Search
895 results for “eln_urbano”
-
¿Quién es quién en el diálogo de paz entre el Gobierno colombiano y el ELN? https://loquesomos.org/quien-es-quien-en-el-dialogo-de-paz-entre-el-gobierno-colombiano-y-el-eln/ #SíSePudo #VivirSabroso #PazAhora #LeyDePazTotal
-
#EnVideo📹| Presidente Petro autoriza suspender órdenes de captura a negociadores del ELN
-
#Teltarif - Krach wegen Medienzeit: Das sollten Eltern niemals sagen https://www.teltarif.de/nr0/medienzeit-regeln-kinder-eltern/news/103692.html
-
The Paradissidents Against the Revolution
Today, paradissident groups have a presence in more than 22 departments of Colombia, expanding their dirty war tactics against the people, murdering, disappearing, and constantly harassing communities while deepening drug trafficking in the regions and forging alliances with other paramilitary factions. While these actions have had serious impacts on communities and grassroots organizations, one effect that has received little attention is the terrible damage they have done to the legitimacy of the revolutionary and insurgent tradition in the country.
The History of Struggle That Is Bleeding Out Today
In Colombia, the history of revolutionary and insurgent projects is long and rich in events, proposals, and methods, at least for study. The influences and motivations for change that fueled each project were varied, ultimately culminating in small “victories” or the annihilation of these visions for the country. With many of these groups, including liberal guerrillas, the State established agreements that often resulted in assassinations after promises of amnesty, as with Guadalupe Salcedo, or in persecution and extermination, as happened with the Patriotic Union, after negotiations and promises. There were also cases where insurgent projects fell into the DDR (Disarmament, Demobilization, and Reintegration) trap, laying down their weapons and surrendering them under false pretenses and projects that the establishment promised but never fulfilled, or only partially fulfilled, without addressing the underlying causes of the conflict. The truth is that the FARC-EP was one such project, which, like all others, had its successes and failures, and which notably deepened the struggle against the oligarchy and imperialism. As the ELN, we understood very well that this was a force that was part of the country’s revolutionary projects, with whom we could engage in dialogue to jointly advance the revolution. An example of this was the formation of the Simón Bolívar Guerrilla Coordinating Board, which, although it ultimately remained just another attempt at unity, helped us understand this force as legitimate, even though we had different methods and approaches. Within it, we recognized great leaders like Manuel Marulanda Vélez, Alfonso Cano, and Mono Jojoy, and we are certain that they felt the same way about our commanders.
Prior to the signing of the agreements in 2016, as part of a strategy to weaken and dismantle this guerrilla group, state forces focused on eliminating several leaders of this project, demoralizing its strength and undermining the effectiveness of its military strategy. Several years were dedicated to striking blows against the FARC-EP, which, coupled with misguided decisions (such as accepting drug trafficking as a source of funding, which led to the political and ideological disintegration of a large part of its ranks), resulted in a strategic defeat for its leadership. In other words, demoralization reached such a point that the certainty of victory was lost. Peace then emerged as a horizon that could offer an option to end the war with dignity. Thus, in 2016, after lengthy negotiations and significant concessions to overcome that historical impasse, the peace accords were signed between the FARC-EP and the government of Juan Manuel Santos. The peace accords constitute a turning point, marking the beginning of a new chapter in history—the story that brings us to the present moment.
The FARC-EP Dies and the Paradissidents Are Born
Prior to the peace agreement, and as a result of internal tensions and divisions stemming from various factors—including the number of concessions made during negotiations, which were not universally supported by the armed forces; the fragmentation of a faction whose primary interest lay in drug trafficking in the regions; and internal power struggles and disagreements that fueled divisions—some groups refused to accept the agreements and remained determined to continue their armed struggle. These groups formed a new structure, eventually commanded by Gentil Duarte and known as the “Central General Staff.” Furthermore, after the signing of the agreements and during the period designated for their implementation, some of the key leaders at the negotiating table surprised the Colombian people by taking up arms again, calling themselves the “Second Marquetalia,” citing the government’s failure to uphold the agreements. These two factions constituted the first phase of the reorganization of these “armed groups.” The main problem became evident after these groups, abandoning the legacy of the FARC-EP, became mere remnants with no real reason to wage war other than their drug trafficking businesses. Although there were some differences between them, both ended up acting in the same way, generating terror in communities and killing at any cost to maintain their economic interests and territorial control in the regions. Later, the Central General Staff subdivided, giving rise to the General Staff of Blocs and Fronts, which today is just another such force, lacking a political vision and instead focused on business interests that only harm the country.
