The re-election of Uribe; a real disaster" according to a Parisian committee? Not so sure!

Certainly the first reaction was one of disappointment among supporters of Ingrid Betancourt. The speculative (but idealistic) arrival to power of a candidate who might be prepared to negotiate with FARC would have certainly raised hopes of a quick resolution. During the four years of his first term in office, president Uribe had often been described as the main obstacle to talks demanded by FARC in efforts to negotiate an exchange of prisoners via a humanitarian agreement. Apart from Uribe, all other candidates in the presidential race had promised a more conciliatory approach towards FARC in this r regard. FARC had asked the electorate to vote for "anyone but Uribe". Along with Ingrid Betancourt's husband, some people think that as a result of this election Ingrid faces four more years of detention…

Perhaps this reasoning is a little simplistic?

Paradoxically the high vote given to Uribe supports him so that he will have free rein, when the time comes, to go into talks. And perhaps he will not have any choice: Despite his success he knows that he has been re-elected with the same promises that he made four years ago. This time he must deliver. And all are agreed that a military victory over FARC is highly improbable. The military operation led for more than three years by 35000 soldiers against FARC has caused the rebels to fall back and consolidate in the jungle, but not a single rebel leader has been captured. If he wants, as he promised to stop this civil war now renamed a "war against terrorism" he must, at some stage, agree to negotiate. And the question of the humanitarian agreement to exchange hostages for imprisoned rebels will have to be one of the first steps to be taken.

For their part, FARC have been doubly deserted by those who voted (the turnout accounts for less than 45% of the electorate…). They had asked the latter to vote for any candidates except Uribe but two thirds of the voters did not oblige. As well, FARC's revolutionary legitimacy is now in question as the Communist Party (which turned away from its military path to gain power) is now a member of the main party in, the Democratic Pole, that got a historic 22% of votes (on previous occasions, the left rarely got more than 10%).

It is clear: after 40 years of civil war, Colombians have had enough. They appreciate a strong President who had reduced official figures relating to violence and criminality. The middle classes in the cities know they are safer in Bogotá or Medellin than in the urban sprawls of Brazil or in the capital of Venezuela. But actually the situation is different.

The Colombian government controls the cities and their surrounding areas, but the situation has not changed in the rest of the country. FARC continues to control vast areas mainly in the south. Paramilitaries, although officially demobilised, still operate on the ground. The Colombian problem remains the same.

But the recent election will be remembered for the historical vote given to the left wing candidate, Carlos Gaviria. Nearly one in four voters voted for this former president of the High Court. A first for a country where the armed conflict prevented the emergence of a progressive left wing party. Ruled for more than forty years by two right wing parties, the liberals and the conservatives, Colombia woke up after the elections to see a right wing President and a left wing party in opposition. A revolution!

Although this new situation is hopeful, it must be followed with care from abroad. Because this new dimension brought about by the Alternative Democratic candidate (PDA) also caught the paramilitaries unawares. Four days before the election the anti- communist group of Free Colombia, the armed wing of the AUC paramilitary group emerged to remind voters about the essence of Colombian democracy: We will not accept any other result except victory for our presidential -candidate Alvaro Uribe, warned these recently demobilised paramilitaries, pointing out that if by chance the majority supported the PDA (who wear yellow shirts) they would change the colour of their shirts to another colour(…) red. Despite the success of their candidate, this threat is taken seriously: at the end of the 1980's, members of AUC killed more than 3000 left-wing militants from the Patriotic Union before they even had a chance to vote in elections.