#Socialism

FARC`s PR war a threat to Colombian peace talks?

Colombia’s President Juan Manuel Santos is fighting a public relations war with FARC guerrillas who in days will fly to Norway to start negotiations to end five decades of conflict.
Peace depends on the will of the FARC to negotiate, and the ability of the government to provide the terrorists an alternative to armed combat.
The government has done its part.
Since coming to power in 2010, the president has rushed through a new legal framework of transitional justice that will permit integration of demobilised guerrillas into civilian life; offering a route to legitimate political representation through the power of the ballot box.    
But the key question is whether the FARC have done enough to show they too are serious about peace.  
Those loyal to ex-president Alvaro Uribe suggest not; pointing to the rebels’ press conference held last week in the safe-house of the Cuban capital, Havana, as evidence the FARC are playing a huge confidence trick. 
Hearing the mendacious words of the groups’ high command, it is tempting to agree with the Uribistas.
After months of preliminary talks between the FARC and the Santos government, the two sides had agreed a tight agenda for negotiations. But in Havana the FARC took advantage of the worldwide media attention to rip this accord apart.
Appearing to enjoy their moment in the sun these civilian and smartly dressed commanders announced they were placing new demands on the Colombian government. Now they would `fight’ for a bilateral cease-fire and for the inclusion of Simon Trindad in the process. 
Santos had previously promised that the army would not cede a millimetre of territory to the FARC and Trinidad is a prisoner in the US and is subject to the will of that country´s judiciary.
The FARC appeared to be constructing barriers, excuses to pull out of the talks and pass blame to the government.
All of a sudden the President was forced to negotiate with the FARC in public, no, he would not pull out troops he confirmed, and Trinidad, well that was out of his hands.
Echoes of the last, failed, talks in Caguan were being heard in the media, and Uribistas took to the airwaves to attack the inauspicious beginnings of this complicated process.  Their argument is clear – if the FARC are willing to negotiate, why are they going back on their word before the talks have even started?
For these sceptics the peace talks are in danger of becoming nothing more than a platform for the FARC to launch a public relations campaign, an opportunity to enjoy the oxygen of global media attention.
The fear is that, far from avoiding the errors of previous peace talks, President Santos is in fact falling into the FARC’s trap even before he has reached the table.
If it is true then that the FARC are setting the agenda in the media and that we are now engaged in a public relations war, surely we shouldn´t worry unduly – no sensible thinking person will take any notice of these criminals?
Unfortunately we shouldn`t be so complacent. As incredible and depressing as it may seem for those who have lived through the pain and suffering of the FARC’s nihilistic campaign of terror, there is a persistent level of support for the group’s ’struggle’; particularly in Europe.
For years the FARC has enjoyed financial and moral assistance from hard left groups across the Atlantic. The computers of Raul Reyes, killed by the Colombian military in 2008, showed us that the FARC is active in Holland, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, Sweden, Belgium, Turkey, and Norway (as well as Libya and Australia outside Europe).
NGOs, student movements and Marxist political parties are all implicated in this web of terrorism.We must remember too, that the Irish Republican Army provided training for the FARC.
Lamentably, this hypocrisy is still alive and kicking. Take the case of French journalist Romeo Langois who was ’abducted’ by the FARC earlier this summer. When released, Langois inexplicably claimed that there were ’neither good nor bad’ in Colombia’s conflict. Moral relativism must have clouded his view, perhaps allowing him to overlook the fact the FARC recruit hundreds of young children to fight their war.
Langois is not the problem but he is a symptom of the willingness of those untouched by the tragedy of the conflict to view the politics with frivolity.
So for Uribe, quite rightly, the thought of the FARC once again using the peace talks to lobby for their ’cause’ is a pill impossible to swallow. For the families of the FARC’s victims and for the majority of the 46 million Colombians who have never known peace it is equally sickening.
We must hope, however understandable that Uribe´s concern is, that it is misplaced.
The FARC might enjoy some level of international sympathy but it is difficult for them to disguise the fact they are a spent force.  The grandstanding of last week`s press conference speaks more of desperation to arrive at the negotiating table ready to play the best hand available, than of a group that seriously believes it can fool the people it continues to kill.
I draw hope from the fact the FARC are rumoured to have begun talks with Santos almost as soon as he took over from Uribe in 2010. So, despite the strikes against the group, the deaths of Mono Jojoy and supreme leader, Alfonso Cano, the FARC have not broken off these talks. The evidence suggests they are serious looking for a way out, a way of saving face. 
What is more, Timochenko is evidently a man with political ambition. He today opened a Twitter account and circulated through his aides the idea that the FARC could run a candidate for the 2014 Presidential elections. He appears to understand like Gerry Adams and Martin McGuiness before him, that the vote must replace the bullet.
We would be naïve to think the FARC won`t continue try to trick us between now and if and when there is an agreement (and of course afterwards) but we should not despair for the talks because of this.
Yes it is gut-wrenching to watch the narco-terrorists deny their involvement in drug-trafficking, and to claim innocently not to hold hostages in their power, but it may be that we will have to live with this if we want to give peace a chance. 
This story was published on Colombia Reports
Also published on Redes Colombia 

FARC´s PR war as peace talks loom

FARC fighters, many are women and children.

Colombia’s FARC guerrillas yesterday released a video of combatants rapping about forthcoming bilateral peace talks with the government, the details of which President Juan Manuel Santos will confirm at 12.30today in a special address to the nation.
The process will be long and arduous and the outcome is unknown, but this is the best chance for peace in the history of the near 50 year conflict.
If peace is the end game, this video, which attempts to present a humorous side to the brutal reality of this terrorist group, is the start of a fierce public relations war in which the battle is for the hearts and minds of the 46 million Colombians that make up this Andean nation.
A music video circulated yesterday in which FARC foot-soldiers appear in combat gear and t-shirts marked with the face of the Argentine revolutionary Che Guevarra singing along to a five minute parody of the peace talks scheduled to take place in October.
The film is amusing (but ultimately offensive given its origin) and pokes fun not only at the government, and Colombian society, but also at the guerrilla group itself. No one should be fooled however; this is a clever political broadcast designed to disseminate the FARC’s message ahead of President Santos’ speech to the nation this afternoon.
When the President speaks from the press office of the Casa de Nariño, as millions of Colombians sit down for the traditional family lunch, he is expected to allude to the mistakes of the past, the tragedy and criminality of the war, and point the way to the sunlight uplands of a Colombia in peace.
He will be prudent, but optimistic, and ask the nation to join him, to lend him their support and together work to secure a permanent disarmament of the FARC and an end to this pointless and bloody insurgency.
Colombian society is split; for some, the desire for peace does not win over the scepticism and hatred for a duplicitous FARC that has brought misery to the country while it pursues communist revolutionary ends.
Santos has reshuffled his government and prepared a detailed communication strategy to help build popular support which he hopes will fight off the snipping from the sidelines and the fierce opposition to negotiations that ex-president Alvaro Uribe has been fuelling since news of the talks emerged last week.
Polls suggest that, for now, over half the nation support the talks and the efforts of the government to secure peace. As the agenda for the talks becomes known today and as the bitterness increases ahead of the first meeting expect to be in Oslo (later the negotiations will move to Cuba) it is unclear how this generosity of spirit will hold up.
Worse still, once the table is set and the real discussions begin, the distrust and fear will begin in earnest. Will Colombian accept a legitimate political role for the FARC, will they accept reduced sentences for those who have committed crimes against humanity? The campaign run by Uribistas (those loyal to the ex-president) is centred around the simple but effective message – ‘Peace, but not at any price’. It is a message that it already resonating.
Both sides – the government and the FARC – are working to ensure they enter the talks with the best possible hand. Any weakness on either side will be capitalised on. The FARC know that Santos’ mandate is based on the will of the people, and they will fight dirty to move public opinion towards their position, and away from that of the government.
Watching the video (judge for yourself, left) closely it is clear that the FARC are not only attempting to present a human side, attempting to build an empathy with the nation, but they are also satirising the government.
Santos is lampooned as a member of the bourgeoisie, a political oligarch; distant from the working and middle classes. Their message is clear – the FARC represent the ‘pueblo’, and theirs is the same fight as the near 50% of Colombians who live in poverty (pure theatre of course). The president is also given the nickname ‘Chucky’ in an allusion to a popular series of 90s horror films (to whom Santos is alleged to bear an unfortunate liking).
The selection of young – men and women – fighters who look and sound (more or less) like ordinary Colombians is an obvious tactic to increase their reach into an uncertain public, as is the selection of the Che -faced t-shirts.
Guevarra remains an idol among the romantic left and student movements the world over. No matter that he was a murderous supporter of oppressive regimes; his is a ‘fight the system’ narrative that attracts a hippy and pseudo-socialist cult following.
There is little doubt that some in Colombia (and across the world) will identify with these misguided revolutionaries.
At the end of the video, ‘Timochenko’, the supreme leader of the FARC appears to announce that the rebels will enter into the talks without ‘rancour or arrogance’. For him this is a show of willing, a public commitment to the fight for peace. Nevertheless, the bombs and the attacks continue and the FARC are far from anything resembling a cease-fire.
This video is a highly cynical piece of PR. The phony war is over. The fight for peace and public opinion has begun.
As its fades to black, the video leaves us with Timochenko’s promise that victory will be theirs. We must hope he is referring, as Santos did last week, to ‘peace’ as being ‘the victory’. All eyes turn now to President Santos who will take the stage in a matter of minutes.
Also published on Redes Colombia

 

 

Dare we dream of peace in Colombia?

Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos confirmed Monday evening that his government has entered into exploratory talks with the FARC to negotiate an end to 50 years of conflict.

Earlier in the day Venezuelan television channel Telesur reported that both sides had signed an agreement to advance official peace negotiations scheduled for 5 October, in Oslo; details Santos refused to confirm.

The president has received support from across the political spectrum and in the country’s media. Ex-president Alvaro Uribe, however has denounced his successor as a traitor and an appeaser.After ex-President Pastrana’s failed attempt to secure peace over a decade ago, and following a recent upsurge in FARC activity, there are also parts of Colombian society sceptical of Santos’ ability to end the continent’s longest-running civil war.

