Bogotá's Own High-Line*

Children play ball in the new Parque Bicentenario, with the Biblioteca Nacional in the background.

Five years late and undoubtedly way over budget, El Parque Bicentenario was inaugurated last Friday, giving Bogotanos a new place to hang out, if not more green space.

The park was envisioned for 2010, the bicentennial of Colombia's founding. However, design changes and a lawsuit by neighbors delayed the project until this year - when Colombia is 207 years old.

The concept of a public space above Calle 26 connecting Independence Park and to the Museum of Modern Art was originated by famed Colombian architect Rogelio Salmona, who died in 2008. The new park is supposed to right a historic wrong: Parque de la Independencia, created in 2010 to host the World's Fair, has suffered repeated amputations as avenues slashed thru its western and southern sides. Ironically, the new Parque Bicentenario took yet another bite out of Independence Park because its elevation required the construction of access ramps and stairways on its northern side. Building those meant eliminating

A romantic moment in the park.

grassy space and cutting down several trees, and prompted an unsuccesful lawsuit by residents of the Torres del Parque on Independence Park's other side. The new park's great cost also made me wonder whether the couldn't have better spent the money creating a conventional park in some other, disadvantaged part of the city.

But that's all in the past. Parque Bicentenario is now finished, and the city has created a pleasant area for relaxing, reading, and perhaps small concerts or theatre events. It's an area of stairways and winding paths bordered by small gardens. When I visited on Monday afternoon, the Bicentenario was active with couples and families sitting, tossing balls around and taking photos, while security guards warned people not to stand on the benches. But the popularity may just be novelty. I'm not sure what will draw people here, except the promise of a quiet spot to walk or sit and read or kiss. But you can find those same things a few meters away in Parque de la Independencia, wher you can also lie on the grass and let your dog run around.

The park's entrance on Carrera Septima.

I also wondered why the designers included so many stairways where wheelchair-friendlier ramps would have worked just as well (perhaps to discourage skateboarding and bicycle riding). And what will happen during rainstorms, when torrents of water will flow down into Parque de la Independencia, turning its grass into muddy pits. And Bicentenario's paucity of trash cans also seems strainge. Sure, it's best to pack out what you pack in, but that's not Colombian culture. Hope not to see this park littered with pop cans and cigarrette butts.

In a few months, will this new park be forgotten by most Bogotanos and taken over by potheads, beggars and skateboarders? Let's hope that city officials remember to fund activities here to keep this an active place.

*For anybody who doesn't follow New York urban developments, the High Line is popular new park their built on top of an old, raised trolley line.

Calle 26 traffic passing underneath the park.

A family in the park.

A rare sight: Trash cans.

A light festival at night.

The original Parque de la Independencia, now much reduced.

Learn about the park's and neighborhood's histories.

Crowds at the Parque Bicentenario´s Inauguration.

At night, the park's lights create a show against the hills.

Ramps and stairways sliced into neighboring Parque de la Independencia.

Lots of rules, as always.

Why stairs, instead of ramps?

Nearby, the iconic Torre Colpatria.

By Mike Ceaser, of Bogotá Bike Tours

The Nobel Tosses Santos a Lifeline

Juan Manuel Santos, defense minister,
president and now Nobel peace prize winner.

"Everything that I have worked for, everything that I have believed in during my public life, has crashed into ruins." -- British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain in despair after Hitler invaded Poland, despite Chamberlain's appeasement efforts.

Pres. Santos might have felt the same way after voters rejected his peace deal with the FARC last Sunday, destroying the project on which he planned to build his legacy.

Suddenly, however, his hopes might be resuscitated by an unlikely ally: The Nobel Prize committee, which awarded him this year's peace prize.

I wonder whether the Nobel committee made their choice before the vote, and now perhaps regret it, as Santos' effort flounders.

But Santos' new stature, as only the second Colombian (along with Gabriel Garcia Marquez) to win a Nobel Prize, might just give him the moral weight to convince voters, the FARC and ex-Pres. Uribe to moderate their positions.

Ironically, Santos was minister of defense for Pres. Uribe, when he led a harsh militery offensive against the same FARC guerrillas whove now become his political allies.

By Mike Ceaser, of Bogotá Bike Tours

Poverty and Peace

Impoverished Colombians are much more likely to have suffered from Colombia's conflict. So, why

did they vote against the peace accord - at least in Bogotá?

Take a look at Bogotá's voting results, as published in El Tiempo. While Usaquen, Chapinero and Teusaquillo all voted SI, while majorities in the poor neighborhoods of Bosa, USME and Ciudad Bolivar, voted NO. On the other hand, many other poor rural areas of the country, such as Chocó, Putumayo and La Guajira, voted heavily SI.

