I have this book but it was packed away during a move and is still in storage. My apologies to the publisher.

I requested this from the Early Reviewers Programme as I have a great interest in Latin America, being a Hispanic Studies graduate.

Journalist Garry Leech takes us through the history of the Colombian guerrilla group, emerging out of the La Violencia up to today. Told in chronological order, we can see that while the FARC has changed both in itself and in the perception of others - as best shown in chapter 5 : 'Narco-guerrillas' to Narco-terrorists' – the reason for its success appears to have remained constant, the government's lack of interest in the poorer areas of the country. Another important issue covered in the book is that of US intervention in Colombia, ostensibly due to the war on drugs.

The FARC is not something that is often covered impartially, so I found Leech's measured text refreshing, while he did not shy from informing the reader of the FARC's ruthless methods, he also showed us the wider Colombian context, one in which both government troops and paramilitary groups should also be held accountable for the vast number of killings and internal displacements.

While I have read quite a few articles about the FARC, I appreciated Leech's methodical explanations, starting with its beginnings and moving through its different important periods right up until the present day. By placing the FARC in context, both politically and socially, the reader is able to see how the guerrilla group has hung on in Colombia for half a century.

My main criticism would be its length, while it is great as an introduction, I would have liked to have gone into more detail, though this would be a good book for someone who wants to get an outline of the FARC. ( )

I found The FARC to be rather dry. Informative but dry. In a sense it's much like reading subtitles on The History Channel, but without the film. I really haven't had much interest in South American politics, but I was hoping that this would change that and educate me on the matter a bit. I feel slightly more informed but in the same way you would after sitting though a three hour class with no breaks. Educational but not enjoyable. ( )

When is a terrorist not a terrorist? When he makes his own rules and follows them.

Colombia is a country with magnificent natural beauty, abundant natural resources, and multitudinous man-caused problems. The government has been full of corruption for years, violence seems to be in the gene pool, the rich get richer and exploit the poor who get poorer. The FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) started with the idea of helping the rural poor get a fair shake. But they aren’t the government and no matter what semantics they use, extorting the rich is not a “tax”, kidnapping them is not “detaining” like governments use prisons, and bombing innocent unsuspecting civilians is criminal.

Having lived in Colombia for 16 of the last 19 years, I had an interest in this book on the FARC. It is well written, interesting, and brings to light many thought provoking factors. It is short and easy to read. But it is biased.
The author spends a lot of time proving that the FARC are justified in what they do because they are ideologues trying to bring about justice, and then tells us they are not “terrorists” because the internationally accepted definition of terrorist includes “politically motivated.”

At one point he states that it is simply not true that the FARC had a very low popularity rating and Uribe had a high one. I lived there. I talked to people of all classes. I watched thousands, (hundreds of thousands?) march against the FARC. I saw Uribe win an unprecedented reelection by a wide margin. I could not drive between cities because if the FARC set up a roadblock, I would be “detained” in return for a “tax” that would cause my families in the states to sell their houses. After Uribe began to crack down on the FARC (yes with sad the loss of some innocents, but those who were actually near the fighting, not just going to a mall on a weekday morning) the nation became safer and I have visited many parts of the country in complete security, in every sense of the word.

He does recognize that the FARC are guilty of human rights abuses (as is the Colombian government and the paramilitary groups), but I had a hard time reading a book so obviously in favor of men who take the law into their own hands. I would have an equally difficult time reading a book in favor of the “paras”. Change is needed in Colombia, but in as non-violent manner as possible.

I would recommend this book to someone who needed to raise their blood-pressure. ( )

I read this book as an outsider on the basic level that I'd never even heard of the FARC before and have minimal knowledge of South American politics though I am interested. I found the book well written, informative, and to the point, an excelent read, though I can't state it's factual accuracy obviously.

The book is short, which works in it's favour as it's very concise, which is a selling point as non-fiction books tend to be long and heavy. It takes a very narative view of events, taking several strains such as the politics of the group and focusing a chapter on them, progressing it as a narrative from the origins though the recent history of the group. The main focus is the very recent history and I felt that was executed very well, a lot of effort is taken to place the struggle not just as an internal war but in the context of the larger global econonmy and to draw attention to the consequences for Colombia of international laws and policies and those of the USA.

Several other reviews have commented on the bias of the book. The book is skewed to the FARC but I think this is acnowledged and adressed in several ways. The end section on human rights abuses does go into the fact that the FARC is an organisation that commits human rights abuse, it also tells us why it chooses to use those tactics which I think is fair, and it doesn't attempt to cast it all in a good light, talking about the negative impact the FARC has because of this. I think there is some bias in that we're told about all the grassroots work the FARC does in it it's stronghold, implying that happens in all areas it controls though mostly in it's strongholds, then are later told that areas it has moved into more recently it doesn't have the same ties to the local community and doesn't help them in the same way. I would also say that Leech does briefly, at the begining, discuss why he sees armed conflict as necessary and pacifism as something that doesn't work, particularly in a situation like this, which goes some way to justifying the actions of the FARC.

So, yes, despite some bias I found the book informative, tightly written and interesting. ( )