Peace talks

Colombia`s year of peace

At Christmas next year there will be extra cause for goodwill in Colombia. In 2014 the FARC guerrillas will sign an end to their self-proclaimed war against the state, silencing the guns that have taken over 220,000 lives in 50 years of bloodshed.

Two generations of Colombians, the majority of the nation, have only known conflict. Officially there are 6 million victims; but the truth is, the entire nation has been scarred by decades of brutal and degrading violence. Read more…

No pause in FARC peace talks for elections

santos01

Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos yesterday dismissed opposition calls to pause peace talks with FARC guerrillas promising to “press down the accelerator” to build on the “real progress” to end the nation`s 50 year conflict.

Former President Alvaro Uribe demands an end to discussions he sees as a farce, while others have argued for a pause during the election campaign that begins later this month.

But Santos is now increasingly confidence of a successful outcome to the negotiations he began last October.

Following yesterday`s agreement on a framework for the guerrilla group`s incorporation into the democratic system, Santos has gone on the offensive:

“There has been talk of breaking or pausing the talks, we are not going to do this…As we move forward and you see results, it is not time to stop, but just the opposite; to accelerate and continue with more courage and more excitement to end this conflict indefinitely.”

Santos will hope further agreements propel his re-election campaign.

Although the full details of yesterday`s agreement are unlikely to be made public until all points in the general accord for the termination of the armed conflict are agreed upon, Colombia Politics can confirm they include rights and guarantees for the exercise of the political opposition, democratic mechanisms of citizen participation, and effective measures to promote greater participation in national, regional and local policy.

Humberto De La Calle, the government’s chief negotiator, hailed the agreement a “new opening for democracy”.

“The agreement today represents a new opening for democracy, an open road for peace to take root after the end of the conflict, to free our government from violence and intimidation.”

“The agreement will create an important mechanism for turning armed groups into political parties and movements.”

FARC negotiator Ivan Marquez, labelled the agreement “perhaps one of the most important achievements so far [in the peace talks].”

As expected, Alvaro Uribe, slammed the announcement, tweeting “Colombia is the only democracy that accepts negotiating its democracy with terrorism.”

While most commentators have welcomed the agreement, concern has been expressed about the lack of clarity on what has been agreed upon. According to this publication`s editor, the fundamental issues such as whether Timochenko and co will seek election, and or directly given seats in congress have been parked.

For Ginny Bouvier, Senior Program officer for Latin America at the United States Institute of Peace, any accord on political participation should look to provide more access to politics for marginalised sectors of society.

“Given that political, economic and social exclusion form parts of the root of the conflict, it will be important to undertake political reforms that allow the expression of these as well as other dissident voices.”

Bouvier also spoke of the challenge of integrating the rebels into political life:

“The stigmatisation of the guerrillas and the highly polarised electoral environment in Colombia add to the challenge of integrating FARC rebels into the political arena.”

Without details of the agreement it is impossible to know how these issues have been tackled.

The next item to be discussed at the peace table is the illicit drug trade; problematic in its own right.

According to organised crime website Insight Crime, the FARC control approximately 70% of the country’s coca crops, while many FARC fronts “earn millions of dollars from the drug trade”.

We have argued before that it is unclear whether Ivan Marquez and co represent the guerrillas` rank and file members. If not, it is highly likely FARC splinter groups will emerge to continue this lucrative business.

“It is perhaps inevitable that a new generation of criminal groups, the FARCRIM, may be born should a peace deal be signed,” argue Insight Crime.

Only time will tell how the delegations tackle this issue.

Photo, Fernando Vergara / AP

FARC to trade bullet for ballot box

farc-2-m

Colombia`s Santos administration and FARC guerrillas have unveiled an “historic agreement” on “political participation”.

Today`s announcement hopes to breathe life back into a year long peace process that faces growing scepticism.

The FARC have promised finally after 50 years of conflict to trade the bullet for the ballot box.

We`re now a third of way through the talks, with two of the six points on the agenda being signed off.

Excellent, you might think.

Disappointingly, however, despite the hype, today`s announcement avoids the very issues that cause most controversy, appearing to kick them into the long grass.

The parties do accept it is a “partial agreement”, and consequently declined to provide us today with real detail on what has been signed up to.

For many, the central consideration under “political participation” is whether the FARC top brass will be allowed to stand for election.

Will the FARC be given seats in congress?

And, if so will they be given to Timochenko, Ivan Marquez and the rest?

Without answers to these questions any accord seems largely cosmetic.

Yes, it`s undoubtedly important that agreement has been reached, but it is difficult to avoid the sensation of unfinished business. A year on we yearn for more progress for the really tough decisions to be made.

