Almost everyone is familiar with the concept of D-Day. A piece of military lingo, D-Day refers to a day in which an important military operation is to begin or a change is to take place.

The most famous D-Day took place during World War II, referring to the Battle of Normandy, which resulted in the liberation of Western Europe from the control of Nazi Germany. The invasion of Northern France was one of the largest amphibious military assaults in history, and it required extensive planning. The day that this crucial battle began was June 6, 1944, the most well-known D-Day.

Although this D-Day triggers little emotional distress to the average college student today, I dare you to bring the word up to any Colombian who crosses your path. For us Colombians, it means a whole lot more.

Sunday, Oct. 2 was our D-Day. The day the Colombian society would vote to bring an end to a devastating 52-year long civil war in our country. The so-called day of demobilization and disarmament. 

For me, the day started full of hope and optimism. Change was in the air. At last, our country would know peace and we could begin to repair the damages, to help the victims, to bring justice and, perhaps most importantly for us young people, we could begin to plan ahead. Finally, we were going to be able to dream about growth and progress and about returning to the motherland to build a future close to our families and our friends and our culture.

That is how the day started. A few hours later, I found myself sitting on the floor, helplessly crying over the phone with my mother. That D-Day had become a dreadful day. And every day after that Sunday has been the longest day of my life. That Sunday, the majority of voters in Colombia rejected a peace deal that had been signed on Sept. 26 by the government and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), making six years of negotiations in Havana, Cuba feel like a waste.

The results of the vote were disheartening. Only 37 percent of the electorate went to the polls, and the vote was almost a coin toss. The margin of defeat was depressingly narrow: the “no to the peace deal” camp won with 50.2 percent of the vote, winning by around 53,000 votes. The vote was also not geographically representative of the suffering experienced in the rural areas. Most of the “no” votes came from the metropolitan cities and urbanized provinces while the “yes” received overwhelming support from people in the countryside, where war has actually been fought, the drugs have actually been planted, and the people that die in this civil war everyday have actually been born, raised and killed.

On Oct. 2, I didn’t sleep. After 52 years, this is the closest people in my country had been to bringing an end to this malice that has torn our country apart. And now, it seemed as if we were never going to have peace. In the vote, the majority of the voters Colombian expressed that they didn’t want to forgive the rebels.

Since the “no” vote won, first of all, it meant that all the demobilization processes that had already started to take place would be frozen. These include the demobilization of child soldiers, the surrendering of arms and the eradication and substitution of illicit crops, among others.

The rejection of the peace deal also invalidated it, preventing it from being implemented by law. Finally, it meant that if the government, the FARC, the opposition and the Colombian society decided they wanted to continue their pursuit of peace, they would have to start the negotiations all over. The vote means that a new deal would have to be formulated, but, given the polarized political spirit in the country, that option seems impossible.

The “yes” supporters have been restlessly searching the constitution, the laws and any legal document trying to find whatever loophole that would allow the agreement to remain valid legally. One of their desperate plans consists of asking the Supreme Court to rule constitutional the repetition of the vote due to the weather caused by Hurricane Matthew.

After the results were revealed, the country fell in a very dangerous legal, political and social limbo. Nobody in Colombia had foreseen the outcome. There was no Plan B, and I along with the rest of the country have been totally disoriented.

The first to pronounce anything was, ironically, the FARC. They expressed willingness to continue with the peace process and their desire to abandon the weapons and become a political party. The second day after the D-Day, the coalition of political parties in the opposition expressed a similar desire: they wanted to participate in the formulation of a new deal — with whatever unrealistic conditions they are demanding. On day three, Colombian president Juan Manuel Santos announced the legal possibility of ending the bilateral ceasefire as early as Oct. 31 and that the government would continue to respect and recognize the ceasefire currently in place. On day four, the president and his nemesis, the former president Álvaro Uribe who led the “no” campaign, met for the first time in six years in a very symbolic event. On day five, the “no” camp suffered a terrible political hit as one of the supporters revealed the campaign’s strategy to inspire rage and fear in the Colombian society and to manipulate the public’s minds using the social media and distorting the message that the actual peace deal carried. That day, thousands of students took it to the streets in an organized march in support of peace. Friday, President Juan Manuel Santos was awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace.

The Nobel Prize for Peace is traditionally a controversial one without a clear objective. In the past, the international community has used it to recognize honest efforts but also to influence future political outcomes. I think that may be the case now. I don’t know if President Santos deserves the award, but he has clearly worked hard for peace.

I am very happy that the international community recognizes the honest and genuine effort of the social and political groups involved in this issue. But I am even happier for the fact that the international community is watching us, that they also care for the Colombian people and that their vote is for the “yes” camp.

I think that awarding a Nobel Peace Prize to a president who has already announced an end to the ceasefire is, to someone extent, a game in reverse psychology. I think that the international community is clearly posing a tacit threat. After all, what Peace Laureate would resume a war after Oct. 31?

Whatever the reason for the prize may be, in the end it doesn’t really matter to us Colombian citizens. Ultimately, the prize that we all want and deserve is not the Nobel Peace Prize, but the prize of peace.