A TV Telesur exibiu na quinta-feira (26) imagens inéditas do funeral do líder das Forças Armadas Revolucionárias da Colômbia (Farc) Manuel Marulanda, conhecido como Tirofijo, considerado um dos fundadores da guerrilha.

O vídeo com o funeral foi veiculado no dia do primeiro aniversário da morte de Marulanda.

As Farc afirmaram que Marulanda morreu de parada cardíaca, nos braços de sua esposa, em 26 de março.

As imagens mostram guerrilheiras emocionadas diante do corpo de Marulanda e rebeldes saudando militarmente o líder guerrilheiro pela última vez em uma tenda de madeira.

O corpo está coberto com a bandeira das Farc.

O vídeo mostra ainda o caixão de madeira sendo levado pelos militantes pela selva.

As imagens são identificadas com o logo da guerrilha no lado esquerdo do vídeo, sinalizando que as Farc produziram as imagens divulgadas pela Telesur.

Manifestantes lembraram o primeiro aniversário da morte de Marulanda na Venezuela.

A homenagem começou com os manifestantes depositando flores diante de uma estátua de Simón Bolívar.

Eles proferiram frases a favor do líder das Farc e contra as políticas imperialistas do governo colombiano e norte-americano.

Em seguida, os manifestantes caminharam em direção ao bairro de 23 de Enero, onde, em setembro, foi inaugurado um busto de Pedro Antonio Marín em uma praça em homenagem ao líder revolucionário das Farc.

“Se Manuel Marulanda não tivesse existido, teríamos tido que inventá-lo, é um símbolo da luta revolucionária na América Latina”, afirmou Carlos Casanueva, secretário-geral do Capítulo Venezuela da Coordenadoria Continental Bolivariana (CCB).

O dia, organizado pela CCB e pela Juventude do Partido Comunista da Venezuela, se insere dentro do Dia Internacional do Direito à Rebelião Armada, com eventos similares em Brasil, Uruguai, Chile, Argentina, Peru, Equador, Porto Rico, República Dominicana e México, segundo os organizadores.

Com agências

It was a year ago today that Manuel Marulanda – “Tirofijo” (Sureshot) – founder and lifelong leader of the FARC died.

Men like Marulanda were radicalized quickly in the climate of the late 1940s and 1950s, especially after the still unsolved death of Jorge Eliecer Gaitan. Colombia, which we know, erupted in what is now known as “La Violencia.” Marulanda took part la violencia and eventually, like many of his time, came under the command of Marxism and expressed a desire towards a radically different Colombia than he, or his family, had ever known.

This post is not so much to highlight Marulanda. The FARC’s only sympathies may lie in the past. It’s present, of which Marulanda was present, was repressive, backward and no better than the government from Belisario Betancur in 1982 to Uribe of today. FARC is an antiquated idea and have been nothing but a repressive agent (attempting to (still?) quash the repressive state) that has led to the deaths of countless citizens of Colombia since the first truce in 1984.

The legacies of the rebellion have become murderous. A betrayal of some kind of future it could have represented – now it is another cause that those ignorant of Latin America use to trumpet the reasons for increased military aide in the region to counteract the threats the “good guys” face. This, of course, is disingenuous. Any form of resistance in Colombia is accused of being funded by FARC, which is not true – as displayed by the Popular Minga last summer.

There was a time when the FARC raised sympathies, as if they truly were fighting for something. Those days are gone. The public violence that Colombia fed upon for a half-century is being juxtaposed by Awá Indians who declare their wish for a “territory of peace and co-existence.”

The Popular Minga last summer called for the creation of a new Colombia

Hell, the ghosts of Marulanda haunt my RSS feed today. From IPS:

“COLOMBIA: Growing International Support for Peace”

Who would have thought? The rigid dichotomies increase violence and repression (“Both the army and the guerrillas are our enemies”) to sustain this war that is killing people still, including the eight indigenous men it has admitted to killing (from the 17 missing). While it is almost one year to the day that Colombia invaded Ecuador’s airspace in its raid of FARC and Hugo Chavez’s posturing troops on the border of Colombia, it is clear that support must end from both sides of the spectrum. The US must stop propping up Colombia and the FARC must be de-legitimized by the world. Instead, we must choose peace – what neither side was ever willing to do in Colombia over the last sixty years.

Marulanda had a huge bounty on his head but he died of a heartache today, one year ago. Unfortunately, the repression continues from both sides.

Tirofijo or Manuel Marulanda, founder and big boss of the FARC in Colombia, died about a year ago. His body has never been found.  I have to correct a post that I wrote a while ago about his burial. The man on the picture in my post is another guy. I think that the man who is sitting in this picture is Tirofijo, although the man with the hat and the poncho on his left also looks like him.This weekend Colombia’s daily El Tiempo published a feature about Tirofijo’s death. The newspaper travelled 1380 kilometres, the area where he probably moved around while he was still alive. The Colombian army has been looking for his body, but hasn’t been able to find it, although it has offered a lot of money to people who can give information.

According to El Tiempo Tirofijo’s girlfriend Sandra had the four men who buried him killed in order to keep the secret where his grave is.

It seems that the army wants to know what was the cause of his death. It is al most funny to oberserve how both the army and the FARC in their press releases try to harm the image of the enemy. For the army it is important to show that Tirofijo died of stress, because of the pressure of the army in the area where he was operating.

Anyway, Tirofijo was an old man, almost eighty years, living in not very comfortable circumstances in the Colombian jungle and yes, probably haunted by the army.

His fight against social injustice ended in a stupid war, whose fuel is drugs trade and in which thousands of Colombians have died. Hundreds are still being kept a hostage. While social injustice still exists.

A organização Coordenadora Continental Bolivariana (CCB) convocou para o próximo dia 26 de março em Caracas, capital da Venezuela, um ato para celebrar o primeiro ano da morte do fundador das Forças Armadas Revolucionárias da Colômbia (Farc), Manuel Marulanda.

O ato, inscrito dentro da chamada Jornada Continental no Dia Internacional do Direito dos Povos à Resistência Armada, começará com uma marcha do centro de Caracas até a praça “Manuel Marulanda” no bairro 23 de Enero, oeste da capital.

Uma vez na praça, os manifestantes irão realizar “um ato político em homenagem ao camarada Manuel Marulanda”, explicou em uma coletiva de imprensa o secretário-geral da CCB na Venezuela, Carlos Casanueva.

A Jornada Continental também será realizada em outros países como Brasil, Uruguai, Argentina, Peru, Equador, Chile, Porto Rico, República Dominicana, México, Espanha, Alemanha, Itália e Dinamarca.

A CCB é uma organização latino-americana antiimperialista nascida há cinco anos e que teve o fundador das Farc como um de seus presidentes honorários.

Com agências

O Ministério Público da Colômbia ordenou a prisão do fundador e ex-líder das Forças Armadas Revolucionárias da Colômbia (Farc), Manuel Marulanda, que morreu em março do ano passado.

A ordem de prisão foi emitida porque sua morte não foi notificada oficialmente.

A medida se estende também ao chefe militar da guerrilha, Jorge Briceño, conhecido como “Mono Jojoy”.

Com agências

In Colombia he was as mythical as the legendary Che Guevara, FARC’s commander Tirofijo (sure shot). He died last year, supposedly of a heart attack.

The Colombian army says that it was because of the tension its presence caused so near to the camp of Tirofijo or Manuel Marulanda, the other nom de guerre of this man, who was born as Pedro Marín. It might be true what the army says.

Now Colombia’s daily La Nación published a picture of the dead Tirofijo. A young guerrillera who deserted from the FARC told the newspaper that the last days of his life he had constant heart attacks and was sweating all the time.

With the picture it is showed that Tirofijo at least had a decent burial. The heroic death of a Robin Hood, who fought for the poor, or the disgraceful end of a criminal who killed, kidnapped and extorted?

Many of the FARC’s victims were thrown into a hole in the jungle.

En Caracas (Venezuela) han construido una plaza en honor a Manuel Marulanda Vélez, alías Tirofijo, líder y uno de los fundadores de las FARC.