Dare we dream of a Colombia in peace?

Talking behind closed doors.

President Santos has promised in the coming days to reveal the details of the 30 meetings held in private between his government and the FARC over recent months in Cuba. What we know is that Enrique Santos, the president’s brother led the delegation, and that representatives of the Chávez and Castro regimes were present. We also understand agreement was reached on the agenda for talks, the issues for negotiation and potentially the red-lines.

 

Crucially, it is reported that the facilitators were able to establish a level of trust between the terrorist group and the government (evidenced by the FARC’s decision to maintain silence throughout the day and wait for the President to speak) – essential if peace talks are to be successful.

Santos has received severe criticism from Uribe and his followers – both for entering into discussion while bombs explode and battles rage, and for doing so clandestinely.

But Uribe is not the only source of opposition, there are sections of society highly critical of Santos’ approaches to the guerrilla group. They point to the level of violence evident in different regions of the country and argue that the FARC are not ready to negotiate.

They might have a point, but analysing the situation differently it is easy to see that the FARC’s recent actions are a sign of desperation, a last-ditch attempt to improve their position at the negotiating table.

Neverthless it will be difficult for President Santos to hold his coalition and the nation together throughout  a peace process whose timescales are unknown. The president has confirmed that the talks are not conditioned on a cease-fire, and will therefore run parallel with the battles, the deaths, the bombs and the political recriminations. The guerrillas will seek to prove they are still a viable fighting force, we must not allow them to convince us that they are.

 

How will the talks work?

President Santos made clear that the country had learnt the errors of the past. The infamous talks at El Caguan that broke down in 2002 have become a byword for the FARC’s duplicity. The rebel group ridiculed Pastrana’s government with broken promises that forced Colombians to lose all confidence in their political leaders. Uribe came to power on the back of the collapse in these talks, promising to punish the FARC.

Santos is a statesman that has studied closely this episode, and of course more successful negotiations across the world. He has previously sought help from former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair who masterminded the famous peace agreement in Northern Ireland.

He is also a president who has worked for decades to end the conflict. Even in 1997 when Santos was the Liberal’s pre-candidate for the presidential elections of 1998, he had a clear plan for peace. When Santos entered the presidential palace he placed the search for peace not only at the heart of his inauguration speech, but also his legislative agenda.

Santos is desperate for his legacy to be the president that delivered peace to Colombia.

As well as Santos’ abilities there are other reasons to be optimistic that the mistakes of the past will not be repeated. The most important is perhaps the change in dynamic between the government and the FARC. In 2002 the state was weak while the guerrillas were in the ascendancy.

There was no imperative for the FARC to negotiate or give up a struggle they had every chance of winning. Following Plan Colombia and the money invested during the Uribe years in fighting back the rebels, the Colombian state has emerged healthy and economically successful while the guerrillas are on their last legs.

Equally, the government is in a significantly better position to offer the FARC what they want. The transitional justice laws are in place that will permit a negotiated settlement for criminal punishments, and also lies open the way for political representation. Additionally, the Santos regime can point to the land restitution law which helps deliver a flagship FARC demand for rural community justice.

Finally, the Caguan peace talks were dominated by discussions about securing a cease-fire and a demilitarised zone. In Oslo this will not be on the agenda, permitting the focus to lie instead on the fundamental issues upon which a lasting peace can be established.

Speculation suggests that the talks will centre on the following issues:

  • Narco-Trafficking
  • Reintegration into civil society and political representation
  • Rural development
  • Human rights

 

Once Santos – in the coming days – starts to confirm the detail of the talks, it is hoped he will also reveal the names of the negotiators. It is speculated that ex-president Cesar Gaviria will lead the government team, with a significant international contingent including Hugo Chávez and Chilean President Piñera also expected to be present.
While there has been no word from the FARC, and questions remain about the ability of its top brass to speak with unity for the fractured organisation, Timochenko and Fabián Ramírez are tipped to participate.

 

So is peace in sight?

 

The conditions are not perfect, the FARC remain a force whose acts of atrocity have increased dramatically since the turn of the year. But the conditions will never be ideal, and it is clear that neither the government  nor the guerrillas have achieved their goals through military means.

 

 

By holding the talks in Oslo (famous for negotiated peace settlements between the Israelis and the Palestinians, the Tamil Tigers and the Sri Lankan government among others) in the presence of the international community, it will be difficult for either side to complain of bias or illegitimacy.

 

 

An unresolved question is how involved the Colombian people will become and how President Santos can keep them onside. There are rumours that the government have hosted a series of focus-groups across the country, to understand reaction to the guerrillas and to possible peace accords. Now the talks are in the open, the government cannot afford to risk losing popular support as it inevitably asks Colombians to swallow unpleasant concessions.

 

The Colombian government has a constitutional duty to seek peace and President Santos’ efforts must be supported. The FARC are a spent force whose leaders have spoken of their desire to bring the war to an end. They have fooled us before, but this time things might just be different.

Uribe will continue to attack but he should reflect that the advances in security made during his eight years in power have made today’s announcement possible. When Uribe entered office he spoke of his hope that the guerrilla would demobilise and that Colombia would have a ‘politics with arms’. It will be a long a painful journey, but the alternative is another decade of bombs, bullets, kidnappings and assassinations.

A Colombia in peace is the ‘country within reach of the children’ as Garcia Márquez put it.

Also published on Redes Colombia


 

Left-wing López capable of a Colombian presidential ‘coup’?

Resounding electoral success is not a phrase often used to describe the Colombian left; unsurprising in a country that has endured 50 years of war against Communist insurgents.

If recent polls are right, however, the presidential elections of 2014 are a once in a generation opportunity to redraw the political map. A third of voters appear set to vote left-wing while the right will be split between a Uribe-backed-horse and President Santos.

If a candidate can be found to unite the left, and appeal to those in the centre, then victory is a (very distant) possibility – well that´s what they´d like you to believe, of course. There are many names in the frame but only one that appeals – Clara López, President of the Polo Democratic Alternative party. The grandstanding polemicists must now give way and let López, a serious politician with real experience, have a shot at the Casa de Nariño.

A divided left?

Gustavo Petro, the Mayor of Bogota, is the left-winger with the most power in Colombia. His position is the second most important in the country, and despite his militancy with the old guerrilla group M-19 he was able to win over a sufficient number of middle and upper income voters to take control of the city in November. His mandate began in January and has been – so far – underwhelming.

In an earlier article published on this website Petro’s approach to winning the election – against the establishment candidate, Enrique Peñalosa – was examined and proposed as a blueprint for the left in future elections. Petro, originally seen as a firebrand who scared away any voter not ideologically tied to his brand of socialism, moderated his style and shifted the focus of his speeches on to the centre ground.

Unfortunately for Bogota this strategy was forgotten as soon as he entered power; his regression to the left has alienated and polarised voters.

Petro is a lesson for the left – both in how to win elections and how (not) to remain in power once there.

Petro is also a warning to left-wingers to avoid the temptation towards internal warfare. The Polo Democratic Alternative party who supported Petro’s presidential campaign in 2010 were unable to unite around his candidature for the mayoralty of Bogota. Petro, in protest at the party’s refusal to condemn corrupt members, left the party to form his own movement, the Progresives.

The Progresives split the Polo vote. The movement, bruised by Petro’s denunciations and internal splits, went on to record catastrophic local election results in November last year. Had the party acted to clean up the corruption and used Petro as a figurehead nationally and in the capital, the results would no doubt have been quite different.

Petro is by no means the only important politician to have left the Polo. Luis Eduardo (“Lucho”) Garzón – a former Bogota Mayor – ditched the party to form the Greens, essentially a left-leaning party (despite being officially part of the Santos coalition government). The Greens have been electorally successful, most significantly gaining the governorship of Antioquia with Sergio Farjardo.

Another figure of the left is Piedad Córdoba, a controversial former senator who is accused of suspiciously close relationships with the FARC and with Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez. Córdoba, an excellent orator and former member of the Liberal Party, this year established her own movement, the far left, Marcha Patriotica.

The left in Colombia is riddled with factions – it must repair them to select a candidate capable of winning the presidency.

Alongside the personalisation of its politics there is another reason why the left in Colombia has failed to make electoral inroads. As Oscar Fernando Sevillano, writing for the Bogota think tank Corporación Arcoiris argues, the left have been ‘frustrated by the extreme right, the political elites in the regions, and parts of the military and the police have participated in their extermination’.

Remembering Gaitán, Galán, and Lara Bonilla, not to mention the hundreds of council candidates that over the years have been silenced, it is difficult to argue with Sevillano’s assessment. Sad then that news emerged this week of a planned attempt on Petro’s life.

The opportunity:

While the threats to the left of either internal annihilation or external assassination are not insignificant, the opportunity to make history is there. Leon Valencia, director of Nuevo Arcoiris in a comment piece for Semana heralded the results of the poll commissioned by his organisation in which it was revealed that 28% of voters would vote for a left-wing candidate.

According to Valencia, the poll is ‘a message of great hope’ for the leaders of the Colombian left. Should they ‘choose a single candidate who looks to the centre’ he ventures, ‘they have a chance of reaching the Palace of Nariño’.

Valencia went on to argue that with the split in the votes of those on the right – as a result of the fight between Uribe and Santos – there is every possibility that the candidate of the left could win through to the second round – the head-to-head. Valencia drew analogy to Petro’s victory in Bogotá, showing how a surprise candidate – in a crowded field – can sneak through the middle.

Choosing the candidate – Colombia’s ´Iron Lady´

The left have been successful in Bogota, it has been a long-held bastion of progressive thought. Many capital cities in the world are more left-wing than the rest of their nation. To win in 2014, the left needs to choose a candidate that can appeal not only to the liberal metropolitan elite, but also to the rural voters.Clara López – despite her Bogota credentials – is this person; a serious and respected voice of the moderate left. She has appeal across all sectors of Colombian society, and will not alienate or repel votes.

