Jump to content

Talk:Peruvian Civil War of 1980–2000

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

US intervention is glaringly absent

[edit]

How could you write a piece about civil unrest in Peru and not mention the activities of the CIA? General Manuel Odria was a pawn of the CIA who practically gave the oil-rich Andes mountains to the U.S. The US funded projects in return but also gave military assistance in the removal of indigenous groups and the suppression (murder) of left wing resistance. http://www.blackelectorate.com/articles.asp?ID=56 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gueux de mer (talk • contribs) 09:22, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Low level resurgence since 2002

[edit]

The source cited doesn't mention any resurgence. It specifically states that all that remains is a rump faction which operates out of the jungles. I don't dispute the claim, but a better citation is needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MLMwFCC (talk • contribs) 22:23, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox Image

[edit]

We need an image on the main infobox like there are for other conflicts (see Vietnam War, Algerian War of Independence, Irish War of Independence, Second Chechen War, etc...). An image that is iconic of the Peruvian internal conflict.--Jersey Devil 20:02, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vera Lentz seems to be the photographer that took almost all of the iconic photographs of the war. I assume she owns them. It'd be nice to get permission to use one of them, though. I have no idea how to contact her. --Descendall 17:10, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I bet that one way you could get in contact with her is to ask for her contact info from any of the producers of "State of Fear," which really heavily used her photographs and even included them all on the DVD of their movie. You can see their email address here. --Descendall 05:06, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It seems I've added a new image from flickr, hope they keep it. --Andersmusician $ 18:38, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have seen that photo before and I am almost positive that it is copyrighted.--200.62.165.65 21:20, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Latest Shining Path attack

[edit]

The article linked to says "What the police have to determine is the motive, the aim, and what kind of criminal did it." In other words, the police do not know the first thing about this bomb. It seems a little too early to say that the Shining Path was responsible. --200.62.165.65 21:20, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added the following: "Because of the timing of the attack the Shining Path is suspected by the Peruvian authorities of holding responsibility for the attack." I hope that clarifies this issue.--Jersey Devil 21:31, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

some old source

[edit]

Think we can add something from onwar.com --Andersmusician $ 03:31, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Impeachment of Fujimori

[edit]

Whoever keeps adding in that Fujimori was impeached knows nothing about Peru. The Peruvian Constitution does not allow any politician to be impeached. The only way that a president can be removed from office is if he is incapable of preforming the duties of the President of the Republic. The Congress of the Republic issued a finding that Fujimori was incapcitated after he fled the country. Please do not say that there was an impeachment proceeding. There was not one. THANX. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.121.161.134 (talk) 03:04, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, that is not accurate at all. Fujimori didn't flee the country: He received the authorization from Congress to participate in the APEC Conference that was taking place in Brunei. After the Fujimorista President of the Peruvian Congress was removed from office and replaced with a hard-line anti-Fujimorista, Alberto Fujimori submitted his resignation, which was not accepted. Congress Impeached him and after that unconstitutionally removed him from the Presidency (there was no enough votes to secure a 2/3 majority). Messhermit 23:47, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is absurd antifujimori garbage. Alberto Fujimori was never impeached or indicted by anyone. In Peru, there is no impeachment at all. The Political Constitution of Peru says only that the presidency vacated. The Congress of the Republic has no indictment power at all. In the case of Fujimori, Chapter IV Article 113 Section 2 was activated. I reproduce Article 113 in its entirety below.
Artículo 113º
La Presidencia de la República vaca por:
1. Muerte del Presidente de la República.
2. Su permanente incapacidad moral o física, declarada por el Congreso.
3. Aceptación de su renuncia por el Congreso.
4. Salir del territorio nacional sin permiso del Congreso o no regresar a él dentro del plazo fijado. Y
5. Destitución, tras haber sido sancionado por alguna de las infracciones mencionadas en el Artículo 117 de la Constitución.

Infobox Image

[edit]

The new image on the infobox looks great. Apparently made by a German Wikipedian and put up on Commons. Thanks for putting it up Anders.--Jersey Devil (talk) 06:40, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Excellent contribution! DBaba (talk) 07:38, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

The image Image:Pcpnovote.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:15, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't this be called Terrorism in Peru?