In the countryside and cities against the revolution
Today, nothing remains of the FARC-EP’s revolutionary project, only an empty shell that has been used to establish a foothold in territories, but also to harass and intimidate those who stand in the way of their business. The strategy has not only been confined to the regions, their municipalities, and rural areas, but has also been evident in the country’s cities. Although the methods vary, a modus operandi of territorial control based on micro-trafficking in the cities is evident. However, the ways in which they have ultimately influenced the social and organizational fabric have been varied, and in this case, it is worth noting that perhaps the point of greatest consolidation of these groups occurred primarily during the social uprising, when, through the dissemination of a false revolutionary discourse, they attracted the attention of many young people who, not knowing where to channel their righteous anger, ended up joining the dissident groups, deceived by the narrative and legacy of the FARC-EP. Furthermore, they were exploited through underhanded tactics, taking advantage of the vulnerabilities of working-class youth by offering money to work for their groups. This was the case for many young people, including el de Coco, el de Bigotes, and many others throughout the country. For the rest of the country, they have implemented different methods, depending on the degree of territorial control and the capacity for co-optation through rhetoric and resources.
Thus, in southwestern cities like Cali, Popayán, and Nariño, the method has been the infiltration of social organizations through their funding, instrumentalizing them to carry out their plans. In places like Putumayo and Caquetá, among others, the modus operandi has been coercion, given the territorial control they have established since their formation in these areas. In other regions such as southern Bolívar, the Aburrá Valley in Antioquia, Chocó, and the Urabá region of Antioquia, the way to establish control has been through opening up to other paramilitary groups in direct alliance for strategic plans. Finally, in northeastern cities like Cúcuta and Bucaramanga, the method of funding organizations, making them functional to their territorial control plans, has also been implemented.
These logics not only complicate the interpretation of the various territorial actors, but in the long run, they delegitimize any revolutionary project, since ultimately, they represent a contradiction between discourse and deeds. These groups have not only damaged their own tradition and the legacy of the FARC-EP, but they also call into question any project that calls itself revolutionary. Today, as the ELN, we know that the actions of these groups contribute to the counterinsurgency war that has been waged against us throughout our years of struggle and resistance, but we also know that we have been transparent with the people, in every word, in every action, in every moment in which we have spoken to the people and they have listened to us. Today it is up to us to tell the people for whom we fight not to be fooled, that they must discern and not fall for tricks, that our tradition of struggle remains intact, and that today we are the ONLY revolutionary project in this country and that we will not take ONE STEP BACK.
By: Octavia Rebelde, Antorcha Correspondent
Source: https://insurgenciaurbana-eln.net/las-paradisidencias-contra-la-revolucion/
https://abolitionmedia.noblogs.org/?p=30329 #colombia #counterinsurgency #eln #farcEp #paradissidents #southAmerica -
The Paradissidents Against the Revolution
Today, paradissident groups have a presence in more than 22 departments of Colombia, expanding their dirty war tactics against the people, murdering, disappearing, and constantly harassing communities while deepening drug trafficking in the regions and forging alliances with other paramilitary factions. While these actions have had serious impacts on communities and grassroots organizations, one effect that has received little attention is the terrible damage they have done to the legitimacy of the revolutionary and insurgent tradition in the country.
The History of Struggle That Is Bleeding Out Today
In Colombia, the history of revolutionary and insurgent projects is long and rich in events, proposals, and methods, at least for study. The influences and motivations for change that fueled each project were varied, ultimately culminating in small “victories” or the annihilation of these visions for the country. With many of these groups, including liberal guerrillas, the State established agreements that often resulted in assassinations after promises of amnesty, as with Guadalupe Salcedo, or in persecution and extermination, as happened with the Patriotic Union, after negotiations and promises. There were also cases where insurgent projects fell into the DDR (Disarmament, Demobilization, and Reintegration) trap, laying down their weapons and surrendering them under false pretenses and projects that the establishment promised but never fulfilled, or only partially fulfilled, without addressing the underlying causes of the conflict. The truth is that the FARC-EP was one such project, which, like all others, had its successes and failures, and which notably deepened the struggle against the oligarchy and imperialism. As the ELN, we understood very well that this was a force that was part of the country’s revolutionary projects, with whom we could engage in dialogue to jointly advance the revolution. An example of this was the formation of the Simón Bolívar Guerrilla Coordinating Board, which, although it ultimately remained just another attempt at unity, helped us understand this force as legitimate, even though we had different methods and approaches. Within it, we recognized great leaders like Manuel Marulanda Vélez, Alfonso Cano, and Mono Jojoy, and we are certain that they felt the same way about our commanders.
