Lessons for Gaza from Colombia

To curb armed groups, the South American country started with a vision of equality, patience, and trust – qualities needed in negotiations and in rebuilding society.

|
AP
Colombian High Commissioner for Peace Ivan Danilo Rueda, left, and Andrey Avendano, a member of the Central General Staff of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, FARC, smile during peace talks in Tibu, Colombia, Oct. 8. The FARC group is an an armed faction that broke away and never signed the 2016 peace agreement by the government.

Whoever governs Gaza after Israel ends its military operations in the Palestinian enclave will have to address what gave rise to Hamas and its extremist ideology. One place to look for that sort of discernment is Colombia, where the government’s year-old Total Peace plan shows signs of curbing the violent radicalization of many armed groups.

South America’s second-most populous country has long tried to end decades of ideology-based warfare and violence driven by guerrilla groups, gangs, and drug cartels. The current government’s all-at-once strategy has plenty of doubters, but it has led to negotiating peace agreements with as many as 26 armed groups simultaneously.

The government’s main assumption in the talks: Equality and trust are building blocks not only for negotiations but also for creating a just and gentle society.

Even setbacks can provide lessons. Last weekend, for example, one armed group broke off negotiations, accusing the government of bad faith. Yet the group said it would honor a joint cease-fire that began in September and even acknowledged a need for self-criticism. “I do not believe that we are perfect,” one of the group’s leaders, Jaime Muñoz Dorado, told EFE, a Spanish news agency. “If there is a will for peace from the Government, the most coherent thing is that we prolong it.”

Mr. Dorado’s comments underscore the idea that a vision of peace can create its own momentum as it relies on humility to listen and an assumption of goodwill by the other side. That idea is well practiced in Colombia, notably in a landmark 2016 accord between the government and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, a movement that had waged guerrilla warfare for half a century.

President Gustavo Petro has vowed to engage all armed factions in a similar way as well as lift the economy to prevent young people from joining such groups. Since taking office last year, he has increased public investments in education and agriculture. And his initial framework for talks with Mr. Dorado’s faction was dubbed an “agreement on respect for the civilian population.”

Yet in raising expectations about curbing violence and poverty, Mr. Petro has also stirred impatience. The one-on-one negotiating tracks with individual armed factions have been disrupted by kidnappings, extortion, and car bombings. Within months of taking office last year, the president saw his public approval ratings plummet. His party took a drubbing in local elections last month.

Such disruptions, however, have not diminished his initiative. The president expects armed groups to take “maximum responsibility” for building a peaceful future. The armed groups, as one gang leader told The Associated Press, expect the government to nurture trust “not with words, but through actions.” For many Colombians, such forward-looking expectations are the language of reconciliation that they want the world to note.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Lessons for Gaza from Colombia
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2023/1109/Lessons-for-Gaza-from-Colombia
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe