Background
The war between the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and the Colombian Government has taken the country through tough times for decades. However, the GOC-FARC peace agreement offers a long-lasting solution to bring peace and development in Colombia. While most previous governments have tried to provide solutions to the war between the two factions, most of such interventions have not identified the root causes of the problem as the key to ending the conflict that has seen a country rich in resources remain poor and depend on interventional aid (Pfeiffer, 2015). The new peace agreement seeks to foster economic development in rural areas and help end poverty and inequality, which are the major causes of the conflict.[1] Therefore, the focus has been on encouraging a bottom-up approach to development through uplifting of marginalized communities, fostering equality in allocation of national resources, and encouraging regional integration, which in turn ensures peace and sustainability, especially in the rural areas.
In 2014, Colombia marked its 50th anniversary of conflict, while some countries celebrated 50 years of independence, self-rule, and democracy (Otis, 2014). The Colombian war has left the Latin America country as a state with the highest number of incidents and accidents from unexploded ordnance and mines, saw thousands of abduction, led to the death of more than 220,000, and seen more than five million internally displaced people (Otis, 2014). Besides, the church, even while playing a key role in helping maintain peace in the country, has been affected with killings of pastoral agents and priests. Although the church has been on the forefront in fighting for equality and protection of the rights of civilians in the country, these killings have increased fear among communities in finding long-lasting solutions to the peace situation in the country (Gaviria, 2014). Therefore, with great interventions made after propositions by key stakeholders in the country’s peace including the government, rebel armies, religious leaders, and the interventional community, Colombia must consider the loss it has endured in the last fifty years as a motivator to end the conflict.
Social and political exclusion have fueled the conflict between the GOC and FARC, especially in the rural areas. Although the government has the responsibility of ensuring equality among its citizens and provide the necessary resources to ensure regional development, previous regimes in Colombia have only focused on enriching those that support them, leading to massive inequality among its citizens (Ruiz 2002). Countries like Sri Lanka have faced similar wars, which has been fueled by hate and previous regimes inappropriately allocating national resources. Rampton and Nadarajah (2016) note that after the institution of securitized development in Sri Lanka, the initiative saw displacement of Tamil-speakers, which resulted in an even intense war between the Tamil and Sinhala. Like Sri Lanka, historical injustices, corruption, and embezzlement of the nation’s funds can be argued as the key reasons for the long war in the country. Like the Tamil militia, the FARC were initially motivated by the need to push the government to ensure equity. However, the government’s continued failure to encourage dialogue only led to more vices in the country. Illegal activities such as mining by the militia and drug trafficking have only led to a different war (Otis, 2014). Such activities have funded FARC, increased war between the government and militia groups, and reduced the chances for dialogue.
Therefore, this paper focuses on how to develop programs that focus on a territorial-based approach to see an end to the 50-year conflict that has threatened the future of Colombia. The focus is to use $50 million to help foster development in rural areas most affected by the war and encourage inclusivity by focusing on the Programas De Desarrollo Con Enfoque Territorial – PDET recommendations. Rural developments will act as a bottom-up approach to encourage national development. Unlike past plans, which have used most funds from aids for counterinsurgency, this program will gear funds towards uplifting the lives of common citizens given the goodwill from both the GOC and FARC to end the war.
Discussion
Although Colombia has been in a 50-year civil conflict, the country is a middle-income country. The USAID mentions that the country has two factions; the sophisticated and dynamic Colombia, and rural areas characterized by conflict. Despite the country’s increase in economic growth from 2007 to 2012 by 4.4%, rural areas are still characterized by lack of licit economic activities, low basic human development indicators, and high poverty rates, which is attributed to historical neglect (USAID, 2014). However, the GOC-FARC agreement to foster stability in the country offers hope to many families affected by the war. The different provisions of the agreement from settling historical land issues, increasing development in rural areas, fostering a reconciliation and healing process, as well as ending illegal activities such as drug trafficking and illegal mining will go a long way in putting an end to the conflict (Pfeiffer 2015).
The new policies and territorial-approach to peace recognizes the input of the citizens in the peace process. For a long time, negotiations spearheaded by the international community have not helped create a room for public participation. However, the new provisions in the GOC-FARC peace agreement require a revision of the citizen participation system. Territorial regulators have to work with locals to help decide development policies and areas they wish implemented. While the GOC and FARC had engaged in repeated confrontations, the real victims were innocent rural dwellers, with women and children being the most affected. Nevertheless, Gaviria (2015) has argued that including the public in peace initiatives offers a real solution to addressing historical injustices. Their resolve to be part of the peace process is driven by the challenges that historical injustices have made them go through. Issues such as land and repatriation of those evicted or those who fled from their land because of the war cannot be solved by boardroom meetings and parliament laws (Ruiz 2002). However, such issues require the active involvement of the public in peace building processes and efforts to seek justice for the victims.
