Peace Process 80s

In the turbulent landscape of Colombia during the 1980s, a multifaceted conflict brewed,
fueled by a complex interplay of political, social, and economic dynamics. At the heart of this
turmoil were several armed groups, each with its own ideological agenda, contributing to a
prolonged and bloody struggle for control and power.

The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), founded in the 1960s as a Marxist-
Leninist guerrilla movement, was deeply entrenched in Colombia's rural areas, particularly in
regions with historically marginalized populations. FARC's insurgency was fueled by
grievances over land rights, social inequality, and the perceived exclusion of rural
communities from Colombia's political and economic spheres. Throughout the 1980s, FARC
engaged in a protracted armed struggle against government forces, employing guerrilla
tactics and engaging in acts of violence aimed at destabilizing the state.

Parallel to FARC's insurgency, other guerrilla groups emerged, such as the National
Liberation Army (ELN), which also sought to challenge the government and establish a more
equitable social order. The presence of multiple guerrilla factions further complicated efforts
to achieve peace and stability.

Amidst the guerrilla insurgency, paramilitary groups, often with ties to landowners, drug
traffickers, and elements within the military and government, rose to prominence. These
paramilitary forces, such as the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), operated
with impunity, committing human rights abuses, massacres, and acts of terror against
perceived collaborators of guerrilla groups, as well as civilian populations caught in the
crossfire. The paramilitaries claimed to be defending communities from guerrilla violence but
often engaged in widespread atrocities, exacerbating the cycle of violence and
displacement.

Against this backdrop of armed conflict, attempts at peace negotiations emerged

Compounding Colombia's challenges was the rise of powerful drug cartels, notably the
Medellín and Cali cartels, which amassed immense wealth and influence through the
production and trafficking of cocaine. The cartels infiltrated every aspect of Colombian
society, corrupting institutions, intimidating officials, and perpetuating violence to protect their
interests. The drug trade further fueled the conflict, providing resources for armed groups
and exacerbating instability.

Despite the complexities and obstacles, the 1980s laid the groundwork for future peace
initiatives in Colombia. The failures and setbacks of this tumultuous decade underscored the
entrenched nature of the conflict and the need for comprehensive solutions addressing
social, economic, and political grievances. It would take decades of sustained efforts,
including peace negotiations, institutional reforms, and grassroots initiatives, to pave the way
for a more peaceful and inclusive Colombia.

In 1984, the Colombian government engaged in peace talks with the FARC guerrilla group in
La Uribe, Meta. However, these negotiations ultimately failed due to irreconcilable
differences between the parties and Throughout the decade, there were several attempts at
dialogue between the government and the ELN. However, similar to the talks with the FARC,
these negotiations did not result in significant progress towards peace.

During the presidency of Belisario Betancur, there were some efforts to seek a negotiated
solution to the armed conflict. His government implemented policies of détente and
democratic openness, but violence persisted, and a lasting peace agreement was not
achieved.

In addition to national-level efforts, there were also initiatives to promote peace at the local
and regional levels involving community leaders, religious figures, and social organizations.
However, these efforts often had limited success and were unable to halt the broader
conflict.

Why it didn’t work?

● Lack of Trust: Mutual distrust between the government and guerrilla groups hindered
the negotiation process. Years of armed conflict had bred deep-seated animosity and
suspicion, making it difficult for both sides to engage in meaningful dialogue.
● Complexity of the Conflict: The conflict in Colombia was multi-faceted, involving
multiple armed groups with diverse agendas, including guerrilla organizations,
paramilitary forces, and drug cartels. Each group had its own interests and
objectives, making it challenging to find common ground for negotiations.
● Violence and Instability: The ongoing violence and instability in Colombia created a
volatile environment that undermined peace efforts. Attacks, assassinations, and
human rights abuses perpetrated by various armed actors continued unabated,
undermining confidence in the peace process and perpetuating cycles of revenge
and retaliation.
● Political Resistance: There was significant opposition within Colombian society,
particularly among conservative factions, to negotiating with guerrilla groups
perceived as terrorists or criminals. Political pressure and ideological differences
within the government also posed obstacles to advancing the peace agenda.
● Influence of Drug Cartels: The rise of powerful drug cartels in Colombia exerted
significant influence over politics, economy, and society. The cartels had a vested
interest in maintaining the status quo of violence and instability, as it facilitated their
illegal activities. Their presence further complicated peace efforts and undermined
attempts to achieve lasting stability.
● Structural Inequities: The underlying social, economic, and political inequalities in
Colombia, including issues related to land ownership, poverty, and marginalization of
rural communities, remained unaddressed. These structural injustices fueled
grievances that continued to fuel conflict and hinder peace negotiations.
● International Dynamics: The geopolitical context, including the global Cold War rivalry
between the United States and the Soviet Union, influenced the dynamics of the
conflict in Colombia. External support for armed groups and ideological
considerations added complexity to the peace process.

2016 peace process

Negotiations in Havana: Peace negotiations between the Colombian government and the
FARC were primarily held in Havana, Cuba, with the mediation of countries such as Cuba
and Norway, as well as the support of Venezuela and Chile. The talks lasted for almost four
years, from 2012 to 2016.

Final Peace Agreement: After intense negotiations, the Final Peace Agreement between the
Colombian government and the FARC was signed in September 2016. This agreement
established a comprehensive framework for ending the conflict, including provisions for
ceasefire, disarmament, political participation of former combatants, comprehensive rural
reform, transitional justice, and counter-narcotics efforts.

Plebiscite: To implement the Final Peace Agreement, Colombian President Juan Manuel
Santos called for a national plebiscite in October 2016 for Colombian citizens to vote
whether they were in favor or against the agreement. However, the result surprised many
when the "No" vote won by a narrow margin.

Renegotiation and Parliamentary Approval: Despite the setback in the plebiscite, the
Colombian government and the FARC returned to the negotiating table and made
modifications to the original agreement to address some of the concerns raised by
opponents of the agreement. These modifications were made in dialogue with political and
social sectors. Subsequently, the revised agreement was approved by the Colombian
Congress in November 2016.

Disarmament of the FARC: As part of the peace process, the FARC committed to surrender
their weapons and demobilize. This was carried out gradually starting from 2017 with the
support of the United Nations Mission in Colombia, which oversaw the process of
disarmament and the reintegration of ex-combatants into civilian life.

Implementation and Challenges: Despite the signing of the peace agreement, its
implementation has faced several challenges, including the socioeconomic reintegration of
ex-combatants, the security of communities affected by the conflict, the fight against other
armed groups, and political resistance to certain aspects of the agreement.

Diferencias

● Involved Actors: In the 1980s, peace processes mainly involved the Colombian
government and guerrilla groups like the FARC and the ELN (National Liberation
Army). In contrast, the 2016 peace process was between the Colombian government
and the FARC, the largest and oldest guerrilla group in the country. The ELN did not
participate in the 2016 peace agreement.
● Scope of the Agreement: The 2016 peace agreement was much more
comprehensive and detailed than peace efforts in the 1980s. It addressed a wide
range of issues, including ceasefire, disarmament, reintegration of ex-combatants
into society, rural reform, political participation of former guerrillas, and transitional
justice. In contrast, peace efforts in the 1980s were more limited in scope and did not
address the underlying problems of the conflict as comprehensively.
● Participation of Civil Society: The 2016 peace process involved greater participation
of civil society, including victim groups, human rights organizations, and other sectors
of Colombian society. This helped ensure greater legitimacy and social support for
the peace agreement.
● International Support: The 2016 peace agreement had strong international support,
with the participation and backing of international organizations, mediator countries,
and the international community in general. This international support was crucial for
supporting and monitoring the implementation of the agreement.
● Verification and Monitoring Mechanisms: The 2016 peace agreement included robust
verification and monitoring mechanisms to ensure compliance with commitments by
both parties. This included the establishment of the United Nations Verification
Mission in Colombia, which monitored the implementation of the agreement and
provided periodic reports on its progress.

Similitudes
● Pursuit of a negotiated solution: Both in the 1980s and in 2016, the parties involved
in the conflict sought a negotiated solution to end the armed conflict in Colombia. In
both cases, there was recognition of the need to address the underlying causes of
the conflict and find a peaceful way out.
● Involvement of international actors: In both peace processes, there was involvement
and support from international actors. In the 1980s, this included countries and
organizations that acted as mediators or facilitators in peace talks. In 2016, there was
strong support from the international community for the peace agreement with the
FARC, with the participation of international organizations and countries in the
negotiation process and in the implementation of the agreement.
● Challenges in implementation: Both in the 1980s and in 2016, one of the main
challenges was the effective implementation of the peace agreements once they
were signed. In both cases, there were obstacles and difficulties in implementation,
including issues related to ceasefire, reintegration of ex-combatants into society, and
guaranteeing rights for victims of the conflict.
● Scrutiny and political opposition: At both times, peace processes faced scrutiny and
political opposition at both the national and international levels. Political parties,
interest groups, and sectors of society expressed criticisms and concerns about the
terms of the peace agreement and its impact on the country.