[edit]

I think it should be called that way instead of "Internal conflict in Peru". Similar to Terrorism in the United States or Domestic terrorism in the United States.--201.230.21.141 (talk) 01:37, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agree In fact, I'm going to rename the article, because this wasn't an internal conflict or civil war, it was a fight between the Peruvian State against two major terrorist factions. Greetings.--Ian (CloudAOC) | Talk 19:11, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since it has been mentioned that this page is only for the internal conflict, another page for "Terrorism in Peru" was created. Please help in completing it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.85.178.205 (talk) 20:00, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Link for the lazy: Terrorism in Peru. jonkerz ♠talk 20:05, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
@76.85.178.205.Please do observe the results from the move request below.--Pseudois (talk) 11:23, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Conflict Today" Section

[edit]

This section contains contradictory information regarding the described bomb attack in Lima. One editor implies that the Shining Path was responsible, but s/he is immediately contradicted by another editor who says that Shining Path has no operations in the city. I don't know which is true, so I've placed "citation needed" tags on both claims. In addition, I've added a tag pointing out this contradiction to the top of the section. Either the attack was carried out by the Shining Path, or it wasn't-we need some sources to determine which is true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dpenn89 (talk • contribs) 20:09, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a source linking the Shining Path to the El Polo bombing, found after a quick google search:

http://www.cablegatesearch.net/cable.php?id=05LIMA3813

It's apparently from a leaked diplomatic cable. I don't really know enough about the subject to judge if this is a plausible source or not. Several someones more knowledgeable than me should take a look and decide what do do with the contradictory information we have in the article. Dpenn89 (talk) 20:42, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Updated with information about the February 2014 Shining Path attack on the Transportadora de Gas del Peru natural work camp. --Protrucks (sandbox) 13:06, 09 March 2014 (UTC-5)

Requested move

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved to Internal conflict in Peru as a revert of the contested move. -- JHunterJ (talk) 14:06, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Terrorism in Peru → Internal Conflict in Peru – This article has always been at Internal Conflict in Peru, the name that scholars give the conflict between the MRTA, Shining Path, the Rondas Campesinas, and the Peruvian state. The translation from what is used in Spanish -- Conflicto interno en el Peru -- is exact. Literally for years there have been arguments about the Shining Path article centering on whether or not it is appropriate to call the Shining Path a terrorist organization with the authoritative narrative voice of wikipedia or rather to mention the multitude of states and international organizations that consider them to be terrorists and instead use the authoritative narrative voice to state objective facts (i.e., that the Shining Path outright rejected the idea that humans have innate rights and therefore participated in atrocities such as the Lucanamarca Massacre.) These arguments culminated in mediation. The result has always been that the consensus is with the latter -- the narrative voice shouldn't make judgement calls but rather state facts and let the reader reach his own informed conclusion as to weather or not the Shining Path, MRTA, Rondas Campesinas, and, yes, even the Peruvian military acted in ways that could be considered terrorist/state terrorist. This is perfectly in line with the Words to Avoid policy of wikipedia, which mentions "terrorist." Unfortunately, User:Cloudaoc, having never participated in these discussions, decided to edit the Shining Path article in order to force the narrative voice of the article to repeatedly call Shining Path terrorists and then changed the name of this article so that he could link to it at Shining Path in order to call them terrorists one more time. I simply request that we return to the status quo of calling this article what, I repeat, scholarly sources call the war -- the Internal Conflict in Peru, which is now a redirect. Furthermore, I wish to highlight the fact that this article is clearly about the Internal Conflict in Peru, a specific armed conflict, and not about terrorism in Peru in general, which, depending on who you are willing to call terrorists, could mean anything from the MIR's uprisings in the 1970s to the FARC's incursions in Peru today to apolitical narcoterrorism, to even Tupac Amaru II's uprising. The name change actually confuses the matter. Descendall (talk) 04:21, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Recent events

[edit]

If anyone here speaks Spanish I would appropriate if you would see if you can find any Peruvian news about recent events in this conflict. The media there may cover these events better than international new organizations. Pug6666 21:53, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 7 external links on Internal conflict in Peru. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:55, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Peruvian Civil War of 1980–2000/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

The article is good enough for B-class now, although I think we can add a LOT of more of content --Andersmusician $ 04:11, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 04:12, 17 June 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 19:00, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

The casualties

[edit]

The casualties for the government side is seen as 70,000 although the source cited said there was 70,000 in net total for both government and rebels casualties are included. Please change? Edpark717 (talk) 21:32, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Question

[edit]

The infobox for this article refers to Abimael Guzmán, Óscar Ramírez, "Comrade Artemio", "Comrade Mono", and Victor Polay as POWs. The Spanish version of the page has them as capturado, or captured. Are they technically POWs, or, since this is an internal conflict (as opposed to an international one), should the descriptor be changed to "Captured" or "Imprisoned"? Paris1127 (talk) 04:48, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Numerous issues

[edit]