Prior to the signing of the agreements in 2016, as part of a strategy to weaken and dismantle this guerrilla group, state forces focused on eliminating several leaders of this project, demoralizing its strength and undermining the effectiveness of its military strategy. Several years were dedicated to striking blows against the FARC-EP, which, coupled with misguided decisions (such as accepting drug trafficking as a source of funding, which led to the political and ideological disintegration of a large part of its ranks), resulted in a strategic defeat for its leadership. In other words, demoralization reached such a point that the certainty of victory was lost. Peace then emerged as a horizon that could offer an option to end the war with dignity. Thus, in 2016, after lengthy negotiations and significant concessions to overcome that historical impasse, the peace accords were signed between the FARC-EP and the government of Juan Manuel Santos. The peace accords constitute a turning point, marking the beginning of a new chapter in history—the story that brings us to the present moment.
The FARC-EP Dies and the Paradissidents Are Born
Prior to the peace agreement, and as a result of internal tensions and divisions stemming from various factors—including the number of concessions made during negotiations, which were not universally supported by the armed forces; the fragmentation of a faction whose primary interest lay in drug trafficking in the regions; and internal power struggles and disagreements that fueled divisions—some groups refused to accept the agreements and remained determined to continue their armed struggle. These groups formed a new structure, eventually commanded by Gentil Duarte and known as the “Central General Staff.” Furthermore, after the signing of the agreements and during the period designated for their implementation, some of the key leaders at the negotiating table surprised the Colombian people by taking up arms again, calling themselves the “Second Marquetalia,” citing the government’s failure to uphold the agreements. These two factions constituted the first phase of the reorganization of these “armed groups.” The main problem became evident after these groups, abandoning the legacy of the FARC-EP, became mere remnants with no real reason to wage war other than their drug trafficking businesses. Although there were some differences between them, both ended up acting in the same way, generating terror in communities and killing at any cost to maintain their economic interests and territorial control in the regions. Later, the Central General Staff subdivided, giving rise to the General Staff of Blocs and Fronts, which today is just another such force, lacking a political vision and instead focused on business interests that only harm the country.
In the countryside and cities against the revolution
Today, nothing remains of the FARC-EP’s revolutionary project, only an empty shell that has been used to establish a foothold in territories, but also to harass and intimidate those who stand in the way of their business. The strategy has not only been confined to the regions, their municipalities, and rural areas, but has also been evident in the country’s cities. Although the methods vary, a modus operandi of territorial control based on micro-trafficking in the cities is evident. However, the ways in which they have ultimately influenced the social and organizational fabric have been varied, and in this case, it is worth noting that perhaps the point of greatest consolidation of these groups occurred primarily during the social uprising, when, through the dissemination of a false revolutionary discourse, they attracted the attention of many young people who, not knowing where to channel their righteous anger, ended up joining the dissident groups, deceived by the narrative and legacy of the FARC-EP. Furthermore, they were exploited through underhanded tactics, taking advantage of the vulnerabilities of working-class youth by offering money to work for their groups. This was the case for many young people, including el de Coco, el de Bigotes, and many others throughout the country. For the rest of the country, they have implemented different methods, depending on the degree of territorial control and the capacity for co-optation through rhetoric and resources.
Thus, in southwestern cities like Cali, Popayán, and Nariño, the method has been the infiltration of social organizations through their funding, instrumentalizing them to carry out their plans. In places like Putumayo and Caquetá, among others, the modus operandi has been coercion, given the territorial control they have established since their formation in these areas. In other regions such as southern Bolívar, the Aburrá Valley in Antioquia, Chocó, and the Urabá region of Antioquia, the way to establish control has been through opening up to other paramilitary groups in direct alliance for strategic plans. Finally, in northeastern cities like Cúcuta and Bucaramanga, the method of funding organizations, making them functional to their territorial control plans, has also been implemented.
These logics not only complicate the interpretation of the various territorial actors, but in the long run, they delegitimize any revolutionary project, since ultimately, they represent a contradiction between discourse and deeds. These groups have not only damaged their own tradition and the legacy of the FARC-EP, but they also call into question any project that calls itself revolutionary. Today, as the ELN, we know that the actions of these groups contribute to the counterinsurgency war that has been waged against us throughout our years of struggle and resistance, but we also know that we have been transparent with the people, in every word, in every action, in every moment in which we have spoken to the people and they have listened to us. Today it is up to us to tell the people for whom we fight not to be fooled, that they must discern and not fall for tricks, that our tradition of struggle remains intact, and that today we are the ONLY revolutionary project in this country and that we will not take ONE STEP BACK.