Si me regalan un minuto de su tiempo, expondré unos cuantos datos de la guerrilla que el homenajeado fundó y lideró la mayor parte de su vida:

• Las FARC aumentan constantemente sus filas con el reclutamiento forzado de menores de edad. En una guerra por la libertad del pueblo…¿Deben sacrificarse los niños?
• Violaciones, torturas, maltratos a las mujeres (las guerrilleras embarazadas no pueden tener a sus niños, a menos que sean de los jefes).
• ¿Han dado por sentado que sus familiares regresarán a cenar? Bueno, gracias a esta organización, diariamente desaparecen personas de la faz de la tierra, sin dejar rastro alguno.
• Secuestro de ciudadanos, colombianos y extranjeros. “Rehenes” tratados sin ningún tipo de humanidad.
• Miles de familias han perdido sus hogares y tenido que marcharse de la tierra que los vió nacer. Las ciudades principales del país se han llenado de colombianos desplazados por este y los demás grupos armados. Ciudadanos sin empleo, sin forma de alimentarse, sin capacidad de subsistir.
• Las FARC han impuesto sobre Colombia un miedo que nos ha acompañado por varias décadas. Han asesinado colombianos, extranjeros, campesinos y empresarios, todos sin discriminación alguna. Colombia entera los reconoce como asesinos, terroristas, narcotraficantes. Colombia entera los rechaza.

Honestamente, ¿Tiene Tirofijo méritos suficientes para ser homenajeado?.

¿Tienes algo para decir? Hazlo en los comentarios.

Si te ha gustado el artículo puedes recibir actualizaciones de Censura20 en tu correo oprimiendo aqui.

“Whether or not he or his brand-new Defense Minister or his wife or his cats
are reelected, Álvaro Uribe is a fascist, and the Colombian government is a murderous government unworthy of being called friendly or brotherly, as my brother Chávez told him (4). Uribe can’t be a contributor or anything like that, and has to be excluded on principle from the Latin American Union.

Having a Latin American Union with self-confessed traitors in our ranks would be –at best– naïve, and a slip-up none of our good dead would ever forgive.”

Celia Hart, daughter of two great Cuban revolutionaries, Haydee Santamaria and Armando Hart, has written a wonderful tribute to those who continue the revolution, especially the FARC and the ELN.

Tomorrow, is the 55th anniversary of the attack on the Moncada barracks, the first major revolutionary act against the Batista regime. It was a tactical disaster but a symbolic victory. Fidel was there of course, as was Celia’s mother, Haydee. Both Haydee’s brother and boyfriend were involved in the attack and were tortured and eventually killed. In order to induce Haydee to talk, Batista’s bastards kept bringing her body parts belonging to her brother and boyfriend. She never cracked.

Celia covers a lot of ground here: recent release of Ingrid Betancourt, Alvaro Uribe’s fascist control of Colombia, Fidel, the plight of Palestinians and Iraqis, writings of Jose Marti, quotes from Che, the plight of the Cuban 5, and the valiant struggle of the FARC and ELN.

She celebrates many and takes some people to task. Yes, it’s long, but with a good cafecito, you will be glad you took the time.

Viva la revolucion!

KAOSENLARED
The FARC, today more than ever

With all my heart, I wish to celebrate our National Rebelliousness Day, my
26th of July, with the guerrillas, trade unionists and fighters in general
from beautiful Colombia.

By Celia Hart Santamaria
(For Kaosenlared) [18.07.2008 23:19]

http://www.walterlippmann.com/ch-07-18-2008.html
A CubaNews translation.
Edited by Walter Lippmann.

“In revolution one wins or dies (if it is a real one)”
Che Guevara

I. The ups and downs of history

It will soon be the 55th anniversary of the attack on the Moncada Garrison
on July 26, 1953, when by, force of arms which they could get only after a
lot of unrepeatable sacrifices, a bunch of kids decided to storm tyrant
Batista’s second biggest garrison and one of imperialism’s most outstanding
strongholds in Our America.

Neither the stories already known nor those yet to be told, nor the wildest
imagination would suffice to detract from our amazement at so much courage,
personal generosity and political maturity.

And here we are, thanks to the integrity of those branded as “crazy” by the
whole political spectrum of those days. There are the horrific images of
torture and murder at a time when it seemed we would have to give everything
up for lost, including that picture of two women who had to relinquish all
their worldly goods as a result of that event, although they surely earned
heaven in return.

History tends to repeat itself, and that’s not only one of its charms but
also its main virtue: we can use it as a means of comparison, association
and guidance. We keep its other face in our academies to make wise
individuals out of us… which is also important, much as God thinks
otherwise.

Today’s left-wing reformists are definitely worthy of modern-day
psychological studies. They can’t understand us, worn as they are by so many
liberal slogans and irrevocably tuned to the relative nature of events to
justify almost anything and change ideas and speeches in a flash with a
simple phrase like “things were different then”. Nicolò Machiavelli himself
would be appalled by their babyish way of doing politics.

That any historical analysis must be put into the right time and space
context is beyond doubt, but never a revolutionary principle. Principles are
absolute.

If they only knew, those latter-day reformists, that Albert Einstein’s
Special Theory of Relativity is largely based on a constant –the speed of
light– they would keep their mouths shut! Such constant, c = 300,000 km/s,
stands as the cornerstone of the blessed theory. Therefore, since it depends
on no system of reference, the speed of light is unchanging. And so is the
consequence, immutable regardless of any reference.

Nature and the heart always abide by the same laws.

That’s why I’d like with all my heart to share with the guerrillas, trade
unionists and fighters in general from beautiful Colombia the celebration of
my 26th of July, the National Rebelliousness Day when Cuban youths, guns in
hand (and I mean GUNS IN HAND) honored José Martí.

And I don’t say it because they appear to be in the minority, even for a
left-wing movement. Quite the opposite: I’d do it because they have become
the target of criticism by people we all respect very much. I’d do it
precisely in his name, the most respected of all… my Fidel, Fidel Castro,
who spearheaded the Cuban Revolution, the most lasting and BEAUTIFUL in
human history.

I celebrated this, my 26th of July, with the usually neglected names, be
they in Colombian dungeons or Zionist prisons; even with those held hostage
by the FARC, whom everybody seems to have forgotten today, in the aftermath
of the rescued swallow that will never make a summer.

Buried deep in the heart of the Empire’s most important springboard in our
America’s epicenter, the oldest guerrilla force ever deserves a much
stronger revolutionary commitment and more support from this watered-down
left, even if, for purposes of the fiercest criticism, we can and must level
at them!… but always from the same side of the fence rather than from the
changing, dubious and ephemeral side of the already sorrowful, eroded
armchair diplomacy.

II. My Commander and Pax Romana

I won’t repeat or discuss my Commander Fidel’s reflection on the FARC and
its historical leaders (1). Not for fear; everybody knows that. It’s just
out of sheer grief. And my fingers feel no pain as they slide all over my
keyboard. God knows I need and love Fidel so much, much more than I do the
Sun and the firmament together…

With his eight remarks (2), my comrade James Petras has already responded to
Fidel. Although I disagree with him about a thing or two, nobody would dare
lie through their teeth by branding James Petras as an enemy of the Cuban
and the Latin American revolution. He’s stood by our side when the things
have been tough, when many a pen rushed to condemn the decision we had to
take in 2003 to send three hijackers to the firing squad. While the left’s
ink hurled insults at us, Petras stood by us.

I dissent from James Petras’s view that the Colombian guerrilla has no
bearing on the episodes experienced by the beautiful Cuban guerrilla headed
by “intellectuals” like Fidel and Che. I disagree with him in that point,
but his thorough appraisal is no less commendable because of that. On the
contrary, it makes it stronger.

Manuel Marulanda was an ignorant peasant no more than Fidel and Che were
intellectuals playing with squirt guns. As guerrillas, all three were
committed to the Revolution and tailored their fight to the specific
realities of their milieux. That’s how far I will go into Fidel’s Pax Romana
reflection and Petras’s eight theses. Tears and confusion usually give bad
advice, so I’d better give time a minute –if it ever wears a watch– and wait
to see whether the same attacks will be launched on someone like “Tirofijo”,
recently deceased, for being the world’s “oldest” guerrilla and best
revolutionary. If so, we would have to study Fidel’s reflections a thousand
times over and read between the lines, for I’d like to think, and above all,
believe –and more than believe, feel– that they’re about something more than
just mere criticism of the FARC and Marulanda.

No matter how compelling reason may be, I won’t admit that there are affairs
of state involved, as any logic along those lines will come up against the
interests of a Revolution that Fidel has enthroned for good.

José Martí said:

“That is why in America the imported book has been conquered by the natural
man. Natural men have conquered learned and artificial men. The native
half-breed has conquered the exotic Creole. The struggle is not between
civilization and barbarity, but between false erudition and Nature”. (3)

And that’s what Marulanda was: a natural man of Our America.

