the farc-government agreement on agriculture

7/28/2019 The FARC-Government Agreement on Agriculture

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-farc-government-agreement-on-agriculture 1/7

The Farc-Government agreement on agriculture: a win-win

By: Juanita León, Mon, 2013-05-27 02:32

Collaborator:

Andrés Bermúdez Liévano

Translatedfor La SillaVacíabyMatilda Villarraga

The FARC and the Colombian Government announced today in Havana, through a joint communiqué,

that they reached an agreement on the first point of the negotiating agenda. The following will be the

political participation of the FARC. Associated Press Photo

The first substantial agreement reached by the FARC and the Government on

agricultural issues sends a hopeful sign for the future of this peace negotiation. Not

only because it is the first to which both parties arrive throughout its history but

because it gives a specific idea of the nature of this process: to identify significant

social changes without affecting the established legal powers, which makes it more

viable.

Although the devil is in the details and up to now we don't know the minutiae of the

agreements reached in the matter of agriculture between the FARC and the

Government, according to what both parties explained, these are aimed at creating

the tools to solve the structural problems of the backwardness of the countryside

that have fuelled the war.

On the one hand, the State is committed to undertake "a vigorous program of

formalization of land", perhaps the most revolutionary point of the agreement given

the level of informality that rural property has.

A study by Ana María Ibáñez, the Dean of Economics of the Universidad de los

Andes and one of the major experts on land in Colombia, estimates that one-fifth of

all rural properties in the country have problems of qualification. "The informality inthe land of small farmers is 48 percent," said Ibáñez to La SillaVacía. "Of each two

small-scale farmers, only one has formal rights over their land."

This informality makes it impossible to have a real land market and significant

investments in the countryside. To put it simply, people just invest in a home when

it’s their own, never when it leased. Withoutveracity of titles, there is no incentive

to invest, andneither is there collateral to borrow money.



This situation of informality also facilitated the theft of land, another of the

positions that this peace agreement would reverse.

More than half - 55 percent – of the people dispossessed during the conflict had

access to land before being displaced, according to Ibáñez’ studies. Most were small

farmers whose plots were on average 13 hectares. Now, one of the major pitfallsfor their return reposes on the high level of land informality. According to Ibáñez,

only one in three displaced peasants have a formal title to their land.

"If we can only manage the formalization of land, it would be already a great

achievement," says Ibáñez. "This is fundamental for the land market to function".

Precisely because this measure would allow the existence of a land market in

Colombia, which moves forward, the great powers (at least the legal) will see this

reform with good eyes and they would not oppose it.

From the perspective of the FARC, the formalization of land attached to the laborformalization (where farmers are paid a minimum wage, have vacation, severance

pay, health insurance) is a vindication the peasants have been doing for decades

and it’s a first signal the guerrillas send that this negotiation will not be an

agreement between two elites but that some of the ideals which inspired 'Tirofijo'

more than 40 years ago will be finally appreciated by the peasants.

"It’s that there are six million Colombians on the countryside who do not even have

id, they do not exist. This formalization at all levels is one way of paying off a

historical debt with them," explained Ricardo Téllez, spokesperson of the FARC, to

La SillaVacía.

It’s easier agreed, than done.

This map, prepared by the economist Ana Maria Ibáñez, shows the percentage on land informality. In

orange and red appear the municipalities where at least 24 percent of the rural land is not formally

titled. Photo map

The World Bank has provided the resources to make these land registries in other

countries and will surely do it also in Colombia. Fiscally feasible, says Ibáñez.

Obviously, for this point to become reality will not be easy. The country lacks a true

rural cadaster. It does not have an updated inventory with maps showing who owns

each lot. Doing so will be one of the first stages of the implementation of this

agreement. And that demarcation will generate multiple agrarian conflicts.



Then again beyond money, what is also needed a strong rural institutional

framework, which we lack. The Instituto Geográfico Agustin Codazzi (IGAC) today is

a disaster, according to those who know this institute. The Office of Registration

and Public Instruments, the notaries and Incoder, three other key actors for this

agreement to become a reality, were infiltrated for years precisely because by

those who stole the land. And while in the past few years a debugging has beencarried out, at the regional level, the paras still have their people in key locations

and look for tricks to avoid that these lands go back to the farmers’ hands.

The head of the Government negotiating team, Humberto de la Calle, said that the agreement will

allow radically transforming the state of the Colombian countryside.Photo

In order to resolve conflicts arising from this formalization of lands, the agreement

between FARC and Government also provides for a new agrarian jurisdiction.

Already the law of victims created judges for the restitution of the land, but this

agreement would pass the solution of all conflicts that have arisen around the land

issue - which are now in the hands of civilian judges – to judges specialized in

agricultural issues.

This agreement, which seems rather bureaucratic, if done right can have huge

effects deactivating one of the main sources of power of the illegal armed groups,

and in particular, of the guerrillas.

As the Farc have threatened to the judges of many rural areas, and the State never

has never put a foot in these places, in practice one of the key social functions that

the guerrillas has played is to be the de facto judge of conflicts between peasant

farmers. And in many cases, these conflicts arise around the land issue: how far the

land covers, the cows, which are crossing from one side to another; and

obligations.

The justice meted out by the FARC is arbitrary because it depends on the humor

and the dexterity of the guerrilla-judge and not on objective and foreseeable rules.

But, it is always effective. In this way of dispensing justice, is that the guerrillas

end gaining some social legitimacy in their areas.

If theagricultural judges work, it would shut down this route of entry of the illegal

armed in rural life. But, again, to create this new jurisdiction constitutes a great

challenge as it has become evident with the judges of land restitution.



The access to land

The third great agreement reached is to aim that "the greatest number of

inhabitants from the countryside without land or with insufficient land, gain accessto it, through the creation of a Land Fund for Peace."

The creation of this Land Fund for Peace was a proposal made by the FARC since

the beginning of the negotiations. As the daily newspaper El Tiempo explained, they

proposed to nurture such a fund withunproductive or seized land for distribution

between 'landless peasants and women, as a priority'.

"They say, timely, that the fund would have 'lands from unproductive latifundia, idle

or improperly exploited, uncultivated land, appropriated land through the use of

violence and dispossession, and lands seized from drug trafficking', wrote the

journalist from Havana.

This proposal to create a Land Fund has been used in other countries and it’s a

practical way to allocate and distribute land to peasants while avoiding the practical

complications of land reform and taking land from those who already have more.

Thus it was, for example, the colonization of the Wild West in the United States.

As explained in Public Reason by the economist of Universidad Nacional,Yesid

Castro Forero, "a substantial percentage of the large rural property in Colombia has

no legitimate source and therefore has no constitutional protection". And they could

go to this Fund: the land of the narcos and the paras, the idle and uncultivated

illegally privatized through the judicial process of belonging and falsification of

documents, and vacant land awarded in violation of the legal procedures.

Castro Forero explains that the agrarian law also allows to extinguish

administratively land not exploited economically, those that violate environmental

standards that are dedicated to growing coca.

In other words, if there is political will, there is much land which the State could lay

hands on without having to touch a hectare of any landowner. This would close the

gap of inequality that exists in the countryside and also promote their productivity.

Because the concentration of land not only increases disparity, but also theefficiency of its use as a high percentage of large farms are not exploited

adequately or are intended for extensive cattle raising. According to the calculations

made by Ibanez, that minor use is equivalent to a loss of 3.5 percent in the

agricultural sector contribution to the GDP annually.



The controversial points

With the conclusion of the agreement on land issues is the deadline of Juan CamiloRestrepo to stay at

the forefront of the Ministry of Agriculture.

The allocation of vacant land is done by Incoder, which directs Miriam Villegas. The formalization of

land is in charge of the program for the formalization of the rural property of the ministry under the

leadership of Gloria Barney. Photos

There are two points of the Agreement that could generate resistance on the part of

the Establishment depending on how they have been written in the Agreement and

through which the Farc could pursue sideways some of their positions against theeconomic model.

"Thinking about the future generations of Colombians, the agreement delineates

the agricultural frontier, protecting the areas of special environmental interest,"

said the joint statement.

