The former vice president and former ambassador in Washington Francisco Santos makes a surprising confession, that had he still been ambassador to the US, he would have resignedin protest at the surprising and unwelcome change in Washington’s relations with Venezuela and Cuba.
Doctor Francisco Santos, already living in Colombia?
Yes, back. Obviously I am involved in different things, looking a lot at the issue of China, Russia and Iran in Latin America, which is going to be one of the issues that we will have to deal with in terms of relations in the next ten or 15 years. I am very involved in the subject of fintech and how that is going to change the way citizens relate to banks and to each other for payments. And, also writing, returning to journalism, which is what I like.
And to politics, too?
There is not the slightest danger.
In any case, you are a political commentator. Analyze me the current moment. With the defeat of Federico Gutiérrez, Uribismo lost a candidate with whom it was related. There were two left who are not from Uribe, and that is why my question is: Are we living in the beginning of the post-Uribe era?
Definitely. I think this is the end of that era of Uribism. Not of his ideas, not of what he represents. But Gustavo Petro’s left has grown riding on the specter of anti-uribismo, which started at the beginning of Álvaro Uribe’s government, to the point that they already have even judges, like Mr. Iván Velásquez, mounted. And not to mention the human rights NGOs. All that was growing with a speech based on hate. That he received a boost from Juan Manuel Santos with the peace process, and that deepened our division. The plebiscite went wrong for them, because that hate speech was creating a counter barrier. In 2018, it comes back and happens to them, when anti-petrism chooses Iván Duque. But the erosion of the current government caused a number of people who were related to Fico Gutiérrez to go with Rodolfo Hernández, to defeat Petro.
You talk about the erosion of the Duque government, but you were part of it…
It is normal. Twenty years do not generate wear? But, in addition, this anti-uribismo never understood that the majority of Colombians saw those eight years of Uribe as the great transformation of Colombia. I think that in three, five, ten years, the government of President Duque is going to be much better seen.
The same as ‘Juampa’?
No, the one from ‘Juampa’ is in his money…
Where does Rodolfo Hernández come from?
Undoubtedly, it represents a change. People do not know exactly what it is, but they are clear that it is neither Petro nor Uribe. And the ‘little old man’, as I affectionately call him, said it: in the first round I killed Uribismo; Second, I kill petrism.
On the other side, they say: in the first round we burned Alejandro Gaviria and in the second round we burned Rodolfo…
Which I don’t think so either. Look, the politics of hate created the strongest political party that Colombia has had in its history, which is the anti-Petro political party. And that political party today could elect Rodolfo, and it has the Petristas confused. Almost desperate, with an air of superiority that is not justified because the story they put together collapsed. Rodolfo does not represent what they needed the other side to represent for the second round.
But they did manage to smear Fico with uribism…
They managed to turn him into something that was a pseudo-uribista, which is what they are desperately trying to do right now, and they haven’t been able to with Rodolfo. He is smart, much more than he lets on. And I think we’re in for a lot of surprises. But, well, the truth is that: his 20-year campaign to see Uribe lynched and hanged failed them too. They do not forgive him and he is part of that rage.
But, let’s say, at this point in life, Uribe does seem very cornered legally and politically. So, inevitably, a new era begins to dawn in which, suddenly, he will not be the one who defines the greatest political options of the future…
Look. That time is over, but it had its splendor. I am one of those who believe that Uribe, in 20 or 30 years, will be considered the best president Colombia had in its history, one of the great leaders of Latin America. When serious historians recapitulate how Colombia was in 2002 and how Uribe left it in 2010, they will say: Juepucha, it can’t be this one.
Have you talked to him recently, about everything that’s going on?
I have spoken with him and I have told him: President, I know that today you are in a degree of disappointment because your reputation has ended, but history is going to evaluate your reputation. And that story is going to be tremendously benevolent.
Do you think Álvaro Uribe is depressed because of that?
Yeah right if. As he is a fighter. But, also, because what they are doing with him is totally unfair.
But does it not indicate that the presidents must pass to their status as ex-presidents with an expiration date?
This is a lesson for everyone. But what about that thing we invented that the loser of the elections goes to Congress by right? No. Losers, as well as former presidents, bye.
And uribism, bye?
Uribismo, guided by Uribe, yes. But I repeat, his ideas of authority, of security, I don’t think so. The important thing in these next four years where Uribismo leaves the stage is going to be: Well, now what, how do we pick up those flags, how do we build something with the Conservatives, with other parties and with other sectors, but with long-term serious ideas? term? How do we make a coalition like Chile to defend democracy and freedoms? Because here too, even if Rodolfo wins, the perverse narrative is maintained.
What do you call perverse narrative?
That there is no democracy here, and eight million Colombians believe in that. And nobody is going to change their opinion, despite the fact that a man who is the son of a peasant would defeat them, which shows, to the core, how strong democracy is in Colombia. But the anti-democratic logic that they began to build in 2003 still finds channels to impose itself. And always in the logic of Uribe vs. Petro. Look, if in any of the two coalitions, that of the Esperanza Center or that of the Team for Colombia, a candidate had emerged who would not allow himself to be drawn into that fight, would have built bridges and would have occupied, let’s say, that almost new space, that would be the candidate for the second round, but they could not.
Could Rudolph…
Rudolph, yes. It is that he was the only one who did not enter into that. The others ended up entering. And that same logic is the one that today has Rodolfo ad portas of the presidency, because he does not represent that, and let’s not lie to ourselves, people are fed up with that.
Dr. Francisco Santos, changing the subject, his time in Washington leaves a question: was the new ambassador, Juan Carlos Pinzón, partly sent there to correct his career? It is that as at the beginning it was interpreted that there was favoritism of the embassy and, therefore, of the Duque government for Donald Trump, that this forced to rebuild the bipartisan relationship.Do you accept that this was so, or is that an unfair impression?
It was not so. We always had a bipartisan agenda and it is nothing but to see with how many Republican congressmen and with how many Democrats I came to Colombia to visit the border, and how many times. I think there are many more Democrats than Republicans, because I am very clear that Colombia’s politics must be bipartisan. The second thing is that I was ambassador to the government of President Trump, I had to put it in my pocket, that was my role as ambassador. It was a very difficult situation, but we made it. Trump was a great ally of Colombia and helped us in many things.
So what happened when the election came?
Two very bad things happened. Two members of the ruling party got into the political campaign in the United States, they were Juan David Vélez and María Fernanda Cabal. To both of them, from all sides, I told them: stay out, this is bad. In private I reiterated that this was hurting Colombia. And, on the other hand, President Santos did move with the Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, and with other advisers, such as Juan González and Dan Restrepo, and managed to convince them that this was true. And it seems to me irresponsible on the part of former President Santos, because he harms the country. It seems to me that he had more than enough to do it, but he managed to affect relations between Colombia and the United States, and incidentally he hurt President Duque, he hurt me. But I am superfluous there, the issue is binational relations, that is above any of us.
Do you think that Ambassador Pinzón has managed to even out relations?
You see, we are too important a country, which has a relationship with the United States at many levels of the administration, not just the presidential one. And it was very clear that we worked together on all the projects, and that is what drives the relationship. What I can tell you is that this relationship is changing. The drug issue, after 20 years, is quite exhausted. But what is clear, both in the White House and in the State and in the defense sector, is that this is a strategic relationship for the United States. The problem is that, for the US, today Latin America is in sixth priority. Ukraine first, Asia second, the Middle East third, Europe fourth, trade relations with Mexico and Canada fifth, and we come sixth. We do not exist, which is very serious, because this is a moment when the world’s great geostrategic battle is also being waged in Latin America and will take place here in the next ten years.
One final question. Do you feel that the United States abandoned us a little, and just like the policies of the Duque and Uribe governments, when it suddenly opened relations with Venezuela and Cuba, and we were left seeing a spark, holding hands with interim president Juan Guaidó? ?
Totally. That is one of the biggest disappointments I have had in my political life.
Explain to me why…
If I had been the Colombian ambassador to the United States, I would have resigned. You don’t do that to a friend with whom you have a policy on which we are working together and without previously informing him, without having a discussion. And, yes, they send the wrong message in the region. Why are they going to ask Guatemala for human rights when they are sitting with Maduro? What the hell do they come to ask of us when they are with Cuba? I think there is an inconsistency there. And that’s part of, shall we say, Democratic foreign policy, which still hasn’t quite defined its stuff. The best example of what is happening now is the Summit of the Americas, about which the discussion is who is invited, and not what is the substance of the relationship with Latin America. That is part of all that confusion that the United States has today, and especially the Democratic Party with Latin America.
MARIA ISABEL RUEDA
#rapprochement #Venezuela #Cuba #USA #abandoned #Colombia