Photo, El Espectador

FARC peace talks start up again – time for results

farctalks

The 16th round of negotiations between the government and FARC guerrillas began Wednesday amidst increasing concern at the pace of the Havana talks.

Both President Santos on one side, and Andres Paris (a FARC negotiator) on the other promised the  delegations will work together to accelerate the process.

12 months have passed since negotiations began, and despite President Juan Manuel Santos’ claim that talks would take “months, not years,” agreement has been reached on only one of six items on the agenda – rural agrarian development.

The second item on the agenda – political participation – is into its fifth month and seventh round of negotiations.

Simultaneous to the slow progress in Havana, FARC related attacks in Colombia have increased.

According to Jane’s Intelligence Weekly “as the FARC seek to enhance their bargaining power at the negotiating table, it is likely to continue its current terrorist campaign until at least the end of 2013”.

Consequently public support for the talks is fading, while rumours of a breakdown in trust between government and terrorist negotiators, combined with the possible suspension of talks are plenty. Furthermore, the November 25 deadline for Santos to announce his candidacy for a second presidential term draws ever closer.

Indeed, Santos on Sunday conceded that progress had been slower than he had hoped for, stating: “I thought that in one year we could have finished the agenda points we agreed upon, but that hasn’t happened”.

The head of state continued, blaming the slow progress on the rebels` attempts to negotiate issues not agreed upon in the general accord for the termination of the armed conflict.

Unsurprisingly however, “Timochenko”, supreme leader of the FARC, accused Santos of playing politics, claiming that he is “seized with the need to show results to justify his reelection” and that he has consequently “intensified his smear campaign”.

The truth is, Santos does need results to justify a re-election campaign. Following nationwide multi sector strikes in August, the head of state’s approval rating dropped to as low as 21%. Results at the peace table are a must for his chances at occupying the Casa de Narino for a further four years. The next month is could decide his fate.

Photo, Colombia Confidencial

FARC peace talks a year on; no end in sight

FARC6

Twelve long months have passed since the Colombian government and FARC guerrillas met in Oslo to announce the start of peace talks to end 50 years of conflict.

Colombia Politics heralded President Santos` bold move, and we were optimistic of a swift conclusion. Things have not gone according to plan, however. Agreement has been reached on the point of agrarian reform yes, but precious little progress is obvious on the arguably more fundamental issues of political participation, narcotrafficking, victims, justice or disarmament.

Latin America`s longest running rebel/terrorist group shows little sign of demobilizing any time soon.

As a publication we remain hopeful of a positive outcome, but questions remain about whether the FARC are committed to the talks and whether President Santos has the leadership skills to deliver the peace all Colombians want but which an increasing number are sceptical will ever arrive.

The questions are greater in number and the reasons to despair more obvious than the signs of progress:

When will the FARC show remorse for their crimes? Without reparation, building a lasting peace is impossible. The FARC continue to argue they are the victims; this is an affront to those displaced, killed, or terrorized over the past 50 years.

When will the FARC release hostages and stop the practice of kidnaping? Despite telling us “economic retention” as the guerrillas euphemistically call it was now off the menu, FARC combatants have continued to capture police, soldiers and civilians. Let us not forget Kevin Scott the retired US soldier, held hostage since July.

And when will the FARC cease to recruit the children of Meta, Guaviare, Putumayo, Caquetá, Arauca y Vaupés? Government figures reveal hundreds have been stolen from their families since the talks began.

Talk has grown in the past weeks of a possible suspension of the talks during the pre-election period. Rumours abound of discord in Havana, of a breakdown in trust between the FARC and government negotiators.

Yes, the majority of Colombians still believe in the talks, but support and hope are falling.

Doubt too remains on President Santos` leadership, the man who must eventually secure a yes vote when the accords are put to a referendum.

Around 70 per cent of Colombians have lost faith in their president. Will he be able to sell an agreement that will be difficult for Colombians to stomach?

It will take a strong leader to convince victims to accommodate the sight of guerrillas walking free, or celebrating election victories.

South Africa`s peace was dependent on Mandela`s unique ability to bring together a nation torn apart by hatred and racism. Moving on will be as hard for Colombians as it was for South Africans.

Until now, Juan Manuel Santos has shown none of Mandela`s qualities. He must quickly find them.

Photo, Reuters

Colombia´s FARC peace talks on rocks? Don´t panic yet

Guerrilleros-de-las-Farc-capturados-en-Arauca

Talk that peace negotiations between the Colombian government and FARC guerrillas are doomed is premature.