In conversation with Téllez, FARC spokesman said to La SillaVacía that this point

sought to "close the agricultural frontier" and avoid further "deforestation,

poisoning from the large-scale mining, logging of forests and wetlands, the

occupation of the national parks".

Does this mean in practice a limit to the conquest of the High Plains where

investors and major 'bigwigs' have made huge investments? Does this argument

curb infrastructure projects? Will it restrict mining in regions such as the fluvial star

of the Inírida River?

The other point of contention is that of the peasant reserves. "The peasant reserve

zones are strengthened and recognized in their fundamental purpose of promoting

the peasant economy, to contribute to food production and protection of areas of

forest reserve."

The peasant reserve zones had become a point of contention between the FARCand the government (the minister Juan CamiloRestrepo used to call them "small

republics") although there are six for a decade ago, and there are six othersaspiring

to be.

As La Silla explained, the original idea of these areas of peasant reserve was to

prevent that within these territories activities will be carried out that would harm



the peasant economy, as monocultures, the concentration of land or mining.But

also to promote small scale rural economy, which a study of Fedesarrollo led by

José Leibovich -an economist closer to orthodoxy - concluded it is more productive

than the more extensive.

However, as most of these areas coincide in the areas where the FARC are present,during Uribe's government were stigmatized as "nests of subversion".

These areas have the advantage or limitation (depending on the perspective from

where you look) that exclude these lands from the market and that somehow do

not encourage productivity.

In any case, the agreement was that they would not have the autonomy of

indigenous territories, which was the largest point of resistance for the

Establishment.

Far from law 001

At the Seventh National Conference of the FARC in 1982, the guerrilla -with its

legalistic spirit and when they still had confidence that they could make the

revolution by force - "issued" the law 001 of revolutionary land reform that

allegedly sought to benefit all the peasants without land.

Its second article read: "All properties or conceptions of foreign companies, oil,

mining, banana, timber, etc.., are abolished from the enactment of this Act and

pass under the control of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, Army

(FARC-EP). Likewise are abolished all personal property of the landowners or those

supported by corporations, limited, limited partnership or deed and pass under the

control of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, People's Army (FARC-EP),

who according to the Agrarian Program of The Guerrillas, will give in usufruct to the

landless peasants, on the basis of economic units that the National Committee for

Agrarian Reform point.

If this "law" was the starting point of the guerrillas, the agreement reached by the

Government with the FARC is historic because it avoids the idea of taking from

some to give to others. And it’s because, in essence, everyone, -except those who

have stolen the land- wins. It’s not a transaction between the parties; it seeks to

create the conditions for the transformation of a real source of the armed conflict.



The agro-industrial entrepreneurs will benefit because - if some day implementing

these agreements - finally there will be a true land market in Colombia, something

vital to be competitive globally. Small farmers will begin to be treated as worthy

Colombians because not only they will have access to basic services in education,

health and infrastructure, but a legal wage and a title to their lands. And it would

remove one of the big flags waved by the FARC to justify their insurgency.

It will be seen if the points failed to agree will be strong enough to put an end to

the bliss.

'We have made progress in the construction of a specific agreement with timely

exceptions that must necessarily be revisited before the realization of a final

agreement', said Ivan Marquez, in a statement read out to journalists gathered in

the Palace of Conventions, venue for the talks and following the joint statement.

A high official involved in the talks told the Associated Press that the last points of

disagreement on land reform revolve around for example a rebel demand to limitthe size of foreign property, among other things.

"According to the official these outstanding issues will be reviewed while the parties

discuss other subjects, that is not expected to be so contentious as this first point,"

reported the Associated Press, an aspect which the majority of Colombian media

chose to ignore.

Although the Farc are famous for never renouncing their central points and revive

the discussion that the counterpart had already believed closed, Téllez told La Silla:

"If it depended on us, we would already confiscate the land of the landowners. But

the government cannot make us the revolution by decree. We are optimistic

because there were some hopeful developments, some tools that allow a great

popular mobilization, that the peasantry knows that it can hunt this retarding

sector. They are advances to stop this conflict and to build peace".

the farc-government agreement on agriculture

Documents