Eight and a half years ago, when, after four years of arduous negotiations in Havana, the Colombian government and the FARC signed a peace agreement, I rejoiced and hoped for the Colombian people. The peace agreement, which Cuba and Norway, in their capacity as facilitators, had helped to conclude, resonated positively around the world.
I remember, like many others, hoping that this historic agreement would end 60 years of widespread violence and conflict in Colombia, which had led to the deaths of more than 200,000 people, and dreaming that peace would finally prevail in the lawless country. In 2016, President Juan Manuel Santos, who signed the peace agreement, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, but peace has not yet come to Colombia; moreover, as of early 2025, the security situation seems to have deteriorated even more than before.In short, I could not get my hopes up in the face of the declarations for the dissolution of the PKK, considering that the previous attempt (the peace process in 2014) was a failure, and remembering the example of Colombia. These things do not end so easily, I wish I could get my hopes up, but what we have seen and experienced in the last 50 years necessitates caution.
How was the peace agreement applauded by the world killed?
The peace agreement of 2016, which we call historic, has been killed.In the referendum organised for its acceptance, the agreement was rejected, albeit by a small margin, as a result of the effective propaganda of the central conservative parties that ‘too many concessions were made to the FARC’.Faced with this unexpected situation, the parties quickly renegotiated the much criticised aspects of the agreement and agreed on a new text.This time, the government ratified it in the Parliament and put it into force without submitting it to public approval.Two years later, in the parliamentary elections organised in March 2018, the FARC participated in the parliamentary elections with the status of a legal political party that had said goodbye to arms and suffered a complete defeat. After the elections, which resulted in the victory of right-wing parties claiming that the peace agreement was not fair and balanced and that concessions were made to the FARC, the historic agreement was blocked. Ivan Duque, the right-wing candidate who won the presidential elections held two months later, squandered the opportunity for peace by failing to fulfil the requirements of the agreement and disrupting its implementation.Many FARC members who had surrendered their weapons returned to the armed struggle.Since the agreement, around 300 former FARC members who laid down their arms have been killed.The failure of the right-wing parties to appreciate the value of peace, the failure to prepare public opinion for reconciliation and the incitement of the electorate against the FARC resulted in the failure to capitalise on a historic peace opportunity for Colombia.
Public support for the process of dissolving the terrorist organisation
When a terrorist organisation lays down its arms and its members descend from the mountains to the plains, it is indispensable, sine qua non, that the public opinion is prepared simultaneously with the arrangements that will lead to peace. Assuming that we are at the beginning of the process of PKK’s dissolution and ‘Turkey without terrorism’, there is no such work in our country today. Unless the government and the opposition act in harmony in the process of leaving terrorism behind and establishing peace, and without the support of public opinion, it is not possible to achieve the lofty goal. I have brought the example of Colombia to your attention for this purpose.
Does the former president regret not implementing the peace agreement?
Ivan Duque, the right-wing president who buried the peace agreement in the ground, was later himself destroyed. His four years in power were characterised by social protests and turmoil. The harsh treatment meted out by the police to the crowds that took to the streets further lowered the rating of Duque’s administration in the eyes of the people. During his time, terrorist organisations came to their senses, revived and the country moved away from social peace. In Latin America, the popular support behind movements founded on the basis of leftist ideology, initially acting as liberation organisations, but later becoming involved in drug trafficking and turning into a hotbed of terrorism, is very weak (the FARC received half a percent of the vote in the 2018 elections). My question is, since the FARC, which laid down arms and turned into a political party, does not constitute a rival for other parties, why was the peace agreement applauded by the whole world not put into practice and why was the step that would have brought peace to the country abandoned? Can Ivan Duque and his mentor, former president Alvaro Uribe, answer this question today? Do they regret it? I wonder how they feel about the loss of life caused today by the FARC, which took up arms again thanks to them.
Socialist president’s collective peace strategy hits a wall
After the Ivan Duque era, even more interesting developments took place in Colombia.
In 2018, Gustavo Petro, the deposed (2013) mayor of the capital Bogotá, who had been imprisoned as a member of a revolutionary organisation in his youth, defeated Ivan Duque as a leftist presidential candidate, became Colombia’s first socialist president, beating his right-wing rival in the presidential elections held in 2022. His announcement that he would initiate simultaneous peace negotiations with all major armed groups (total peace strategy) after he took office has reverberated around the world.
Negotiating with terrorist groups at the table: the hardest job in the world
Colombia’s only problem is not only the FARC, which laid down arms in a peace agreement in 2016 and has since returned to armed struggle.Apart from the ELN and the Clan del Golfo, which are at least as powerful as the FARC, around 150 armed organisations operate in the cocaine trade, illegal mining and extortion, clashing with security forces and each other.Negotiating peace with all the major armed groups in the same time frame is therefore an ambitious and unrealistic strategy.We know that former president Juan Manuel Santos came to the negotiating table with the ELN after signing peace with the FARC.Indeed, I read in the foreign press that former President Santos told President Gustavo Petro in an interview that it was impossible to negotiate with all the organisations simultaneously, warning him ‘you are not superman’.
I hope that the process of a terror-free Turkey will not resemble the Colombian example
Socialist president Gustavo Petro’s ‘strategy of collective peace’ has, as expected, hit a brick wall in two years, with no progress and no improvement in the fight against terrorism.Last January, President Petro announced the end of negotiations with armed groups.The failure of the socialist head of state’s efforts to bring peace and tranquillity to his country is naturally regrettable. There are successful examples such as Northern Ireland in the fight against terrorism in the world, let’s see where our struggle leads. While we hope that Ankara’s ‘Turkey without terrorism’ initiative will be successful this time, it is noteworthy that the data and signs on the ground are not enough for a happy ending.