Sure, Colombia’s largest guerrilla group are doing their best to convince us they are not serious about the peace process. This week, the terrorist organization murdered 15 soldiers in an ambush close to the Venezuelan border, and yesterday they promised to send reinforcements, troops and arms to the front line of the protests in troubled Catatumbo, Norte de Santander.

Yes, the FARC are making it easy for former president Alvaro Uribe´s Democratic Centre to argue the talks are a farce, all smoke and mirrors. Would-be presidential candidate Francisco “Pacho” Santos, has used the FARC´s promise to fight in Catatumbo as a pretext to call for a suspension of the discussions. He argues the guerrillas have no intention of signing a peace accord, that they are having us on, and the plug should be pulled.

And ok, I accept it is hardly a source of good cheer that nine months from the start of the talks, we’re limping along with agreement reached on just one of the five points on the agenda.

But despite all this, I don’t accept the premise that we might as well pack up and go home. The course of lasting peace never did run smooth, and in a conflict as bloody and interminable as Colombia’s, finding a way out is a devil’s job.

Last night I took to the television studios to argue against the grain, to put the case that perversely, quite apart from being evidence that the peace talks were a dead duck, the FARC´s recent actions, the attacks and the full frontal with the government, could in fact be real evidence of their committment to the talks.

I’m quite aware it sounds bold, but if we look at the dynamics of any negotiation we can start to see where I’m coming from.

Negotiations are a power struggle where each actor must seek to strengthen his hand at the table.

Remember, we were told the FARC arrived in Havana totally demoralised, exhausted, defeated…on its last legs. Meanwhile, the government bright‐eyed and bushy‐tailed talked victoriously of signing an agreement within months.

Well, that was sadly not true – the FARC had not been defeated. They still have thousands in their ranks, and have an almost endless supply of youngsters to ‘forcibly recruit’ – or kidnap, if the euphemism isn’t to your taste. Not to mention the oodles of dosh that comes their way through narco trading.

Many Colombians, quite rightly given what the government had told them, did not really want a negotiated peace process, what they wanted was a rendition. Tired of close on 50 years of pointless conflict, Colombians wanted the FARC to lay down their arms and give up the fight. This was never going to happen.

So if the FARC are not about to capitulate, it shouldn´t surprise us if they use all the tricks available to secure an agreement that works best for them. That folks, is the nature of negotiation.

I see the events of recent days in this context, as evidence not that the FARC are throwing in the towel on the talks, but that they are exploiting external forces to improve their position in Havana.  The FARC want us to believe that, as they are very much alive and kicking, we are going to have to pay a higher price for peace than once we bargained for.

So, however distasteful it might be, it is logical – not illogical as many suggest – that the FARC should pursue their peace goals in Havana by warring at home.

Unfortunately, the FARC are also able to take advantage of a struggling government. Santos ‘ team has failed to end the protests in Catatumbo and the president must now face a month of unrest as miners, coffee farmers, milk farmers, rice farmers, and truck drivers join forces to bring the country to a standstill.

By November, the president must announce whether he will run for re-election next year. By September he might have already lost the race to a nationwide rural uprising.

The FARC scent blood.

I also believe the FARC are not just preparing their hand at the table, they are also planning for what happens after the agreement is signed – another clue that they are serious about these talks.

It looks to me as though the FARC are massing their political troops, projecting forward to a time when they´ll fight at the ballot box, not on the battle field.

Look for a minute at the groups the FARC are proposing to help in Catatumbo. They are peasant farmers, those virtually abandoned by the state over decades. The FARC have always claimed to stand up for and represent “el pueblo”, the people – the lowly, but most of all, the rural. It does not take a genius to see they will seek to mobilise these groups when elections swing into view. And yes, the terrain is being prepared with Piedad Cordoba´s Patriotic March.

What luck for the FARC.

The election message has been handed to them on a plate – “Colombia’s rural poor is in open rebellion against the urban elite of Santos’ oligarchical government “. It´s “us” against “them”.

Maybe I am over optimistic but I hope I sense a hint of a sign the FARC could make a transition from the “people ‘s army” to the “people’s party”. Yes, I know they are nothing of the sort, but this is their world view, not mine.

The FARC top team are no fools, they know how to play the game, and they know how to squeeze as much out of their position as possible.

I might be wrong, these peace talks may yet end in acrimomy. But there is no reason yet to panic.

Negotiating peace while war rages is far from ideal, but what is the alternative?

Pack up? Go home? No chance. Keep going President Santos, we all want to live that dream of a Colombia in peace.

This article was written by the editor for Colombia Reports.

