April 9, 1948, was a tragic day in Colombia’s history. On this day, Jorge Eliécer Gaítán, a candidate for the presidency of Colombia, was assassinated. In the 10 hour period that followed the assassination, angry mobs marched throughout the city of Bogota, looting and burning down over 100 buildings. Before the night would end, nearly 3,000 people would die in the streets. This terrible event in Colombia’s history is today referred to as the Bogotazo. This paper examines some of the underlying reasons contributing to the outbreak of this violence and the events that transpired during the Bogotazo. The paper concludes that the events leading to the violence of the Bogotazo are still present in Colombia today and will hamper its prospects for peace in the future.
Colombia’s history has had many episodes of violence ever since it won its independence from Spain in 1819. After independence, the people of Colombia, Venezuela, Ecuador, Panama, northern Peru, western Guyana, and northwest Brazil united to form a single nation called Gran Colombia. Simon Bolivar became this new republic’s first president. However, Gran Colombia would not last for long. Its leaders would become divided on how the new republic should be governed. Some of its leaders would favor a strong centralized government whereas others would prefer a federal form of government. Liberal and conservative views would divide the country. Finally, in 1831, Gran Colombia would divide into the nations that originally formed it
Gran Colombia after 1831 went through several name changes. From 1832 to 1858, it was the Republic of New Grenada. From 1858 to 1863, it was the Grenadine Confederation. From 1863-1886, it was the United States of Colombia. Since 1886, it name has been ...
... middle of paper ...
.... The death of Gaitán and the Bogotazo on April 9, 1948, would later be used by historians to mark a new era of violence in Colombia called La Violencia. In the years following the Bogotazo, from 1948-1958, another 200,000 Colombians would die. More than 1000 people would die every month during the peak of the La Violencia. Many of the reasons and injustices that divided Gran Colombia in 1831 continue to cause violence in Colombia today. Daily one can read in Colombia’s newspapers report of incidents of violence in many different regions of the Colombia. Fighting between guerilla and government soldiers still take people’s lives and rob them of their hopes for a better future. Our United States State Departments still sends out travelers warnings of more potential violence in Colombia. No significant breakthroughs toward lasting peace seem likely in the near future.
Beginning in the late 1970s Liberation Theology, Marxism, and U.S. Cold War policy collided in El Salvador culminating in a civil war that lasted over a decade and ultimately produced democratic political institutions that persist into the 21st century. Despite the prejudices against the church on behalf of government and media organizations in the U.S. and El Salvador, religious actors fought for human rights and the implementation of democratic institutions throughout the period of conflict. The Salvadoran Civil War, which occurred in the context of the Cold War, was one of the bloodiest and longest events in the history of Latin America after the Guatemalan Civil War. The conflict lasted from 1979 to 1992, left approximately 75,000 people dead, and a country in ashes. The conflict started after the fraudulent elections of the Coronel Arturo Armando Molina (1972), who focused his term on repressing the communist political parties that wanted to work for a social reform. This aroused the anger of the popular sectors, which started to organize groups and demonstrations demanding fair election and improvement of social conditions. The government responded to their demands with savage violence, focusing primarily on the oppression of campesinos because they were the ones who supported the revolutionary leftist forces. These actions alienated the Salvadoran population even more and caused many people in the Catholic Church to start denouncing the government’s actions. Thus, as the Civil War started to rise, the church started to radicalize and to and spoke up against the government’s actions. One of its most fervent advocates was Monsignor Oscar Arnulfo Romero, who during his short time as the Archbishop of San Salvador manifested hi...
From the perspective of the United States, the U.S. was a keen backer, especially since the policy reinforced both U.S. domestic and foreign policy initiatives: war on drugs and security. Yet, United States foreign policy towards Colombia continues to be a topic of fiery dispute both among specialists in foreign policy and in Congress. During the deliberation over supporting Plan Colombia as a United States foreign policy initiative, a large number of Democrats in Congress were anxious that the U.S. was getting too ensnared in a foreign civil war that was more and more affecting Colombia’s neighboring nations as well. Previous human rights violations by the Army of Colombia and paramilitaries were a source of trepidation for the United States. However, the U.S. ultimately supported the government of Colombi...
Wallace, Arturo. "Drug Boss Pablo Escobar Still Divides Colombia." BBC News. BBC, 02 Dec. 2013. Web. 28 May 2017.
Moving ahead in time periods until the early 18th century, Bogotá (the present capital of Colombia), became the capital of the new Spanish Viceroyalty of Nueva (New) Granada, which also ruled over Ecuador and Venezuela.
During 1979-1992 El Salvador was engaged in a civil war, with the government fighting the rural indigenous citizens. Violence and gang culture were taking over the country and creating a cycle that can’t be easily broken. El Salvador’s citizens were searching for new power, opportunities, and a way out of poverty.