Using a territorial approach, it is easy to include the public in fostering peace and development in their localities than taking a national perspective. The institution of territorial councils means that each region can choose its own path in the peace process based on the extent of the damages caused by the war and historical injustices. Besides, since these councils are elected by local citizens, they will be in a better position to represent grievances from their communities. As such, the peace-process becomes inclusive and focused on the people rather than just a truce and deal between the GOC and FARC.
The UNDP Human Development Report (2016) indicated that Colombia’s Human Development Index (HDI) has been increasing over the last 25 years.[2] Colombia’s HDI increased from 0.592 in 1990 to 0.727 in 2015. This increase represented a 22.9% rise, although it is lower than Brazil (0.754) and Mexico (0.762). While this increase is commendable, a look at the inequality adjusted HDI (IHDI) shows that when adjusted for inequality, Colombia’s HDI reduces to 0.548, which represents a 24.6% decrease against the average loss of 20% (UNDP, 2016, p.2). Therefore, inequality in Colombia has been a major cause of low development in the region, high illiteracy levels in the rural areas, low standards of living, and poor healthcare. However, using a territorial approach to address these issues is a formidable solution.
Development programs takin a territorial approach have been effective in some regions of Colombia and other countries such as Palestine. Through a program controlled by the Development Coordination Latin America and Caribbean, €36510000.00 has been channeled from donors in the EU targeting farmers in the Afro Colombian regions (European Commission 2016). The program has helped many indigenous families get title deeds, increase their farm production, and get good housing, all geared towards improving their lives. Finland also contributed to territorial development in Palestine through financial aid and helping manage aid from donors in the EU (Debi, 2016). Through this programs, many regions affected by war in Palestine have benefited from better healthcare, education, and food.
However, this approach to peace through territorial development may worsen tensions in the country if not well-implemented. Unequal resource allocations would spur a worse war than has been witnessed in the country. For instance, as already indicated, Sri-Lanka became submerged into further killings after donors focused on one group and saw unfair allocation of land. In the end, funds that were aimed at development went to fighting new militia groups, which resulted in more deaths, underdevelopment and displacement of people. As such, Colombia must lead as an example and allocate resources based on transparency to avoid another civil war.
Evaluation
The implementation of this proposal should start with ensuring that land disputes and past injustices are addressed. Land remains a major issue among rural families in Colombia. The displacement of more than 5 million people means that any peace process must start with their repatriation. The territorial councils and authorities will play a major role in this case. After their institution, they should develop modalities to identify families that were displaced during the conflict and help settle them. However, this may not be an easy process given that most families did not have title deeds for their lands. As such, the focus should be on ensuring that available land is divided and new title deeds issues to the new settlers. While territorial councils and regulators will help in managing their respective territories a high-level national body should define guidelines for land use while considering the diversity of different territories. The Colombian government has targeted issuance of at least 500,000 titles to rural families, which will cover 4 million hectares (USAID, 2014). With the help from donors and the international community, Colombia can use the territorial approach to settle more families within 5-10 years. A similar project funded by the EU has seen 2,759 Afro-Colombian and indigenous families settled through a title issuance program (European Union 2016). For instance, in the Naya region, which suffered the worst of the Colombian war, the Afro-Colombians in the region were issues with titles titling to 178,000 hectares benefiting more than 1000 families (European Commission 2016). A replica of these programs would see more families settled and engage in farming and other income generating activities, which would substantially improve their lives.
Moreover, education remains a major issue in rural Colombia. The low IHDI can be attributed to inadequate structures to foster formal education in rural Colombia. The 50-year war has made it hard to build schools and encourage parents to take their children to school. Families that have been on the run and living in poverty could barely take their children to school. Besides, the government has neglected rural Colombia and has only focused on developing urban areas. Therefore, efforts to improve education in rural areas could help improve Colombia’s Global Innovation Index (GII) by encouraging technology and innovation through educational programs in rural areas. Colombia is currently ranked position 63 with a GII of 34.2, below other Latin American countries like Chile (38.4) and Costa Rica (38.4) who are ranked position 44 and 45 (Global Innovation Index, 2016). Therefore, significant resources must be channeled to education programs to enable more young people in rural Colombia get knowledge to work in the formal sector and encourage entrepreneurial development.
