Let $\sf{A}$ be an abelian category and consider its homotopic category $\sf{K}(\sf{A})$. I am writing some notes about homological algebra and, since the reader usually wonders why this isn't generally an abelian category, I want to prove right after its definition that, if it is abelian, then it is semi-simple. (This means that, at this stage, I haven't yet proved that it is triangulated.)
Consider a short exact sequence in $\sf{K}(\sf{A})$:
The proof (which uses the triangulated structure of $\sf{K}(\sf{A})$) in Gelfand-Manin shows that $M^\bullet$ is homotopy equivalent to $L^\bullet\oplus \operatorname{cone}(\varphi^\bullet)$. This means that a splitting $M^\bullet\to L^\bullet$ of the exact sequence above would be given by the composition $$M^\bullet\to L^\bullet\oplus \operatorname{cone}(\varphi^\bullet) \to L^\bullet,$$ where the first morphism is the (homotopy) inverse of \begin{align*} L^i\oplus M^i\oplus L^{i+1} &\to M^i \\ (l,m,l') &\mapsto \varphi^i(l)+m \end{align*} and the second is just the usual projection. Now, a morphism $M^\bullet\to L^\bullet\oplus \operatorname{cone}(\varphi^\bullet)$ in $\sf{K}(\sf{A})$ would be an equivalence class of morphisms $M^i\to L^i$, $M^i\to M^i$ and $M^i\to L^{i+1}$. The only reasonable choice seems to take the morphism on the middle to be the identity and the other two to be zero. This would imply that our splitting $M^\bullet\to L^\bullet$ is the zero morphism. But the zero morphism is not usually homotopic to $\operatorname{id}_{L^\bullet}$.
What am I doing wrong and/or how can we prove this result without using the triangulated structure of $\sf{K}(\sf{A})$?