On the one hand, you might expect that victims of violence, such as the tens of thousands of displaced people living in these poor areas, would vote SI to end the conflict. El Tiempo, however, hypothesizes that impoverished Colombians object to the guerrillas, who may have victimized them, receiving government stipends and other support, as agreed to in the peace accord.

Poverty has undoubtedly fueled Colombia's conflict. It may also be blocking an agreement.

Update: Multiple news reports say that evangelical churches, which tend to be strongest in poor neighborhoods, came out strong for the No vote, which might explain both the No winning in poor neighborhoods and the higher turnout there. However, the connection between the peace deal and evangelical issues - mostly LGBT rights - is pretty tenuous.

By Mike Ceaser, of Bogotá Bike Tours

A Conspiracy?

The 'NO' was a blow to Pres. Santos, to liberals, to the FARC and to Colombia's international allies.

It couldn't lose, but it did.

But perhap the group which comes out looking worst in the vote's wake were the pollsters. Polls published in the weeks before the vote consistently showed the peace deal being approved by more than 60% of Colombian voters. In fact, the NO won, albeit by a sliver.

How is this possible? Abstention was high, so perhaps many SI voters, overconfident of victory, just stayed home. Or, maybe the pollsters didn't do their job identifying which eligible voters were actually likely to go to the polls.

But the most intriguing theory suggests conspiracy. Media, business and government all wanted desperately for this to pass. Some campaign experts belief that many voters want to be on the winning side. So, by making people believe that the deal was a sure winner, perhaps that would make the victory come true. Did these groups team up to fake, manipulate or release polls only if they showed SI winning?

If so, things didn't work out that way.

Even the New York Times seemed to take a SI victory for granted.

VOX has this interesting analysis about why the pollsters misread the vote so badly, and why NO won. All the propaganda made NO voters ashamed to tell pollsters their position, and the victorious signing ceremony, with Timochenko's prominent participation, may have generated a popular rejection. I also suspect that the signing ceremony's air of victory and fait accompli made many SI supporters overconfident, and so they didn't bother to vote.

By Mike Ceaser, of Bogotá Bike Tours

Can Opposites Meet?

On Monday, a woman reads a newspaper
headlining the NO vote.

Should FARC leaders do prison time for their crimes?

Should land be redistributed to landless farmers?

Should ex-FARC leaders guilty of serious crimes be eligible for public office?

Unless the FARC guerrillas and ex-Pres. Uribe's supporters can agree on these issues, a lasting peace deal appears impossible.

Sunday's vote, in which Colombians rejected the deal by a tiny margin and with high abstention, left Pres. Santos severely weakened, and ex-Pres. Alvaro Uribe, who led the opposition to the deal, strengthened. Any new deal will have to satisfy the Uribistas. But Uribe made his reputation killing FARC guerrillas during his presidency from 2002 to 2010, and the FARC murdered his father. Uribe does not seem likely to compromise.

FARC leaders have said they won't return to war.

The FARC, on ther other hand, have insisted they are unwilling to go to prison, despite the
innumerable murders, kidnappings, recruitment of children and forced displacements they have committed. And Santos has also said this is not an option.

Uribe also comes from a family of landowners, who aren't likely to look kindly on others losing their land to campesinos, even tho Santos insists that owners' rights will be respected. Unequal distribution of land and resources has often been called the root cause of Colombia's conflicts, so leaving this unfixed might plunge Colombia into more conflict.

A demonstration Wednesday in favor of the peace agreement.

It's clear that FARC leaders' first priority in the negotiations was protecting their own freedom and comfort during the post-conflict period. Will they make concessions on those points at the behest of their sworn enemy? The FARC guerrillas have already vowed not to accept changes in the peace agreement.

Colombia's stability depends on whether these two enemies can find common ground - and quickly. Guerrilla leaders say they won't return to war. Nevertheless, while politicians talk, thousands of armed FARC guerrillas are sitting in jungle camps, growing frustrated and restless. What will they live off of, if they can no longer traffick drugs and extort ranchers?

Peace remains frustratingly far away.

By Mike Ceaser, of Bogotá Bike Tours

And What Now?

No party here. On Plaza Bolivar, soldiers truck away
decorations intended for a SI victory celebration.

Against most expectations, and a full-press propaganda campaign by the government and major media, Colombians voted to reject the peace accord with the FARC guerrillas.

So, what happens now?

The guerrillas are already half demobilized, and looking forward to a different life.

The guerrilla leaders have gotten used to a comfortable life at the negotiation table in Havana, and don't want to return to jungle.

The government has stopped fighting the guerrillas, and prepared plans and resources for the post-war. Those are suddenly useless.

Only with difficulty can the nation turn back. But how can they go forward with a deal rejected, albeit by a tiny proportion of voters?