This entire article is awash with right-wing imperialist bullshit. The lies are so numerous, I've given up editing it. There is plagiarism, references that don't back up claims, etc. Needs a complete encyclopedic rewrite. Trash. 76.70.118.211 (talk) 01:51, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please give specifics. These broad claims are not easily verified. I undid your content removal in the article. A request was made to explain your removal. See wp:BRD Jim1138 (talk) 05:04, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article photo revert

[edit]

@Vif12vf:, what was your reasoning for undoing this edit? The new photo seemed like a perfectly acceptable infobox photo for the conflict. Rosguilltalk 16:31, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Such pictures should not be replaced without discussion unless it is an improved version of the picture already in place. Somebody put that picture there for a reason! Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 22:37, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That reason is presumably that it is an informative map of where Shining Path was active. However, the edit that put the new image in place moved the old image to a more relevant part of the article discussing the actual proceedings of the conflict. I understand your concern that we should not make drastic edits without consensus, but I think in this case the edit was an improvement and would move to reinstate it. Rosguilltalk 22:39, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox photo change proposal

[edit]

As mentioned in the discussion in the section above this one, I am in favor of replacing the current infobox image to

File:Terrorismo en el Perú.png
proposed infobox image

. The current infobox image, featuring an informative map of the conflict, can be moved to another section of the article (I propose the section "Escalation of the war"). The infobox's caption on Spanish Wikipedia (translated) is (top left to bottom right) Comrade Artemio in front of a terrorist guerrilla group; the primary leaders of the Shining Path, with their leader Abimael Guzmán in the middle; Néstor Cerpa Cartolini giving a speech; MRTA guerrilla group on the northeast border; The first meeting between Vladimiro Montesinos and Abimael Guzmán on the island of San Lorenzo; Replica of the home of the Japanese ambassador for the training of the Armed Forces, which I think should be edited for NPOV a bit (also the Japanese embassy hostage crisis alluded to by the last photo caption currently gets no mention in the article, although this is something that should be fixed in the article, not removed from the infobox), but it would be silly to have that discussion before approving the photo change in itself. Rosguilltalk 02:29, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Peasant?

[edit]

I'm wondering why Peruvian civilians are constantly referred to as peasants? Is it not a bit of a dated term? WikiEmz (talk) 11:53, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiEmz: a lot of the fighting in this conflict was in the rural parts of Peru, where the majority of the population was (is?) peasants (see Economy of Peru). The Shining Path further considered the indigenous peasants to be their primary base and recruited heavily there, leading to reprisals from the government against these populations, as well as violent conflict between the Shining Path and peasant groups that were not sympathetic to them. signed, Rosguill talk 18:16, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple unsubstantiated claims

[edit]

Pursuant to Wikipedia policy, the following segments of the article should be removed as unsupported and reflecting a pro-regime bias:


*Shining Path's disrespect for the culture of indigenous peasants[citation needed], turned many civilians in the Sierra away from the group.

No source to support the claim that Shining Path "disrespected indigenous culture" - more of a smear than a substantiated fact

No source to support the claim that many civilians "turned away" from the group

*Faced with a hostile population, Shining Path's guerrilla campaigns began to falter.

No source to support the claim that Shining Path was faced with a hostile population, nor that its guerilla campaigns "began to falter"

*The Shining Path, like the government, filled its ranks by conscription.[citation needed]

No source to support this claim

*Some atrocities were allegedly committed by the National Intelligence Service, notably the La Cantuta massacre, the Barrios Altos massacre and the Santa massacre.

"Some atrocities" were "allegedly" committed by the regime? Sounds like this line was written by Fujimori himself. This phrasing clearly indicates a pro-regime, anti-people bias. No equivalent "benefit of the doubt" is extended to the Shining Path

*On April 5, 1992, Fujimori dissolved the Congress of Peru and abolished the Constitution, initiating the Peruvian Constitutional Crisis of 1992. The reason for these actions was that Congress was slow to pass anti-terrorism legislation.

This sentence unquestioningly regurgitates Fujimori's justification for his demolition of Peruvian democracy, without mentioning alternative (anti-regime, pro-people) perspectives.

*At the same time, Shining Path suffered embarrassing military defeats to peasant self-defense organizations – supposedly its social base – and the organization fractured into splinter groups.[citation needed]

Not only is there no source to support this claim, the adjective "embarassing" is a violation of Wikipedia's rules requiring Neutral POV.

*Following a period of widespread poverty and unemployment, Velasco himself was overthrown in a bloodless military coup on August 29, 1975.

No source to support the claim that Peru suffered "widespread poverty and unemployment" under Velasco. Peru experienced widespread poverty and unemployment before and after Velasco. Once again, this belies the pro-regime, anti-people bias of the article's authors. It clearly justifies the Tacnazo right-wing military coup.

