#Terrorism

by

FARC links with Al-Qaeda?

e6e926eb-350a-43e5-887a-553ffdab8fbc_zps165f515f

Evidence has emerged of a link between the FARC and Islamist terrorist groups in the North African Maghreb after two Colombian nationals were arrested in Algeria last month by the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and Spanish intelligence services.

Spanish radio station Cadena Ser reported the news this week claiming that the arrests relate to events that took place in the autumn of last year whereby the Colombian nationals – one of whom is a member of the FARC – traded cocaine for arms with Islamists in North Africa.

It is alleged that the Islamists – three of whom are being held by the Algerian army – belonged to Salafi groups operating under the Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) umbrella and obtained the weapons during the turmoil in Libya after the deposing of Colonel Gaddafi. Details of the weapons obtained are not known.

In a further similar development, the DEA reported last week that two more Colombians were arrested – this time within Colombia – for conspiring to trade cocaine for arms in the West-African country of Guinea-Bissau.

In recent years West and North Africa has become a key drug trafficking route between the cocaine producing countries in Latin America and consumers in Europe, and Islamist groups operating in the region have been linked to the trade. The FARC have long used the cocaine trade as a key source of income, and these arrests suggest that their activities go far beyond the Colombian borders by linking up directly with terrorist groups abroad.

Category: News Review
by

Peace in Colombia, still daring to dream

Government negotiating team en route to Oslo, photo Reuters.

This article was written for The City Paper, and released today.

Phase two of the peace talks between Farc guerrillas and the Santos government begins on the 15 of this month in Havana.

Many have already written the talks off; pointing to the rancour of Iván Márquez´s Oslo speech as the moment the mask slipped, revealing the rebels´ bluff. Others even suggest that the talks are an affront to democracy, and that negotiating with the Farc will lead to the eventual ´Bolivarianization´ of Colombia.

The talks must be given a chance.

Norway was a fiasco but it was a side show. What happened in public, in front of the world´s media, offers a very poor guide to how the rebels will behave in private.

So while we cannot know either way whether the Farc will try to veer from the agreed agenda, we can be safe in the knowledge if they do, Humberto de la Calle will pull the plug.

And what really did we expect Márquez to say? This is a man who has been deprived the oxygen of publicity for years, and for whom the home of the Nobel Peace Prize was the perfect political platform. Reflecting on the event, we can now see that it´s naïve to imagine Márquez would waste the opportunity to justify the Marxist cause. Did we honestly expect contrition?

Perhaps we did, or we at least hoped for a more conciliatory tone.  The hype, and the hope, had got to us. The papers for weeks had told us that peace was not merely within reach, but was virtually inevitable. Some of us even dared to believe the rumour that an agreement had already been signed – that official talks were designed solely to lend the process political legitimacy.

So, the one positive outcome of Oslo is that we are all more circumspect; our expectations have been checked.

What then to expect as these talks begin in earnest? Well, the good news is, we don´t know. Bluntly, the less we know the better.

The speculation will mount and the media will become increasingly desperate to publish details on how the programme is advancing. But for the talks to succeed, it is important that leaks are kept to a minimum.

It is also essential that the negotiating parties are given the space to fall out and make up, delay and obfuscate. Santos has said he wants the two sides to remain at the table until an agreement is reached, and he has put a time limit of months to the overall process.

Peace negotiations that are easy and quickly executed, however, are difficult to come by.

I remember the peace processes in Northern Ireland that eventually led to the signing of the Good Friday Agreement in 1998. Talks stalled, stopped, restarted and appeared at various stages to be doomed only, finally, to conclude with the outcome we had all hoped for.

The conflict in Colombia is complex; securing peace will be neither simple nor straight forward. The bumps in the road should not allow us to lose sight of the destination, and both the media and the political class have a major role to play in maintaining a mature and measured response to events.

Last month I was interviewed for a documentary (´La búsqueda de la paz, desde otro punto de vista´) about the views of the expat community towards the peace process. Ángela Verge, the producer, when asked about the conclusions she drew from filming her work, commented that as foreigners we were able to see the peace process differently – perhaps more abstractly – to Colombians for whom the immediacy of the violence and the tragedy of the war unavoidably provoked a more visceral reaction. This distance, suggested Verge, allows us to step back, and analyse events with greater coolness – something the nation´s leaders must also do.

The vast majority of Colombians have never known peace. It is understandable, almost inevitable that as talks begin in Havana, feelings will run high, and that the media will fuel this. But reporters too have an obligation to show reflection, calm and patience.

To read the thousands of column inches after Oslo you´d be forgiven for concluding that the negotiations are over before they´ve begun.

