With
its base in the interests of North American imperialism and of the local
bourgeoisie, for more than a decade we have seen the development of the theme of
dialogue and negotiation with the organisations which are the driving force of
the revolutionary war in Latin America. This is a policy which is essentially
concerned with liquidating the revolutionary movement or at least preventing it
from achieving a level of development which could put in danger the stability of
the state and of capitalist society, with all its harrowing consequences.
In
Latin America this policy is part of the strategy of Santa Fe II and of the
processes of modernisation being undertaken by the Pentagon. Among other things
one of the wings of this strategy is the ideological, political and military
adjustment in relation to conflicts of low intensity, like the tactic of
"total war or complete war", alongside the need to shape the
counter-guerrilla forces, a fundamental part of the state armed forces, and the
creation and development of paramilitary armed forces organised, led, financed
and protected by the state. In Colombia, these fascist elements have undergone a
dangerous development, corresponding to the level of aggression from the state;
one of these groupings is the so-called Co-operative CONVIVIR, institutionalised
by the state.
This
policy of so-called dialogue and negotiation coincides with the more intense
application of the neoliberal economic model and the rightward shift of the US
and of the bourgeois political parties, with their frequent fascistic
expressions, which have made more extreme the usual repressive behaviour of the
US. The basis of this policy comes from a series of arguments which claim to
demonstrate the definite "triumph" of capitalism across the world, due
to the collapse of the USSR and of Eastern Europe, the ending of
Marxism-Leninism as an ideological and political guide for the struggle of the
people and for the armed revolutionary struggle, and its collapse also as an
indispensable instrument for the triumph of revolution and the taking of
political power by the people.
In
general, this idea has joined the international bourgeoisie and the countries
where there is a national liberation movement. At the same time there have been
identified more stubborn fascist sectors, who reject the instrument of dialogue.
These and other reactionaries prioritised the intensification of
counter-guerrilla war, which means war against the people, more murders,
massacres, forced removals, tortures, to sum up a virtual holocaust is what
attracts them.
The
application of this strategy brings with it the activation on the part of
imperialism of social democratic currents as a means of expanding their
domination over the people; and putting into play their double policy of
combining repression with demagogy, which has been successful for them in many
cases.
With
this strategy we see put into action some "new" aspects concerning
peace and the so-called national consensus:
-
There is an accent on the presumed pacifist nature of the bourgeoisie "a
party to world peace and a force for peace in countries with internal armed
conflicts";
-
We see reactivated the theme of Humanisation of War, naturally enough it being
the insurgent movement of whom it is demanded that they meet the requirements of
the declaration of International Human Rights; and they seek to bring on board
humanitarian organisations such as the International Red Cross, Amnesty
International, America's Watch, etc.;
-
In many countries the bourgeoisie is putting into action the policies of social
contract, with the aim of co-opting for their counter insurgent aims, the
struggles and social protests of the workers;
-
The slogans and rhetoric of peace persistently repeated, in every tone and in
every context, accompanied by insistence on the search for negotiated settlement
for all political, economic, social and military conflicts, have managed to
convince some democratic and even revolutionary sectors of the need to stop
revolutionary war and to take part in the "peace" process, and by this
route to conquer power for the people.
-
In some cases, such as in Central America and regions of the South, there have
developed social democratic tendencies inside the anti-imperialist forces and
they have succeeded in re-directing the struggle into openly treacherous
negotiations. This has been done through the conception that rich and poor,
bourgeoisie and proletariat, imperialists and peoples have all now arrived at a
communion of interests, and that this makes it unnecessary to fall back on one
method.
-
We see revived the thesis of the impossibility of the triumph of revolution,
only through which it could truly be possible to seek negotiated solutions for
conflict, to arrive at agreements and to throw some crumbs to the people.
Although they do not say as much, this means the renunciation of revolution.
-
They pick up and retouch the idea according to which the bourgeoisie might be
disposed to make fundamental changes in favour of the people, to establish a
democratic state with full political liberty which would make viable the seizure
of power through the electoral road. Some among the anti-imperialist fighters,
product of political softening, are exchanging revolutionary aims for second
rate reforms and are submitting themselves to the pacifist campaign helping to
give credibility to imperialist domination and bourgeois repression and
exploitation through the means of pacts and agreements.
Colombia
has been one of the most important arenas for the launching of this
bourgeois-imperialist policy. Since the government of Belisario Betancurt, in
this new stage this policy has been practised but with little success.
