The desire of some to see the break between Santos and President Uribe, a version widely circulated national newspapers in recent days, reminds me a bit of desire and obsession with the ultra conservative American 's Tea Party exacerbate tensions to the point of polarization with hints of violence. Apart from any consideration, is mean-political criticism become essential in a democracy, a popular comparison tool to shake things down. It is petty in Colombia for a reason: continuity does not mean all that reliable conservation became a predecessor. If Santos preserves the successes of Uribe, is not required to keep their mistakes, does anyone do it?
But look a little history. In 2001, true, while pressuring FARC negotiations in their favor with the Colombian government to ensure that military patrols around the former Demilitarized Zone was an obstacle to peace, which never came, the specialized international opinion was determined that Colombia a country whose institutions was similar to that of Haiti or the Ivory Coast (considered failed states) , the country was in one of the most critical of its recent history, mired in a weak economic recovery that followed into a deep recession that affected the Colombian economy between 1999 and 2000 while breaking the hopes for peace with the largest illegal armed group, which now carried the weight of a terrorist organization after the events of September 11, 2001 and that he charged fiercely against the Colombian state.
The stage was anything but inspiring: the FARC's armed proselytism, under suspicion of being too deep in the illicit drug business, generating panic and sosobra and nearly two million Colombians displaced from the countryside to the cities and a similar number who left the country before the violence perverse consistency, weak State and the macroeconomic environment. Pessimism in all its fury. A growth was -4.8% in the third quarter of 1999, an indicator of industry confidence that ranged in the same way that expectations were unstable and consumer confidence deteriorated further predicted that the change in the course was a necessity. It was no fault of the Pastrana administration, was the confluence of many phenomena engendered years ago. It only takes one time for all the ills to flood with devastating effect.
Uribe's arrival represented the turning point. Government political will for dialogue and peaceful resolution conflict in 2002 chose a strategy of armed and strong state. In a few years the results are obvious, Colombia recovered some lost ground and gained security priority. After 8 years of government and for the first time in several years, but new priorities that emerged were not attended by Uribe, a president should not think about how to give some viability to the country through violence. Hence the arrival of Santos is the opportunity of an entire country to turn to the basics: build a real project of nation.
Why consider as a danger to what was built in the last decade victims law, land law or social reforms that the new government wanted to implement?, a social and economic agenda that attacks the strong core of the conflict, such as poor distribution of ownership of land and low State's ability to defend, can not be considered a danger to a legacy like Uribe, on the contrary, if the state has regained some lost authority, it is time to promote reforms. It is also a message of optimism for the international community, whose expectations are finally set to the desired post-conflict.
however, Colombia can not pretend to overcome fundamental problems if it assumes the costs of years of neglect, much less whether retains prejudice. The continuity of Uribe is guaranteed in the same way that fundamental problems are undertaken as a priority. If poverty and exclusion remain immovable, successes in security, yet to be consolidated, disappeared after a few years. If we retain prejudices, the failure will be waiting just around the corner.
0 comments:
Post a Comment