Owning the Process: the Role of Civil Society in Peace Negotiations
March 5, 2004
Author: Celia McKeon
Available: http://www.oneworld.net/article/view/80821/1/
In the tropical heat of the Magdalena Medio region of central Colombia,
local people are at work on an ambitious project for development and peace.
Caught in the middle of a violent political conflict between guerrillas,
paramilitaries and the government's armed forces, they have chosen to build
their futures "from below".
Modelling the path
The Magdalena Medio Peace and Development Programme believes that the
participation of all social and political groups is essential for regional
development and integration. Working outwards from the municipal level,
the project enables broad participation in development planning, political
consensus-building and access to local, regional and national markets.
This is just one among many extraordinary initiatives devised by local communities and organisations throughout Colombia. Compelled to act in the face of devastating violence, they work to build a shared understanding on the causes of the conflict and to develop appropriate responses.
In an environment dominated by political exclusion and polarisation, their initiatives focus on inclusion, participation and democratic renewal. With their successes as well as shortcomings, they model the path towards the peaceful future so many Colombians crave.
Military strategy
It is therefore deeply regrettable that President Uribe, who recently
defended his policies before the European Parliament, chooses to pursue
a predominantly military strategy amid the growing humanitarian crisis.
Although programmes such as that in Magdalena Medio receive funding from the Colombian government (as well as from foreign donors such as the World Bank and the EU), there appears little interest in recognising the potential of such processes to transform Colombia's conflict.
Past peace processes disappointingly failed to harness the opportunities and resources of Colombia's own rich tapestry of experience.
Despite extraordinary mass mobilisation in support of the last negotiations between the government and the insurgencies - the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and the National Liberation Army (ELN) - the conflict parties kept the door more or less shut to broader participation in the talks.
Controversial negotiations with some paramilitary groups are being conducted
in an even more secretive fashion. Decision-makers are failing to make
vital connections between formal peace negotiations and civil society's
peacebuilding work. Colombia is not alone in this regard.
Despite increasing recognition that civil society can play a constructive
role in addressing violent conflict, non-combatants around the world remain
largely excluded from the political negotiations that end civil wars.
Parties with high-tech weapons but usually weak popular support and
questionable legitimacy retain the power to make fundamental decisions
about how a country will be governed, its development managed and human
rights guaranteed. With unarmed citizens disqualified from participation,
the message reinforced is that violence pays.
Missed opportunity
Consequently, a big opportunity is missed. Examples from Conciliation
Resources' publication series Accord show that by opening peace negotiations
to a wider range of social and political actors, the process can gain broader
public legitimacy and in turn become more durable.
The South African transition illustrates that people are more likely
to support the outcomes of a peace process when they have been involved.
Experience from Guatemala shows that opening up the process can help widen
the negotiating agenda, enabling root causes of the conflict to be addressed.
It can also give a voice to traditionally marginalised sectors, such as
women and indigenous communities.
Rather than deferring democratisation until the post-conflict phase,
public participation in peacemaking can nurture renewed democratic processes
and build on each society's own channels for consultation, participation
and decision-making.
There will still be a need for negotiations between the armed actors
on ceasefires and disarmament terms. And the sensitive and contested nature
of these processes will require some discussions out of the public eye.
But this must not be the excuse for public exclusion on issues of broad
political significance - something governments and armed groups need to
recognise.
Conflict transformation through participation
Foreign donors must use their leverage of incentives and sanctions
to promote mechanisms for inclusion and accountability. And local civil
society must make its voice heard and prepare the public to participate.
Colombian civil society has a strong track record of mobilising public
support for its peace processes. It also has rich experience in creating
spaces for discussion and consensus among a broad range of stakeholders.
A new peace process should build on these foundations, not ignore them.
Outside Colombia, there must be greater recognition of the importance
of broad participation in peacemaking as a fundamental human right, not
an optional extra. For this to happen, we need to stop seeing civilians
simply as the victims of armed conflict and recognise they are central
to its transformation.
Celia McKeon is Accord Programme Manager at Conciliation
Resources. For more information, please visit: http://www.c-r.org/accord/index.shtml