By: Octavia Rebelde, Antorcha Correspondent
Source: https://insurgenciaurbana-eln.net/las-paradisidencias-contra-la-revolucion/
https://abolitionmedia.noblogs.org/?p=30329 #colombia #counterinsurgency #eln #farcEp #paradissidents #southAmerica -
The Erosion of the International Order
Comandante Antonio García
For decades, the so-called “rules-based international order” was presented as the civilizational horizon that emerged after the end of World War II in 1945, a framework of multilateral institutions, treaties, and consensuses that promised to replace the “law of the strongest” with the primacy of law.
This foundational narrative legitimized the postwar architecture and sustained the expansion of economic and political liberalism as a universal model. However, the most recent deliberations of the Munich Security Conference and the World Economic Forum (2026) reveal a profound mutation, a transition to an order governed by military, technological, and financial supremacy.
This shift is not merely rhetorical; it expresses the realization that the rules have been operating in an increasingly selective manner, where economic sanctions function as coercive devices, comparable to weapons of war, and that security, understood in strategic rather than human terms, has become the organizing principle of contemporary capitalism. The economy is militarized and foreign policy is corporatized, shaping—or rather, imposing—a new order where systemic competition replaces regulated cooperation.
Munich: Security as Dogma
The Munich Security Conference (2026) consolidated itself as a privileged space for strategic coordination among Western powers. The repeated emphasis on “deterrence,” “great power competition,” and the strengthening of military alliances reveals a significant shift, where classical diplomacy, based on negotiation, is discarded or used as part of a strategy of deception, while the next military coup is being prepared.
In this scenario, security ceases to be a means of guaranteeing stability and becomes an organizing dogma of the system. Now, technological and military supremacy redefines the limits of legitimacy, where international law fades or is conditioned by who holds the power.
Davos: Economy and War Under the Same Paradigm
In parallel with the security debates in Europe, the World Economic Forum (2026) has insisted that the energy transition, digitalization, and artificial intelligence constitute the pillars of the new global growth cycle. Its strategic reports underscore the need to strengthen supply chains, secure critical minerals, and accelerate technological innovation as conditions for the “resilience” of the global economic system.
However, these processes cannot be analyzed outside the context of geopolitics. The competition for advanced semiconductors, rare earth elements, and control of digital infrastructures is part of a systemic struggle for technological and productive primacy. Economic security has become national security. The corporate language of Davos—resilience, sustainability, innovation—thus converges with the strategic lexicon that dominates the Munich Security Conference: deterrence, hybrid threats, strategic competition. Both forums express the same concern: the reconfiguration of global power in a context where multipolarity has become highly conflictive, and where perhaps the very concept of “multi” is being questioned.
It has long been clear that historical hegemonic transitions combine financial expansion and military reorganization in cycles where economic supremacy is sustained by global coercive structures. Today, financialization coexists with accelerated remilitarization, evidenced by increased defense spending and the integration of industrial policy and security strategy. The global economy is not reorganizing itself apart from security; it is becoming securitized.
The Hemispheric Discourse: Latin America as a “Strategic Zone”
In this scenario, the interventions of Marco Rubio and other US leaders reaffirm a vision in which Latin America and the Caribbean are conceived as a geopolitical space under dispute. Under the narrative of countering “adversarial” influences and protecting strategic supply chains, the old doctrine of hemispheric alignment is presented as renewed and legitimized.
Furthermore, contemporary global capitalism has long operated through a transnational apparatus of control and security that connects states, corporations, and military complexes beyond formal borders. The expansion of mechanisms for military interoperability and regional security cooperation can be interpreted within this structural logic, a doctrine already in place.
The recent call for military leadership (2026) from more than thirty countries in the hemisphere by the United States suggests an attempt to institutionalize common standards of doctrine, training, and equipment that, in their strategic rationale, are reminiscent of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), perhaps adopting a more suggestive name.
This “doctrinal” update is more dangerous because it goes beyond military risks. The expanded definition of “threats” incorporates social conflicts, disputes over natural resources, and sovereign political projects that challenge the dominant economic architecture.
From Consensus to Coercion
To date, all hegemony has combined consensus and coercion. After the Cold War, the liberal order was sustained by the promise of economic integration under common rules; today, faced with the fragmentation of the system and the rise of new powers, coercion is gaining centrality.
Crises in the world order become evident when its mechanisms of legitimation are exhausted, as is happening today with the proliferation of regional wars, sanctions, and technological disputes; where the transition is being attempted by prioritizing hard power, if not solely military power.