But little has obviously moved on since 4 September when President Santos addressed the nation. What has changed is that the secret he let us in on that day is now public property, allowing the Farc PR machine to click through the gears.

Yes Marquez´s speech will have offended the vast majority of Colombians, but it is not cause to throw in the towel. Scepticism is healthy but hope remains.

 

Category: Comment, Peace talks
by

The FARC in Congress?

How will the army view the FARC in Congress?

Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos plans to allow the FARC to fight for seats in congress.

For many in Colombia the mere thought of a Timochenko in a position of power is enough to make the blood boil. How can a mass murderer enter parliament, they say? How can the families of the victims killed by the 45 years of terror be expected to react to the sight of this criminal pretending to represent the electorate?

They have a point, but however difficult it is to live with, we are going to have to get used to the idea of former combatants fighting for our vote.

President Santos confirmed as much in an interview with CNN while in the US last week.

In the UK they have grown accustomed to the site of former terrorists now in power, Following the Good Friday Peace Agreement of 1998, the IRA promised to disarm and began the process of choosing politics over violence.

But in Northern Ireland these former guerrillas are not just any ordinary senators or parliamentarians – they have been elected to govern, and they hold some of the top jobs.

In Colombia it is virtually impossible to foresee a Timochenko becoming president, or vice president. The thought of his even occupying a ministerial role appears more science fiction than potential reality.

But while we look to the example set in Northern Ireland we should remind ourselves that demobilised guerrillas have been reintegrated into society and have played a role in the nation´s political life even here in Colombia.

Two former M-19 guerrillas are now emblematic leaders of the left, perhaps their most electorally succesful in recent years. Gustavo Petro is of course Mayor of Bogotá and Antonio Navarro Wolff is a former Governor of the department of Nariño.

So, starting from the basis that, should the peace process be successful, political actors (either ex-guerrillas themselves or those sympathetic to the group´s professed ideology), the question is when to expect them to take to the national stage, and in what form.

Evidently we will not know for certain until after the peace talks have concluded, but there has already been speculation that candidates will be put forward for the congressional elections in 2014.

It is difficult to see how the talks could be concluded and the necessary amendments made to the constitution in time for such an eventuality. Nevertheless, it is possible that the FARC could lend their support to candidates that are sympathetic to their cause but were not active in combat.

Piedad Córdoba´s Marcha Patriótica is a movement that shares at least part of the prospectus put forward by the rebels.

The Marcha Patriótica is currently on a tour of Europe, forming alliances with far left politicians there – alliances that could well be used to finance electoral battles and or to provide campaign assistance.

Córdoba denies the link between the FARC and her political ´party´, but for Defence Minister, Pinzón the ties are irrefutable. Córdoba, it should be remembered, has been banned from occupying a congressional post because of her closeness to the guerrillas.

Amid these rumours that suggest we may see, as soon as the end of next year, the beginning of an official FARC or post-FARC political campaign, news emerged today via the new Interior Minister, Fernando Carillo, that the government is planning a legislative reform of the electoral code – a reform that many have suggested has been designed to permit just this.

Carillo is expect shortly to present the bill to congress, but denies that it has been cooked up to allow rebel participation at the ballot box. Carillo took to the airwaves this morning to argue that the reform is necessary to iron out the wrinkles that have crept into the system over the last 26 years.

Participation is explained is something that cannot be decided by congress, but requires a change to the constitution, which in turn demands presidential approval.

However, Carillo´s interview left the listener less than convinced.

Although it is true that the president must authorise the change, it does not mean that congress cannot examine the issue and propose it – indeed pass the law and offer Santos the opportunity to rubber stamp.

Equally, although the government has not planned to include participation in the legislation as presented to parliament, we all know that senators and representatives have the ability to amend, to add or to remove clauses as the bill passes through both houses. That is the nature of the presidential and bicameral system.

In other words, it is perfectly possible that discussion of the FARC´s involvement in Colombian politics could be heard in parliament within weeks – concurrent with the peace talks.

Is this a worry? Perhaps so if you belong to the part of society appalled by the idea of former terrorists in positions of political power.

For those who analyse other peace processes, however, it appears that such steps are necessary and unavoidable.

The final judgement will always lie with the people. We are not compelled to vote for those who march to the FARC´s colours. And yes, I realise that Colombia´s democracy is far from perfect and that the electoral system is subject to distortion, but that is another issue the country faces,

At the end of August the Attorney General, Eduardo Montealegre said he would ´rather see (the FARC) in congress than causing violence´. He may well get his wish.

Also published Redes Colombia

Category: Comment, Peace talks
by

Too much talk of peace?