In January Clara López returned to the presidency of Polo following a highly successful period as the caretaker Mayor of Bogota. Having taken over from Samuel Moreno – who had been suspended on corruption charges – López succeeded in uniting the capital, governing from the centre, and vanquishing the ghosts of her predecessor’s regime. López’s reputation as safe pair of hands had been cemented – and she remains one of the few left-wing Colombians with real and tangible governing experience.

The appeal of Doctora López is based not only in her experience but also her character. Her image is not that of the prototype politician of the Latin American left. Cadenced rhetoric and polemical speeches about imperialist Yankees are not her style; she is a rolled-up-shirt-sleeve, no-nonsense politician. The tone of her discourse is serious and modest, the content realistic, not idealistic.

‘Colombia’s Iron Lady’  (as a Brit who grew up in the time of the real Iron Lady, I know one when I see one) often wears thick rimmed glasses, pins tightly back her hair and dresses seriously. She is more akin to head mistress of a posh British school than a gun-toting revolutionary.

Although aristocratic and formidable, although schooled overseas and an impeccable member of the governing class, López has never let the common touch evade her. The aloofness of oligarchical arrogance that Santos is accused (unfairly) of is not in evidence here.

Examining her closely, there is almost something Churchillian in her stare and in her determination to do what she believes is right. If the left wants a presidential candidate that will deliver blood sweat and tears, it should look no further.

Also published on redescolombia

Gustavo Petro useless or ruthless Mayor of Bogotá?

Gustavo Petro is a ruthless politician, or he is a useless one. The Mayor of Bogotá faces heavy criticism today for his decision – only five months into his mandate – to demanded the mass resignation of his cabinet.

According to most commentators, the Petro administration is in crisis. These critics point to a string of high-profile departures (even before last night’s political massacre) in particular to Antonio Navarro’s (effectively his second in command) sudden exit three months in, and conclude that Petro is unable to run a government.

 

The public are equally sceptical of the way the mayor is governing Bogotá, and disapproval ratings are running at 65%.  No one can deny it has been an unhappy start to the Petro regime. But this crisis today represents, for this website, an opportunity for Petro to regain the initiative. He may well not be the best administrator, but the decision to sack his cabinet is a political calculation, a bold move that might just work to re-position his government, and provide the impetus it needs to recapture the confidence of Bogotá.

 

 

What is wrong with the Petro administration?

 

 

Petro is unpopular. Bogota is in chaos; this is the assertion heard as much in the posh cafes of Parque 93 as it is in the rough cantinas of the city’s southern barrios. It is difficult to disagree with such a widely held view.
In fairness to Petro, Bogota was in trouble before he took hold of the reins. The Samuel Moreno administration (Petro’s predecessor) was disastrous. It left a series of deep-seated problems that now require immediate attention. The difficulty for Petro is he is yet to provide the evidence that he is equipped to resolve these issues.
Take transport – the area of policy that needs the most urgent action. It is no exaggeration to say that Bogota’s public transport network is at breaking point – major works are required, while others scheduled to have been completed years ago remain unfinished, underfunded and victims of the alleged corruption at the heart of the Moreno government. But, Petro’s approach to mobility in the capital has failed to reassure.
Although Petro argues that the issue is the most important of his administration, Bogotanos still await a clear plan or solution to the problem. His contradictory announcements on whether a metro system will be built or whether the city needs a light-rail system have caused confusion, and leave the impression of uncertainty at the heart of the mayoralty.
It has not helped, either, that the new bus system designed to come into effect on 2 June failed to do so because of a walk out of technical staff supposedly in protest at Petro’s penchant for ambivalence.
Petro’s Development Plan for Bogotá
The inability to make a decision is the most frequent criticism thrown at Petro. Last week, Petro pushed through his Bogotá Development Plan, the programme of commitments and policies the administration will seek to deliver during the lifespan of the mandate.
This plan has been slammed, precisely because it represents a series of compromises, volte-faces, uncertainties and contradictions – there were over 600 amendments to the final text. The airwaves have been full of those who argue that the plan is incoherent, that its promises are near impossible to keep and will saddle the public purse with huge debts.
Even more damming is the claim that the plan omits many of the more eye-catching commitments Petro made during his election campaign. Will Petro deliver free water to the poorest, for example, will he build the colleges he promised on the campaign trail? What has made him change the focus of his mandate, where has this recent policy shift come from?
Petro argues that he has amended his policies to reflect the reality of the Bogotá he inherited. But, it is the same Bogotá whose streets Petro canvassed last year.
Petro – the politician brain
Perhaps the critics of Petro are too harsh, however. In order to get his plan through Bogotá’s council it was inevitable that he would have to accommodate changes to his proposals. The majority of councillors are opposition members – and many of them will be viscerally opposed to Petro’s left-wing politics.
Politics is the art of the possible, and Petro is playing the game. In an earlier post, I argued that in order to win the mayoral elections last year, Petro had decided to move to the centre, and to appear a more pragmatic politician. Had he not done so, he would have been unable to win over the middle classes, frightened of his polemical views.
The same pragmatic Petro can be seen behind the decision to sack his cabinet. Petro understands that public opinion is not with him at the moment, that his administration has started off badly, and that it is failing to deliver on the fine rhetoric. What better way of making a major statement than to sack the people charged with this delivery? Sure it’s bold, and it could give the impression of a sinking ship – at least in the short-term. But it offers Petro a clean slate, an opportunity to regain the initiative, and set about achieving the goals the plan sets in place.
The most important move will be who Petro chooses to put in place in his new cabinet. Petro knows that if he is to keep the council on his side, which he must do if he is to secure the funding agreements for his projects, he must build a coalition. He cannot continue to govern solely with the friends he had placed in his old cabinet.
Given this, Petro appears likely to reach out and bring to the table members of the opposition, from the U Party and from Cambio Radical. A year ago when the campaign for Bogotá mayor was getting under way, it would have been impossible to imagine Petro – who was still viewed as a left-wing firebrand, an anti-establishment figure – working with the right-wing parties of the Santos administration.