FARC, “restructure Colombian state”

Farc leaders Marcos Leon, Ricardo Tellez, Mauricio Jaramillo and Andres Paris

Colombia´s FARC guerrillas today called for a “restructuring of the Colombian state” to secure a deal as part of the Havana peace talks.

Rebel spokesman, Rodrigo Granda read a press statement announcing a 11 point plan for the “creation of a fourth power; people´s power…orientated towards the greater citizen participation”.

The plan calls for wide-ranging changes to the state, including economic and justice reform as well as a reconstitution of the military and the police.

Santos´s government and FARC guerrillas are discussing point two, “political participation” of the five point agenda for peace agreed last year. President Santos and government chief negotiator, Humberto de la Calle argue this discussion is restricted to the FARC´s involvment in politics once demobilized.

The FARC´s demands however, go beyond this, proposing a major redesign of the 1991 Constitution.

Ivan Márquez, top FARC negotiator, has asked for Santos to postpone next year´s congressional and presidential elections to allow more time to negotiate peace without the pressure of electioneering.

The Marxist group also put forward a “constituent assembly” to set in legal stone the detail of the agreement, once signed.

Santos told the FARC he is sticking to the 2013 year end deadline set at the start of the talks and dismissed the assembly claiming it opened a pandora´s box.

Colombia Politics view

The government have been clear that the peace talks are not an opportunity for the FARC to achieve the “revolution through negotiation”.

The talks will lead to the demobilization of the FARC and their eventual incorporation into civilian life, but they will not allow the FARC to advance their politics at the negotiating table.

But the FARC´s demands are a manifesto to rebuild Colombia in its image.

All this means public opinion is being tested to the limit. Time is running out and the talks are progressing painfully slowly.

The FARC´s apparent intransigence has led commentators and opposition politicians to dismiss the talks as unworkable. They argue that the FARC is up to its old tricks, that it doesn´t want to negotiate but instead to impose its vision for the nation.

Our hope, however, is that the FARC´s “demands” are in fact a bluff, a dress rehearsal for what will happen once they lay down their arms. They are preparing their discourse and preparing their audience for a time when they enter politics. Unsurprising they should attempt to drum up support at this early stage.

The FARC top brass is more than aware of the government´s position, they are no fools.

So, as unpalatable as it is to see FARC attempts to gain political capital, it is, after all, entirely predictable. We did not expect the guerrillas to give up give in and demobilize quietly, did we?

And we should have confidence that the government will not concede ground to the FARC. Both Santos and Humberto de la Calle have been strong and direct.

We must continue to hope.

Photo, El Tiempo.

Colombia and the arms treaty with no legs to stand on

un2

On April 2nd the United Nations had a breakthrough moment – after years of negotiating the definitions of many terms and at the end of several rounds of revision 154 States voted to adopt the UN Arms Trade Treaty (ATT).

Every year thousands of people are killed, injured, raped or abused as a resolute of irresponsible arms transfers.

Colombia’s armed conflict has seen human rights violations committed by all sides; guerillas groups, paramilitary and security forces. And it is one of the very conflict cases many claim has motivated this Arms Trade Treaty.

What is the treaty for?

The Arms Trade Treaty is the first international treaty aimed to regulate the multibillion dollar arms trade that has been fueling conflicts and human rights abuses.

The treaty seeks to control the transfer of weapons through a legally-binding instrument that establishes common international standards to prevent weapons from failing into the hands of terrorists, insurgents, and human rights violators.

Proponents of the treaty believe it will make it harder for regimes like Syria committing human rights violations, to acquire arms.

Why? It requires each exporter to assess the risks associated with an arms deal prior to trade, and prohibits the sale of conventional weapons where there is substantial risk that the arms will be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of international human rights, or acts of terrorism.

When will the treaty be in force?

50 countries need to ratify the Treaty.

To ratify a treaty, the State first signs it – as many states did yesterday – and then have the document pass through the respective legislative requirements.

Once ratified, enforcement is even then only up to the nations who have agreed to move forward with the treaty.

How will this affect Colombia?

Supporters of the ATT process argue the treaty will strengthen global security, but will it strengthen the security within Colombia?

What effect will it have on Colombia’s 50 year long conflict, fueled by small arms, a conflict that continues to threaten the lives of civilians?

The ATT has no jurisdiction over the domestic use of weapons in any country – it only requires countries that ratify it to establish national regulations to control the transfer of conventional arms.

Despite not turning up to sign the treat, we can assume from the vote to adopt the resolution, the statements made by the Colombian government and their report submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations that Colombia will ratify the treaty.

The Colombian government has acknowledged that while the absence of an ATT is not “the sole reason for easy access to conventional arms, the existence of a strong and comprehensive ATT will greatly reduce the likelihood of conventional arms ending up in the hands of irresponsible end-users.”

