Press "Enter" to skip to content

En Defensa del Optimismo. | Juanita Goebertus | TEDxFulbrightBogotá


the laws

[Music]

the little one my dad always told me

in the story of two girls who had

received different gifts at Christmas the

Major had received a bicycle and

I was sad because I did not know

ride it and I felt sure I was going to

fall

besides it seemed that it probably

they were going to steal it because it was a time of

much insecurity and the little one had

received a hill today daughter but

I was happy because he said is that

They gave away a horse but it was a

ratico

I’m going to go after him and web and that

it was the logic in my family that

contradicted a lot with the logic that

there was usually in the country and that is

everything goes from bad to worse

everything that goes wrong can go no

all these logic much more

pessimists in my house

instead the rule was you have to be

optimistic of the horse and despite the

bankruptcy of the architectural sector

despite the divorces

despite the cancer, it had to be said

bad weather good face

You have to enjoy everything, everything always

get out better

maybe that’s why a few months ago in

twitter they told me so small and so

naive and I ‘m good

Well, I think that small but

Neither am I what I am

optimistic

so I would like to make a defense of

optimism a few years ago I had the

opportunity to be called to participate

in a peace process in colombia was the

2011 was still the beginning of the

possibility of having some contacts for

to be able to design a peace process with the

guerrilla of the farc and finish a

war over 50 years for me by

course it was a huge surprise

opportunity obviously gives me a lot

afraid to imagine what would be what I

I had to be doing there but

started a whole process

amazing to start trying

understand why this had existed

war and what the formulas will be

to try to finish

They spent several years of research

of preparation and when it came 2014

I had to go to Havana for a year and

medium

to work as a consultant on issues of

transitional justice and of victims and

it was a very interesting process but very

hard

had to be as they have been hearing

for eleven days it did not matter if it was

Saturday it did not matter if it was Sunday they were

lengthy sessions we had to

work from 8 in the morning many times

up to ten at night in situation is

supremely tense with a speaker

that for those of you who have heard

some of the guerrillas a few

minutes on radio will imagine what

means to be a year and a half

working with them every day and

trying to find points of

meeting despite thinking so

so different immense tensions inside

from the delegation itself a quantity of

them difficult to handle wear

it was not the family not seeing friends

the normal stresses of a process

peace of this style as there was

bombing and there were people dying of

one side and another and that means that

soon the process is going to stop everything is

threw to the ground that soon the president

he made an outgoing statement of tone and

then we lost favorability will be

which carries out the process

the tension was very high so

we put a rejection in the peace process

if one was going to do a criticism had

have a solution in some way

the rule was to move this

peace process

you have to be optimistic because if not this

it’s not going to come out and we were developing

a kind of methodology of

optimism

the first is that you had to have a

approach based on evidence that no

we could stay in the places

common in generalizations in the

conspiracy theories because by

that place we were not going to get

ana and you many of you maybe

I still think at that time I

I think most Colombians

they did not think so the guerrilla said

will never let the weapons never go to

stop drug dealers is a business

too profitable

nobody believes them but if one looked at the

evidence of the information that is

they had about the guerrillas because it started

to find different things

the guerrillas had begun to see how

different left groups had

come to power in Latin America and

start analyzing on your own

conversations between members of

secretariat to which he had access

then different military operations the

Colombian government because he was

that I really had analyzed that

they had a better chance if they

they did through politics instead of

by way of arms if it arrives in a

day or is not a different discussion

but they had already taken that

decision and perhaps the most

forceful that corroborated this was that

at the beginning the process was still in

these preliminary conversations before

of the exploratory phase the government takes

the decision to order the death of

khan who was the head of the secretariat of

the farc at that time and despite a

blow so hard that in any other

scenario would surely have taken

a guerrilla to retreat

even those contacts and not go to a

conversation process the farc

in spite of this, take the decision of

move forward in the peace process and

carry out the exploratory phase and

then the public phase

if one looks at the evidence and one

it remains in the common place of them never

they would leave the weapons because there is no process

of peace that could get ahead

the second and a fundamental strategy

we must be able to see in the crisis

opportunities because all circumstances

always has two faces and almost always

it’s much easier to criticize and say

does this do this if these risks and

in last see the glass more half

empty that half reaches so

we constantly try to

search despite all these crises of

all these difficult moments if

there could be some element of

opportunity in this new crisis that

we were fine

an example of this is that at the end of the

exploratory phase when this is achieved

general agreement

there was a lot of optimism between the

government delegation has finally been

managed to lower the guerrilla of the farc

of an agenda and message has been the

cagüán’s agenda the previous process

of peace in Colombia where they wanted

negotiate the divine and the human of the

national agenda and it had been achieved that

only five points will be reached

specific on which it could be

build an agreement it was believed that the

agreement to be months and not years and

however the FARC designates as chief

from his delegation to Ivan Marquez the