III. The American Union is impossible if the enemy is involved

Whether or not he or his brand-new Defense Minister or his wife or his cats
are reelected, Álvaro Uribe is a fascist, and the Colombian government is a
murderous government unworthy of being called friendly or brotherly, as my
brother Chávez told him (4). Uribe can’t be a contributor or anything like
that, and has to be excluded on principle from the Latin American Union.

Having a Latin American Union with self-confessed traitors in our ranks
would be –at best– naïve, and a slip-up none of our good dead would ever
forgive.

Let’s read again about what José Martí called Our America! Again, America is
not just a regional project. I insist, because it’s on behalf of our
supposed unity that many reformists pretend to sell us all those despicable
worms, including Uribe, his aristocrat ministers and one Ingrid Betancourt.

So there goes José Martí again:

“Only those born prematurely are lacking in courage. Those without faith in
their country are seven-month weaklings. Because they have no courage, they
deny it to the others (…). The ships should be loaded with those harmful
insects that gnaw at the bone of the country that nourishes them. If they
are Parisians or from Madrid, let them go to the streetlamp-lined Prado, to
boast around, or to Tortoni’s, in high hats (…). These sons of our America,
which will be saved by its Indians in blood and is growing better; these
deserters who take up arms in the army of a North America that drowns its
Indians in blood and is growing worse!”. (3)

Ingrid Betancourt will never go beyond her manicures, forever confined to
colorful magazines or TV programs teeming with stupid details.

Pascual Serrano said it loud and clear: “Betancourt and her family have not
betrayed anybody. They’re just back in the social, political and economic
class where they always belonged: Colombia’s wealthy neoliberal bourgeoisie”
(5)

However, we can teach Ingrid Betancourt, the new media princess of this
eerie summer –provided she doesn’t faint on us or gets one of her nails
chipped– what Latin American fascism did to tens of thousands of innocent
women who were raped, tortured and thrown off to the sea from helicopters in
an effort to make them say things they never really knew. We can teach her
about babies kidnapped by the killers of her real parents, and about Plan
Condor, which gave her “brave president” a power niche in this continent
and keeps stretching his mandate.

I don’t care what people say: measured against such horrors, Princess
Ingrid’s stay in the Colombian jungle can be compared to a sojourn in a
five-star hotel.

And it’s not something of the past. All that suffering is still endured
today by Palestinian, Afghan and Iraqi women. And even at Guantánamo Bay,
here in my own land! Suffice it to read Alejandro Ruiz’s heartfelt words.
(6)

Tel Aviv’s Mossad, whose advisors helped Uribe so much, knows very well
about treating female hostages.

Ingrid enjoys perfect health, as evidenced by the images of her kissing and
hugging the worst heads of state in the world.

So much determination to save this princes should, or better yet, can have
an important logistical influence on any plan to rescue the Mexican women
who are murdered in Ciudad Juárez and Atenco, prevent any more innocent
little girls in Palestina from being torn apart by Zionist bombs, or at
least help us punish those responsible for these and many other crimes…
Well, judging by the way things are going in this mad world, it would be
harldy surprising if the girls were blamed for not doing their homework….

IV. To Hugo Chávez

May no one doubt my love, respect and admiration for the president of
Bolivarian Venezuela. There are plenty of my writings out there in support
of his project, for which I’d be willing to give my life.

But that’s not enough. Honesty is one of the Revolution’s weapons,
especially because it’s endorsed by commitment. I followed Chávez’s lead
when I lacked Fidel’s voice that horrible July 31, 2006. And what does
Chávez tell us now? That Uribe’s captives are better off than FARC’s
hostages (4) “because they can be visited”. Is that the only reason?

In that case I can tell my Bolivarian comrade that I know a couple of
innocent Cubans, René and Gerardo –two of our Cuban Five– who can’t be
visited by their wives Olga and Adriana because they tried to prevent
kidnappings, illegal trade in immigrants and other actions aimed at
decimating a small people.

They and the other three comrades were kidnapped by the U.S. ten years ago.
Yes, kidnapped, just like Ingrid Betancourt was, only much worse! And I
regret that the Colombian army won’t help me release them from that steel
jungle. In the meantime, they know nothing about their wives. Adriana went
through vile humiliations for hours in the U.S. before she was forced to fly
back to Cuba without even knowing how many hairs his joyful, optimistic
husband had lost ever since he was imprisoned. Young and healthy, she’s one
of the most beautiful women I’ve ever met, perhaps bound to die childless,
unlike Ingrid Betancourt.

We’ve also overlooked two details owing to this bout of collective amnesia:
a) FARC’s unilateral decision to release two women, and b) the Continent’s
top genocidal government sequestered Clara Rojas’s little Enmanuel, a child
born in the jungle. Whether he was conceived as a result of rape or an act
of love under the stars, we don’t know. Clara is yet to make clear whether
she was mistreated or doted upon by a FARC member who deserved to father the
boy. Be that as it may, this story of love –or lack thereof– is worthy of a
movie script better than the one about Ingrid Betancourt’s alleged
liberation.

V. Ingrid gets rid of us… and we her

Ingrid is free, and I’m glad for her, her family and, most of all, her
child. Even more so now that we and the FARC comrades are also “rid” of the
woman.

However, there’s a whole population sequestered in Colombia that nobody is
trying to rescue. I refuse to accept, if only because the 26th of July is
drawing near, that the price of the fatigues that the FARC and ELN wear and
that of my red and black banner be charged on that population.

Let’s rearm, then, for war.

Following the military disaster that the attack to the Moncada garrison was,
Cubans restructured our war doctrine. Yes, it’s called war. There will be
war as long as there’s injustice and murders at large. That’s something that
even my eleven-year-old son understands.

My uncle Enrique Hart died trying to activate a bomb in 1958. It’s true
that, owing to Cuba’s specific circumstances then, so-called “terrorism”
harmed no innocent person, only the revolutionary fighters themselves,
including my own uncle. Still, those irregular methods of struggle were
never relinquished, and if anyone says otherwise let’s hear them! On that
point I second James Petras 100% percent: a revolution is not made with
roses. Roses are for love, if ever we have any time left for love and
growing roses in the midst of so much disaster.

If it’s true that guerrilla warfare is what fuels the Empire’s arrogance,
whose fault is it then that the Palestinians and Iraqis are suffering? Which
guerrilla’s? Were we to pay heed to arguments about why we should dislike
them, whose fault is it that the world is going to pieces? Is it ours? Are
the revolutionaries to be blamed for the climate change, the rise in fuel
prices and the merciless killing of polar bears and thousands of living
species? And this is only by transitive law.

But Fidel Castro –my Fidel– said once in front of a crowd gathered in
Havana: “Do away with the philosophy of plunder and you will have done away
with the philosophy of war”. (7)

Plunder is what the Colombian people are enduring. Plunder is what we’re all
enduring. Even our own conscience is being plundered.

Ingrid, the princess of this weird summer, said that Uribe is a great
president.

Once snatched out of FARC’s “ferocious clutches”, begging for mercy on the
hundreds of prisoners held in her own country or the U.S. and calling the
army to account for so many dead Colombians instead of congratulating them
so much is the least she could have. So much so when we know her rescuing
didn’t really take place as they say…

Unfortunately, the media have become weapons of mass destruction which
enthrall us with their excellent making, images and words.

VI. Che and Rafael Correa

As I said from the start, history is like sea waves: they go up and down.
Smart fishermen know it only too well, so they wait for the right time to
stretch their drift nets.

Ecuadorian president Rafael Correa, for whom all men and women –especially
us WOMEN– would be capable of mopping the sky with a single pail of water–
said: “They know who provides the best support and the best bases to Uribe:
the FARC, whose foolish acts make him all the more popular” (8). Is Uribe’s
popular thanks to the FARC??? Who would believe it!!! If that’s so, he
should pay the guerrilla group a share of what he gets through dubious
channels.

I don’t believe that anymore than I believe last March’s raid, where
civilians were wounded and a number of guerrillas and an Ecuadorian peasant
were shot at point-blank range, is the result of FARC’s existence.

Rafael Correa was very much to the point in the OAS Assembly last March when
he rebuffed the war on terror as a justification for the foray into Ecuador.

If there’s anything captivating about Correa is that he sails under no
political flag to stand for his principles, defend his country and face up
to the Empire.

But when it comes to our summertime princess, he charmed no one. “How great
that [Betancourt] has been freed, and how bad has the FARC looked!” (8).
Ingrid, however, rooted for and commended the Colombian army for the March
1st raid, tagged by Correa himself as one of the worst actions ever
conducted in America.

The ex-hostage condoned the shame, disrespect and larceny committed in
Rafael Correa’s land.