In dealing with education, poverty and unemployment are also presented as major challenges in the country. With a relatively high Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI), 0.032, compared to Brazil and Mexico at 0.010 and 0.024, Colombia has to focus more on provision of employment opportunities in the country.[3] The high levels of unemployment have been the major causes of the rise in illicit activities, such as illegal mining and drug trafficking (Otis, 2014). While these activities have for a long time been used to fund FARC’s militia, most Colombian’s in rural areas have had to engage in them to put food on the table. However, the COG-FARC agreement has reiterated on the importance of ending them. For instance, programs to see an end to planting of the coca plant have been fruitful in reducing the amount of cocaine produced in Colombia. Colombia supplied more than 90% of the world’s cocaine over a decade ago; however, there has been improvement especially with the help of the U.S and the international community, reducing the percentage to less than 50% (Otis, 2014). Nevertheless, provision of alternative economic activities would help ensure that the FARC support an end to drug trafficking in the country.
However, while economic empowerment, settling of people, solving land issues, and improving education among rural areas focus on solving most inequality problems, the major challenge lies in fostering reconciliation in the country. Sergio Jaramillo, Colombia’s High Commissioner of Peace, has insisted on the need to work on a cohesion plan in the country. He notes that “The Government’s vision of peace is centered on rights and on a territorial approach (Jaramillo, 2014. p.1).” Jaramillo notes that the peace process must first address rights of all Colombians and ensure that they feel respected and valued by their government. Such rights ensures equality, protection, and sustainability. Since the peace agreement requires that the FARC lays down their weapons and integrate into the civilian life, there must be enough reassurance that the war will not manifest in the near future. Similarly, addressing historical crimes will be critical for both the COG and FARC if the peace process should see the light of day. As such, there is a need to continue investing in protection of citizens, disarm militia groups, and increase programs geared towards encouraging reconciliation and compensation of victims.
Conclusion and possible policy recommendations
The Office of the High Commissioner for Peace (2016) provides proper guidelines on how to manage the local territorial zones. Since these zones are meant to offer a solution to enable peace and development, they should remain temporary and free from any political influence. Maintaining the rule of law in these zones will be crucial to ensure sustainability and support for peace organizers. Further, it is vital that the zones be of reasonable sizes, which will enable proper monitoring and also provide an opportunity to develop their infrastructure. Provision of healthcare by building better facilities with enough specialists, building new schools that have enough teachers and resources, better road networks, and increasing electricity coverage will be crucial to ensuring that as local communities are given new lands, they also work towards social and economic development. Such measures will help reduce inequality, which as indicated, was the main factor that led to this war. However, it is crucial to ensure that the regions are governed by non-military groups although the government will still provide protection for civilians. Therefore, it is will be critical to ensure that these regions provide massive public education especially for FARC members to reintegrate them back to the civilian communities. During this period, it is vital that proper monitoring be made to ensure no non-military personnel carries weapons in the mentioned zones. However, ensuring that FARC members and civilians are not mistreated by the military will be critical if the goals of the territorial approach are to be achieved. As the reintegration process goes on, funding encampments for FARC members will be critical. No civilians will be allowed into these regions while FARC members will have to be closely monitored while moving into the local zones. Lastly, to ensure protection of civilians, a safety perimeter of 1km will be required around localized zones. These efforts will help ensure that any economic and reconciliation activities in the territorial zones are not jeopardized by any illegal gangs.
Another critical issue as already highlighted is on how land will be divided to the rural people. The COG will work to create a Land Fund, which will help distribute and to those without or with insufficient land and empower them to engage in farming activities. Title deeds will be issues to ensure accountability and protect locals from opportunists. The project aims at issuing over 3 million hectares of lands based on different topography and needs of different zones (Presidency of the Republic 2016). To ensure accountability, the land issuance process will incorporate assistance from international bodies such as the European Commission and USAID, who will help build trust among locals that the process is fair. To help ensure appropriate land use and protect farmers and other land owners, it is crucial that citizens participate in formation of regulations focused on their protection, include zones that prevent overutilization of resources and deforestation, ensure a proper registry management is put up to manage production, taxes, process transfers, and other records on land. Finally, a legal system to manage the land in rural areas will be worthwhile as an effort to ensure that the rural people, who are mostly uneducated are protected from potential land grabbers. During this period, any land purchases or sell will be prohibited until the necessary legal frameworks are built and stability and sustainability maintained.
