Senator Ivan Cepeda poses for a portrait at the Congress of the Republic in Bogotá November 16, 2022.Diego Cuevas
The hunched and stealthy figure of Iván Cepeda walks through a stout-columned courtyard surrounded by murals depicting the violent Mexican Revolution. On the walls of the old San Ildefonso school in the historic center of Mexico City, Diego Rivera and José Clemente Orozco immortalized men’s desire for change. Cepeda (Bogotá, 60 years old), wearing his signature shirt with a high collar this morning, has dedicated his life to this task. President Gustavo Petro has every confidence that he will reach an agreement that will demobilize the ELN, Latin America’s last guerrillas. But Cepeda believes something even bigger must emerge from the peace process, something unprecedented in Colombia’s history: a government of national consensus in the style of other countries that have suffered brutal violence, such as Northern Ireland.
– When could this agreement be reached, after Petro’s mandate?
– Let’s see when. That has no data, but it’s a possibility.
Cepeda takes part in this interview on a stone bench shortly after it was announced that the government and the ELN had agreed on the agenda that will serve as a roadmap for negotiations that continue in Havana, Cuba. One day maybe this story will decorate the walls.
Questions. Now that the agenda is set, things should accelerate. Are we entering a time of greater concreteness?
Answer. The new peace agenda for Colombia is not just a list of issues, it is a vision for the country. What the preamble to this agenda shows is that, unlike other processes that have taken place in the past, the problem is not just an agreement between the government and the ELN, but rather is inviting the country to convene what we are have named a major national agreement. It’s a different vision of peace, attempting something that was elusive in Colombia: a national pact.
Newsletter
Current affairs analysis and the best stories from Colombia, delivered to your inbox every week
GET THIS
Q Does the ELN share this global vision of the country or is it more regional in focus, in the areas where it is present?
R The ELN agrees and has addressed it at other times. For a long time he insisted on a number that was the national convention, that is, a body to designate all the sectors that could contribute to this goal of the agreement. But of course this process also includes the territories, it includes the transformations, the voices and the participation of the communities. The agenda clearly says that while politics escalates, we need the military confrontation to de-escalate. So that the bilateral ceasefire, first of fire, and we hope soon of hostilities, becomes a reality.
Q How long do you think this ceasefire could last?
R We don’t start from scratch, but from the experiences that the ELN has gained. In 2017, the ELN conducted a successful recruitment for 101 days. The government and the military, who sit at the table as observers, also come out of this process and partly out of the negotiations with the FARC. You bring with you a wealth of military experience of armistices and hostilities.
Q The cessation of hostilities goes beyond silencing guns.
R Hostilities is a much broader concept. The concept of fire is limited to offensive clashes between opposing forces, between the guerrilla and the military and police forces. Hostilities are a series of actions, often involving attacks on the population or civilian targets. It is a concept that is achieved gradually.
Q The ELN would negotiate a ceasefire with the government, but would it be possible to reach a larger ceasefire that would include FARC or Gulf clan dissidents?
R That’s not foreseen.
Q Aren’t you surprised that the ELN doesn’t call for a constituent assembly like other guerrillas who have sat down to negotiate with the state?
R No, it seems to me a sign of understanding that not everything is limited to juridical-legal figures that in another time have shown that they do not solve problems. The Constituents are useless unless they are based on a national pact such as we are proposing. Here the agreement is more important than the legal figure.
Q This pact emerges from these negotiations, but the rest of society would have to go along with it.
R The pact can be anchored in a government. The number used in the new agenda is that for national unity we need a political and social alliance. What is this alliance? It could be in one government or in several national governments, including territorial ones, of concertation.
Q From the government of Gustavo Petro?
R when would we see That has no data, but it’s a possibility. This obviously comes from dialogue and participation. Apart from a Constituent Assembly, which has become a cliché, this requires a real concertation of the country, its deterrent forces, national and territorial powers capable of change. It was done elsewhere.
Q Which mirror are you looking in?
R In Northern Ireland, where there was concerted government. I was very impressed with a visit where we learned about the process in Ireland. We were received by the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister. One was Mcguinness, head of the IRA, a Catholic, an independent; and the other man, I don’t remember his name, who was loyalist and ultra-conservative and also took part in the armed confrontation. And I was very surprised that they both said that although they didn’t have much personal empathy for each other, they ran a country together. That influenced me a lot. Why couldn’t we do it in Colombia? In Colombia it was always said that an ex-guerrilla would never govern, and today we have one. Why not dream of an alliance that brings everyone together? This is a personal vision, these are my ideas.
Q Last week the President had a very busy few days with many issues surrounding his administration. Does this instability permeate the negotiations and does the ELN use it to exert pressure?
R No, there is no such thing. Our discussions revolve around substantive issues: the political recognition of the ELN, its legal and legal recognition, the agenda, its points, the visions of the attitude… Political issues and how the government is are not influenced. We see no desire in the ELN delegation to use these elements to get results at the table.
Q How did you feel when Francia Márquez told the ELN leaders here today that it is the first time she has seen their eyes and she is not afraid?
R France speaks as a social fighter defending its territory, who has built peace with its community. So I think she has all the moral authority to speak in such an environment and be heard with great respect and openness, both by the ELN delegation and by the government.
Q Do you sometimes have the feeling that the ELN is trying to impose its utopian vision on the world?
R I see that we are building a common vision.
Q How to avoid problems like the ELN’s belief in direct democracy when there is a representative one in Colombia?
R You are critical of the current democracy in Colombia, but do not dismiss representative democracy as an option. They are not seen in the Republic Congress, but they are in the local powers. That’s what they said. Obviously they understand that the existing state in Colombia today is a reality that cannot be erased by an agreement. We must reform and create realities within the legality that this system offers. The ELN has a fairly mature vision of the type of state and model we are in. Of course he is very critical of that. He believes these rooms are corroded by corruption.
Q What can become of the ELN now that the roadmap is in place?
R I think it will probably become a political force. Everything points to that, but they also talk about being a social force and having a presence in the territories.
Q They talk about putting an end to paramilitarism. Does this fall within the total peace of Petro?
R This is the constitution of Colombia. There is an article, 22a, that prohibits paramilitarism.
Q But here it means eradicating…
R That’s what it’s all about, ending it.
Q But can this be done during negotiations?
R That is a duty of the state. The state is obliged to do this, it cannot question its obligations. This delegation is not behaving like other government delegations at the negotiating table who have turned their duties into a fight with their counterparts. The constitution says it’s a crime to create paramilitary groups, to support them, to support them, to fund them, to encourage them. It is the government’s duty to put an end to paramilitarism. This is not a matter for negotiation, it is mandatory.
P. When you talk about participation in society, how can it be specified?
R It is the first item on the agenda. We will create it with the people. It can be specified in multiple ways, not a single model. There will be one in the territories, in the social sectors, and there will also be national participation in building the agreement. So we will design the mechanisms for that. It has been said that it is mandatory and transformative participation, meaning it’s not just about people making suggestions, no. Here’s something different. That means people make some requests, but also participate in policy execution and management.
Q The time will come when it is time to implement the agreement and ensure the security of the demobilized guerrillas. How to achieve the latter when many former members of the FARC have been murdered?
R We will arrive at that moment and make an effort.
Subscribe here to the EL PAÍS newsletter on Colombia and receive all the latest information about the country.