...es relationship is soaring through trade embargo. The reinforcement of the Colombian National Police force everywhere in Colombia is very secure. People in Colombia are fun loving people willing to teach anyone there culture. Thru trials and error learning from their past the image of Colombia changed for the good.
This source is valuable to examine as it demonstrates how cocaine rendered the country more vulnerable to globalization when the nation was already engaged in a prolonged armed conflict. Taussig himself asserts how cocaine exposed the nation to other threats, claiming, “along with the cocaine come the guerrilla, and behind the guerrilla come the paramilitaries in a war without mercy for control of the coca fields and therefore of what little is left of the staggeringly incompetent Colombian state” (16). This source is also valuable as Taussig even mentions how the United States War on Drugs in the 1970s heightened conflict and corruption, doing nothing on an international scale and allowing for Colombian cartels to dominate the cocaine market throughout the 1980s. My Cocaine Museum analyzes Colombia’s transition to cocaine and a critique of world inaction and globalization, interweaving both fact and fiction through first-hand accounts of Colombia’s history. In this sense, it is a worthy source to examine due to the first-hand stories of the violence caused by cocaine trade. Yet, the novel shares a limited perspective as it only tells one side of the story of the arise of cocaine and gives little voice to those who took over the farms and turned them into profit machines for funding the war. Nonetheless, it sheds light on a very important reality in Colombian
Throughout his life the Liberator set forth many different addresses, essays, letters and other written works in which he always expressed his admiration and aspiration for unity in Latin America. “Bolivar longed for political unity. His ultimate ambition was to have a single nation, a sort of United States, but in Latin America.” Simon Bolivar faced and encountered the many different negative aspects that the Spanish had on his land. The exploitation and overall inequitable form of government which allowed the Spanish to dominate the Americas prevented its inhabitants from defining their own identity and expressing their innermost desires for freedom. Perhaps inspired by the recent revolutions in North America and in France, Bolivar constructed and commanded the Venezuelan War of Independence which was won in 1819 and formally established the Great Colombia which included Venezuela and New Granada. Although Bolivar aspired for unity, what he encountered was tremendous disharmony and a lack of nutrients to support a democratic
Colombian citizens experience and live through the good and bad things Pablo does, when Americans only hear about the negative actions Escobar commits. Hearing versus seeing plays a vital role in the difference of perspectives between the Colombians and Americans. In the United States, only hearing about Pablo Escobar leads to confusion among different people as “For what, exactly, isn’t easy to understand without knowing Colombia and his life and times” (15). American civilians not knowing personally know why they hate Escobar reflects poorly on the United States. The media does not inform the general public about all the great and generous things Escobar accomplishes for Colombia, and only publishes the stories of his cartel killing innocent people. From the perspective of Colombians, they only know Escobar as a hero of Colombia as “At his death, Pablo was mourned by thousands. Crowds rioted when his casket was carried into the streets of his home city of Medellin” (15). Colombians create a national mourning day for Escobar after his death, when the Americans celebrate their success in killing him. This represents the difference in opinion of Escobar between the two countries. Pablo made promises and he conqueres them; he said he would end poverty as he provided education and housing to the poorest people inside of Colombia. On the other hand,
Religion in Latin America has always been tied closely to Catholicism because of the influence of Europeans who came to settle South America, bringing along their Catholic foundation. With the early formations of governments in Latin America, church and state were closely linked. The church had significant influence over what happened in the political realm of the countries’ relations. The case was no different for Colombia. The Catholic church has played a significant role in the history of Colombia, assuming an esteemed status in the country and exercising control over different areas of the government and public affairs, but as time passed its role in power has taken a slight downturn.
McDermott, Jeremy. “US Targets Colombian Rebels as War against Terrorism Escalates.” Scottsman.com. February 10, 2002.
On June 25, 1821, Simon Bolivar wrote to the General Congress of Colombia stating, “may the Sovereign Congress accept, in the name of the brave men whom I have the honor of commanding, the homage of an army tried and true, the greatest and finest ever to bear arms on any battlefield in Colombia…Your Excellency’s most humbler servant.” By 1821, Gran Colombia had proclaimed its independence from Spain, with Simon Bolivar (1783-1830), a Venezuelan statesmen and military leader, becoming its first president. The region, previously known as New Granada, had decided to forever sever ties with the Spanish Empire after a series of battles beginning in 1810. Yet, formal political liberty and independence, although common in the minds
As you know that Colombia is republic countries they are select their president every 4 years by the election, the last election was in June 2010.
A. Area of conflict: The efforts of the Colombian government and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) to end their 52 year old civil war that has caused the death of more than 260,000 people. The Colombians need to develop a system that comprehensively investigates the crimes committed during the war and that allows for reconciliation, and the eventual, peaceful advancement of the nation’s development.