 

 

Petro’s administrative qualities have been questioned, but his politics are adroit. There is no precedent for the sacking of the cabinet immediately after agreeing the development plan. It is expected that the mayor sticks with the secretaries that drew up the document.

 

 

But Petro likes the unexpected, and Petro administration that brings together those on the right and the left would offer an echo of perhaps the arch-pragmatist in Colombian politics – President Juan Manuel Santos.

 

 

Petro’s poor start to his time in office could yet lead to a successful mayoralty. No one doubts Petro’s ability to appeal through wise words, but he has failed so far to deliver. He must choose a new cabinet that is competent enough to do this dirty work for him.

 

Senator Robledo’s bid to change Colombia’s politics

Robledo, photo El Espectador

 

The 2014 Colombian presidential race is already underway. For once the talk is not about Juan Manuel Santos’ re-election. Nor is the focus on the machinations of the former president, Alvaro Uribe. This week we learnt that Senator Jorge Enrique Robledo, the intellectual left-winger intends to allow his name to go forward as a candidate.

Eloquent and polemical, Robledo has star appeal. He is, now that Gustavo Petro is in power, the most vocal and recognisable opposition politician in Colombia. In the 2010 senate race Robledo secured the third highest vote. He is undoubtedly a cult figure.

The left’s candidate of choice?

It is not in any way certain that Robledo will emerge as the chosen candidate for his Polo Democratic party. Clara Lopez, the Polo Democrats’ president is the favourite to secure the nomination. But the party is unlikely to decide this before next year, leaving plenty of scope for Robledo’s star to continue to ascend.

An eventual Robledo candidature would offer Colombians radical change. Robledo is opposed to just about every policy of the Santos administration. In fact Robledo runs counter virtually to the entire political culture of the country.

Robledo has made his career attacking the effects of the pro-market neo-liberalist policies that have reigned in Colombia since the 1990 presidency of Cesar Gaviria. Robledo is a red-blooded socialist who tends to protectionism, and the anti-big business rhetoric popular in large swathes of Latin America.

He is against the free-trade agreement with the USA, against private involvement in university education, and against the (as he sees it) colonialism of the Washington Consensus. Were he to win the presidential elections, he would quickly set about reversing much of the work of the last 20 years of centrist and right-wing Colombian governments.

In a telling interview with the quality publication El Colombiano earlier this month, Senator Robledo told Colombians that their country is on the sick-bed, and that the treatment the Santos presidency is administering is making the patient worse.

In this article, Robledo sets out the case for an alternative government for Colombia. A government based on socialist ideals. The senator’s thoughts for this brave new world were published a little over a week before it came to light that he was exploring the possibility of his candidature, as it is put. He will consult friends within the Polo Democratic Party before deciding his course of action.

Should he get a chance to present his prospectus, the article in El Colombiano sets outs clearly how this policy platform might look.

He argues that during the eighteen months of the Santos regime Colombia has gone from bad to worse. His principle argument is that government policies have benefited the monopolies, big businesses, and foreign investors at the expense of the poor, the middle classes, and the country’s small and medium-sized businesses. According to Robledo, Santos has widened Colombia’s inequality gap, reinforcing its status as the third most unequal nation on earth.

The intimation is that a Robledo presidency would halt the free trade agreements with the USA, with Europe and with South Korea. Robledo’s contention is that Colombia would not benefit from the agreements: The inherent structural imbalance would lend foreign companies a major advantage over less well developed Colombian businesses.Robledo predicts a new era of colonialism, as bad, he suggests, as the era of Spanish rule. This fatalism is typical of the protectionist left.

In the article, Robledo also attacks Santos’ land restitution policy, and his judicial reform laws arguing in his characteristically colourful language, that the President is steering the country into the ‘abyss’.

As with many politicians of his colour, Robledo is hotter on what he is against than on what he is for. A clear and compelling plan for a workable alternative for the country is not – for this website, at least – immediately available for consideration.

But Robledo will not worry about that. For now his brand is one of opposition. Last year when university students went on strike in protest against President’s Santos proposed changes to the education system, Robledo became the flag bearer of their cause. With soaring anti-privitisation rhetoric, Robledo launched wave after wave of attack, eventually helping students to force the government to shelve the plans.  Robledo has long enjoyed cult status within certain parts of Colombian society.

