By Hendrikje Grunow

It was as if God had decided to put every capacity for wonder to the test, holding Macondo's inhabitants in a continuous back and forth of exultation and disappointment, between doubt and revelation, until finally no one could know exactly where the boundaries of reality lay. [1]

Since Colombians were called to vote in a referendum on October 2 on whether to accept the peace agreement between the government and the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC ), Macondo has once again become the more real reference for Colombia, as this quote by Colombian Nobel Prize winner García Márquez, which has since gone viral, shows. Only those who take into account the emotions on all sides of the conflict can come close to an explanation of why a narrow majority of voters opposed the treaty.

Shock and disappointment

Sunday evening, October 2: My husband and I sit in front of the computer and watch the results of the vote live. When the first figures appear, we breathe a sigh of relief: around 53% in favor, only the quorum of around 4.5 million votes still needs to be reached. New results are now being added every five to ten minutes and the quorum will soon be reached. On the other hand, the lead of Yes votes is getting smaller and smaller, the urban centers will soon be completely counted. Stunned, we refresh the page, click frantically through the individual regions and hope that larger shares of the vote are still missing. When more than 99% of the votes are counted at around one o'clock in the morning, it is clear that those who voted at all - 37.4% - have decided against the agreement by a narrow majority. There is silence in the otherwise so active family WhatsApp group, and I also see many stunned posts from friends on Facebook. No one understands exactly what has just happened. Why are people rejecting a peace treaty?

(Lack of) compassion

Many of my friends and relatives are certainly not ardent admirers of Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos. Nevertheless, they agreed that the vote was not about being for or against the current government, but about showing support for the efforts to achieve peace. Especially in the country's urban centers, the conflict has become less and less visible in recent years. In the parts of the country that are heavily affected by the conflict, people voted overwhelmingly for peace, but in the cities, skepticism prevails.

Many people have made themselves at home in the insecurity and often know nothing else, as the war has been going on for decades. When many news reports talk about 52 years of conflict, this only applies to the conflict with the FARC, which was founded in 1964. However, the historical, social, political and economic context that made this foundation possible is rarely mentioned. The enormous inequalities in income distribution, conflicts over land, drug trafficking and paramilitarism are also part of the conflict and point to historical continuities that are given little consideration in this periodization. Although these aspects are addressed in the almost 300-page peace agreement [2], many Colombians still doubt whether the regulations - particularly with regard to drug trafficking and organized crime - can be implemented at all. The hope for peace of the victims in the countryside does not outweigh the doubts and fears of the less affected urban population.

Envy and fear

In particular, the regulations on the level of punishment for human rights violations and the political participation of the ex-guerriller@s had raised eyebrows. The promised state financial support for ex-combatants to reintegrate into civilian life was also a thorn in the side of some voters. The No! campaign had also stirred up envy and fear through targeted misinformation. In the post-factual election campaign, it was then more important that the "gender ideology" would not destroy the "traditional family structure" and that the country would be saved from communism. The fact that none of these points were part of the agreement was of secondary importance. In many cases, the "no" was also based on a feeling of envy: Why should they get money from the state when I have to work to survive? Why are they allowed to sit in Congress when nobody asks me for my opinion? Why don't they have to go to prison for their crimes, where I am reported for every little misdemeanor? Although these questions are based on a misunderstanding of the points agreed in the treaty, they speak to people's feelings: even this treaty does not eliminate many historical injustices. [3] Fear, envy, anger and defiance are expressions of a diffuse feeling of disadvantage, the relevance of which for peace research should have become clear from the surprising victory of the No vote.

Silent hope

Yet a permanent ceasefire and the disarmament of the FARC would be a major step forward, at least in those parts of the country where the weapons are not at rest. And so demonstrations and rallies for peace also began in the cities once the initial shock had passed. A new sense of cohesion and common struggle found expression on the streets. In Bogota alone, 40,000 people took part in the 3rd March of Silence, joining a historic tradition of silent protest. [4] When the Nobel Peace Prize was finally awarded to President Santos on October 7, there was a renewed sense of euphoria. The sign from the international community not to throw in the towel now gave many disappointed Yes voters new courage and hope that one day in the not too distant future there could still be peace. The back and forth between elation and disappointment, between doubt and revelation, will probably continue for a while yet, but the citizens of Macondo are prepared to tear down the borders of reality for peace.

Sources

[1] Gabriel García Márquez (2014): One Hundred Years of Solitude. Frankfurt am Main: Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag, p. 258.

[2] The full text can be found in Spanish here: https://www.mesadeconversaciones.com.co/sites/default/files/24_08_2016acuerdofinalfinalfinal-1472094587.pdf (last accessed 13.10.2016).

[3] See also the report in the Colombian daily newspaper El Espectador on voters in Ciudad Bolívar, one of the poorest districts of Bogota with a very high density of displaced people, who - in contrast to most other regions severely affected by the conflict - voted no in the majority of cases: http://www.elespectador.com/noticias/paz/un-no-hacerse-escuchar-articulo-659274 (last accessed 14.10.2016).

[4] The first March of Silence took place on February 7, 1948 and was directed against the violence against representatives and supporters of the Liberal Party. The second March of Silence took place on August 25, 1989, following the assassination of the liberal presidential candidate Luis Carlos Galán.