In this context, for the Global South, this means greater plunder, more financial and technological dependence, where the application of international rules is becoming increasingly diffuse or nonexistent.
Contemporary Barbarism and Challenges of the South
Current barbarism is not expressed as total collapse, but as the normalization of permanent war, prolonged conflicts, blockades, sanctions, and hybrid operations, which make peace a fragile condition, entirely subordinate to the balance of power.
As we can see, the ongoing transition can lead to a conflictive multipolarity, but it also opens avenues for redefining rules from non-subordinate perspectives. In this sense, both the World Economic Forum and the Munich Security Conference express an attempt to reorganize hegemony in a world where consensus is meaningless unless accompanied by force.
From the Global South, understanding this shift is a strategic imperative, because when force redefines the norm, sovereignty and self-determination become conditions for survival.
ADDENDUM 1: The ELN’s unilateral ceasefire on this election day is entirely true and will continue until tomorrow, March 10th, at midnight. The truth prevails, and the liars are exposed for what they are, so that we may all remember.
Source: https://eln-voces.net/2026/03/09/la-erosion-del-orden-internacional/
https://abolitionmedia.noblogs.org/?p=29645 #AntonioGarcía #colombia #eln #geopolitics #hegemony #latinAmerica #southAmerica -
The Erosion of the International Order
Comandante Antonio García
For decades, the so-called “rules-based international order” was presented as the civilizational horizon that emerged after the end of World War II in 1945, a framework of multilateral institutions, treaties, and consensuses that promised to replace the “law of the strongest” with the primacy of law.
This foundational narrative legitimized the postwar architecture and sustained the expansion of economic and political liberalism as a universal model. However, the most recent deliberations of the Munich Security Conference and the World Economic Forum (2026) reveal a profound mutation, a transition to an order governed by military, technological, and financial supremacy.
This shift is not merely rhetorical; it expresses the realization that the rules have been operating in an increasingly selective manner, where economic sanctions function as coercive devices, comparable to weapons of war, and that security, understood in strategic rather than human terms, has become the organizing principle of contemporary capitalism. The economy is militarized and foreign policy is corporatized, shaping—or rather, imposing—a new order where systemic competition replaces regulated cooperation.
Munich: Security as Dogma
The Munich Security Conference (2026) consolidated itself as a privileged space for strategic coordination among Western powers. The repeated emphasis on “deterrence,” “great power competition,” and the strengthening of military alliances reveals a significant shift, where classical diplomacy, based on negotiation, is discarded or used as part of a strategy of deception, while the next military coup is being prepared.
In this scenario, security ceases to be a means of guaranteeing stability and becomes an organizing dogma of the system. Now, technological and military supremacy redefines the limits of legitimacy, where international law fades or is conditioned by who holds the power.
Davos: Economy and War Under the Same Paradigm
In parallel with the security debates in Europe, the World Economic Forum (2026) has insisted that the energy transition, digitalization, and artificial intelligence constitute the pillars of the new global growth cycle. Its strategic reports underscore the need to strengthen supply chains, secure critical minerals, and accelerate technological innovation as conditions for the “resilience” of the global economic system.
However, these processes cannot be analyzed outside the context of geopolitics. The competition for advanced semiconductors, rare earth elements, and control of digital infrastructures is part of a systemic struggle for technological and productive primacy. Economic security has become national security. The corporate language of Davos—resilience, sustainability, innovation—thus converges with the strategic lexicon that dominates the Munich Security Conference: deterrence, hybrid threats, strategic competition. Both forums express the same concern: the reconfiguration of global power in a context where multipolarity has become highly conflictive, and where perhaps the very concept of “multi” is being questioned.
It has long been clear that historical hegemonic transitions combine financial expansion and military reorganization in cycles where economic supremacy is sustained by global coercive structures. Today, financialization coexists with accelerated remilitarization, evidenced by increased defense spending and the integration of industrial policy and security strategy. The global economy is not reorganizing itself apart from security; it is becoming securitized.
The Hemispheric Discourse: Latin America as a “Strategic Zone”
In this scenario, the interventions of Marco Rubio and other US leaders reaffirm a vision in which Latin America and the Caribbean are conceived as a geopolitical space under dispute. Under the narrative of countering “adversarial” influences and protecting strategic supply chains, the old doctrine of hemispheric alignment is presented as renewed and legitimized.