Yet, that was not the Ecuadorian president’s biggest mistake. He put his
foot in his mouth deep enough to outmatch Hugo Chávez!

Rafael Correa resorted to the most unsuitable “Saint” to disqualify the
guerrilla, a Saint you can hardly mention unless you’re carrying a rifle on
your shoulder or shedding a tear over your helpless inability to follow his
lead. Therefore, he mentioned Che Guevara in vain. You don’t do that, much
less to lash against a guerrilla force in Latin America, with or without
hostages!

As a Christian, Correa is well aware that thou shalt not take the Lord’s
name in vain. And Che Guevara is the revolutionary’s God… if we had one.

Let’s see then what He, Che, said: “The capture of power is the unique
strategic possible aim of the revolutionary forces, and everything must be
bound by that premise”. (9)

That’s what the FARC and the ELN are trying to do. It’s all about seizing
power, and not only the government, my friends. Being in government is
merely the first step… provided that accomplishment can be called a step.

Our Rafael Correa should not and cannot believe that Uribe draws his
strength from FARC’s “terrorist” leanings. What makes him strong is the
presence of imperialism’s IV Fleet off the Caribbean coasts and the fact
that we the revolutionaries seem to be running out of choices, now that even
Fidel frowns on the use of force.

Last March we stood by Correa and his sound principles against a deceiving
Alvaro Uribe, who keeps lying. We all loved to see the Ecuadorian economist
taking the presidential chair of his country. How come he invokes Che
against the FARC? I’ve already pointed out my objection to taking hostages,
but there’s a big difference between that and using Che to put them to
shame.

Rafael Correa has used Che’s Saint Name in vain. And there you have, even
Ingrid the summertime princess rubber-stamps what the pharisaical Colombian
brass did against Manuelita Sáenz’s land….

Now that was a real princess, made of a mold you never find around anymore,
who knew how to warn Bolívar against Santander. Manuelita, the liberator of
America, died in poverty, forgotten by everyone and rescued by none except
history.

VII. …and in the end, only Che

“Now that we’re discussing America, we must ask ourselves the standard
question: what tactical elements should be implemented to accomplish the
great aim of capturing power –socialist power, needless to say– in this part
of the world? Is it at all possible to do it by peaceful means in our
continent’s present circumstances?

Our categorical answer is: impossible in most cases. At best, we would
formally get hold of the bourgeois power superstructure, and the transition
to socialism by a government who assumes formal power under bourgeois laws
must take place through a very violent offensive against anyone who tries
one way or another to stop its advance towards new social structures.” (9)

FINAL NOTE

Take your pick: elections, armed struggle, strikes or love poems.

But how do we defeat them? You see, we will have to defeat them eventually
if we truly want to save the Earth, polar bears, pandas and whales… let
alone this forgotten human species, slowly dying day by day by its own hands
and ideas in a sort of cruel collective suicide attempt.

God willing, the war will go on, because the philosophy of plunder will
continue and bring with it, as my Commander Fidel said, the philosophy of
war.

All ways are welcome when the ultimate goal is to do away with those who
kill the world’s children, pets, bees and water sources while they whoop it
up for the liberation of one, just one victim who, incidentally, is among
the least damaged in the world.

It’s your call! I only have one word, even at the risk of disagreeing with
our best men: Revolution.

What about yours?

Thanks to the FARC and ELN and all those who fight to keep these hopes
alive, as they make me and the whole world live.

References
(1) Fidel Castro, “La paz romana”, Rebelión, 6 de julio de 2008.
(2) James Petras, “Fidel y las FARC”, Rebelión, 12 de julio de 2008.
(3) José Martí, “Nuestra América”, Revista Ilustrada de Nueva York, 30 de
enero de 1891 (Obras escogidas; tomo II, Editora Política, La Habana, 1979,
p. 519).
(4) Hugo Chávez, “Chávez a las FARC: La guerra de guerrillas pasó a la
historia; es hora de liberar a todos los rehenes”, Telesur, 10 de junio de
2008.
(5) Pascual Serrano, “La traición de Ingrid”, Rebelión, 5 de julio de 2008.
(6) Alejandro Ruiz, “Ingrid no pasea por Guantánamo”, Blog Venezuela
Cantaclaro, 13 de julio de 2008.
(7) Fidel Castro’s Speech in the United Nations, New York, 1959.
(8) Rafael Correa, “Declaraciones”, Resumen Latinoamericano, 5 de julio de
2008.
(9) Ernesto Guevara, “Táctica y Estrategia de la Revolución Latinoamericana”
(octubre- noviembre de 1962), published in Verde Olivo magazine on October
6, 1968.h

Party for Socialism and Liberation

http://www.pslweb.org/

News and Analysis

Latin American media broadcasts FARC statement
Friday, July 18, 2008
By: Alfonso Cano

‘We will never give up the struggle for justice’

Recent events in Columbia have been widely discussed in the U.S. media, but what has been missing is the voice of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). Without that, there cannot be an informed discussion of the issues at play.

We reprint below the PSL’s translation of a July 15 statement issued by FARC leader Alfonso Cano published by the New Colombia News Agency and TeleSUR. Subheadings have been introduced for ease of reading.

Comrades of the Central High Command, of the High Commands of the Blocks and Fronts, of the units, commanders of the urban networks, columns, companies, guerrillas, squads and commissions, women and men guerrillas, Bolivarian commanders and militiamen, Clandestine Communist Party militants and members of the Bolivarian Movement: revolutionary greetings to you and to all who work together with us for a new Colombia.

During the last week of May, we received solidarity messages from all our Farianas units, in which it was
emphasized the gigantic political and military dimension of Commander Manuel Marulanda Velez as one of the greatest revolutionaries in our history, and also those messages reconfirmed the absolute loyalty to his legacy, to our commitment and objectives of revolutionary transformation and backing of decisions made by the leadership of the FARC at this juncture.

On March 27, after our Comrade Manuel passed away, we decided that we would inform the leadership and fighters, friends and acquaintances; and, the world, after the 23rd of May. We deemed this necessary in order to guarantee the continuity of the plans being carried out.

We redistributed the functions within the Secretariat and we readjusted it as we did the Central High Command. We fortified the High Commands of the Blocks where needed, we reviewed our organic structure and the mass work—all of this in the midst of constant enemy fire and under cover of the indestructible shield of hundreds of fighters who knew that our chief in command had died and kept it a secret.

Therefore, among other decisions, we determined that comrade Iván Márquez should be the chief of international relations of the Central High Command and comrade Pablo Catatumbo the new chief of the Bolivarian Movement for the New Colombia.

Our rich exchange of opinions about the present situation ratified the sacred revolutionary commitment of the FARC-EP, with its leadership at the forefront, to continuing raising very high the flag of the New Colombia, the great Bolivarian nation, and socialism. This exchange did reaffirm the validity of all our political and military plans as well as the conviction of our combatants for democratic peace, meaning peace with social justice—without hunger, with jobs, housing, healthcare and education for all, with national sovereignty and the relevance of a true political democracy that is far removed from violence and administrative corruption.

‘An answer to institutional violence’

It is worthwhile to remind ourselves that the FARC was born 44 years ago as a revolutionary and popular alternative to the institutional and paramilitary terror—as an alternative to the shameless U.S. intervention in our internal affairs, to the forceful removal of peasants from their lands and the increased concentration of such lands in the hands of very few people—to the deep social injustices and to the oligarchic corruption—all of these realities have remained to the present day. They have multiplied and they continue to cause so much pain to our people.

As revolutionaries, we fight for the reconciliation of the Colombian family and the formation of the new just social fabric. But the oligarchy, that dammed mixture of privileged fortunes, huge haciendas, gold cradles and political power, do not want to share even one iota of their privilege with the majorities of the country. That’s why they avoid any real possibility for a peace negotiation.

Comrades, we will insist as many times as necessary that we are willing to produce a humanitarian accord that will define clear terms and will involve the civilian population guaranteeing that both sides follow the terms, and above all, that will produce the freedom of our extradited comrades Sonia, Simón, Iván Vargas and all the prisoners of war on both sides.

Unfortunately, and it is not a secret, this government has not had any interest in finding an accord because that would mean that they would have to recognize us as a legitimate revolutionary guerrilla force. They would rather demonize us. That is why they keep coming up with excuses, absurd theories, media shows, orders filled with fake bravado—to rescue the prisoners whose lives they are playing with in order to satisfy their delusions of grandeur.

The government interpreted our unilateral decision to free six prisoners early this year as a sign of weakness rather than a willingness to act in good faith.