Let’s assume, for the sake of this article, it has been ratified.

The weapons used to fuel the conflict in Colombia come from a number of sources – national production by the government (production from non-government entities is illegal), government imports and illicit trafficking by guerrilla groups.

Reports suggests that illegal weapons are manufactured in at least five different countries, exported to Colombia’s neighboring states, and then illegally diverted into Colombia.

Many suggest weapons are also diverted from the stockpiles of Colombia’s security forces. For instance, the government of Venezuela has been accused of smuggling weapons to the FARC.

In Colombia the manufacturing of small arms, ammunition and/or their components is prohibited, excluding government manufacture.

Colombia is considered a low ranking country when it comes to exporting weapons – it exports some $8,000,000USD compared with the $54,000,000USD it imports which by world standards is not very high either – So economically the ATT will not significantly alter the import/export landscape.

Yet the supply of weapons in Colombia is not lacking, continually finding its way onto the streets.

According to GunPolicy an estimated 3,100,000 civilians in Colombia own firearms. The number of unlawfully held guns cannot accurately be counted but is estimated to be roughly 2,000,000 more. Meanwhile the defense force is reported to have just 500,000 firearms.

What is even more concerning is that the prevalence of illicit arms or “home-made” firearms and the number of weapons smuggled into the country is one of the highest levels in the world.  To access weapons in Colombia one is not reliant on imports from supplier states.

So will the treaty work here?

While the government is positive, let’s not be fooled – the ATT is not the miracle cure to the conflict nor the gun violence that affects many in Colombia.

The treaty has no effect on weapons already in a country.

Colombia’s problems with small arms and arms smuggling, will not go away with the implementation of the Arms Trade Treaty.

Decreasing incidences of violence and the use of arms in conflict is not just about a more transparent supply of weapons but eliminating both the number of weapons already in Colombia as well as changing a cultural mindset which relies on small arms to commit petty crime and gang violence or to protect in self-defense from those attempting to perpetrate such violence.

This is not to deny the treaty will have some impact, but it won’t solve the problem of the amount of small arms already fueling armed conflict in the country.

How will the peace process with the FARC work with the treaty?

Should the peace-negotiations be successful (and lets plan, they will be), the challenge will be much greater than controlling what weapons cross the border, by whom and for whom. There will also be an urgent need to collect the small arms that already exist in ‘the wrong hands.’

Peace will not come the moment the pen is pressed firmly to a piece of paper. We have seen it in other post-conflict cases whereby the small arms once used to fuel a conflict end up on the streets in the hands of youth looking for new ways to make a living. To avoid this, means getting the FARC leaders to agree to demobilize.

The next step is to actually demobilize the FARC and other rebels groups who have relied on guns to make their livelihood. Also a problem is the fact that the peace negotiations primarily involve those at the top and neglect the wishes, and concerns of those fighting on the ground – not to mention the groups not involved in the peace process at all.

The government has an obligation as well…

Demobilization must be executed in a way that the small arms do not end up on the streets in the hands of former soldiers, former rebels or civilians who turn to violent crimes such as gang violence and robbery as a way to meet means ends. This means, the government ensures that former soldiers and rebels are given other ways to make ends meet; trained in vocational skills, given the opportunity to finish their schooling.

Demobilization isn’t the only answer, it needs to be implemented in conjunction with better trained police force with zero tolerance to gun violence and improved civilian protection and stronger regulations on internal gun control.

Most importantly, it means changing a culture reliant on guns. We have already seen a significant decrease in the access of weapons and gun crimes since Bogota’s days of having the title as the Murder Capital of the World. So we know it can be done!

This is not only important for Colombia, but also for the security of neighboring countries. We need to learn from the case of Libya where we are now seeing thousands of weapons used to fight the Libyan war in the hands of Malian rebels. The international community and the government of the day neglected a holistic approach to eliminating guns.

If ratified, the Arms Trade Treaty might have an impact on ensuring the supply of weapons into Colombia is not increased (although we all know there are other means), but the work on small arms control for Colombia needs to happen from within.

It needs to happen simultaneously with the implementation of the peace negotiations.

The old adage says you should hope for the best but plan for the worst. In the case of Colombia’s pending peace, I would say we need to hope for the best, an effective peace-agreement which is more than just words on paper. This means we also need to plan for the best by realizing post-peace agreement we genuinely address the problem of illicit weapons.

There is a lot of work to be done in Colombia towards eliminating the supply of weapons and this means we need to start planning how to do this now.

Photo, Reuters.