This doesn't seem to be the most suitable language for someone who claims to be basing his political prestige on achieving peace through dialogue. At this point in the process, when different sectors are speaking of a crisis, it is worth analyzing if this arrogant and violent attitude of the state spokespersons hasn't always been the main obstacle to reconciliation, and the true cause of this and all crises of peace in Colombia.
It is clear to everybody that the current confrontation, which has lasted more than 51 years, is a national tragedy that must end. In the FARC we are convinced that the vast majority of the Colombian people think that way. Colombians won't make it out of the long night of violence with more blood and more suffering. Therein lies the strategic importance of the peace talks; it is about making the war impossible.
To assert that Colombia has the most powerful, best-trained, best equipped Armed Forces of all its history, thanks to whom for the first time they achieved to get to the burrows of the enemy and obtain results, and then finish his speech defining this moment as a dilemma between achieving peace, which is the victory of our armed forces, or continuing war, says very little about his real willlingness to dialogue.
Instead, it suggests a certain desire of imposition. Which is concerning. Since the first talks with President Santos in order to explore the possibilities for a negotiated solution to the conflict, we put forward that a Conversation Table should be installed, at which the causes of the confrontation - and that still feed it - had to be examined. To definitely heal them with a final agreement.
In that spirit, the General Agreement of August 2012 was signed. Each of the agenda items had to be discussed and debated, also involving the Colombian people. Speaking from our hearts, we ask ourselves if we haven't fulfilled that commitment, why is it that we are pointed at all the time as the ones who lack will. Our proposals have been the result of the contribution made by different sectors and organizations in the respective forums.
The national government has never collected proposals from such events; all the contrary, it has radically opposed itself to most of them. The pending points of the partial agreements are based on the categorical statement made by the official spokespersons, that it comes to issues that aren?t covered by the Agenda. And it is publicly known that even with the partial agreements signed, the national government approves and encourages constitutional and legal projects that are openly contrary to them.
It was the national government who was firmly opposed to any possibility of ceasefire, armistice or truce, stubbornly prevailing its own thesis of talking in the midst of the confrontation. And he is the one who is proud of the tens of forceful blows against the insurgency. Our numerous gestures of peace have always been despised, as the unilateral ceasefire declared last December. The only scandal is when we decide we won?t allow them to continue killing us.
The only thing that has been demonstrated with the actions of war carried out since the end of our ceasefire, is that we are not the defeated and despicable force they intend to present in the mainstream media all the time. As a persistent drop of water, the actions of our forces cause mayor craters in the rock every day. That's why the propaganda of the neo-liberal regime aims to introduce us as enemies of the people of Colombia.
We are Colombians and we are part of the people. Not even the power of the media is able to overshadow that the real predator of nature, in surprisingly irrational dimensions, is the government of the neoliberal economic policies. Moors and forests of the country, the largest river in the country, beaches and coasts are in imminent danger, without anyone from the government saying anything about it.
The poor inhabitants of Putumayo and Nariño, forgotten, deprived, persecuted by a State that only works to the benefit of transnational capital, suddenly appear as the victims of a senseless guerrilla, when the reality is that the State has never supplied drinking water to them, not even the most basic essential services. Surveys among the upper strata of the great capitals of the country, reflect only the ignorance they have on the reality of the other Colombia.
They appeal to empty slogans, without any real content, to position ideas in people?s minds, in whose name they speak irresponsibly. "Time is running out" or "patience has its limits", say nothing about half a century of blood and suffering of the Colombian people. What we should be impatiente about all are these horrific tragedies that never concern the country's elite, many of whom call for continuing the war which has provided them so much benefit.
Nevertheless, we again express our disposition to a unilateral ceasefire for one month from July 20, with the hope that the national government finally corresponds with an equivalent humanitarian gesture. It cannot be indefinite, because of past experiences, when we were paid with many ground operations. And they tell us that this is insufficient, that we must also accelerate the signing of the rest of the agreements.
Mr. De La Calle told us so in an interview: At any moment, the government spokespersons will not assist to the Table, the process should end as soon as possible. As if we were forced to sign whatever they present to us at the Table, without any right to express our positions. As if, now that we arrived to the items of victims, justice and end of conflict, the only viable alternative were to submit to the discourse of power.
Besides, they always talk about five points of the Agenda, as if the sixth didn?t exist, as if the agreements, once they are reached, had to be endorsed by the regime. Another worrying sign. Regarding the speed, we do not quite understand why they always demand speed in public, while at the meetings of the Conversation Table they are slow, they retire frecuently, they don?t assist, they seek excuses to avoid critical discussions; they retard the drafting of the agreements.
As in previous processes, the bad ones have to be the FARC. If the national government presents a proposal on transitional justice, we are in the right to propose our own. This is about agreements, about stopping and ending the confrontation. The war is a threat to the people of Colombia, not only to the FARC. Our conscience tells us to persist in seeking agreements without bending our necks. We do not agree with the idea of ??an Armageddon.
Colombian jungle, July 11, 2015.