I could feel all my dreams just falling apart." The hesitation and mistrust in the FARC by the Colombian citizens is understandable and a realisitic mindset. Think about it: What's stopping violent or drug-motivated rebels from independent drug trafficking, becoming a member of the ELN (National Liberation Army) -who is still not at peace with the nation, or joining a paramilitary organization? A piece of paper signed by Juan Manuel Santos, passed by congress, and hated by half of the nation? I highly doubt that. Peace is the ultimate goal; yet it is factual that FARC has illegally built their entire empire. By exoneration and empowerment, they have the potential to grow stronger and commit even larger scale crime since that is their expertise. In an article called Chronicle of a Peace Foretold, former Vice President Francisco Santos gives a quote of defiance and opposition to the FARC by stating: "no peace without impunity". The only thing that is guaranteed is that Colombia is by definition, in peaceful state. It is highly possible and predictable that there will still be high rates of crime and now, fractionalized criminals rather than one large revel militant group.
Evidently, the past decade of transitioning from civil war to peace has gained so much momentum, global support, and formalities that it is too late to turn back now and try to imprison or neglect the FARC. Juan Manuel Santos, though the deal is extremely flawed, has shown determination to bring his country into a peacful state, no matter what the cost. The fact that he was given the 2016 Nobel Prize Award exemplifies that the world is supporting his efforts and desperately trying to convince the Colombian public that he is leading them on the right path. Colombia is a democracy. Therefore, shouldn't the common, everyday person be able to contribute to whether they want the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia to be exonerated and legitimized in their society?
The Cry for Justice
Over the course of the past two months, there have been two peace deal votings. The October 2nd and November 24th peace deal votes of 2016 each came with a vast array of concerns and well-deserved public backlash. The October peace referendum succeeded in forging together the first official and formal declaration of peace between the FARC and the federal government. The shockingly competitive result of 50.22% voting "No" and 49.78% of voters choosing "Si" illustrated the massive divide and polarization in Colombia. The main issue with this style of deal is that it is a sensitive, complicated, and deep-rooted issue that has been half-heartedly and irresponsibly dealt with by a simple sheet of paper that does not truly guarantee an end to the crisises. The contents that go along with this "peace" proposition are also shown to anger Colombians citizens and former president Alvaro Uribe. Uribe understandably wants tougher sanctions on an organization that is currently slowing down, but has a blatant and unapologetic past of criminal activity. The Guardian shows us that other critics of ths October deal are dissastisfied with the concept of "transitional justice"- the idea that confessing your crimes and cooperating to build peace. The FARC could easily give an artificial statement of their criminal past and then become much more dangerous in the future because of the leniency that the federal government has shown. The problem is that other nations may just blindly go along with President Santos and agree because peace is better than war. However, they cannot empathize with the people who have actually suffered under the atrocities committed by this rebel group. A CNN broadcast back in early October featuring Rafael Romo shows a clip of Santos' speech following this deal in which his defense was basically just: "We all want peace." and "I have heard those who have said yes, and I have heard those who have said no." in order to show that he is non-partisan. He has had a very tough time trying to find a "happy medium".
The problem of which can be found within the November peace deal is the desperation and deceit shown by Santos. He signed this deal and it passed through congress based on what he expected to be the best solution for his nation. Notice how he didn't allow his country's citizens to cast their votes this time. He needed a deal to pass or else his entire administariton would be embarrassed and would have found themselves in even deeper turmoil. It seems as if Santos used this deal as a last resort. He may not want or even be ashamed of shaking hands with former enemies of the state. However, he is in far too deep and if he listened to the infuriated Alvaro Uribe now, he would be flip-flopping on his policies. Whether his hand was forced or not, President Santos was wrong to go behind the public's back and aggressively pursue a deal of complete uncertainty: turning the terrorist group into a political (Marxist) movement. Former president Alvaro Uribe has never been shy in criticizing this deal, saying that FARC's entry into politics will turn Colombia into a "second Venezuela".
Authentic Guarantee of Peace is Currently Non-Existant
It is calming to see that when TIME Magazine conducted ethnographic research on a remote FARC camp in Colombia, it was disarmed and demobilized. On the bright side, by the end of Uribe's preisdency, the FARC declined from 20,000 to only 7,000 soldiers. This group has been exhausted by combatting its own government for 52 years. Many of the revolutionaries are ready to move on and were devastated by the October referndum's failure. FARC member Milena Reyes even stated "I had a lump in my throat because I could feel all my dreams just falling apart." The hesitation and mistrust in the FARC by the Colombian citizens is understandable and a realisitic mindset. Think about it: What's stopping violent or drug-motivated rebels from independent drug trafficking, becoming a member of the ELN (National Liberation Army) -who is still not at peace with the nation, or joining a paramilitary organization? A piece of paper signed by Juan Manuel Santos, passed by congress, and hated by half of the nation? I highly doubt that. Peace is the ultimate goal; yet it is factual that FARC has illegally built their entire empire. By exoneration and empowerment, they have the potential to grow stronger and commit even larger scale crime since that is their expertise. In an article called Chronicle of a Peace Foretold, former Vice President Francisco Santos gives a quote of defiance and opposition to the FARC by stating: "no peace without impunity". The only thing that is guaranteed is that Colombia is by definition, in peaceful state. It is highly possible and predictable that there will still be high rates of crime and now, fractionalized criminals rather than one large revel militant group.