ROBERTO GIUSTI
EL UNIVERSAL

Belisario Betancur turned national reconciliation into one of the fundamental issues of his electoral campaign and once in power, he reached agreements with Colombian Revolutionary Armed Forces (FARC), M19, and other subversive groups and, at the same time, he enacted an amnesty law and had a National Rehabilitation Plan approved. The opposition of political, economic, and military sectors, as well as the occupation of the Justice Palace by M19, tarnished an effort that might have been the closest to reaching peace in Colombia.

Now, in an office of the Chamber of Commerce in Maracaibo, Betancur confessed to being a militant of "the extreme left of the extreme right; that is, the extreme center," and for the first time he speaks about Chávez's mediation in the Colombian conflict.

Is a Venezuelan president capable of settling a conflict that Colombians has not been able to solve in 50 years?

The golden rule in these cases is that conflicts be settled by the nationals of the respective country, but today we live in a globalized globe, and this is not a pleonasm, but a deliberate reiteration. I was appointed by the UN to chair the Commission of Truth, which was responsible for judging the atrocious crimes committed in the conflict in El Salvador, which lasted 12 years. The Commission had three members: the Venezuelan Reinaldo Figueredo, the German-American Professor Thomas Burghental, and I, who chaired the commission. The UN granted us an authority that had been agreed upon in peace treaties between the guerrilla and the Government. Our decisions were binding for both parties: the Government and the guerrilla of the Frente Farabundo Martí. During a year and a half we were visiting El Salvador every 20 days; then we submitted a report where both the Army and the guerrillas were individually condemned. At the end, risks were involved for us all and we had to move to the UN Headquarters, in Manhattan, because we were going to be killed. This is the reason why it is illusory to remain self-sufficiently within the borders of a single country.

What can you tell me about the mediation of President Chávez?

I am just getting to that. This was the preamble. Do not think that I am avoiding the question: the Colombian conflict has lasted more than 50 years and it has multiple facets, sometimes contradictory, which together constitute a reality before which Colombian leaders, including myself, have failed. Some of the agreements I signed with FARC and M19 lead to the suspension of hostilities; other failed due to mistakes made by the guerrilla and us. That is why, at this moment, any outside efforts seeking a solution for the conflict is welcomed.

Even if they come from a figure like Chávez?

Even if they come from a figure like Chávez.

Or may be thanks to that; to his ties with FARC.

With all the implicit controversy and relations of understanding, and I am not using the word ties, that can exist between President Chávez and FARC. If thanks to Chávez's mediation, progress is made towards achieving peace; if his efforts are focused not only on humanitarian exchange and releasing Ingrid Betancourt, whom I admired very much, but progress is made in the peace process, then welcomed be President Chávez's mediation! This in spite of all contradictions involved in this intervention about which there are many doubts and conflicting positions in Colombia.

Which?

Those derived from a figure with the visibility of President Chávez in Latin America, who is said to have sympathy for FARC. But, I repeat, if creative outcomes are obtained from that polemic mediation, well that is excellent.

Is not that sympathy the most powerful argument to justify mediation?

That effort has to be carried out within the framework established by talks with President Uribe, and that framework is that of the Colombian Constitution and Laws, not the Constitution and Laws of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. I only know what has been reported by the media. I know, because I've heard it from President Uribe and High Commissioner, Luis Carlos Restrepo, that President Chávez's mediation is circumscribed in its action and maneuver space by Colombian legal framework.

Don't you think that there already exists an agreement between FARC and Chávez on the materialization of the humanitarian exchange, which would be announced a few days before the next referendum in Venezuela?

President Uribe, whom I do not represent (I've been out of the political arena from many years now), has been cautious and prudent. In President Chávez's last visit to Colombia, President Uribe received him in Hato Grande, the presidential country house, without the paraphernalia that would imply receiving him in the Nariño Palace. President Uribe acted cautiously on that occasion. Now, an effort like this would give more visibility to President Chávez if he is successful. If he is not, it will not be so.

He can be successful in the humanitarian exchange, but not in achieving peace.

We Colombians are very hopeful about the success of President Chávez's mediation and not only concerning the humanitarian exchange, but also with regard to the essence of a conflict surrounded by great expectations. I would say that a majority of Colombians are tired of the conflict, including FARC. And we all are with our arms stretching out, like crazy blades as Pablo Neruda would say, scanning the horizon and looking for any effort, regardless of the many contradictions it may have, as the media have pointed out.

So, is Chávez Colombians' hope?

Many Colombians are pinning their hopes on him and on the good offices of Senator Piedad Córdoba, who has been always very conflictive for President Uribe's government. So, when he entrusted Piedad Córdoba with the task of intermediation, a large part of the country was in perplexity; but when she started her work, perplexity began to turn into admiration, because her steps have been marked by prudence.

Can you imagine Tirofijo as a presidential candidate and Mono Jojoy campaigning for a seat in the Department of Caquetá?

The Frente Farabundo Martí is about to win election in El Salvador. Daniel Ortega came to power through violence, lost it through a civilian movement and regained it through votes. A guerrilla can become a statesperson. Please, I do not want to mention names but, in abstract, a guerrilla can become a statesperson. Why not?

Do you think that the Colombian government is a hindrance to Chávez's aim of recreating the Gran Colombia as a block against the US?

Those times when leftists threw stones to the US embassy are gone. This kind of revolutionaries is obsolete. Today's revolutionaries put their countries in motion through technology.

Where do those attitudes that you consider outdated lead?

I have read that President Chávez is planning to re-establish the Amphictyonic Congress that Simón Bolívar, the Liberator, convened in Panama in 1826, like Pericles, who joined together Greek amphictyonies in the Strait of Corinth. The Liberator drew inspiration from Pericles. I think President Chávez has the same dreams.

Translated by Alix Hernández