---

I understand the reasons for this article's extreme pro-regime bias - most poor Peruvians can barely afford the necessities of life, much less an Internet connection. They certainly don't have the free time to edit Wikipedia.

Regardless, this sort of bias is unacceptable for an encyclopedia claiming to provide a neutral perspective. It needs to be completely rewritten from scratch. The fact that the Shining Path has still not been defeated (the year is 2019), despite 40 years of near-genocidal imperialist-backed state violence against Peruvian peasants, workers, and intellectuals tells you all you need to know about the imperialist-backed Peruvian regime's relationship with the Peruvian people.

--2606:6000:6602:C800:31C8:8A3A:6F0:F254 (talk) 06:58, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For the record there are a lot of factual inaccuracies in the article. I fixed one regarding the dates of both phases some weeks ago. I you wish you could edit by yourself creating a new account or maybe I could begin by myself but using available sources. Mr.User200 (talk) 00:32, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 10 January 2020

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 17:14, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Internal conflict in Peru → Terrorism in Peru – This article focuses specifically and solely on terrorism in Peru, particularly the terrorism crisis in Peru throughout the 1980s and 1990s. The Spanish version of the article also refers to the article as the Época del terrorismo en Perú, which is roughly Age of terrorism in Peru. Moving this page to Terrorism in Peru would make the article title more accurate, as well as correct. DoctorSpeed ✉️ ✨ 18:15, 10 January 2020 (UTC)—Relisting. Dekimasuよ! 14:14, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose "Internal conflict in Peru" is widely used in English language academic literature and is thus an appropriate title per WP:COMMONNAME. "Terrorism in Peru" also runs afoul of WP:TERRORIST and is thus not well-suited to be an article title, although if the phrase is used frequently in Spanish coverage it could be appropriate to include it in the lead and as a redirect to this article. As a side, note, it would appear that "Conflicto interno en Perú" is used more frequently than "Época del terrorismo en Perú" in Spanish literature as well, and as such I'd question the wisdom of the title there. signed, Rosguill talk 21:21, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Those terrorism articles are about the general incidence of terrorist attacks in those countries, not about a specific conflict between an insurgent group and the governments of the US, Australia, etc. respectively. As for the other claims I made, I'm just looking at result numbers for a Google scholar search, which is easily reproducible. I would concede that the numbers are pretty close in Spanish though. signed, Rosguill talk 19:03, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Heavily Biased and Poorly Written

[edit]

Clear anti-left bias, lack of citations, opinions presented as fact, and issues with grammar and syntax. This article leaves huge gaps in the narrative and where it does use verifiable information, it is presented with heavy bias. Tyler Dalk (talk) 08:31, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Colombian conflict spillover?

[edit]

It'd be interesting to include Colombian conflict into the article, as the conflict in Peru happens to have some spillovers from Colombia which is also torn by the same civil war. ZaDoraemonzu (talk) 13:18, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dates in infobox

[edit]
  • Main phase:
  • 17 May 1980 – 22 November 2002
  • Low-level resurgence:
  • 22 June 2002 – present

This makes no sense. By definition the "resurgence" should start after the end of the "Main phase", not before it has ended. Any ideas on how to amend it to something more sensible? FDW777 (talk) 19:27, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Seems like a error copied from the Spanish aticle.Mr.User200 (talk) 01:38, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox purpose

[edit]

MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE, the purpose of an infobox: to summarize (and not supplant) key facts that appear in the article. The article does not mention East German, North Korean, Colombian or Chinese support. "Support" also means significantly more than a statement saying The People's Republic of China rejects and condemns the violence practiced by the Maoist organization Shining Path, as declared yesterday by the Prime Minister of Peru, Luis Alva Castro, on an official visit to Beijing (Google Translate, but I'm sure everyone will agree even with any subleties in the translsation being missed by a machine the gist of it is clear as day. FDW777 (talk) 22:04, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template Documentation

[edit]

Hello! I think this article could use an SVG picture of the current military situation, as the internal conflict war is still ongoing, as most articles with ongoing wars have template documentation. Thanks! WonderWeirdo (talk) 20:41, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The war ended in 2000. I think that this article should be separated with the more current remnant attacks. JD John M. Turner (talk) 23:13, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Update needed

[edit]

The reference for the conflict lasting to the present is 20 years old. 82.36.70.45 (talk) 14:55, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 19 November 2024

[edit]

Peruvian Civil War of 1980–2000 → Peruvian conflict – This article has been repeatedly moved without consensus in what appears to be an edit war. I think the name it had prior to this was the most fitting but I welcome discussion. Charles Essie (talk) 05:30, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Peruvian_Civil_War_of_1980–2000&oldid=1258708289"