In a Congress where over 90% of the politicians are members of the coalition government, Robledo stands out like a sore thumb of contrariness.

There is no point in pretending that Robledo is anything other than a long-shot for president in 2014. He is a politician that is best suited to opposition. There is no denying his eloquence or even his likability. But he is precisely the sort of leader the Colombian left needs to steer well clear of.

Petro’s election in Bogotá showed the way for his former Polo Democratic colleagues – move to the centre, or die. For the Colombian left to have a real chance in 2014 it must select the moderate (and experienced) Clara Lopez.

Robledo is a stalking horse, but one that provides a bit of colour to a Colombian political system where the odds are stacked hugely in favour of the ruling administration, and where opposition is often drowned out in a din of unanimity.

Gustavo Petro, the great outsider of Colombian politics

Gustavo Petro on the campaign trail, photo La Silla Vacía

The red flag was hoisted high above the Lievano Palace in Bogotá on the afternoon of 1 January, announcing the official start of the Gustavo Petro era.

Petro, once a hard-line ultra-left guerrilla militant, has morphed into a populist, centre(ish)-left elected mayor, in charge of Colombia’s capital city.

Until a fortnight ago, Petro had only known life as an opposition politician. He now has the second most important job in the country. Critics complain that he lacks the experience necessary to run a city of 8 million souls, and that he is an ideologue, not an administrator. Supporters respond that he is a principled man with strong beliefs, who has brought together a cabinet of wise heads.

After years of relentlessly attacking those who held the reins of power, Petro has four years to prove he knows what to do now they’re in his hands.

Petro has started his time in office as those on the right fear he intends to carry on. His first address as Mayor was unmistakably of the left. Those that crowded into Bolivar Square to see their leader sworn in, heard how his government will tax the rich, how it will plough the money into public services, providing free education and drinking water for the poor, and how it will levy taxes on motorists to fund cheaper ‘more accessible’ public transport.

In Europe these policies would be called ‘old left’. Since taking office, however, Petro has shown he is equally at home with ‘new left’ ideas. He has borrowed from the modernising left movements that swept through Spain and the UK in the early 2000s.

Petro, like a Colombian Tony Blair or Jose Luis Zapatero, has committed his government to the pursuit of ‘equality’, openly embracing positive discrimination. Marking the sand, Petro in a highly symbolic act appointed women to half his cabinet positions.

Not content to stop there, he has now moved onto the territory of political correctness. Last week Petro set about dismantling centuries old tradition by seeking to end bullfighting in the capital. It was not appropriate for a city in the 21 century to applaud and make a spectacle of violence and death, he argued.

This way of thinking is new for Colombia, a deeply conservative and traditional country. Petro is setting about on a quiet revolution. He hopes to bring about social change, a shift in values, and a re-calibration of Colombian politics. The right and the church have dominated political discourse. Petro wants to present an alternative. As he puts it – socialism and love.

It is no surprise that there are those in Colombian politics who are frightened of Petro, not just because of his politics, but also as a result of what his personal story represents for the future of the country. Petro’s background promises to revolutionise the country even more than do his politics.

Unlike most Colombian politicians, Petro’s blood is not blue. Colombia has tended to be run by an elite, a governing class. Looking at Petro’s family tree you do not see generations of former senators, governors or presidents. If Petro is a success as mayor, his narrative of commoner turned political leader becomes a dangerous precedent for those who currently run the country. Could he encourage power to begin slowly to shift from the governors to the governed?

Petro’s genetic background ensures he is a political outsider. And by appearing to move to centre, Petro is now an outsider within a Colombian left that has marched en masse into the wilderness of untempered socialism. But most interesting will be Petro’s relationship with the national governmenFor now Petro is an independent in a country of consensus. President Santos’ coalition government controls over 90% of the Congress. But the coalition’s reach is felt at all administrative levels. The local and regional elections at the end of October were seen as a major success for Santos.

Of the 32 new governors, sworn in on 1 January, 17 belong to coalition parties, as do over half of the 1,100 new mayors. In some cases – like that of Cali’s new mayor, Rodrigo Guerrero, even candidates elected on non-coalition platforms are also unofficially linked to the government. Semana, Colombia’s intelligent weekly publication, have suggested that never before have the national and regional governments been more closely aligned.

There is nothing necessarily troubling in all this, President Santos’ reforms are the right ones for the country, and he desperately needs local politicians on his side to make the policies a reality, and to deliver his land restitution plan. But such a lack of opposition cannot for long be healthy.

In this context, Petro is almost uniquely positioned to present the country with an alternative prospectus – one that in the future he may choose to put forward as a presidential manifesto.

Even for those instinctively against his way of viewing the world – like the author of this website – Petro should not represent a threat. Colombia desperately needs more outsiders. Opposition is necessary for a participatory and more mature democracy. Petro represents large sections of Colombian society, it’s a good thing for the country that he is heard, and given a chance to govern, even if he fails.

The dawn of a new, democratic, Colombian left?

