Editorial: The two Colombias

0
604

[dropcap]I[/dropcap] am still one of those who believe the bilateral ceasefire with FARC will hold. Call me nai?ve, post it on Twitter. Some may even take offense at the photo above, taken during a military operation against the guerrilla somewhere in the Middle Atrato – take it up with Instagram.

I call the image the “two Colombias” – one heading to the market in a long dugout canoe, the other heading to the unknown in a high-speed craft with heavy artillery. Our “two Colombias” have existed side by side, like resignation and intolerance, complacency and discontent, for far too long.

We experienced a wide range of emotions recently with the final stage of the peace process in Havana. For many what has been agreed upon with FARC is historic, momentous. For others, the process has been a farce from its inception to imminent conclusion. In fact, the whole signing was a rather drab and unceremonial affair, and to think that we end 50 years of conflict with the oldest guerrilla group in the world, with formulaic speeches from the representatives of these “two Colombias.”

The FARC’s “Timochenko” couldn’t shake off his Cold War rhetoric, and President Juan Manuel Santos, sounded like he had done this so many times before. There were some poignant moments however on 23.06.16, such as when Venezuelan President Maduro managed to read his lines in their entirety, and FARC’s maximum commander referred to Hugo Cha?vez as the “immortal commander.” Very touching, indeed.

Then, a guest list with everyone from the most recent Blue Label cocktail in Bogota?, all in their impeccable guyaberas for an essential “selfie” before getting back on the presidential jet, destination: the “other Colombia” of manicured golf courses. No matter how dilligently “Civil Resistance” campaigners collect signatures to revoke all that has been written up in Havana (Will we ever really know?), the bilateral ceasefire is a “fait accompli” like Brexit, Shakira’s next hit jingle and James Rodri?guez getting booted out of Real Madrid.

While we cheered on “Colombia” during the Chicago washout in the Copa America and the doomed semi-final against Chile, the effervescent patriotism – which the national team inspires – stumbled in Havana, exacerbated by bad transmission and a lackluster conference room. There was no apology by FARC to the Colombian people for the bloodletting, disappearances, mass kidnappings and forced displacement of 6,9 million. There was no hint of any remorse by “Timochenko” of the suffering caused to so many by the members of his Revolutionary Armed Forces. Instead, we got a lesson in FARC history and their military dexterity. “There are no victors, nor vanquished in this conflict,” stated “Timochenko.”

So, we reach the end of the armed conflict in Colombia with a commitment on paper, but words void of historic responsibility. Maybe our “two Colombias” grew too used to seeing each other outside Colombia and over breakfast at a four-star hotel. President Santos remarked in Havana that the peace process will come home and the final agreement signed in Bogota?. Even though a proposed date, July 20, was suggested, the true historical moment has passed us now, with 23.06.16 being the day the shooting officially ended. For this is a very good thing, a day we should remember even though it wasn’t “our finest hour” for speech writing, and hopefully, from that fateful day forth, tens of thousands of lives will be spared from fighting an out-dated insurgency.

The FARC’s days as a military force have ended, but suspicion will not recede when they concentrate in their territories to hand over their weapons and begin life as ordinary civilians. The hard work of reconciliation requires a mental leap of faith from all of us, a commitment to set aside differences in the hotel lobby, the golf course, in the public market, on social media – in other words – on both sides of the same river, we call Colombia.

Now post this on Twitter.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here