People debate the NO vote
on Plaza Bolivar.

But if the Santos government does try advancing with the deal in the face of public rejection, many

This man objected to impunity for
guerrillas and soldiers guilty of
human rights violations..

guerrillas may not cooperate, knowing that if supporters of ex-Pres. Uribe win the next election, they could reject the Santos government's commitments and send the guerrillas to prison.

Renewed negotiations could last years, leaving thousands of armed guerrillas sitting restless in their camps looking for something to do, with no assurance that new negotiations will be more successful. If impunity for crimes committed by the guerrillas and soldiers is why Colombians rejected the current deal, would the two sides ever accept prison terms?

The peace agreement, with its broad impunity, was deeply flawed, but may have been the best one possible.

Someone debating on Plaza Bolivar this evening suggested that the Uribistas, who rejected this peace

Voting in central Bogotá. Most Bogotanos
backed the SI, but not enough.

deal but insist that they really do want peace, should now handle the negotiations with the FARC. But sincere talks between two such fierce enemies are almost unthinkable.

And will the bilateral ceasefire continue?

And what about the ELN guerrillas, who have been talking about entering peace talks? The public's rejection of the FARC deal shatters hopes of negotiations with them. The ELN will now stay in the mountains, kidnapping, murdering and sabotaging infrastructure.

Could Santos launch a new offensive against the same guerrillas with whom he just reached a peace deal? Santo was, after all, minister of defense during Pres. Uribe's successful military offensive against the same guerrillas in the early 2000s. But now the FARC have become his political allies against Uribe. He's unlikely to start killing them.

If one thing is clear, this loss devastates the presidency of Santos, who planned to make peace his legacy and resurrects Uribe, who led a military offensive against the guerrillas.

It seems likely that many Colombians rejected the peace agreement because of the impunity it gave the FARC, who committed innumerable human rights violations.

LGBTI for the SI.

One man, who identified himself as a Christian evangelical, objected to the agreement's 'impunity' for both guerrillas and soldiers. The soldiers guilty of the 'false positive' killings "will walk away laughing," he said.

Jaime, a middle-aged man who owns a pizzeria here in La Candelaria, said he voted No because of the stipends and subsidies guerrillas were to receive. His family, who owned a farm in Antioquia, had been driven off of their land by guerrillas, and relatives murdered, he said.

"Why should I pay those people with my tax money," he said.

But it also exposes lack of confidence in the government, which put all its energy behind the peace accord.

More broadly, this vote, together with Brexit, might indicate a generalized public rejection of establishment opinion - making me more fearful that Donald Trump could be the next U.S. president.

Colombians go to sleep tonight with their future uncertain.

But if something positive came out of this, it's the proof that Colombia has a real democracy in which the population can reject the president's most important policy.

By Mike Ceaser, of Bogotá Bike Tours

Colombia's Oil Addiction

Articles in El Tiempo call for more investment in
petroleum production.

Colombia is not often seen as a petroleum state like its neighbors Ecuador and Venezuela. Yet, until oil prices tanked, Colombia earned more than half of its foreign exchange income from petroleum exports. And oil provided a big chunk of government royalties - money that Colombia is desperate for to pay the costs of the peace deal to be voted on Nov. 2.

However, oil has brought big environmental costs, and produced relatively few jobs.

Now that petroleum's price dive has demonstrated the danger of relying on commodity exports, Colombia's response is simple: Double down on oil.

EcoPetrol's headquarters building in
Bogotá. The company's mascot
is an iguana.

El Tiempo has run a series of stories emphasizing the need to boost oil production with subsidies and tax breaks, neglecting to mention that these subsidies also benefit some of the nation's wealthiest men and corporations.

Nor is the newspaper or the government bothered by the contradiction between their dire warnings about the effects of oil-driven climate change and promises that Colombia will do its part, and the nation's oily ambitions.

I read recently that Colombia has only 7 years of petroleum reserves at the rate that it's pumping them out. Undoubtedly, they can extend those with more prospecting, but in the end it's probably a losing race.

There's also a vicious cycle (another type of tragedy of the commons) involved in the race to pump

An electric tax. Bogotá has exactly 43 of them on the streets,
according to El Tiempo.
(Photo: Ministry of the Environment)

more oil, which many other producers are also engaged in. The more oil producers pump to compensate for low prices, the lower prices will drop, making production gains valueless.

Colombia should instead direct subsidies toward manufacturing, which employs lots of people and is more sustainable in the long run. (And would produce employment for ex-guerrillas who may not want to become poor farmers.) It should also make real efforts to shift toward more efficient and oil-free energy in transportation and industry.


By Mike Ceaser, of Bogotá Bike Tours