Colombian Civil War is Nearly Over...

[Frodo]

...after more than fifty years:

Colombia, FARC leaders agree on path for peace

By Elwyn Lopez and Greg Botelho, CNN
Updated 10:12 PM ET, Wed September 23, 2015

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Fantastic news!

[Cory]

Fantastic news!

[MaxQue]

A mere distraction. It doesn't deal with the other source of the violence in Colombia, the far-right paramilitaries.

[Hash]

A mere distraction. It doesn't deal with the other source of the violence in Colombia, the far-right paramilitaries.

Please don't talk about what you don't know.

[ingemann]

A mere distraction. It doesn't deal with the other source of the violence in Colombia, the far-right paramilitaries.

"sign"

Yes I'm sure it won't have any influence on semi-legal paramilitaries that the rebel group they claim to fight make peace with the government. Just as when IRA made peace with government it had no influence on loyalist groups, whose terror against NI Catholics continues unchanged to this day.

[politicus]

A mere distraction. It doesn't deal with the other source of the violence in Colombia, the far-right paramilitaries.

Please don't talk about what you don't know.

No offence Hash, but your view of Colombia always seems to be through rosy tinted glasses, and contradicts with the one from human rights organizations. There is a very high number of IDPs (+ several  hundred thousand refugees in neighboring countries) and reports that many can not return because the people (mainly land owner run militias) that took their land dont want them back, and kill and terrorize people who return etc. Even if the paramilitaries are "demobilized" they still seem to wield enormous power in many regions and there is a grey zone between ex-paras and drug cartels.

So even if you are in Colombia and we are not, I remain skeptical. What exactly is wrong with what Max wrote? (apart from "far right" giving these groups too much of an ideological taint)

You might argue that the "once registered, never deregistered" practice is responsible for the high IDP number, but there are still hundred of thousands of people that simply do not dare return to their land and houses. At least terror from informal networks of former paras/landlord gangs is a reality.

[Hash]

No offence Hash, but your view of Colombia always seems to be through rosy tinted glasses, and contradicts with the one from human rights organizations. There is a very high number of IDPs (+ several  hundred thousand refugees in neighboring countries) and reports that many can not return because the people (mainly land owner run militias) that took their land dont want them back, and kill and terrorize people who return etc. Even if the paramilitaries are "demobilized" they still seem to wield enormous power in many regions and there is a grey zone between ex-paras and drug cartels.

It's obvious that I love this country and that I try to change people's misconceptions of this country, but I'm not sure what makes you say that I have 'rosy tinted glasses' - my comments on Colombia have mostly been non-political, on things like the life in this country or the different regions/cities. I don't recall having written much on Colombian political or historical topics on here recently, and I'm quite certain that I've never written anything which contradicts anything written by human rights organizations or NGOs nor do I recall denying the very harsh and horrible reality of the conflict situation in Colombia. I have read tons on this topic, to a point where I'm confident of what I say, and that I can better understand an extremely complex situation. Please don't make it seem as if I have naive and 'rosy tinted' mindset on the aspects of the armed conflict in this country, because that's not the case.

[DC Al Fine]

No offence Hash, but your view of Colombia always seems to be through rosy tinted glasses, and contradicts with the one from human rights organizations. There is a very high number of IDPs (+ several  hundred thousand refugees in neighboring countries) and reports that many can not return because the people (mainly land owner run militias) that took their land dont want them back, and kill and terrorize people who return etc. Even if the paramilitaries are "demobilized" they still seem to wield enormous power in many regions and there is a grey zone between ex-paras and drug cartels.

It's obvious that I love this country and that I try to change people's misconceptions of this country, but I'm not sure what makes you say that I have 'rosy tinted glasses' - my comments on Colombia have mostly been non-political, on things like the life in this country or the different regions/cities. I don't recall having written much on Colombian political or historical topics on here recently, and I'm quite certain that I've never written anything which contradicts anything written by human rights organizations or NGOs nor do I recall denying the very harsh and horrible reality of the conflict situation in Colombia. I have read tons on this topic, to a point where I'm confident of what I say, and that I can better understand an extremely complex situation. Please don't make it seem as if I have naive and 'rosy tinted' mindset on the aspects of the armed conflict in this country, because that's not the case.

I know literally nothing about the situation in Colombia. Could you give a brief rundown of the situation and explain why you think MaxQue is wrong?

[politicus]

A mere distraction. It doesn't deal with the other source of the violence in Colombia, the far-right paramilitaries.

"sign"

Yes I'm sure it won't have any influence on semi-legal paramilitaries that the rebel group they claim to fight make peace with the government. Just as when IRA made peace with government it had no influence on loyalist groups, whose terror against NI Catholics continues unchanged to this day.

The Colombian civil war was in the last three decades almost exclusively about control of resources: agricultural land, mineral resources  and places to set up drug labs. This fight and the fight to keep what some people took during the war is not going to stop because FARC is out (if they are so). So not really comparable to NI, even if fighting over the drug market between ex-paramilitaries continue up there too. The level of state power/ability to control is different, the scale and the amount of resources at stake is too. There is no reason to believe the gangs set up by wealthy estate owners and businessmen will stop their terror just because there is no guerillas - but they may reorganize into more informal networks and use less conspicuous violence - a process they have by most accounts already begun years ago.

[ingemann]

A mere distraction. It doesn't deal with the other source of the violence in Colombia, the far-right paramilitaries.

"sign"

Yes I'm sure it won't have any influence on semi-legal paramilitaries that the rebel group they claim to fight make peace with the government. Just as when IRA made peace with government it had no influence on loyalist groups, whose terror against NI Catholics continues unchanged to this day.

The Colombian civil war was in the last three decades almost exclusively about control of resources: agricultural land, mineral resources  and places to set up drug labs. This fight and the fight to keep what some people took during the war is not going to stop because FARC is out (if they are so). So not really comparable to NI, even if fighting over the drug market between ex-paramilitaries continue up there too. The level of state power/ability to control is different, the scale and the amount of resources at stake is too. There is no reason to believe the gangs set up by wealthy estate owners and businessmen will stop their terror just because there is no guerillas - but they may reorganize into more informal networks and use less conspicuous violence - a process they have by most accounts already begun years ago.

Yes I get this, but hee's a thing, "pro-government" paramilitaries usual need some excuse to do their dirty deeds, with FARC making peace that excuse disappear and the paramilitaries risk if they continue their behaviour that the government decides to focus on them, and I doubt they will do as well as FARC as a rebel group.

[politicus]

A mere distraction. It doesn't deal with the other source of the violence in Colombia, the far-right paramilitaries.

"sign"

Yes I'm sure it won't have any influence on semi-legal paramilitaries that the rebel group they claim to fight make peace with the government. Just as when IRA made peace with government it had no influence on loyalist groups, whose terror against NI Catholics continues unchanged to this day.

The Colombian civil war was in the last three decades almost exclusively about control of resources: agricultural land, mineral resources  and places to set up drug labs. This fight and the fight to keep what some people took during the war is not going to stop because FARC is out (if they are so). So not really comparable to NI, even if fighting over the drug market between ex-paramilitaries continue up there too. The level of state power/ability to control is different, the scale and the amount of resources at stake is too. There is no reason to believe the gangs set up by wealthy estate owners and businessmen will stop their terror just because there is no guerillas - but they may reorganize into more informal networks and use less conspicuous violence - a process they have by most accounts already begun years ago.

Yes I get this, but here's a thing, "pro-government" paramilitaries usual need some excuse to do their dirty deeds, with FARC making peace that excuse disappear and the paramilitaries risk if they continue their behaviour that the government decides to focus on them, and I doubt they will do as well as FARC as a rebel group.

They controlled most of the drug trade (up to 80%) around 2010 giving them enormous wealth and many have morphed into criminal successor groups since + they have contacts in the military and the police. You overestimate the efficiency of the Colombian state quite a lot - especially dealing with people who are old partners and cronies of officers and high ranking officials and have ties to the business community (para groups mostly being started by businessmen and rancheros makes them quite different from leftists guerillas). They may not function as paras, but that doest make them less able to terrorize the population. The Mexican drug cartels are quite capable of terrorizing their population without any ideological legitimation and the Mexican state isn't exactly about to defeat them anytime soon. The social structure, porousness and (in-)capability of the state + geography makes large Latin American countries quite different from something like NI.

[politicus]

No offence Hash, but your view of Colombia always seems to be through rosy tinted glasses, and contradicts with the one from human rights organizations. There is a very high number of IDPs (+ several  hundred thousand refugees in neighboring countries) and reports that many can not return because the people (mainly land owner run militias) that took their land dont want them back, and kill and terrorize people who return etc. Even if the paramilitaries are "demobilized" they still seem to wield enormous power in many regions and there is a grey zone between ex-paras and drug cartels.

It's obvious that I love this country and that I try to change people's misconceptions of this country, but I'm not sure what makes you say that I have 'rosy tinted glasses' - my comments on Colombia have mostly been non-political, on things like the life in this country or the different regions/cities. I don't recall having written much on Colombian political or historical topics on here recently, and I'm quite certain that I've never written anything which contradicts anything written by human rights organizations or NGOs nor do I recall denying the very harsh and horrible reality of the conflict situation in Colombia. I have read tons on this topic, to a point where I'm confident of what I say, and that I can better understand an extremely complex situation. Please don't make it seem as if I have naive and 'rosy tinted' mindset on the aspects of the armed conflict in this country, because that's not the case.

Okay, maybe I am being unfair, but a brusque rebuttal as the one you gave to Max for stating a commonly held opinion requires arguments and facts to back it up - otherwise it just seems like "I don't wanna hear this". Generally the burden of prove is on the one that challenges the consensus and in this case that is you (that may be unfair, but is the nature of public debate).
I am sure there is a huge regional variation (as there aways was), but it seems unlikely that the power of the old paras have been broken in the areas were they were strongest and the continuity gangs established themselves the easiest - and if it really is so it would contradict the info available to us non-specialist outsiders (which leads to one having the picture I describe in the post above), so presenting a coherent argument/analysis and some sources would be good (even if I know you are busy).

[Famous Mortimer]

These negotiations have been going on for two years and the agreement this thread is about is an agreement on a framework for continued negotiation. So basically nothing. The Colombian Civil War is not ending. FARC deals cocaine and that's all they care about, not anything that's being discussed in these talks, although they are happy to drag the talks out as long as possible because it gives them cover to produce cocaine.

[Famous Mortimer]

The main right-wing paramilitaries disbanded a decade ago. Some drug gangs have risen up in their place but they are weaker and the government does not pull punches when dealing with them. FARC are a much bigger problem. It's disappointing to see non-Colombian leftists engaged in whataboutery in FARC's defense, especially when FARC isn't even particularly leftist.

[politicus]

The main right-wing paramilitaries disbanded a decade ago. Some drug gangs have risen up in their place but they are weaker and the government does not pull punches when dealing with them. FARC are a much bigger problem. It's disappointing to see non-Colombian leftists engaged in whataboutery in FARC's defense, especially when FARC isn't even particularly leftist.

No one said FARC was anything but nominally leftist for at least the last three decades (longer of course, but the further back you go, the more mixed the picture is). The 2003-06 demobilization was a deeply flawed proces and your description of it trivialize the successor groups ("some gangs"), the criminal networks established, their ties to the business world and authorities, and the whole culture of violence created by the paras. "The government does not pull punches when dealing with them" rather depends on who and what you call the government and who "they" are. It is a sweeping and dubious generalization. Then there are more informal networks of people who used to be paras/para associated and their interest in protecting land/houses/other assets etc. they took during the conflict. The whole IDP and refugee situation speaks volumes of the fear still installed by those types.