Imperialism and the bourgeoisie have not completely given up the possibility of
inflicting military defeat on the insurgent movements, but among the reasons why
they are now proposing the tactic of finding political solutions to conflict in
Colombia, at least in words, are the following:
-
It is now more than 35 years since the launching of the armed conflict for the
revolutionary seizure of power by the people and throughout this time the
movement has suffered many increasing campaigns of extermination, co-ordinated
through the permanent deployment of dirty war and black propaganda. In these
campaigns the whole range of tactics has been utilised, including the taking of
hostages and assassinations among the mass of the civil population, claiming by
this to be "taking the water away from the fish". It cannot be
forgotten that the doctrine of National Security defines the people as "the
enemy within" which, logically, it must be necessary to exterminate. The
bestial activities of today's paramilitaries is the practical application of
this policy of the state which is combined with the criminal business of drug
trafficking, and which has turned itself into a mighty and diabolical arm to
massacre the civil population in various regions of the country.
-
The revolutionary movement particularly the insurgent movement has acquired a
level of development and a significance such that it has become a factor that
must be taken into account in relation to the implementation of any government
plans. That is to say in Colombia the insurgent movement is a force which
seriously influences in important aspects of national life. This movement has
the support of growing sections of the people which gives it the perspective of
still further development and strength.
-
Even though the geographical location of this movement is mainly rural, its
urban presence and influence is becoming ever greater. Many of these forces are
located in areas which because of their economic production have strategic
importance. For this reason, the movement has become an important factor in the
economic life of the nation; and from the political point of view its decisions
and actions have serious repercussions in national life, and up to a certain
point, in the international life of our country.
-
Given this preceding reasons the status of the insurgent forces is more evident
everyday.
-
The bourgeoisie is aware that while on the one hand, the rhythm of revolutionary
forces is one of development and accumulation, on the other hand, their own
forces are going through a situation of serious crisis, which has exposed
contradictions with an unanticipated level of seriousness; the deepest that has
been experienced in any of the last few decades. In passing we should note that
this has something to do with Washington's decision to "recognise",
(however conditional this may be, nevertheless it is still recognition) the
government of Samper, even though this is in its decline. This tells us very
clearly of the great merrymaking which was awakened in all the political and
economic sectors united in any way with the establishment and its interests.
-
The armed actions of the guerrilla movement against La Fuerza Publica (State
Forces) in the last two years have become real defeats for the national army and
police. The battles of Las Delicias, Patascoy, San Vicente del Caguan, La Carpa,
el Billar and the latest ones until now, Miraflores, La Uribe and others, among
them the defeat of Number Three Brigade, the most highly qualified of all the
elite troops, all these show, on the one hand, the weak state of the army and
the police, and on the other, the grand development and quality of the guerrilla
movement. According to the declarations of the present of the republic,
ministers of the state and leaders of the bourgeois parties this has really been
a catastrophe, described as the worst in the last 30 years. Among the generals
are those with the highest of ranks; never before, that anyone can remember has
there been such a humiliation for these superb emissaries of the establishment.
In
the months of July and August and in the last days of Samper's presidency - as
if to render even greater his helplessness and loss of prestige - that guerrilla
movement launched a political-military campaign, which has shaken the state
already riddled with the generalised corruption and immorality of a government
in agony and a dominant class which is blind and dim-witted in its pride.
These
circumstances which should be matters of urgency for a state in a tight spot,
have not however changed in any way the behaviour of the government, which has
shown itself in every way unable to rise to the challenges posed by reality.
These tremendous lessens from life may perhaps be of some use to the present
president Pastrana, who has began by showing that his peace policy is different;
and as if to gain credibility he went to the mountains to talk to two of the top
leaders of the FARC-EP, commanders Marulanda and Mono Brice–o, and he has made
many promises about changing traditional policies, by pretending to submit to
the guerrilla forces with the trap of a false dialogue or through force of arms.
The
fact is that independently of whatever may make up the essence of the peace
policy of Pastrana, the forcefulness of the facts of the war of recent times are
forcing the government to give them their proper importance in the new
circumstances.
-
The evolution of the all of the aforementioned in the different spheres of
national life and in many difficult ways , and particularly in what concerns the
climate of peace and tranquillity required for the development of the country,
these developments are going further and further away from the direction hoped
for by the establishment. Throughout the government of Samper the country became
less and less governable and he was unable to provide the necessary bold
solutions to confront the enormous complexities becoming more serious everyday.
