http://edition.cnn.com/2011/11/15/world/americas/colombia-farc-leader/index.html
Last Tuesday Rodrigo Londono Echeverri, known as Timoleon Jimenez, was elected by the leftist rebel group as the new leader of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia. Timoleon was elected after his predecessor Alfonso Cano was killed in a military operation at the beginning of the month.
The FARC, which is the well known name of this guerrilla organization, claims to protect the poor and the weak and have used the armed conflict against Colombian government since 1960. The group is not willing to end up with the guerrilla struggle and they will continue kidnapping and attacking the security forces and civilians to take over the power of the country.
After reading this article, many questions came to my mind. Does the FARC really represent the oppressed and the poor people of Colombia? If so, why don’t they give up the armed conflict and just try to act in a more democratic way? It is considered as a terrorist group by more than 7 states including the countries of European Union and the United States, are we really doing enough to put an end to all this? Apart from the insecurity, violence and crimes that this group brings to Colombia, here we find another case of how human rights are once again widely ignored and once again nobody (powerful states, international community) do much about it. There are child soldiers recruited by force, assassinations of civilians, especially of indigenous people, drug trafficking and most important, a lack of freedom that Colombians are constantly suffering due to the fear of being kidnapped or killed. I know the FARC has been the main concern in Colombia’s affairs for the past years and it is very difficult to put an end to it, but if we really wanted it, if it was in the interest of the powerful states, much more could have been done to capture the leaders and to put an end to this terrorist group.
I totally agree with you Mercedes, more should be done internationally to control the FARC. But I would just like to remember that it's not the only example of guerrilla groups in Latin and Central America, and that some of them are nonviolent. That is the case of the EZLN, in Mexico.
ReplyDeleteI feel that if there are so many groups like these (both violent and nonviolent) in the region, maybe governments should ask themselves if there is any other underlying problem that they are not able to see.
I agree with you both in that the FARC is a guerrilla movement (many would call them terrorists) that should be erradicated right away. However, as Clara said, I think the case of the FARC should be more widely studied to understand the social reality of many Latin American countries. The FARC are actually the "de facto" government in most of Southern Colombia, an area vastly covered by rainforest that has been grievously ignored by Bogotá. The FARC there are the only thing locals respect, the FARC have built schools and roads, they collect taxes and behave like a legitimate government in a region where the real one does not care to act. In short, I agree with the idea that FARC's activities should end inmediately, but I believe we ought not to think that it's something that could be solved in a matter of weeks with just a few talks between the FARC and the Colombian government, it's something much bigger than that.
ReplyDelete