Guerrillas In Colombia
... all, terrorism. Two brothers, Fidel and Carlos Castaño, whose father had been kidnapped and killed by the FARC, formed another paramilitary force called the Peasant Self-Defense Groups of Córdoba and Urabá (ACCU). However, after Fidel Castaño disappeared in 1994, Carlos Castaño decided to expand his paramilitary operations from the regional to the national level and, in 1997, the group came to be known as the United Self-Defense Units of Colombia (AUC). This group is actually supported by the government and this, in turn, is supported by the United States (U.S.) with money and military advisors (Molano). Civil disobedience is when someone violates a law with the intention to force change in a law. This includes the use of passive resistance or other nonviolent ways. Civil disobedience never goes as far as to kill anyone. Some examples include strikes, threats, and hijackings. One example is that the FARC sent the government officials death threats stating that they would be killed if they did not resign. Government officials in Bogotá have talked to the mayors and have tried to convince them to ignore the threats but have been unsuccessful because of previous incidents in which officials have not been able to protect other political figures. Also, the ELN and AUC threatened that, if any of these figures did resign, then these guerrilla groups would be forced to take the politicians’ lives because the politicians would officially be considered a target (Leech "FARC Targets Local Officials"). Unfortunately, these guerrilla groups have gone on to cause further damage, now taking it from being just civil disobedience to more serious, actual acts of activism. Field research was performed in which 16 college students were surveyed, and it was obvious, from the results, that they agreed with the essay’s point of view. They all pretty much answered in the same way when it came down to what they believe civil disobedience is and some examples of it. For example, when asked if they agreed that “civil disobedience is the refusal to obey laws through the use of passive resistance,” almost all agreed that this was true. Two interviews were also done, and in both, the interviewees agreed, for the most part, with the paper’s point of view, which is that civil disobedience is understandable because no harm is ever done. As long as they don’t actually cause any harm in any way, it was agreed that this is, for the most part, an acceptable way of protesting and speaking your mind. What is unacceptable, however, is when the acts civil disobedience cross the line over into what is known as activism. According to an article in the news magazine NACLA Report on The Americas, reporter Carlos Lauria states that: “The climate of fear has made accurate news coverage a growing casualty of the conflict. Under constant threat from rebels or paramilitaries and fearing for their lives, journalists are oftentimes forced to present a particular side of the conflict, showing the respective armed group in a favorable light. In other instances, journalists are prevented from covering the war at all because of threats and harassment.” This statement definitely agrees with the definition that was used to describe civil disobedience. Some examples of civil disobedience, according to this paper, include threats and harassment. Paramilitaries are constantly threatening the lives of everyone in the country including journalists and political figures, as well as the people themselves. Activism, unlike civil disobedience, is not passive and instead includes the use of force but does not, however, include death. Activism is the use of direct and often militant action to achieve a political goal. This is usually used in acts of defense and can sometimes be somewhat violent. Some examples include car bombs and kidnappings. For example, to show that they were serious, the guerrilla groups reminded officials of the sixteen mayors that had been kidnapped (Leech "FARC Targets Local Officials"). The guerrillas wanted to let the officials know that they had done committed horrible acts before and would continue with these acts unless the guerrilla groups got what they wanted. However, if the guerrillas did not get their way, they threatened that they would be forced to take part in much worse acts, escalating this situation from activism to terrorism. The results that were obtained from the survey showed that the people who were surveyed pretty much all agreed with the main idea of the essay. According to one statement on the survey, they were asked whether or not they agreed that “protesting, in the form of strikes and/or petitions, was believed to be activism” and the answers were all pretty much the same in saying that it was activism. The two interviewees agreed with the paper’s point of view on the definition and examples of activism. Activism, according to this essay, is not an acceptable form of disobedience and the interviewees answered in this same way. In activism, it was agreed that things are taken a little too far sometimes in that they use force and cause harm. “A dramatic raid in which Marxist rebels burst into a regional parliament building and abducted 12 politicians has confirmed what many Colombians had long feared. After nearly 40 years of violence, the country’s largest guerrilla group has brought its war to the cities... If the FARC [Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia] were losing strength, they would be hiding out in the mountains, not driving through city centers. They’re showing us what they can do.” This is a statement that was written by Martin Hodgson, a reporter for the newspaper The Christian Science Monitor. This statement agrees with the point of the paper because some examples of activism include acts such as kidnappings as well as hijackings. Guerrilla groups are very well known for taking part in acts such as kidnappings. They do this very often and usually for reasons such as extortion, to collect ransom, and to get their point across or to simply get their way in a specific situation. One example of them trying to get their way is shown in this following passage, written by Garry Leech, a reporter for Colombia Journal Online. It states that: “On June 21, some 97 mayors and town councilors from the eastern department of Arauca collectively resigned after receiving death threats from the FARC. This mass resignation followed on the heels of 23 mayors from the department of Antioquia stepping down due to similar threats. The FARC launched this latest campaign of intimidation against local officials several weeks ago when they threatened officials in the southern departments of Caquetá, Cauca, Huila, and Putumayo who had supported President-elect Alvaro Uribe in last month's election. As a result, more than 30 mayors resigned with many of them fleeing the region.” Although this is an unacceptable form of expressing a certain point, it gets much worse if it escalates into acts of terrorism because terrorism actually includes death. Terrorism, although it also uses force, is different from activism in that it is always very violent and always results in destruction and/or death. Terrorism is the use of terror or violence against governments or individuals with the goal of intimidating that government. Some examples include bombings and assassinations. One example is the fourteen mayors that have been killed by these guerrilla groups just to make their point clear. The officials are unsure and terrified of what to do because no matter what they choose, they are still at risk of getting killed. Due to these threats and acts of terrorism, many officials have been forced to resign and go into exile. President Alvaro Uribe’s interior and justice minister, Fernando Londono, announced that “the new administration would seek a constitutional amendment to allow for the declaration of a state of emergency,” according to the article written by Garry Leech in Colombia Journal Online. He went on to say that all necessary rights and freedoms would now be restricted in order to try to fix this situation (Leech "FARC Targets Local Officials"). When it came to terrorism, the surveys showed that terrorism is usually defined, to most, as resulting in destruction and death. For the most part, the people who were surveyed agreed on how to define terrorism as well as the examples of terrorism. It’s obvious, from their answers to the questions, that terrorism is always very destructive. Another statement in which the people being surveyed agreed was true was the one that stated that “mass destructions and assassinations can be considered as terrorism.” In both interviews, it was apparent that both interviewees didn’t agree with terrorism. They agreed that terrorism is very unacceptable, which was the main point of the essay. It was obvious, according to the interviewees’ answers, that once it’s gotten to the point of terrorism, it’s gone too far. Terrorism includes death and destruction and it was agreed that the guerrilla groups should be stopped because the acts of terrorism that are occurring more and more frequently are beginning to get out of hand. The article that appears in the news magazine Latin America Update states that: “The impact of right-wing death squads on Colombia’s deteriorating...