For the emotional tone of the letter, and its precise conditions, I understand that my statements to the country do not seem helpful or friendly to you. Everyone has the right to value things according to his or her criteria, which in turn expresses a class interest.
You should ask students from MANE or the peasants who are mobilized in the MIA, whom you think are so far from our thinking, how much outrage or sympathy awakens our word to them. Would they say the truth, knowing the risk that entails that in Colombia?
Is it the country or the overwhelming majority, who has lost the credibility in our commitment to peace? If you, who likes to show herself as a candid and objective analyst, say it categorically, it is likely that you induce others to think the same, although this doesn't necessarily mean it's true.
If this is said, almost holding hands, by the big media, prosperous companies that are publicly connected to the economic, social and family cores that revolve around power, one wonders whether it wouldn't be rather these circles which are disenchanted.
The truth is that in the highest classes peace has always been conceived as the simple termination of the armed uprising, without any significant change in the economic-social structures or the political system of the country. Some personal perks for the price of surrender and disarmament.
Our position is different. Colombia requires deep transformations, its institutions are rotten. The Colombian State has become the guarantor of the enrichment of the wealthiest sector, and a machine to violently subdue dissent. That must change.
Our word is loftily ignored. Manipulated or interpreted in accordance with the immediate conveniences. Like when they speculate that the Oslo speech was designed to calm down the guerrilla fighters who were unsatisfied.
Or that no one should pay attention to what the FARC say out of the Table, suggesting that at the Table we take an entirely different position. In this way, the idea that what we say is false or opportunistic is being generated and promoted.
The fact of saying that our peace delegation in Havana has been authorized to present a public report on what really happens at the Table, which everyone in this country demands, is titled and commented as a threat that endangers the continuation of process.
Posted my Addendum Required, Caracol Radio presents it like this, Timochenko says that revealing the advances of the Table is not a threat. You, in your note, ask if I calibrated the threats expressed in my last letters about throwing the confidentiality down the drain.
Many who get near to us fear being absorbed by our logic. They recognize a position of absolute commitment with the oppressed classes and do not want to get involved in this way, it is too risky for their life and their personal peace.
Therein, at the bottom, lies the key of the current conflict. Those who question the legitimacy of the order of things and take seriously the task of working together with those most affected by it, in order to overcome, end up knowing and experiencing the brutal side of the regime.
We live and fight because we want that face and that criminal hand to disappear forever. The horrors lived in Colombia for more than six decades on behalf of the open or disguised official violence are too much. They intend to ignore that truth at our expense.
We have said it, we have no objection to show our face to the victims of the conflict, to recognize our share of the consequences of war.This does not mean that we assume responsibility for the generation, scaling and degradation of it.
That has to be clear. Now the mortal remains of Fidel Castaño appeared and the country learns that he died in a confrontation with the FARC in San Pedro de Urab?. Why, in over 30 years of paramilitarism, there hasn't been a single confrontation between the army and them?
The eternally unfortunate victims of Bojayá perished in the middle of a several days combat against a paramilitary structure tolerated and supported by the military. The hundreds of paramilitary massacres against unarmed civilians or the destruction of the UP are something else.
Peace is supposed to bring up such facts. As the linkages of drug-trafficking with military and police forces, the paramilitary, the financial sector and the political class.That cannot be dodged with the pretext of our relationship with it, which we can explain without any shame.
Talking like this is equivalent, for certain sectors of the country, to our loss of credibility. They would like the rest of Colombians to follow them. If that were so, it would be impossible to build a more inclusive Colombia, the thing the devotees of war and unconditional surrenders least want to happen.
Colombian democracy is so intolerant and violent, that consistently working for peace and reconciliation has become an opprobrium that borders with criminal law. That's why Senator Piedad Córdoba was deprived of her political rights.
And that's why, despite of his more than thirty years of struggle for a political solution to the Colombian conflict, doctor Álvaro Leiva is publicly put into question. I thought I heard that the political scientist and journalist Claudia López rushed out of the country. Can you imagine why?
Maria Jimena, articles like yours, or like Marta Ruiz' or Leon Valencia's, like those of many columnists who every day refer to the Havana process, show the great expectation of the country with it and not its entry into decline.We think differently, that's all.