Colombian President Santos has called on the country´s media for prudence in its coverage of the forthcoming peace talks with FARC guerrillas.

Earlier this month the president confirmed his government had been in preliminary discussions with the Marxist rebels to agree a set agenda for official negotiations to end the 48 year conflict. Since that moment public interest in the story has ensured discussion and speculation has been ever-present across the networks.

Colombia is a young country and the vast majority have never known peace. The FARC´s ´struggle´ is the longest running internal conflict in the region and there is a real and understandable excitement about the possibility of a cessation of hostilities.

Yet there is also scepticism; the memories of the failures of previous talks are difficult to erase.

The political class has coalesced around President Santos and his negotiation team. Except, that is, for ex-president Álvaro Uribe, and those loyal to him, who continue to rage against the talks, choosing to cast Santos as a terrorists appeaser. For Uribistas, the FARC cannot be trusted to deliver; so long as the guerrillas continue to bomb, kill and recruit children, there is little sign of a willingness to lay down their arms, they argue.

The media too, save for the dwindling number of Uribista columnists, lend almost unconditional support to the peace process. The desire and yearning for peace is detectable in the wistful lines of the commentariat – a group usually inclined to more a jaundiced world view. It is far to say that this website too has struggled to conceal its hope for a new and peaceful Colombia.

Santos is right to call for caution and reserve.

To listen to Hora 20, to read Semana, or Nuevo Arco Iris, and to cast the eyes over publications generally less disposed to positive and progressive thought, it is difficult to escape the sense that the nation´s thought leaders are allowing their hope to overpower the natural break of scepticism.

It is as though journalists across the country have been let into a secret.Perhaps, we begin to ponder, a deal has already been done and the two actors are going through the process to avoid the accusation of a stitch up.

Neither Santos nor the FARC would be able to sell an agreement reached through private, clandestine means. The public negotiating tables of Oslo and Cuba are perfect embellishments to add the necessary political legitimacy to a secret liaison.

It is a little hard to believe this, of course, but amid such positivity it is equally difficult to hold the mind back, to stop it from racing to these conclusions.

But, taming the audaciously hopefully media is precisely what the president must do. Expectations must be managed if we are to protect the hand the government takes to the table.

We all want peace, but we want to get there with as few concessions to the FARC as possible. Negotiation requires nerve and a cold, poker face. But the excitement of the Colombian media is anything but cold and detached.

There are those who will also take Santos´ words to mean that those who attack the talks must also act with caution.

It is equally unhelpful, he appears to say, that those with radical and strident views against any form of negotiated agreement with the FARC are loudly making their voice heard, feeding scepticism.

As the discussions take place Santos will need to keep a constant thermometer to public opinion.

He needs to be able to sell any accord reached in Cuba to a public who in growing numbers appear unwilling to countenance compromise with the FARC.

The potential for former combatants to enter the political arena, and the very real likelihood of reduced sentences for those proven to have committed atrocious acts of terrorism are likely to form part of this agreement – and they will require real political skill to sell to a public that has been victimised over decades of war.

Neutral, cold and reflective coverage is a necessity, throughout the talks. We should not expect the media to play ball, however. News from the negotiating table will be poured over by eyes lasciviously coveting the conflict´s end; Santos´ plea is likely to go unheard.

We are in for months of continued and heightened debate. We are all anxious for peace, but Santos will want us to hold our cards a little closer to the chest. Is this too much to ask?

Category: Comment, Peace talks
by

FARC guerrillas to disarm

Colombia´s FARC leader Timochenko today confirmed the guerrillas´ intention to disarm if next month´s peace talks with President Santos´ government are successful.

In an interview with the Communist weekly publication Voz, Timochenko admitted that without a ´true farewell to arms´ any agreement would be worthless.

The interview is a clear response to critics – principally those loyal to ex-president Uribe – who question the will of the rebel group to put an end to 48 years of conflict. But the Voz is far from a neutral media outlet, and Timochenko´s words should not to be taken at face value.Nevertheless, the conciliatory tone and openness of the FARC leader to discuss the issues for which agreement are a prerequisite for peace, does offer us cause for a degree of optimism.

Scepticial, cautious optimism, that is.

Why? In a previous article I set out nine reasons to believe a different outcome to previous negotiations is possible. I highlighted the balance in the talks´ agenda – neither side will be able to argue that their areas of greevance were absent from the table – so often a reason for talks breaking down (think particularly in the case of the Isreal Palestinian conflict).

What is clear is that during the preliminary talks an agreement was reached between the government and the FARC, both on the hoped-for-outcome of the process, and, crucially, the route map to get there. This is something that plainly did not happen in Caguán (the previous talks, during the Pastrana years).

