Terrorism in Peru

During the two decades of terrorism in Peru, the population was subjected to a great deal of violence and fear. The terrorist groups recruited from universities and rural areas, targeting men, women, and children. They also targeted government officials, such as mayors, police officers, and governors. These groups were founded based on Marxist-Leninist principles, with the aim of establishing a socialist government that would address the needs of the poorest members of society. 

The first guerrilla attacks in Peru began in the 1960s, during a time of moderate civil reformism, with the emergence of the Revolutionary Left Movement (MIR). Despite their training in Cuba, the MIR was not well-equipped to operate in the harsh conditions of the Peruvian jungle and were easily defeated by government forces. Some members of the MIR later joined the MRTA or Sendero Luminoso.

The MRTA had a two-phase plan, with the first phase involving organizing "mass work" to build "mass movements included in the revolutionary war process." The second phase was focused on publicizing the group, which began with their first armed action in 1984 when they attacked a police station in the District of Villa El Salvador. Unlike other groups, the MRTA took responsibility for their actions and wore badges to differentiate themselves from the civilian population.

Abimael Guzmán, the leader of Sendero Luminoso, was considered a strategist who developed strategic plans based on Marxist-Leninist-Maoist principles. Their first armed action was the burning of electoral ballot boxes in the town of Chuschi in 1980. However, the group was weakened by Guzmán's concentration of power, and his capture ultimately led to the collapse of the organization.

The violence and terror brought by these terrorist groups had a profound impact on the Peruvian society, causing the death of thousands of people and leaving a legacy of fear, trauma, and social division that still affects the country to this day.

In the face of this situation, the Peruvian state launched a series of military campaigns and counterinsurgency operations to fight against the terrorists. While these operations were effective in weakening the terrorist groups, they also led to widespread human rights abuses, including extrajudicial killings, forced disappearances, and torture.

The legacy of the Terrorism era is a complex issue in Peru, and many questions still remain unanswered. The country has gone through a long and difficult process of truth and reconciliation, which has helped to shed light on some of the atrocities committed during that time, and to provide a degree of closure for the victims and their families.

Today, Peru is a democracy with a stable political system and a growing economy, but the scars of the Terrorism era are still visible in many aspects of society. It is important to remember this period of history, to honor the victims and their families, and to work towards a more peaceful and just future.

As a result of the violence and terror that marked the period of terrorism in Peru, the country suffered significant economic losses, social fragmentation, and a deep sense of insecurity. The impacts of this dark chapter in the country's history continue to be felt to this day, particularly in the families of the victims and those who were directly affected.

Despite the difficult circumstances, Peru has made significant strides in the areas of peace, reconciliation, and justice. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission, established in 2001, sought to investigate the causes and consequences of the violence and provide reparations to victims and their families. Additionally, the government has implemented various measures to strengthen democratic institutions, promote human rights, and address the root causes of social inequality and exclusion.

The history of terrorism in Peru is a tragic reminder of the devastating consequences of violence, extremism, and intolerance. It highlights the importance of promoting a culture of peace, tolerance, and understanding, and working together to address the root causes of conflict and build a more just and equitable society.

ORIGINS OF TERRORISM IN PERÚ WITH SENDERO LUMINOSO (SHINING PATH) AND THE TUPAC'S AMARU REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT (MRTA)

Peru has a long history of political violence and terrorism, with two groups standing out in particular: Sendero Luminoso (Shining Path) and the Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement (MRTA). These two groups emerged in the 1980s, during a period of social and political upheaval in Peru, and were responsible for numerous acts of terrorism, including bombings, assassinations, and kidnappings.

Sendero Luminoso was founded in 1980 by Abimael Guzman, a former philosophy professor. Guzman was influenced by the teachings of Mao Zedong and believed that a violent revolution was necessary to bring about social change in Peru. The group was initially based in the Ayacucho region of southern Peru, which was one of the poorest and most marginalized areas of the country.

The group began its campaign of violence in earnest in 1983, with a series of bombings in the capital city of Lima. The group's tactics were brutal and indiscriminate, targeting civilians as well as government officials and military personnel. Sendero Luminoso also carried out a number of high-profile kidnappings, including that of the American citizen Lori Berenson in 1995.

The group's ideology was a mix of Maoism and Peruvian nationalism, and it sought to establish a communist state in Peru. Sendero Luminoso also rejected the legitimacy of the Peruvian government and sought to overthrow it through violent means. The group gained a significant following among the rural poor, who were drawn to its anti-government message and promises of land reform.

The Peruvian government responded to Sendero Luminoso's campaign of violence with a heavy-handed counterinsurgency campaign. The military was given broad powers to detain and interrogate suspected terrorists, and the government also implemented a number of draconian measures, such as curfews and censorship of the press. The government's tactics were often brutal and indiscriminate, and they led to widespread human rights abuses.

The MRTA, on the other hand, was a Marxist guerrilla group that was founded in 1984. The group's goals were similar to those of Sendero Luminoso: it sought to overthrow the Peruvian government and establish a socialist state. The MRTA was more focused on urban areas, and its tactics included bombings and kidnappings.

The group gained international attention in 1996, when it seized the Japanese embassy in Lima and took over 70 hostages. The siege lasted for 126 days, and it ended when the Peruvian military stormed the building. One hostage and all of the MRTA militants were killed in the operation.

The origins of terrorism in Peru are complex and multifaceted. The country's long history of poverty, social inequality, and political corruption created fertile ground for extremist groups like Sendero Luminoso and the MRTA to take root. These groups were also influenced by the wider ideological currents of the Cold War, which saw Marxist and communist movements gain traction in many parts of the world.

The government's response to these groups was also a factor in the escalation of violence. The heavy-handed tactics used by the military and police often led to human rights abuses and created a sense of resentment among the civilian population. This, in turn, created a cycle of violence that was difficult to break.

Today, both Sendero Luminoso and the MRTA are largely inactive, but the legacy of their violence lives on. The scars of Peru's decades-long conflict are still visible in the country's political landscape and its society as a whole. The country has made significant strides in recent years to address some of the underlying issues that gave rise to these groups, but there is still much work to be done to ensure a peaceful and stable future for all Peruvians.

Reference: Murga-Pizarro, R. (1990). PCP-Sendero Luminoso/MRTA: apuntes sobre sus orígenes y principales diferencias ideológicas. Advocatus, (001), 69-72.