Despite this, our proposal to meet with the government to work out the details of a humane accord is still valid. So is the decision to keep the channels of communication open and to redouble our efforts to allow the generosity of many friendly governments to help make the Colombian government understand that denying the current conflict, lying about the facts and hiding the awful truth will only aggravate the problem and increase the hatred, moving us further from peace.

We will continue to persist with our efforts to reach a democratic peace through the civilized means of dialog just as we have done for the last 44 years, because that is our revolutionary orientation. Those are our principles. The armed uprising, the guerrilla war, the underground work and conspiracy activities are necessary as an answer to the institutional violence that has been unleashed by the powerful against the masses that have fought for freedom, land, jobs, justice, democracy and sovereignty ever since the death of the Liberator Simón Bolivar.

In search of those goals, we will never give up. We will back our word with our daily practice and the heat of the daily struggle. That is what we were taught by Bolivar, Manuel, Jacobo and all our founding fathers and the heroes of the history of our motherland. We have committed our honor and our lives to this work because we are convinced of the just and real possibility of materializing the dream of a new Colombia.

‘The sword of Bolivar is in our hands’

We do not fear the difficulties; we are not intimidated by the threats from the oligarchs, we have heard them all of our lives. We do not believe in their calls for surrendering and dishonor, or in the Judases who take the coins of our opponents. If we did, we could not build a better country with a thriving society and a family who believes in solidarity. The chief value that guides us must be the common good which will be sustained by a transparent ethic.

Comrades: the roads that lead to the upsurge of the people’s struggle in all its forms and to the conquering of power have never been easy, not in our country and not in any other part of the world—not today or yesterday. Only a deep conviction in victory, justice, in the validity and relevance of our principles and objectives, backed by a monolithic collective effort will guarantee our victory.

To those reactionaries who happily think that the FARC are defeated, we inform them that the intensity of this confrontation has fortified us. We have tightened our links with communities, their organizations and their popular struggles. We have elevated our discipline and our respect for the civilian population and we have learned. Many of our combatants have fallen. That is how war is. But their generous blood is the evidence of our total commitment to the people. Other comrades have already taken their place in the trenches and many new ones have continued to arrive. That is how our independence war took place—and all the liberation processes of humanity where the evils of war were unleashed.

We are a revolutionary force with sufficient history, solidity, and consistency to overcome the death of our comrade Chief in Command. He himself contributed to the collective effort of our political and military consolidation. The Secretariat, the Central High Command and the High Commands of the Blocks and Fronts, the commanders of all levels and the combatants of the FARC-EP will guarantee the triumph.

We continue to fight to implement all the plans that were approved, maintaining the strategy of mobile guerrilla, increasing our links to the civilian population and the mass movement which is resisting the offensive of big capital and the big landlords. We continue to intensify the exchange of ideas and opinions with all the forces interested in finding a political solution to this conflict. We seek to reach a political and democratic accord unlike the fractured institutions that are ruled by narco-paramilitaries, totalitarianism and subordination to the White House.

We must invite all communities to denounce the military aggression by the government. Using the excuse of fighting the guerrillas, they are massacring civilians. Those dead bodies are then presented to the media as dead guerrillas. They destroy villages, agricultural fields, forests and wild preserves with massive bombardments; they generate displacements of peasants and they terrorize anyone who dares to protest.

We must double our efforts to keep the world informed of the hundreds of daily battles taking place in the cities and in the country-side, because the regime hides the terrible reality of the fratricide war. It lies about its casualties and its set backs in order to project the illusion that they are in control of the entire country.

We must also reject the lies about the alleged computers and files of Commander Raúl Reyes. This is a macabre manipulation, and part of a reelection agenda. It is meant to vilify those who do not support the Colombian president’s North American strategy for democratic security. This plan is designed to step up military aggression against the countries of Latin America in order to regain their deteriorated world imperial hegemony.

The indignity of building a U.S. military base in Colombia, the plans to obtain a second reelection, the cancer of the narco-paramilitary politics which have submerged all institutions in disgrace—all of this in contrast to the proposals of the Bolivarian platform—must be the topics of any accord. This is what should unify Colombians and motive them to build a collective peace.

Comrades: the sword of Bolivar has been drawn. It is in our hands; the hands of all of those who, like us, will not rest until we achieve social justice, democracy and sovereignty, the basis of the life that all Colombians dream of.

A very strong handshake to all of you.

By the Secretariat,

Alfonso Cano

Eight Mistaken Thesis of Fidel Castro

By James Petras

08/07/08 “ICH” — – I have been a supporter of the Cuban Revolution for exactly fifty years and recognize Fidel Castro as one of the great revolutionary leaders of our time. But I have never been an uncritical apologist: On several crucial occasions I have expressed my disagreements in print, in public and in discussions with Cuban leaders, writers and militants. Fidel Castro’s articles and commentaries on the recent events in Colombia, namely his discussion of the Colombian regime’s freeing of several FARC prisoners (including three CIA operatives and Ingrid Betancourt) and his critical comments on the politics, structure, practices, tactics and strategy of the FARC and its world-renowned leader, Manuel Marulanda, merit serious consideration.

Castro’s remarks demand analysis and refutation, not only because his opinions are widely read and influence millions of militants and admirers in the world, especially in Cuba and Latin America, but because he purports to provide a ‘moral’ basis for opposition to imperialism today. Equally important Castro’s unfortunate diatribe and critique against the FARC, Marulanda and the entire peasant-based guerrilla movement, has been welcomed, published and broadcast by the entire pro-imperialist mass media on five continents. Fidel Castro, with few caveats, has uncritically joined the chorus condemning the FARC and, as I will demonstrate, without reason or logic.

Eight Erroneous Theses of Fidel Castro

1. Castro claims that the ‘liberation’ of the FARC political prisoners “opens a chapter for peace in Colombia, a process which Cuba has been supporting for 20 years as the most appropriate for the unity and liberation of the peoples of our America, utilizing new approaches in the complex and special present day circumstances after the collapse of the USSR…” (Reflections of Fidel Castro, July 4, 2008).

What is astonishing about this thesis (and the entire essay) is Castro’s total omission of any discussion of the mass terror unleashed by Colombia’s President Uribe against trade unionists, political critics, peasant communities and documented by every human rights group in and out of Colombia in both of his recent essays. In fact, Castro exculpates the current Uribe regime, the most murderous regime, and puts the entire blame on ‘US Imperialism’. Since the “collapse of the Soviet Union”, and under the US-led military offensive, a multitude of armed revolutionary movements have emerged in Lebanon, Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Nepal, and other pre-existing armed groups in Colombia and the Philippines, have continued to engage in struggle. In Latin America, the “new approaches” to revolution were anything but peaceful – massive popular uprisings overthrowing corrupt electoral politicians in Argentina, Bolivia, Ecuador, Venezuela…costing many hundreds of lives.

Continued . . .

As usual, Fidel is right on the money with his observations about recent and not so recent events in Colombia. First of all, as he points out, the Colombians and the United Statesians (not to mention their Mossad friends) can’t get their stories straight. But of course, Defense Minister Santos contradicted himself in his very own press conference where he explained that the United States was contacted before the hostage liberation show, “because President Uribe promised President Bush that he would inform him whenever Americans were involved.” (It can be assumed that he was not using “American” in the correct sense of the word, but as a good subordinate should, meaning that U.S. Americans are the only Americans who matter.) Also, Santos mentioned the AWACS plane flying overhead during the operation – well, it would have to be an AWACS plane, wouldn’t it? U-2’s are so passe.

Machetera has slightly revised a couple of awkward word constructions by Fidel’s translator (revising is a piece of cake compared to translating) and highlighted two other points of interest.

* * *

Pax Romana – Fidel Castro Ruz

I basically drew these data from statements made by William Brownfield, US ambassador to Colombia, from that country’s press and television, from the international press, and other sources. The show of technology and economic resources at play is impressive.

While in Colombia, the senior military officers went to great pains to explain that Ingrid Betancourt’s rescue had been an entirely Colombian operation, the US authorities were saying that “it was the result of years of intense military cooperation of the Colombian and United States’ armies.”

“’The truth is that we have been able to get along as we seldom have in the United States, except with our oldest allies, mostly in NATO,” said Brownfield, referring to his country’s relationships with the Colombian security forces, which have received over $4 billion US dollars in military assistance since the year 2000.”

“…on various occasions it became necessary for the US Administration to make decisions at the top levels concerning this operation.

“The US spy satellites helped in locating the hostages during a month period starting on May 31^st until the rescue action on Wednesday.”