How did this work for both sides?

Government negotiators secured victory by forcing the FARC – for the first time – to accept the inclusion of disarmament on the agenda. Previous talks have focused on cease-fires but never disarmament.

And for the FARC team the ´red lines´ were the inclusion of land reform and political participation.

The serious of the agenda allowed Timochenko to draw a distinction with past talks when, as he say it, the major mistake was the government´s lack of ´real desire to address and find solutions to the causes that gave rise, and continue to feed, the conflict´. This time they will have the opportunity to push their world view.

Whatever you think of the FARC´s war, they were never going to give it up unless they could point to some success, some reflection of their view in government policy.

The FARC might now be considered as nothing much more than a narco-trafficking cartel, but their origins are based in political struggle, and Timochenko belongs to this ´philosophical wing´. Listen to him speak and it is impossible to avoid the rhetoric of the far-left; the paranoid anti-capitalist rage against a system that allegedly makes victims of us all.

Those who stand firm against the talks should be reminded that conflicts end either through obliteration of the enemy or through a form of negotiated quid pro quo. So long as the FARC can make money from selling drugs it is impossible to see how this war can end without compromise, unappealing as that may be.

So to expect capitulation from the guerrillas in return for jam tomorrow is naive. The guerrillas have to save face. They know the battle is lost and they cannot impose their brand of Marxism on the country. But they have to ´acheive´ something to be able to justify (to themselves and their sympathisers) laying down their arms.

A message to Uribe?

Uribistas have appeared on television and radio arguing that the FARC have no will, that this is a huge confidence trick. They might be right.

But for now it seems prudent to allow the president to get on with the serious task of convincing Timochenko to deliver on his promise  ´the abolition of the use of force – of appeal to any kind of violence – to achieve economic or political purposes´.

Because for the moment the alternative to these talks is clear, as prophesied by Timochenko,´the continuation of the conflict, more death and destruction, more grief and tears, more poverty and misery for some and greater wealth for others`.

If this proves to be a smokescreen then the FARC will have lost their last chance to pursue their ends through political means. Their slow death will continue, and tragically for Colombia it will take innocent lives with them.

Category: Comment, Peace talks
by

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 
Category: Comment, Peace talks
by

Changing perceptions of Colombia – a personal story

Colombia Politics´ editor on Cable Noticias

This article was originally written for See Colombia Travel.

When I finished university (over) ten years ago and I packed my bags to set off to travel the Spanish speaking world, my father told me that under no circumstances was I allowed to go to Colombia. In the mind of dad, Colombia was synonymous with the FARC, with guerrillas groups and with – the nightmare scenario for my poor old man – kidnappings.

Eight years after my first six month trip to South America I finally made it to Colombia, and you know what, I fell in love with it and I haven’t been able to leave since.

Ten years ago the risk in coming here might well have been something altogether grizzlier, but as the tourist board says; now the real risk is that you’ll want to stay.

I write on politics and I see the development of Colombia through the political decisions taken by the top brass running the country. When I first started travelling, President Uribe had not yet entered power and the infamous peace talks of the Pastrana era were about to collapse in ignominy; the FARC had a presence in around 50% of the country and there were barrios full of those sympathetic to the Marxist revolution in even the capital, Bogota.

Uribe came to power in 2002 and for eight years he used the aid money secured as part of the Plan Colombia agreement signed with the US to take the fight to the FARC. Uribe’s Democratic Security strategy pushed back the FARC, took out key leaders and turned Colombia into a destination for foreign investments and for tourists. Over the years the economy doubled in size and the visitors began to stream through the doors.

Colombia’s image abroad was changing.

This process has continued during the Santos years (the president took office in August 2010) and the country is now more popular than ever for backpackers and luxury tourists alike. This website is testament to the allure of this mystical, and magical place. The government expects 4 million yearly visitors by 2014, at which point it will become $4 billion industry.  This was unthinkable as little as a decade ago when I was fresh out of university.

President Santos is fond of saying that Colombia ‘va por un buen camino’, that it’s heading in the right direction.

With the announcement this week that the government will sit down for peace talks with the FARC in October, many of us here are beginning to dream that Colombia’s almost five decade long war could be over within the year.

We know that Colombia is a tourist paradise. But we also know that during the 90s and the early years of this century, tourists were understandably scared away by FARC, and the violence of drug cartels. If President Santos can secure peace there will be no reason for the fathers of future travellers to warn their kids against travelling to Colombia.

The peace process will be complicated, the road bumpy and arduous. On my website I’ll be covering the talks from all angles, so please visit, join in the debate, and keep up to date with Colombia’s politics.