-
The peace policy of Samper, which was a continuation of that of his predecessor,
demonstrated its complete bankruptcy; it was always undermined by having deep
contradictions with the reality of the country. They talked about peace while
intensifying war, and they did not want to recognise the existence of internal
war, while the deficit in the national budget was caused by the excessive
expense of the war. In the middle of this conflict the state always prioritised
solutions by force, with the hope of liquidating the guerrilla movement in the
field of battle at the same time as they painted many doves of peace.
-
Samper, Gavaria and those who went before them always used the language of
"peace and civil concord" but only as a dream; they were never sincere
or honourable, neither with the Colombians nor with the international community,
who they filled with lies. The collapse of the Samper government is a proof of
our assertion. Our history is full of lessons which should be learnt by
governments if they wish to be right in their actions.
It
is the people who are the makers of history. It is they who generate wealth and
constitute the most progressive force of society. For this reason, we understand
dialogue as an instrument for political argument with the dominant class and its
state, when it is concerned with the political project of revolution, and its
proposals for change to meet the needs of popular and national interests in so
far as on the one hand revolutionary and progressive organisations are involved,
and on the other, are the various proposals from the bourgeois and
pro-imperialist state.
Nothing
and no one can be substituted for the people in this undertaking; it is the
people with their determined participation who constitute the guarantee that the
right road will be kept to, that they will not be deterred by their own pain or
anguish, and that they will defend their interests with complete determination.
It is obvious that we are not talking about making the revolution at the
negotiation table; however, there are social and military policies which could
allow the great majority the space to gain material and spiritual benefits to
enable them to go forward with sufficient independence and political freedom,
and which could make possible the full deployment of the people's capacity for
struggle on behalf of the construction of the new society and new human being.
We are talking about the creation of a New Colombia, different from that which
came out of the defeat of the generals over the land, the property of the
Indians, different from the Colombia which came out of the confrontation between
the "godos" (conservatives) and "cachiporros" (liberals);
different from the country bathed in blood and surrounded by the misery of her
children, which has been left to us by the Liberal and Conservative parties,
which are still in power today, lining up once more, hoping to gain power in the
presidential elections, and who went along with the recent triumph of the
candidate for North American imperialism and for the right wing sectors whether
liberal or conservative, inheritors
of the throne of Gaviria.
In
this, as in the following experiences of dialogue, we must take into account the
teachings of history, however not very encouraging: the faithful antecedents of
the betrayal of Obispo-Virrey Caballero and Gongora in the agreements with the
communards in 1789 and the hideous crimes, the most horrible of all committed
against Jose Antonio Galan; the dark experience of the agreement of Rojas
Pinilla and the liberal guerrilla fighters murdered in the decade of the 50s;
the murder of Carlos Pizarro after the signing of the Negotiations
Virgilio Barco; the number of commanders and fighters murdered after the peace
agreements in the present decade, and the policy of murder and assassination of
revolutionaries, fighters for the people, defenders of human rights, trade
unionists, workers and people, victims of militarism
and paramilitarism who continue to make bloody Colombian soil.
As
the Marxist-Leninist Communist Party of Colombia and as the Popular Army of
Liberation (EPL), we are ready to undertake, alongside the people and the
guerrilla movement, the Simon Bolivar Guerrilla Coordination, this new
experience of dialogue with the state, if the policy of Dialogue of Peace of
President Pastrana makes it possible.
The
theme of dialogue and of peace today constitutes a wide political scene, where
we find very diverse currents of political-economic and social thought in the
country, including different religious and ethnic groupings, women, youth,
workers, professionals and intellectuals, educators and educated, employed and
unemployed. However, the participation of the people in this dialogue does not
yet have the force necessary to ensure that the many heavy obstacles, many of
them dating back into the past, can be removed. As yet, there does not exist the
right atmosphere to ensure that this human torrent can say what it wants to,
without fear, in every possible scenario.
This
is because dialogues of this kind of breath and depth, which should take place in the capital city as well as in the
provinces, in the city and in the small town, in the city district and in the
county, in urban areas and rural ones, require
democratic freedoms and security, the absence of soldiers and police,
detectives, paramilitaries and informers and all others whose job it is to
arrest, isolate, torture, assassinate or massacre. Within these limitations and
facing these risks no dialogue can reach the required political level. This
being the case proper dialogue cannot take place, instead of this we see only
meetings of a few individuals, almost always same people undertaking the same
discussions. The fact is that a state policy o dialogue and peace, which is
demanded by the present conditions of national conflict, must offer a wide, free
an secure atmosphere; and only the state -if it really wants peace- can
guarantee this.
