[ad_1]
On April 28, protests erupted across Colombia as Ivan Duque’s right-wing government proposed raising taxes in the midst of the third wave of the coronavirus pandemic. In the face of public outrage, the president withdrew his controversial tax reform proposal, but protests have continued, exacerbating savage repression.
At least 40 protesters have been killed and hundreds injured by security forces and armed men in civilian clothes. Many have been arrested and dozens of women have been sexually assaulted by police.
The escalation of violence not only reflects the government’s failure to address long-standing socioeconomic grievances, but also its growing legitimacy and regression to democracy. This puts the country at risk of slipping into conflict again.
Factor: Unfair tax reform
The Colombian government initially announced the proposed tax reform to expand the “solidarity income” scheme to help Colombians most affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. But the way the reform package was formulated made it clear that it would do more harm than good to the poor and vulnerable.
Although the reform package included an estate tax on people with $ 1.35 million in assets, it also contained a number of provisions that would damage low-income homes. It would lower the taxable income threshold and increase the tax on pensions and value added tax (VAT), which would significantly increase the prices of maintenance items such as eggs, milk, cheese and meat.
Other elements of the reform benefited the private sector and specific economic groups. They included maintaining tax exemptions for various industries, including the financial sector, for the benefit of entrepreneurs who are mostly beneficiaries.
While the government claimed that tax reform was needed to help mitigate the effects of the pandemic on the Colombian economy and state budget, it was also pushing for some questionable spending, including on expensive U.S. arms purchases.
Although some elements of the reform could have a positive impact on the economy, such as tax rebates for vulnerable sectors, the VAT increase indicated a link between the experiences of elite authorities and broad segments of the population.
The Kobid-19 pandemic is estimated to have caused 3.5 million people to fall into poverty, with the number of people living in poverty rising from 17.5 million in 2019 to 21 million (42.5% of the population) in 2020. The crisis has severely affected those working in the informal sector, which make up half of the workforce. Formal employees would not benefit from the tax refund they would receive as compensation for the VAT increase.
Government response: violence and slander
The government’s initial response to cross-sectoral criticism of the tax reform proposal was completely inaudible. Finance Minister Alberto Carrasquilla addressed the media, trying to defend the package, but revealed that he had no idea what the basic amounts were. Speaking about the impact of the VAT extension, he said it costs a quarter of what eggs actually do in the market, increasing people’s anger.
When the protests began, instead of holding an open dialogue and hearing the complaints of the population, the government launched a dirt campaign. The demonstration tried to portray the country as a radical leftist conspiracy that would destabilize the country.
Several pro-government people have publicly denounced the protest organizers for trying to establish a “castrochavismo” regime in Colombia. Such conspiracy theories have prevailed in certain sectors of the armed forces and police, in the belief that the protesters are aiming to overthrow the state to carry out the left-wing revolution.
Arming these accounts, the government went further and ordered repression against protesters, expanding security forces and the military, throwing tanks and using violence to disperse unarmed people, mostly peaceful.
Even when the United Nations and human rights organizations condemned the violence, the government did not respond and controlled the security forces. The irrelevance of the complaints of various sectors of the population and even their lives has led to a level of popular mobilization that has not been seen for decades.
Mobilization as a result of the 2016 peace agreements
Although the tax reform proposal was the driving force behind the recent protests and the government’s violent response, its fuel, the social roots of the general disagreement, are much deeper than that.
For years, governments have not been able to cope with the growing inequality in Colombian society, as efforts to reduce poverty have stalled. Under the influence of the wealthy Colombian class, they have repeatedly made decisions that have made citizens weaker and more distrustful of the state.
But the protests should also be seen in the context of the 2016 peace agreements between the Colombian government and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC-EP), ending the five-decade conflict between them.
As the violence between the FARC-EP and the government diminished, social movements gained more space for mobilization. Peace agreements created hopes that the government would provide a greater response to citizens ’complaints after the end of this armed conflict.
Even after the peace agreement, however, violence against civilians continued. Indigenous leaders, social activists, human rights defenders, farmers and environmentalists who have defended the rights of various communities and implemented the provisions of the 2016 peace agreements have been killed. The government has not taken any serious measures to stop the ongoing violence or respond to members of the security forces or non-state actors, such as cartels, armed groups of the left and right, who still victimize Colombian civilians.
Meanwhile, a large part of the political elite continues to perceive demands for democratic reform as a left-wing conspiracy to overthrow the state.
The crisis of legitimacy
The protests of recent weeks, provoked by numerous socio-economic complaints and fueled by the government’s violent responses, prove that there is no suitable way for citizens to hold their government accountable.
It seems that the elite authorities expect the general population to remain silent about any policy. The narrative they use in the face of popular mobilization is focused on “restoring order,” that is, ensuring dependence by using savage force.
But the legitimacy of the state derives from the idea that it derives from a monopoly of force. The forced embrace by elite authorities across Latin America and as part of a participatory democracy is a dangerous trend.
Colombia is a country whose political leadership has historically feared mobilization, albeit in a peaceful manner. Such fears have led to the closure of avenues for political representation and participation. They have pushed for cycles of violence, including armed conflict with the FARC, as the country is still recovering.
The current government is repeating the mistakes of the past by tarnishing the protesters and ordering a violent dispersal of demonstrations. It also does not comply with the 2016 peace agreement.
Loss of legitimacy poses great risks in Colombia. This is reflected in the escalation of violence against police forces, which has a dangerous potential to encourage civilians to join armed groups that are still active in the country. That, in turn, could be used by government elites to restart counterinsurgency efforts and close democratic avenues for participation and representation, as it has done in the past.
The present places Colombia at a crossroads. If the government chooses to recognize and engage in population complaints, it can help the state regain its legitimacy and strengthen its social contract. If he chose to continue to ignore the militarization of cities and the needs of the population, he would have to prepare for more unrest and international pressure to change course before the country enters another conflict.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the attitude of Al Jazeera’s editorial.
[ad_2]
Source link