“The Colombians installed video surveillance equipment, supplied by the United States. Operated by remote control, these can take close-ups and pan along the rivers which are the only transportation routes through thick forests, said the Colombian and US authorities.”

“US surveillance aircraft intercepted the rebels’ radio and satellite phone talks and used imaging equipment that can break through the forest foliage.”

“’The defector will receive a considerable sum of the close to one- hundred-million-dollars reward offered by the government,’ stated the Commander General of the Colombian Army.”

On Wednesday, July 1^st, the London BBC reported that Cesar Mauricio Velasquez, press secretary at Casa de Nariño (Colombian Government House) had said that delegates from France and Switzerland had met with Alfonso Cano, chief of the FARC.

According to the BBC, that would be the first contact with international delegates accepted by the new chief after the death of Manuel Marulanda. The false information of the meeting of two European envoys with Cano had been released in Bogota.

The deceased leader of the FARC was born on May 12, 1932, according to his father’s recollection. Marulanda, a poor peasant with a liberal thinking and a follower of Gaitan, had started his armed resistance 60 years ago. He was a guerrilla before us; he had reacted to the carnage of peasants carried out by the oligarchy.

The Communist Party he later joined, the same as every other in Latin America, was under the influence of the Communist Party of the USSR and not of Cuba. They were in solidarity with our Revolution but they were not subordinate to it.

It was the drug-traffickers and not the FARC that unleashed terror in that sister nation as part of their feuds over the United States market. They caused powerful bomb blasts and even blew up trucks loaded with plastic explosives, destroying facilities and injuring or killing countless people.

The Colombian Communist Party never contemplated the idea of conquering power through armed struggle. The guerrilla was a resistance front and not a basic instrument for taking revolutionary power, as had been the case in Cuba. In 1993, at the 8^th FARC Conference, they decided to break ranks with the Communist Party. Its leader, Manuel Marulanda, took over the leadership of that Party’s guerrillas who had always excelled in their narrow sectarianism when admitting combatants as well as in their strong and compartmentalized methods of command.

Marulanda, a man with remarkable natural talent and a leader’s gift, did not have the opportunity to study when he was young. It is said that he had only completed the 5^th grade of grammar school. He conceived a long and extended struggle; I disagreed with this point of view. But, I never had the chance to talk with him.

The FARC became quite strong, with over 10 thousand combatants. Many had been born during the war and had known nothing else. Other leftist organizations rivaled the FARC in the struggle. By then the Colombian territory had become the largest source of cocaine production in the world. Then, extreme violence, kidnappings, taxes and demands from the drug producers became widespread.

The paramilitary forces, armed by the oligarchy, basically drew from the great amount of men enlisted in the country’s armed forces who were discharged from duty every year without a secure job. This created a very complex situation in Colombia, with only one way out: real peace, albeit remote and difficult as many other goals humanity has set itself. This is the option that, for three decades, Cuba has advocated for that nation.

While our journalists meeting in their 8^th Congress debated on the new information technologies, the principles and ethics of social communicators, I meditated on the above-mentioned developments.

I have expressed, very clearly, our position in favor of peace in Colombia; but, we are neither in favor of foreign military intervention nor of the policy of force that the United States intends to impose at all costs on that long-suffering and industrious people.

I have honestly and strongly criticized the objectively cruel methods of kidnapping and retaining prisoners under the conditions of the jungle. But I am not suggesting that anyone lay down their arms, when everyone who did so in the last 50 years did not survive to see peace. If I dared suggest anything to the FARC guerrillas that would simply be that they declare, by any means possible to the International Red Cross, their willingness to release the hostages and prisoners they are still holding, without any precondition. I do not intend to be heard; it is simply my duty to say what I think. Anything else would only serve to reward disloyalty and treason.

I will never support the pax romana that the empire tries to impose on Latin America.

Fidel Castro Ruz
July 5, 2008
8:12 p.m.

SIMON ROMERO

Published: May 26, 2008

CARACAS, Venezuela — Manuel Marulanda, the guerrilla tactician whose rise from peasant origins to top commander of Latin America’s largest rebel group was a mythical feature of Colombia’s long internal war, died on March 26 in a mountainous hideout in the Meta department in central Colombia. He was believed to be 76 years old.

Skip to next paragraph

José Miguel Gomez/Reuters

Manuel Marulanda, who helped turn a Colombian insurgent group into an elaborate cocaine trafficking apparatus, in 2000.

The cause was a heart attack, said Timoleón Jiménez, a commander of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, who confirmed Mr. Marulanda’s death in a video broadcast on Sunday by the Venezuelan television network Telesur. The Colombian military had announced the death on Saturday, citing intelligence sources.

To the end, Mr. Marulanda remained an enigma in Colombia, with his death kept secret for two months by the FARC. He evaded capture and death from the time he formed a rudimentary guerrilla force as a teenager in the coffee-growing hills of western Colombia in the late 1940s.

Mr. Marulanda got his first taste of warfare during the years of La Violencia, or The Violence, from 1948 to 1958, which served as the basis for the decades of armed struggle that followed. The civil war between two political factions, Conservatives and Liberals, took more than 200,000 lives.

When that killing spree subsided, Mr. Marulanda settled in Marquetalia, a farming enclave of several dozen families in the Andes Mountains south of Bogotá. But this period of relative idyll ended when Colombian forces attacked Marquetalia in 1964. That same year Mr. Marulanda helped turn Liberal fighters who had remained under his control into the FARC.

The FARC ultimately evolved into Latin America’s most feared insurgency, boasting about 15,000 fighters at its height in the late 1990s. Its roots lay to some degree in the personal experiences of Mr. Marulanda, who was born Pedro Antonio Marín in Génova, a town surrounded by coffee groves.

The year of his birth was 1928 or 1930 or 1932; Mr. Marulanda acknowledged to Arturo Alape, his biographer, that he did not know his precise age. He grew up in Génova listening to tales from his grandfather of the Thousand Days War, an epic conflict at the dawn of the 20th century that is featured in “One Hundred Years of Solitude,” the novel by Gabriel García Márquez.

As a child, Mr. Marulanda sold sweets on the street and worked in a bakery, but he left home as a teenager to try his luck as a woodcutter. The lure of guerrilla warfare intervened. By 1951, he had adopted the nom de guerre Manuel Marulanda Vélez, in honor of a slain union leader.

His marksmanship also earned him the nickname Tirofijo, or Sureshot. Considered a brutal pragmatist, Mr. Marulanda vied for power within the FARC with urban intellectuals and labor leaders. By the 1990s he was the group’s supreme leader, after the death of Jacobo Arenas, who hewed to Marxist ideology.

While the FARC remained Marxist in name, it evolved into something unrecognizable in the annals of Latin America’s guerrilla movements. It was haunted by the killing — reportedly by right-wing paramilitary groups — of about 4,000 members of Patriotic Union, a movement created by the FARC and the Communist Party in the 1980s to enable former guerrillas to enter political life.

Under Mr. Marulanda, the FARC’s paranoia and military acumen coalesced in the creation of an elaborate cocaine trafficking apparatus. Geography helped, offering Mr. Marulanda jungle hideaways in swaths of Colombia where the government has little presence. The country is about the size of California and Texas combined.

The rebels also honed the practice of abducting people for ransom. Their bombs killed innocents in the heart of Bogotá. Their land mines still cripple dozens of children each year. Today the FARC is one of the most despised groups in Colombia: opinion polls show just 1 percent of Colombians hold a favorable view of the rebels.

“The 20th century will leave warriors to history, and the 21st century will leave in history those who took Colombia out of war,” said Gustavo Petro, a former guerrilla who is now a senator in Colombia. “Marulanda did not understand this change.”

Indeed, toward the end of his life, Mr. Marulanda had a public standing not much better than the FARC’s.

He rarely emerged from his hideouts. When he did, as in a zone set aside for peace talks early in this decade, Colombians scrutinized his photos in an effort to catch some glimpse into the character of the man who seemed content to live at war for six decades.

What they saw was a stocky man with a machete strapped to his waist. He had bags under his eyes and squinted into the sunlight. But there was a hint of revelry, too. For visitors, he would pour glasses of Chivas Regal whiskey. Then he would prefer to listen than talk.

“Marulanda smiled when talking about his chicken pen,” said Carlos Lozano, who met the rebel leader numerous times as editor of Voz, a Communist newspaper in Bogotá. “The FARC’s objective is overthrowing the government, but I don’t know if Marulanda contemplated life in a government palace.”

Mr. Marulanda was reported to have had more than four children, but it was not possible to determine his survivors, other than an unknown female companion at the mountain encampment where he died. Mr. Jiménez, the FARC commander, said he died in her arms, surrounded by his personal guard, after what Mr. Jiménez called a brief illness.

New York Times

Time has come. On May 25th, Manuel Marulanda, legendary founder of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), was confirmed dead by members of his movement. For the Colombian government, this is a historical opportunity that should not be underrated.

Having spent more than forty years at the head of this Marxist guerillas quickly converted to drug trafficking and hostage taking, Manuel Marulanda, alias “Tirofijo” (“Sureshot”), was the movement’s spinal column. With his death, the movement loses both its historical legitimization and its main unifying force.

And Marulanda’s death could not have happened at a better time. In the past months, the FARC suffered many setbacks. On March 1st, Raul Reyes, spokesman of the organization was killed in Ecuador by the Colombian army. Only a week later, Ivan Rios, another FARC commander, was assassinated by one of his personal guards. And more recently, on May 18th, Karina, a colorful FARC leader, surrendered. Marulanda’s passing might not sound the guerilla’s death knell, but it creates a unique opportunity for the Colombian government to pressure an already diminished organization into negotiation.

Over the years, the FARC’s popularity has indeed plummeted. The numbers speak for themselves: while the rebel army enjoyed almost 20 000 inductees in the 1990s, its troops now barely reach 9 000 people.

Of course, this should not prevent the Colombian government from showing its willing to find a negotiated solution to the conflict. It might be true that “(the government) (is) in the process of winning the war”, as the Colombian minister of defense maintained on Sunday, but time has come for the Colombian officials to be more humble, and to play low profile, for such an opportunity might never turn up again. Alvaro Uribe must let aside his traditional hard-line rhetoric, and adopt a tone that will be conducive to genuine dialog with the rebels. The lives of the guerillas’ 700 or so hostages are at stake. More so, the national unity and democratic stability of a country gangrenous with ever-present violence is at stake.

The arrival at the head of the FARC of the moderate Alfonso Cana will sure help. He indeed played a crucial role in the piece negotiations held in 1991 in Caracas, Venezuela, and in 1992 in Tlaxcala, Mexico. But to get the rebels to lay down their arms and to release their hostages will take more than just good will.

Sermonizers will shout that the president shouldn’t change his political stance after six years of fierce fighting against a guerilla that is now regarded as a terrorist group. They have a point. But the FARC are so weakened that they will have to listen to Colombia’s rules. Such a chance might be a once in a lifetime opportunity for the country. Renounce to it on the ground of moral principles would be a shame.

Mr. Uribe already declared that he was open to using a $100 million fund to compensate the guerilleros who would demobilize and set free hostages. He further promised them the exile in France. Good for him. But that might not be enough. Further proposals are needed, and Uribe shouldn’t be embarrassed to finally favor national reconciliation over pride.

(IAR Noticias) 28-Mayo-08

Antonio Marín Marín, más conocido como Manuel Marulanda Vélez y “Tirofijo”, era el líder máximo de las Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC). Fue, sin duda alguna, el campesino revolucionario más grande de la historia del continente americano.

Por James Petras

Traducido para Cubadebate, Rebelión y Tlaxcala por Manuel Talens.

Durante sesenta años organizó movimientos campesinos y comunidades rurales y, cuando todas las vías democráticas legales se le cerraron de forma brutal, creó el ejército guerrillero más poderoso de América Latina y las milicias clandestinas que lo sustentaban. En su época de mayor apogeo, entre 1999 y 2005, las FARC contaban con casi 20.000 combatientes, varios cientos de miles de campesinos activistas y cientos de unidades de milicias comunales y urbanas. Incluso hoy, a pesar del desplazamiento forzoso de tres millones de campesinos como resultado de las políticas de tierra quemada y las masacres del gobierno, las FARC tienen entre 10.000 y 15.000 guerrilleros en sus numerosos frentes distribuidos por todo el país.

Lo que hace tan importantes los logros de Marulanda son sus habilidades organizativas, su agudeza estratégica y sus intransigentes posiciones programáticas, basadas en el apoyo a las exigencias populares. Más que cualquier otro líder guerrillero, Marulanda, tenía una compenetración sin par con los pobres de las zonas campesinas, los sin tierra, los cultivadores indigentes y los refugiados rurales durante tres generaciones.

Tras empezar en 1964 con dos docenas de campesinos que habían huido de pueblos devastados por una ofensiva militar dirigida por USA, Marulanda construyó metódicamente un ejército guerrillero revolucionario sin contribuciones económicas o materiales extranjeras. Más que cualquier otro líder guerrillero, Marulanda fue un gran maestro político rural. Las extraordinarias dotes organizativas de Marulanda se fueron refinando a través de su íntima vinculación con el campesinado. Como había crecido en una familia de campesinos pobres, vivió entre ellos cultivando y organizándolos: hablaba su mismo lenguaje, se ocupaba de sus necesidades diarias más básicas y de sus esperanzas de futuro. De manera conceptual, pero también a través de la experiencia cotidiana, Marulanda realizó una serie de operaciones políticas y militares estratégicas basadas en su brillante conocimiento del terreno geográfico y humano. Desde 1964 hasta su muerte, Marulanda derrotó o eludió al menos siete importantes ofensivas militares financiadas con más de siete mil millones de dólares de ayuda militar usamericana, que incluía miles de “boinas verdes”, cuerpos especiales, mercenarios, más de 250.000 militares colombianos y 35.000 paramilitares integrados en escuadrones de la muerte.

A diferencia de Cuba o Nicarangua, Marulanda construyó una base masiva organizada y entrenó una dirigencia en gran parte rural; declaró abiertamente su programa socialista y nunca recibió apoyo político o material de los denominados “capitalistas progresistas”. A diferencia de los corruptos y codiciosos gánsteres de Batista y Somoza, que saqueaban y se retiraban bajo presión, el ejército de Colombia era un formidable aparato represor, altamente entrenado y disciplinado, reforzado además por homicidas escuadrones de la muerte. A diferencia de otros muchos famosos guerrilleros “de afiche”, Marulanda fue un auténtico desconocido entre los elegantes editores izquierdistas de Londres, los nostálgicos sesentaiochistas parisinos y los socialistas eruditos de Nueva York. Marulanda pasó su tiempo exclusivamente en la “Colombia profunda”; prefería conversar y enseñar a los campesinos y enterarse de sus quejas a conceder entrevistas a periodistas occidentales ávidos de aventura. En lugar de escribir manifiestos grandilocuentes y adoptar poses fotogénicas prefería la pedagogía popular de los desheredados, estable y poco romántica pero sumamente eficaz. Marulanda viajó desde valles prácticamente inaccesibles a cordilleras, desde selvas a llanuras, siempre organizando, luchando… reclutando y entrenando a nuevos líderes. Evitó presentarse en los “foros de debate del mundo” o seguir la ruta de los turistas izquierdistas internacionales. Nunca visitó una capital extranjera y cuentan que jamás puso los pies en Bogotá, la capital de la nación. Pero tenía un amplio y profundo conocimiento de las exigencias de los afrocolombianos costeños; de los indiocolombianos de las montañas y la selva; de las ansias de tierra de millones de campesinos desplazados; de los nombres y direcciones de los terratenientes maltratadores que brutalizaban y violaban a los campesinos y a sus familiares.

Durante las décadas de los sesenta, los setenta y los ochenta, numerosos movimientos guerrilleros se levantaron en armas, lucharon con mayor o menor capacidad y, luego, desaparecieron asesinados, derrotados (algunos incluso se convirtieron en colaboradores) o se integraron en los partos y repartos electorales. Poco numerosos, luchaban en nombre de inexistentes “ejércitos populares”; la mayoría eran intelectuales, más familiarizados con los discursos europeos que con la microhistoria, la cultura popular y las leyendas de los pueblos a los que trataban de organizar. Fueron aislados, rodeados y arrasados; dejaron quizá una herencia bien publicitada de sacrificio ejemplar, pero no cambiaron nada sobre el terreno.