While the peace-building deal between GOC and FARC is a formidable solution to Colombia’s war, territorial peacebuilding will be necessary given the high mistrust among civilians and between FARC and the GOC. Past interventions have not been fruitful in providing a long lasting solution to the war (Europa 2016). As such, the public will need convincing that the 50-year war will end. Ending illicit activities such as the drug trafficking business will reflect an intention to end the war by cutting off the main source of funds for the militia groups (Pfeiffer, 2015). Further, disbarment of the militia will also allow for public education on the need for reconciliation and reintegration of former FARC members in society. Additionally, there is a need of disarming other militia groups such as The National Liberation Army (ENL) through negotiations to prevent a new war. Besides, distribution of resources and power will be essential for the peace program. The territorial zones should be a ground where locals can exercise democracy and also feel represented in the governing process. Therefore, efforts to foster development and peace should directly address the causes of the war and not just the aftermath.
Bibliography
Debi, D. 2016. A Case Study on Peace and Development in Finland’s Country Programme in Palestinian Territories. Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland to Itad Ltd.
Europa. 2016. The European Union Trust Fund for Colombia Strategy Document. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/sites/devco/files/eutf-colombia-strategy.pdf (Accessed 30 April 2017)
European Commission. 2016. Sector Reform Contract for Rural Development with a Territorial Approach” –DRET – Programme. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/printpdf/case-studies/sector-reform-contract-rural-development-territorial-approach-dret-programme_en (Accessed 30 April 2017)
European Union. 2016. Rural Development with a Territorial Approach –DRET – Programme. Available at https://eeas.europa.eu/node/15503_es (Accessed 30 April 2017)
Gaviria, H. F., 2015. “And They Shall Make War No More”: Lessons about Peace‐Making and Overcoming Conflict from Colombia. New Blackfriars, 96(1062), pp.177-191.
Global Innovation index. 2016. 2016 Global Innovation index. Available at https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/analysis-indicator (Accessed 30 April 2017)
Jaramillo, S. 2016. Territorial peace. Available at http://www.lse.ac.uk/IDEAS/images/events/15-05-12-Colombian-Peace-Event/4-Territorial-Peace-in-Colombia—High-Commisioner-for-Peace.pdf (Accessed 30 April 2017)
Otis, J. 2014. The FARC and Colombia’s Illegal Drug Trade. Available at https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/Otis_FARCDrugTrade2014.pdf (Accessed 30 April 2017)
Pfeiffer, S. 2015. Territorial peacebuilding in Colombia: The opportunity to do what has not been achieved before? Available at https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/192284/d6c6acc131e49dbc761018bfe2951621.pdf (Accessed 30 April 2017)
Presidency of the Republic. 2016. Colombia’s Agreement to End Conflict and Build Peace. Available at http://www.altocomisionadoparalapaz.gov.co/herramientas/Documents/summary-of-colombias-peace-agreement.pdf (Accessed 30 April 2017)
Rampton, D. and Nadarajah, S., 2016. A long view of liberal peace and its crisis. European Journal of International Relations, p.1354066116649029.
Ruiz, B. 2002. The Colombian Civil War. Jefferson, N.C: McFarland.
The Office of the High Commissioner for Peace. 2016. Available at http://www.altocomisionadoparalapaz.gov.co/herramientas/Documents/The_Colombian_Peace_Agreement_the_opportunity_to_build_pace.pdf (Accessed 30 April 2017)
UNDP. 2016. Human Development Report 2016: Briefing note for countries on the 2016 Human Development Report Colombia. Available at http://hdr.undp.org/sites/all/themes/hdr_theme/country-notes/COL.pdf (Accessed 1 May 2017).
USAID. 2014. Country Development Cooperation Strategy 2014-2018: A Path to Peace. Available at https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1862/USAID-Colombia-CDCS.pdf (Accessed 30 April 2017)
[1] “In Colombia, structural change on the ground as an approach to conflict resolution has been a proclaimed government policy for decades (Pfeiffer, 2015, p.2).” However, most efforts have failed due to bad governance
[2] “The HDI is a summary measure for assessing progress in three basic dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life, access to knowledge and a decent standard of living UNDP, 2016, p.2).”
[3] “MPI identifies multiple overlapping deprivations suffered by households in 3 dimensions: education, health and living standards. The education and health dimensions are each based on two indicators, while standard of living is based on six indicators. All of the indicators needed to construct the MPI for a country are taken from the same household survey (UNDP, 2016, p.6).”