Furthermore, contemporary global capitalism has long operated through a transnational apparatus of control and security that connects states, corporations, and military complexes beyond formal borders. The expansion of mechanisms for military interoperability and regional security cooperation can be interpreted within this structural logic, a doctrine already in place.
The recent call for military leadership (2026) from more than thirty countries in the hemisphere by the United States suggests an attempt to institutionalize common standards of doctrine, training, and equipment that, in their strategic rationale, are reminiscent of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), perhaps adopting a more suggestive name.
This “doctrinal” update is more dangerous because it goes beyond military risks. The expanded definition of “threats” incorporates social conflicts, disputes over natural resources, and sovereign political projects that challenge the dominant economic architecture.
From Consensus to Coercion
To date, all hegemony has combined consensus and coercion. After the Cold War, the liberal order was sustained by the promise of economic integration under common rules; today, faced with the fragmentation of the system and the rise of new powers, coercion is gaining centrality.
Crises in the world order become evident when its mechanisms of legitimation are exhausted, as is happening today with the proliferation of regional wars, sanctions, and technological disputes; where the transition is being attempted by prioritizing hard power, if not solely military power.
In this context, for the Global South, this means greater plunder, more financial and technological dependence, where the application of international rules is becoming increasingly diffuse or nonexistent.
Contemporary Barbarism and Challenges of the South
Current barbarism is not expressed as total collapse, but as the normalization of permanent war, prolonged conflicts, blockades, sanctions, and hybrid operations, which make peace a fragile condition, entirely subordinate to the balance of power.
As we can see, the ongoing transition can lead to a conflictive multipolarity, but it also opens avenues for redefining rules from non-subordinate perspectives. In this sense, both the World Economic Forum and the Munich Security Conference express an attempt to reorganize hegemony in a world where consensus is meaningless unless accompanied by force.
From the Global South, understanding this shift is a strategic imperative, because when force redefines the norm, sovereignty and self-determination become conditions for survival.
ADDENDUM 1: The ELN’s unilateral ceasefire on this election day is entirely true and will continue until tomorrow, March 10th, at midnight. The truth prevails, and the liars are exposed for what they are, so that we may all remember.
Source: https://eln-voces.net/2026/03/09/la-erosion-del-orden-internacional/
https://abolitionmedia.noblogs.org/?p=29645 #AntonioGarcía #colombia #eln #geopolitics #hegemony #latinAmerica #southAmerica -
📣 News Digest #RDM in #NaturalScience Week 10, 2026!
Today with @deltablot, @NFDI4Cat, @NFDI4Chem and @PSDI. Enjoy reading:
https://thefairelephant.com/news_digest_archive/news-digest-rdm-in-natural-science-week-10-2026/
#FAIRElephantNews #RDM #ELN #ResearchDataManagement #FAIRdata
-
📣 News Digest #RDM in #NaturalScience Week 09, 2026!
Today with #eLabFTW (@deltablot), @FAIRmat, @NFDI4Cat, @NFDI4Chem, @NFDI4DS and @PSDI. Enjoy reading!
https://thefairelephant.com/news_digest_archive/news-digest-rdm-in-natural-science-week-09-2026/
What was this week's highlight? Let me know in the comments.
#FAIRElephantNews #FAIRdata #ELN #RDM #ResearchDataManagement #Chemotion
-
Und am Mittwoch und Donnerstag geht unsere #LoveDataWeek 2026 dann weiter:
📅Mi, 11. Feb, 14h00
An #ELN for Thuringian Research Groups: eine #TKFDMCoffeeLectures-Episode über unsere #eLabFTW-Instanz📅Do, 12. Feb, 10h00
Exklusiv für Dich, falls Du PI oder Projektkoordinator:in in der @unijena bist:
“Research Data Management - Essentials for project coordinators”Infos zu allen Beiträgen
👉 https://forschungsdaten-thueringen.de/nachricht/das-tkfdm-bei-der-love-data-week-2026.html -
#Kolumbien: In #Catatumbo, nahe der venezolanischen Grenze, griff das kolumbianische Militär gezielt Mitglieder der #ELN-Guerilla an. Mindestens sieben wurden getötet, ein weiteres festgenommen. Mehr dazu auf #amerika21. https://amerika21.de/2026/02/282619/eln-guerilla-kaempfe-kolumbien
-
#Kolumbien: In #Catatumbo, nahe der venezolanischen Grenze, griff das kolumbianische Militär gezielt Mitglieder der #ELN-Guerilla an. Mindestens sieben wurden getötet, ein weiteres festgenommen. Mehr dazu auf #amerika21. https://amerika21.de/2026/02/282619/eln-guerilla-kaempfe-kolumbien
-
Colombia confirmó acuerdo con Estados Unidos para perseguir a jefes de grupos armados y del narcotráfico | vía #UChileRadio
-
Colombia confirmó acuerdo con Estados Unidos para perseguir a jefes de grupos armados y del narcotráfico | vía #UChileRadio
-
Colombia confirmó acuerdo con Estados Unidos para perseguir a jefes de grupos armados y del narcotráfico | vía #UChileRadio
-
Antonio García: ‘A National Agreement Is Required’
In the last week, Antonio García, first comandante of the ELN, gave interviews to journalists from the United Kingdom, France and the United States; Here we present a selection of his responses, about the kidnapping of President Maduro, the resistance to imperialist aggression and the political solution to the conflict.