Por el contrario, Marulanda encajó los mejores golpes de los presidentes contrainsurgentes de Washington y Bogotá y se los devolvió al cien por cien. Por cada pueblo arrasado, Marulanda reclutó a docenas de campesinos luchadores, enfurecidos y desamparados, y los entrenó con suma paciencia para que fuesen cuadros y comandantes. Más que cualquier ejército guerrillero, las FARC llegaron a ser un ejército de todo el pueblo: un tercio de los comandantes eran mujeres, más del setenta por ciento eran campesinos, si bien se les asociaron intelectuales y profesionales, que fueron entrenados por cuadros del movimiento. Marulanda fue un hombre venerado por su estilo de vida excepcionalmente sencillo: compartió la lluvia torrencial bajo cubiertas de plástico. Millones de campesinos lo respetaban profundamente, pero nunca practicó el culto a la personalidad: era demasiado irreverente y modesto, prefería delegar las tareas importantes a una dirigencia colectiva, con mucha autonomía regional y flexibilidad táctica. Aceptó un amplio abanico de opiniones sobre tácticas, incluso si discrepaba profundamente de ellas. A principios de los ochenta, muchos cuadros y líderes decidieron probar la vía electoral, firmaron un “acuerdo de paz” con el presidente colombiano, crearon un partido –la Unión Patriótica– e hicieron elegir a numerosos alcaldes y diputados. Incluso obtuvieron cuantiosos votos en las elecciones presidenciales. Marulanda no se opuso públicamente al acuerdo, pero no abandonó las armas ni “bajó desde las montañas a la ciudad”.

Mucho más lúcido que los profesionales y los sindicalistas que se postulaban en las elecciones, Marulanda comprendía al carácter extremadamente autoritario y brutal de la oligarquía y sus políticos. Sabía que los gobernantes de Colombia no aceptarían nunca una reforma agraria justa sólo porque unos “pocos campesinos analfabetos los derrotasen en las urnas”. En 1987, más de 5.000 miembros de la Unión Patriótica habían sido asesinados por los escuadrones de la muerte de la oligarquía, entre ellos tres candidatos a la presidencia, una docena de congresistas y mujeres y alcaldes y concejales. Los supervivientes huyeron a la selva y se reincorporaron a la lucha armada o se marcharon al exilio.

Marulanda era un maestro a la hora de romper los cercos y evitar las campañas de aniquilación, sobre todo las que diseñaron los mejores y más brillantes estrategas del centro de contrainsurgencia de los Cuerpos Especiales del US Fort Bragg y de la Escuela de las Américas. A finales de los noventa, las FARC habían ampliado su control a más de la mitad del país y bloqueaban autopistas y atacaban bases militares situadas a sólo 65 kilómetros de la capital. Muy debilitado, el entonces presidente Pastrana terminó por aceptar negociaciones serias de paz, en las que las FARC exigieron una zona desmilitarizada y un programa que incluía cambios estructurales básicos en el Estado, la economía y la sociedad.

A diferencia de las guerrillas centroamericanas, que cambiaron las armas por cargos electorales, antes de deponer las suyas Marulanda insistió en la redistribución de la tierra, en el desmantelamiento de los escuadrones de la muerte y en la destitución de los generales colombianos implicados en las masacres, en una economía mixta basada en buena medida en la nacionalización de los sectores económicos estratégicos y en la financiación a gran escala de los campesinos para el desarrollo de cosechas alternativas a la coca.

En Washington, el presidente Clinton asistía histérico a aquel espectáculo y se opuso a las negociaciones de paz, en especial al programa de reformas, así como a los debates públicos abiertos y a los foros de debate organizados por las FARC en la zona desmilitarizada, a los que asistía numerosa la sociedad civil colombiana. La aceptación por parte de Marulanda del debate democrático, la desmilitarización y los cambios estructurales desenmascara la mentira de los socialdemócratas occidentales y latinoamericanos y de los universitarios de centroizquierda, que lo acusaron de “militarista”. Washington trató de repetir el proceso de paz centroamericano engatusando a los jefes de FARC con la promesa de cargos electorales y privilegios a cambio de que vendiesen a los campesinos y a los colombianos pobres. Al mismo tiempo Clinton, con el apoyo de los dos partidos del Congreso, hizo aprobar un proyecto de ley de apropiación de dos mil millones de dólares para financiar el mayor y más sangriento programa de contrainsurgencia desde la guerra de Indochina, denominado “Plan Colombia”. El presidente Pastrana dio por terminado de forma abrupta el proceso de paz y envió soldados a la zona desmilitarizada para que capturasen a la cúpula de las FARC, pero cuando éstos llegaron, Marulanda y sus compañeros ya se habían ido de allí.

Desde el 2002 hasta ahora, las FARC han alternado los ataques ofensivos y las retiradas defensivas, en especial desde finales de 2006. Con una financiación sin precedentes y un apoyo tecnológico ultramoderno de USA, el nuevo presidente Álvaro Uribe –socio de narcotraficantes y organizador de escuadrones de la muerte– adoptó una política de tierra quemada para ensañarse con el campo colombiano. Entre su elección en 2002 y su reelección en 2006, más de 15.000 campesinos, sindicalistas, trabajadores de derechos humanos, periodistas y otros críticos fueron asesinados. Regiones enteras del campo fueron vaciadas: de la misma manera que en la Operación Phoenix usamericana en Vietnam, se contaminó la tierra de cultivo con herbicidas tóxicos. Más de 250.000 soldados y sus compinches paramilitares de los escuadrones de la muerte diezmaron amplias zonas del campo colombiano controladas por las FARC. Helicópteros proporcionados por Washington bombardearon la selva en misiones de búsqueda y destrucción (que no tenían nada que ver con la producción de coca o con el envío de cocaína a USA). Al destruir toda la oposición popular y las organizaciones campesinas y al desplazar a millones de colombianos, Uribe logró empujar a las FARC hacia regiones más remotas. Al igual que había hecho en el pasado, Marulanda asumió una estrategia de retirada táctica defensiva, abandonando territorio para proteger la capacidad de lucha de los guerrilleros en el futuro.

A diferencia de otros movimientos guerrilleros, las FARC no recibieron ningún apoyo material del exterior: Fidel Castro repudió públicamente la lucha armada y buscó lazos diplomáticos y comerciales con gobiernos de centroizquierda e incluso mejores relaciones con el brutal Uribe. Después de 2001, la Casa Blanca de Bush etiquetó a las FARC de “organización terrorista”, presionando a Ecuador y Venezuela para que restringiesen los movimientos fronterizos de las FARC en busca de abastecimientos. El “centroderecha” de Colombia se dividió entre los que prestaban un “apoyo crítico” a la guerra total de Uribe contra las FARC y los que protestaban infructuosamente contra la represión.

Es difícil imaginar que un movimiento guerrillero pueda sobrevivir frente a una financiación tan masiva de la contrainsurgencia, un cuarto de millón de soldados armados por el imperio, millones de desplazados de sus tierras y un presidente psicópata vinculado directamente con una cadena de 35.000 miembros de escuadrones de la muerte. Sin embargo, sereno y resuelto, Marulanda dirigió la retirada táctica; la idea de negociar una capitulación nunca se le pasó por la mente, ni a él ni a la cúpula de las FARC.

Las FARC no tienen frontera contigua con un país que lo apoye, como Vietnam la tenía con China; tampoco goza, como Vietnam, del suministro de armas de la URSS ni del apoyo masivo internacional de los grupos occidentales de solidaridad, como los sadinistas. Vivimos en una época en la que apoyar a los movimientos campesinos de liberación nacional no está “de moda”; en la que reconocer que el genio de líderes campesinos revolucionarios que construyen y mantienen la auténtica masa de los ejércitos populares es tabú en los pretenciosos, locuaces e impotentes Foros Sociales Mundiales, cuyo “mundo” excluye regularmente a los campesinos militantes y para los que “social” significa el constante intercambio de mensajes electrónicos entre fundaciones financiadas por ONG.

Es en este ambiente tan poco prometedor frente a las pírricas victorias de los presidentes de USA y Colombia donde podemos apreciar el genio político y la integridad personal de Manuel Marulanda, el más grande campesino revolucionario de América Latina. Su muerte no generará afiches o camisetas para estudiantes universitarios de clase media, pero vivirá eternamente en los corazones y las mentes de millones de campesinos de Colombia. Se le recordará siempre como “Tirofijo”, un ser de leyenda al que mataron una docena de veces y, a pesar de ello, regresó a los pueblos para compartir con los campesinos sus vidas sencillas. Tirofijo fue el único líder que era realmente “uno de ellos”, que durante medio siglo se enfrentó al aparato militar y mercenario yanqui y nunca fue capturado o derrotado.

Los desafió a todos en sus mansiones, sus palacios presidenciales, sus bases militares, sus cámaras de tortura y sus burguesas salas de redacción. Murió de muerte natural, después de sesenta años de lucha, en los brazos de sus queridos compañeros campesinos.

¡Tirofijo, presente!