This article was published by See Colombia Travel

by

Peace in our time

Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos today set a timetable for an end to Latin America’s longest-running armed conflict announcing that peace talks with FARC guerrillas will begin in October and conclude within ‘months’.
At 12.30pm, to a television audience of millions and flanked by the nation’s military leaders and his cabinet, the president confirmed what for months rumours have dared to speculate; Colombia’s bloody and pointless war could be over next year (before the presidential elections of 2014).

Within the hour, FARC leader Timochenko, took to the airwaves from the safe-house of Cuba. With his professorial beard and camouflage livery the rebel chief spoke at length, spitting out his Marxist hatred, and in the end resigning to the reality that peace cannot be achieved by ‘war’ but only through ‘civilised dialogue’.

Frankly, the game is up for the FARC, and they know it; their dream of a Communist revolution is in tatters as Colombia develops into one of the fastest growing economies in the world, and as its people in record number are lifted out of poverty.

Timochenko understands he must save face and secure a dignified exit for his jackbooted comrades. The negotiating table is the only way out for his cornered rabble.

Yet there are those in Colombia who remain understandably sceptical that these kidnappers, extortionists, murderers and torturers have the will to bid a farewell to arms.

None more so than ex-President Álvaro Uribe who this afternoon launched a tirade of abuse at the FARC and also at what he sees as a government of appeasers. For Uribe, Santos is rather like 1930s British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain who announced he had secured ‘peace in our time’ a year before Hitler’s aggression sparked World War II.

Uribe argues the government is acting in haste, sacrificing the advances in security made during his eight years in power to secure re-election in two years’ time.

How can you trust a FARC who refuse to enter into a ceasefire and who threaten to continue the bombing and the killing throughout the peace talks? How can the political elite sit at the table with these criminals to discuss peace while the military is at war? Uribe’s rhetoric certainly resonates with sections of a society tired of the FARC’s duplicity, and chastened by the disappointment of previous promises for a negotiated cessation of violence.

Time will tell whether the detractors are right and whether the FARC is bluffing, but I see cause to be hopeful that they are not. Last week I set out nine reasons why these talks are different from the past failures, and why a successful outcome is within reach.

There is not space here to reiterate them, but the overwhelming truth is that balance in power is different now than it was at the end of the last century when the then President Andrés Pastrana initiated talks in Caguán. Then the FARC believed they had a chance of installing a Communist state, and the Colombian government sat down with a weak hand. Now the guerrillas are a depleted force, in troops, in morale, and in leadership (both the military chief strategist Mono Jojoy and the previous overall leader, Alfonso Cano have been killed in the space of the last two years). It is time to face the reality of defeat.

Another reason for hope, overlooked by some, is that since coming to power in August 2010, the Santos government has paved the way for peace through a series of important legislative changes that allow for the integration of the FARC into civil society; an opportunity to pursue their ends through politics rather than armed combat.

The new transitional justice law allows Santos to place a meaningful offer on the table, one that Timochenko should take.  Provision is made within this law for reduced penal sentences (but not impunity) and the possibility of elected political representation (potentially throughout the tiers of governance) for those who share the FARC’s philosophy.

As with the IRA in Northern Ireland, the ballot box must replace the bullet. Martin McGuiness and Gerry Adams before the ‘Good Friday Agreement’ of 1998 were terrorists. Both have since been at the top of Northern Irish politics and presided over perhaps the most successful decade in the country’s history.

The IRA famously trained the FARC during the 80s and 90s. It would be less than surprising if Timochenko has one eye on following in the footsteps of his former comrades.

We are about to enter into a crucial period in Colombian history. Santos may be remembered as the father of peace and the president who finally ended one of the world’s most bloody insurgencies.  Alternatively, the FARC could again pull the plug, and prove Uribe right.

Timochenko’s discourse today in which he spoke of capitalism’s dehumanisation and enslavement of the people, in which he spoke of an ‘alternative Colombia’ sounded more like a manifesto launch than an indignant battle cry. For those on the far left, currently represented by Piedad Córdoba’s Marcha Patriótica, this was a clarion call, a sign to ready for an election campaign – perhaps as early as the congressional elections in 2014. While it is too soon for the ‘new, civilian FARC’ to have a presence, former commanders may urge sympathisers to unite around Córdoba.

Finally, Timochenko is wrong to say that dialogue is the end – disarmament is the end. We will not believe the FARC until they lay down their arms.

The might of rhetorical argument must replace the bullet of terrorism.

This was a piece for Colombia Reports.

Category: Comment, Peace talks