THE SUNDAY TIMES NEWSPAPER OF THE UNITED KINGDOM
[1] What impact does the arrest of Nicolás Maduro have on the political and military strategy of the National Liberation Army?
AG: The impact is not for the ELN, but for international legislation, since any president of any government, who does not share the policy of the United States, can be attacked and kidnapped by the American military forces. It also sets a precedent for the application of extraterritorial justice, destroying the sovereignty of the judicial systems of other countries, putting an end to the existence of Nation States.
For the ELN it is the reaffirmation of the existence of flesh and blood imperialism and that it does not distance itself from wars, to deal or understand with other States, legitimizing the right to defense and the fight of resistance.
[2] In the case of a direct military intervention by the United States in Venezuela, what would be the position and reaction of the ELN?
AG: The ELN at various times in its history has been linked to international solidarity, the José Antonio Galán National Pro-Liberation Brigade, which would give rise to the ELN, was created to link itself to fighting with the Cuban people, in the October crisis in 1962. We also had comrades supporting the struggle in Nicaragua, El Salvador and other processes.
We are an Organization linked to the struggle of the National Liberation Movements of the world and we listen when they call us, to support the struggle of the people, we are not interventionist, when they call us we support in solidarity and therefore we place ourselves under the orders of those people and processes. We do not direct anything where it does not belong to us.
FRENCH PRESS AGENCY (AFP)
[3] What changes for you as a structure that operates on the border, the fact that Nicolás Maduro is no longer the president of Venezuela? Is it true that you are or were in Venezuelan territory and began your return to Colombia?
AG: The location of the ELN structures is defined by the strategic plan, Colombia’s land borders are 5 and two oceans. Due to its configuration, for each of them there is a definition in the plan, the same with the seas and rivers, no one ‘puts their eggs in one basket’. What happened in Venezuela affects the continent because the American troops kidnapped a President, who even made Petro change his speech.
The ELN is focused with priority on Colombia. The government and the military have always said that I spend my time abroad, that is not new, if I told them now that I was abroad, they would say that I was in Colombia. What I do specify is that there is no exodus in the ELN and it is attentive to threats.
[4] Alias Iván Mordisco proposed a union of guerrillas to fight against the United States, will you accept?
AG: As soon as the demobilization dissident groups began to form, they were told that we agreed to talk when they were unified, so as not to talk to each faction, but they could not join and it became complex. If it is to defend the Homeland against the foreign aggressor, we will find ourselves in the fight.
MAX BEARAK FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES
[5] Has the ELN been increasing its military capabilities in anticipation of offensives by Colombian and US forces?
AG: The generation and creation of capabilities with the application of technology in our weapons is not new, that cannot be improvised, the State military has realized, it is no longer a secret, we have been developing that plan for more than 10 years in our military industry, in various types of weapons.
[6] Are you still open to dialogue with President Petro, or do you feel that he has abandoned the peace process with the ELN?
AG: The ELN speaks to the country, it presents its proposal for a National Agreement to all political and social forces, to all candidates for the next government; Of course, Petro is part of the political game in the composition of forces in the next elections. Now it is about going beyond a dialogue, to build a more in-depth route that allows overcoming both the country’s structural crisis and the social, political and armed conflict.
We have already seen that all governments have fallen short in their peace policies and a national agreement is required that makes this possible, a truly constituent process that has the strength to produce the changes that the regime and the political class block in parliament.
Source: https://eln-voces.net/2026/01/19/antonio-garcia-se-requiere-un-acuerdo-de-pais/
https://abolitionmedia.noblogs.org/?p=27557 #AntonioGarcía #colombia #eln #guerrilla #southAmerica #usImperialism #venezuela -
Antonio García: ‘A National Agreement Is Required’
In the last week, Antonio García, first comandante of the ELN, gave interviews to journalists from the United Kingdom, France and the United States; Here we present a selection of his responses, about the kidnapping of President Maduro, the resistance to imperialist aggression and the political solution to the conflict.