The
people must be able to express the truth, communists and other revolutionaries
must be able to say what they are thinking and what they want for the people;
the guerrilla fighters must be enabled to explain their projects for their
homeland, and their spokespersons must have security that they will not be
assassinated as happened to Oscar William Calvo, spokesperson for the EPL who
was riddled with bullets in 1985, for the "offence" of having signed
some agreements concerning truce and National Dialogue.
Now,
there must be real and deep changes in the policy of Dialogue and Peace, or
otherwise they will be something other than real dialogues. This has its
difficulties. The state forces, including those which declare themselves to be
NGOs, are undertaking an intense political labour and have put into action
various initiatives in the search for a wide consensus of the people against the
revolutionary guerrilla movement and for the strengthening of the institutions
of the state, including fascistic organisations, as a guarantee that an
"official peace", whose application -we should remember- has already
produced hundreds of thousands of assassinated and massacred people. These
postures, basically of a social democratic nature, unify a range of
organisations which have in common a bourgeois conception of so-called
"civil society", which they include all the social classes of the
nation, because, according to them, their interests are similar, and above them
stand the sacred interests of the homeland, and those interests represent a
single interest. Another central idea is that making peace is mainly a question
of will, and that it has not been achieved until now because dialogues have not
taken place in the context of "civil society", in its spirit of
harmonising views with the perspective of the higher interest; but rather
dialogues so far have put in place of tolerance and the spirit of conciliation
confrontation between sectors of society divided by differences of class. This
view blames "the lack of culture and of education", and according to
this notion, "the absence of peace has its origin in the formation of a
culture of violence and intransigence", other causes in order of least
importance are considered to be social inequalities, and the deficiencies of
democracy and of Human Rights.
An
important part of this current of thought is based on the principle plank of its
political campaign (openly or covertly) towards the war undertaken by the
revolutionary movement; every effort is made to demonstrate that this is not a
just war, that it does not make sense, that it cannot lead to social change, and
that the persistence of this war has its cause in the violent nature of the
guerrilla fighters.
Not
withstanding the multiplicity of currents and tendencies, this whole complex
system of positions can be summed up in two grand conceptions about the world:
On the one hand a metaphysical and idealistic conception; and on the other a
dialectical materialist conception of history and society.
The
former look for idealist and psychological reasons to explain the absence of
peace and the tendency to violent action; they speak of the culture of violence,
of generosity, of solidarity and of tolerance. With this vision of the
architecture of history and of the construction of society they are unable to
understand that social phenomena are eminently material facts, that they have
their roots in complex objective processes subject to laws which determine the
course of events in the society; they do not understand the determining role of
the economic and material base of the existence of classes and the interests of
classes clashing with the world of consciousness, with the various aspects of
the juridical and political superstructure.
Our
party has emphasised that "every situation for dialogue requires a
particular tactic, an appropriate agenda, coherent foundations, favourable
settings and the means to develop it (...) We therefore propose a revolutionary
manoeuvre to win this space for dialogue, to create new political scenarios, to
widen the acceptance of our policy, to promote the organisation and mobilisation
of the people; in order to contest the bourgeoisie on our own terms, to promote
our conception of peace, social justice, democracy and political freedoms (...)
This political manoeuvre must be linked with the dynamic of the movement of
workers in order to develop its agitation around its own political proposals and
its own demands, and so that it develops its mobilisation and wins in disputes
face to face with the bourgeoisie."
These
dialogues for peace and social justice have a fundamental beneficiary: Colombia
and the Colombian people.
They
can open up a new period of our history, in that the realisation of the hopes of
humankind must be based on meeting the needs and wishes of the workers both of
city and of countryside within a certain framework. This framework must include:
-
The humanisation of war, so that International Human Rights are no longer a dead
letter for the state committed to its people and to the international community
for its implementation.
-
Human Rights as a harmonious body of achievements meant to serve the people on
every terrain: economic, political, social, cultural, in terms of security, etc.
-
En economic model which must make a 180 degree change in the distribution of
goods and services, and put an end to the unjustified privileges of those who
have been the lords of capital and of the land.
-
Democratic freedoms so that the citizen can have restored to him/her the well
being and dignity which belongs to his/her present and future.
-
National sovereignty without which we cannot have a free and prosperous homeland
such as we wish to construct.
This
would be the nucleus of the great gains which through many actions the people
must achieve through a programme of changes with a democratic and
anti-imperialist government which could open a wide road towards a future
governed by the people themselves.
Communist
Party of Colombia (ML)