Petro´s campaign literature

Sunday saw the dawn of a new left-wing in Colombia. Gustavo Petro, a former guerrilla in the ultra-left M-19 was elected Mayor of Bogotá, in the process becoming the second most powerful politician in the land. The progressives – a political party he formed only four months ago – also became a major political force gaining councillor seats across the capital city. Petro wasted no time in announcing that this party would take their fight to the nation, promising to field candidates across the country when the country elects its congressmen and the president of the republic in 2014.

The left in Colombia has tended to the extreme rather than to the centre – more guerrilla and Chavez supporting  than ´third way´ pragmatists. Petro himself once played this role. But to get elected in Bogota he underwent a transformation, tidying up his image, softening his rhetoric and appealing to the middle-classes who once would have been appalled by his guerrilla past.

The election of Petro sends a message to those on the left that if they want to play a useful role in the political life of Colombia they must move to the centre. Will they heed it and will a new, democratic left become a major force in Colombian politics?

After years in the wilderness in a country where the right-wing has dominated, the Colombian left finally appear to be finding their voice. Last month this website reported on the leftwards recalibration of the Santos government, and of the polls that pointed to a left-wing victory in Bogotá.

Since that article Gustavo Petro has indeed won the election, and is now mayor-elect of the Colombian capital. At the same time Santos´ government has taken a further step – albeit an incremental one – to the left, by naming the leader of the Liberal Party, Rafael Pardo, the new employment minister.

Pardo´s appointment will be explored in greater detail in future articles on this website, but it´s worth noting here that Santos is focusing on those issues which the right is accused of having neglected. Santos is presenting his government as the job-creation government. This week employment figures showed that those out of work had dropped below 10% – an historic achievement, according to the Santos regime. Under the previous government, unemployment rose.

Santos has also pointed in recent months to the fact that within Latin America, Colombia is the country where most new jobs have been created in the last year. So, who better to take charge of what is set to become a pillar of the Santos administration, than the leader of the centre, centre-left party within his coalition? Pardo is set to become a key figure, and he will not shy from his left-leaning (but centre-left leaning) ways.

Back to Bogotá and to Petro´s historic victory. Until a few months ago Gustavo Petro was still seen largely as a  left-wing rebel – a serious politician, yes, but one that could appeal to those on the centre, most definitely not. Both his guerrilla past, and his scruffy left-wing philosopher appearance turned voters off, in equal measure.

But Petro decided to change. He appeared on television in suits and ties, he toned down his rhetoric and focused not on attacking his opponents but on presenting a positive image of the future of Bogotá. He moved towards the centre – or at least appeared to do so. Petro´s campaign borrowed from Tony Blair´s Labour Party in the UK and from Bill Clinton´s Democrat Party in the US. He tore into the current administration, and the corruption at the heart of the Bogotá government. He began to embody change. Petro´s old rhetoric had been negative, attack-dog like but over the last few months he began to paint voters a picture of the sunlight uplands of life under his leadership.

He promised a ´politics of love´ not a classic left-wing class war. He cast himself as Bogotá´s saviour, he became a quasi-religious figure. His own story is too one of salvation – a reformed guerrilla bringing peace to the streets of Bogota, healing the wounds of a nation scarred by bloody civil war. Hís victory speech read like St Francis of Asissi, bringing peace and harmony to a discordant city, and country. In this speech he called himself ´the son of the 1989 peace process´, and told the world that his election showed that Bogotanos ´had not fallen into the trap of the politics of hate and of the eternal war, but instead had said yes to reconciliation and yes to peace´.

President Santos was quick to congratulate Petro, and offer him a way of working with his government. Santos pointed to Petro as an example to guerrillas, demobilise and join us, he said. But he also showed how Petro´s politics can help deliver the President´s agenda. The two will work together to deliver the land reform which will give back to the displaced poor territory stolen from them during the years of conflict. Petro has moved to the centre, but he has also moved the centre to the left.

So what of the rest of the left in Colombia? Polo Democrat tanks have historically occupied the left-wing lawn. The party is, however, in disarray in the aftermath of the Samuel Moreno scandal and following a poor showing in the elections last Sunday.  Petro has signalled intent – his Progressives movement is now in his words ´the biggest political force in Bogota´. There can be little doubt that Petro will seek to exploit his victory, claiming the Polo Democrat territory as his own. In Petro´s victory speech he spoke of the future ín which his party ´would transform into a national movement to construct a more democratic Colombia, a movement to build the 21 century (in the country)´. There is already talk of one time presidential candidate Antanas Mockus joining the group, and this website would not rule out many Green voters flocking to express their support.

Colombia is a country in which the opposition has historically been weak. The government and the president enjoy a concentrated power. Petro looks to be creating the base from which a healthy opposition can grow. The left must now seize this opportunity, modernise and move to the centre. Petro´s victory changed Colombian politics – he was the first ex-guerrilla to take control of Bogotá. But perhaps the biggest change will be seen in the formation of a new, democratic left.

Latin American countries too often fall into the trap of electing populist, socialist extremists like Chavez in Venezuela and Correa in Ecuador. Frustration at a lack of alternative to the right-wing is often to blame. Petro and his new movement should help to offer Colombians at least a way of voting left without enduring the whims of the revolutionaries.