THE SUNDAY TIMES NEWSPAPER OF THE UNITED KINGDOM
[1] What impact does the arrest of Nicolás Maduro have on the political and military strategy of the National Liberation Army?
AG: The impact is not for the ELN, but for international legislation, since any president of any government, who does not share the policy of the United States, can be attacked and kidnapped by the American military forces. It also sets a precedent for the application of extraterritorial justice, destroying the sovereignty of the judicial systems of other countries, putting an end to the existence of Nation States.
For the ELN it is the reaffirmation of the existence of flesh and blood imperialism and that it does not distance itself from wars, to deal or understand with other States, legitimizing the right to defense and the fight of resistance.
[2] In the case of a direct military intervention by the United States in Venezuela, what would be the position and reaction of the ELN?
AG: The ELN at various times in its history has been linked to international solidarity, the José Antonio Galán National Pro-Liberation Brigade, which would give rise to the ELN, was created to link itself to fighting with the Cuban people, in the October crisis in 1962. We also had comrades supporting the struggle in Nicaragua, El Salvador and other processes.
We are an Organization linked to the struggle of the National Liberation Movements of the world and we listen when they call us, to support the struggle of the people, we are not interventionist, when they call us we support in solidarity and therefore we place ourselves under the orders of those people and processes. We do not direct anything where it does not belong to us.
FRENCH PRESS AGENCY (AFP)
[3] What changes for you as a structure that operates on the border, the fact that Nicolás Maduro is no longer the president of Venezuela? Is it true that you are or were in Venezuelan territory and began your return to Colombia?
AG: The location of the ELN structures is defined by the strategic plan, Colombia’s land borders are 5 and two oceans. Due to its configuration, for each of them there is a definition in the plan, the same with the seas and rivers, no one ‘puts their eggs in one basket’. What happened in Venezuela affects the continent because the American troops kidnapped a President, who even made Petro change his speech.
The ELN is focused with priority on Colombia. The government and the military have always said that I spend my time abroad, that is not new, if I told them now that I was abroad, they would say that I was in Colombia. What I do specify is that there is no exodus in the ELN and it is attentive to threats.
[4] Alias Iván Mordisco proposed a union of guerrillas to fight against the United States, will you accept?
AG: As soon as the demobilization dissident groups began to form, they were told that we agreed to talk when they were unified, so as not to talk to each faction, but they could not join and it became complex. If it is to defend the Homeland against the foreign aggressor, we will find ourselves in the fight.
MAX BEARAK FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES
[5] Has the ELN been increasing its military capabilities in anticipation of offensives by Colombian and US forces?
AG: The generation and creation of capabilities with the application of technology in our weapons is not new, that cannot be improvised, the State military has realized, it is no longer a secret, we have been developing that plan for more than 10 years in our military industry, in various types of weapons.
[6] Are you still open to dialogue with President Petro, or do you feel that he has abandoned the peace process with the ELN?
AG: The ELN speaks to the country, it presents its proposal for a National Agreement to all political and social forces, to all candidates for the next government; Of course, Petro is part of the political game in the composition of forces in the next elections. Now it is about going beyond a dialogue, to build a more in-depth route that allows overcoming both the country’s structural crisis and the social, political and armed conflict.
We have already seen that all governments have fallen short in their peace policies and a national agreement is required that makes this possible, a truly constituent process that has the strength to produce the changes that the regime and the political class block in parliament.
Source: https://eln-voces.net/2026/01/19/antonio-garcia-se-requiere-un-acuerdo-de-pais/
https://abolitionmedia.noblogs.org/?p=27557 #AntonioGarcía #colombia #eln #guerrilla #southAmerica #usImperialism #venezuela -
#Kolumbiens Präsident #GustavoPetro äußert sich zu einer angeblich von den USA bombardierten Fabrik in #Venezuela und kritisiert die #ELN wegen mutmaßlicher Kokainproduktion. Mehr zu seinen Äußerungen in unserer heutigen Meldung. https://amerika21.de/2026/01/280036/petro-stellungnahme-venezuela-und-eln
-
📣 News Digest RDM in #NaturalScience Week 50, 2025!
https://thefairelephant.com/newsdigest_kb/news-digest-rdm-in-natural-science-week-50-2025/
Today with updates from @nfdi4culture @NFDI4Chem @NFDI4Cat @BeilsteinInstitut @PSDI @nfdi4earth and @FAIRmat. Enjoy reading!