most critical person of the peace process

between the guerrilla that had

uttered totally against that by

course arrives ao

the first meeting of the public phase

of the peace process

in a super strong speech against

of the agenda itself and trying to say

here we have to go much further

if one is pessimistic the first thing that

think is this is over we lost everything

this time we touch maybe start

zero

we probably have to go to war

more time before this can be

turn into a peace process but if

one tries to look at the opportunity the

true crisis of the case is that if we

it was going to take a lot longer as in effect

happened but what happened is that the

most radical sector of the FARC

was adding to the negotiation and that

once we reach a final agreement and

we will also have the

participation of that sector more

radical

but maybe the most strategy

important of the optimist is to be

open to change your mind is

open to recognize that perhaps we

We were wrong that we did not see enough

elements that the scenario changed and be

able to go back and change

position and the most important moment

in which that happened throughout

this peace process

It was on October 2, 2016

Colombia went to the polls to a plebiscite

to make the decision as Colombians

he said we approved we rejected that

peace agreement and paradoxically in

against all the surveys against

of everything that had been said

publicly he does not win these

elections all of us who had

worked in the peace process we had

said this is the best possible agreement

it was not possible to go further if he wins

he does not

the process is over we have to go back to the

war and there was no alternative

different than saying we recognize the

error we can not return to the

war

we have to look for alternatives there

try to understand what it was that those

sectors saw that you could try to

change starts a whole phase of

renegotiation of the agreement and then

subsequently approved at the congress

of the republic

if one does not part the possibility of

change your mind to transform

according to new scenarios for no

can have an optimistic attitude

today colombia is facing a

supremely difficult scenario

surely many of those who are

here can imagine that the guerrilla not

deliver

all weapons that some weapons are

will surely keep many of you

they will think that there are some of the coves

that they are not going to deliver that they are going to

stay with some money

we all know that the arrival of the state

to the areas most affected by the

conflict is supremely slow and

difficult and worse than worse we are

facing an electoral scenario is

say the peace process has gotten into

half of a presidency campaign

the scenario is very difficult but we

we find at the same time before a

historical opportunity that is to have

finished an armed conflict of more than

50 years and we owe as Colombians

to be optimistic about that reality

first of all because they have been delivered

more than seven thousand individual weapons

because more than 3,000 have been destroyed

caletas

those are heaps of weapons that save

lives

It is not strange why we are today

in the lowest homicide rate

the last 40 years in 2012 it

registered for this year 850 thousand

victims per year

this year they have registered the year

past 81,000 victims is still a

very high proportion but it is 10% what

we registered when we had the

most hostile armed conflicts of the

region

we are a country that is finally

growing in tourism last year

we received 5 million tourists

it is supposed that this year if we continue with

the growth curve we will get to

7 million tourists last

in colombia we are allocating resources

from the royalty fund to the roads

rural than if many of us

urban citizens we do not use but that of

it depends on all the peasants

they need to be able to take out their products

and have an economically stable life

they need

finally resources are being allocated

that fund for rural roads in 25

years of the political constitution of

1991 in Colombia we had not achieved

fulfill the promise a statute of the

opposition

today is the law of the republic a statute

of the opposition in Colombia

the magistrates almost always chose

a logic very clienteles very of

elite that the courts post on one side

that the presidents are running for another and

they were chosen today we have the first

fully public process

choice of magistrates of the

special tribunal for peace is a

process in which any citizen

that meets the requirements can be

apply with public criteria

we had never experienced that

we face a country where we also

there is a separation of powers

perhaps one of the biggest challenges of

the implementation of the peace agreement is

that of seven of the rules he has

revised the constitutional court has

lying down 3 is to say that this is not a

process where there is absolute unanimity

on the contrary it shows a process and a

healthy country a democracy where there is

a separation of powers

we are also facing a scenario

economic where even though we

they had raised a very

difficult because of oil prices and

without a doubt it is because Colombia in all

case according to the projections is going to

end up growing at 2 percent not

we are entering a recession and we are one of

the strongest economies of the

region that is supremely beaten

for the oil crisis and more

impressive still colombia that there was

always been the recipient of advice

international cooperation in resources

technical cooperation countries

different places telling us how the

what we had to do to replicate

here there

today the world is asking us to

us that we help them solve

Conflict is telling us the

savior that how we help them

solve the transitional justice that

they did not do 25 years ago we

is saying ‘me and markets and they

we help to set up a land agreement

like the one that was set up in our process

of peace sir lanka is telling us that

can they learn from our

plebiscite for your referendum

constitutional

then one can always look at

things in two ways

one can be more optimistic or more

pessimistic because always the scenarios

they are difficult

I invite you to each of you

be that girl who goes out to pursue her

horse thank you very much

[Applause]

[Music]

to

i

”

Be First to Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *