HRW on Colombia's unnameable threat
Jose Miguel Vivanco of Human Rights Watch:
I hate using the term "emerging groups." These groups have been emerging for 7-10 years. At some point they stop emerging and start existing (and hopefully declining). What do you call them then? Emerging is very temporal and not a particularly useful description.
They're not really paramilitaries. Even HRW, which does a good job documenting some specifics in this report, doesn't think the national government colludes with them in a "paramilitary" manner the way the Colombian military certainly did with the autodefensas in the 90's (or certain regional governments do today with groups in their own country). The most recent stats I saw (I don't remember where) said about 50% of the membership of these groups were former AUC, 20% were former FARC or ELN and 30% had no previous links to any armed groups. That's a pretty significant percentage that are former paramilitary, but it's still quite a mix
Paramilitary "heirs" or "successor groups" that HRW uses in this report aren't a bad description. These groups emerged after and as a near direct consequence of the paramilitary demobilization. Still, describing them as successors to something doesn't really say what they are. These groups don't have the same goals and motivations of the old groups.
Yet, to call them gangs or cartels or Bacrim (bandas criminales) seems to minimize the role Colombia's long running conflict had in their creation. While they don't have ideology and aren't really actors in Colombia's old conflict, they certainly aren't completely separated from it either. Many of the members are from the AUC or FARC and others are certainly influenced by the conditions created over four decades of conflict. Their recent emergence is a result of the government's security policies encouraging demobilization of the AUC as a group and thousands of FARC combatants individually without a strong reintegration program. The groups are playing a role in corrupting politics, even if they don't share the AUC's old "rightist" or "anti-communist" ideology. These aren't gangs like those in Central America or cartels like those in Mexico or elsewhere in Colombia.
So, long story short, I've been thinking about this problem on and off for years and I still don't know what to call them.
"Successor groups" may be the best description, but successors to Colombia's conflict more than just the paramilitary demobilization. It's not just the AUC that has gone and come back in another form. The FARC in many ways has declined, changed, reduced its ideological aims and become a strange cartel/gang/insurgency hybrid organization as well. Remnants of the AUC and FARC regularly mix and cooperate and groups that used to share "ideologies" now fight over drug trafficking turf.
Perhaps what we're seeing is Colombia's old conflict winding down, but a new conflict emerging with these "successor groups" that include former AUC and FARC fighting it out. It's less ideological than the Cold War framework and looks more like cartel or gang violence we see today in Mexico or Brazil, but is certainly influenced by the structures of the past. It's a successor to Colombia's conflict rather than a continuation. That would require a rethinking of the problem on all sides.
And yes, however you want to define the problem, the violence and terror these groups cause is very real. It's a human rights issue and a security issue and must be fought head on by the Colombian government and the region.
One of several previous posts on emerging threat here.
"Whatever you call these groups - whether paramilitaries, gangs, or some other name - their impact on human rights in Colombia today should not be minimized,"I agree with that entire quote, though I disagree with Vivanco's statements elsewhere about the issue, and recommend reading the report. However, I wanted to stop for a moment on the comment about what to call them. Nobody is really sure.
I hate using the term "emerging groups." These groups have been emerging for 7-10 years. At some point they stop emerging and start existing (and hopefully declining). What do you call them then? Emerging is very temporal and not a particularly useful description.
They're not really paramilitaries. Even HRW, which does a good job documenting some specifics in this report, doesn't think the national government colludes with them in a "paramilitary" manner the way the Colombian military certainly did with the autodefensas in the 90's (or certain regional governments do today with groups in their own country). The most recent stats I saw (I don't remember where) said about 50% of the membership of these groups were former AUC, 20% were former FARC or ELN and 30% had no previous links to any armed groups. That's a pretty significant percentage that are former paramilitary, but it's still quite a mix
Paramilitary "heirs" or "successor groups" that HRW uses in this report aren't a bad description. These groups emerged after and as a near direct consequence of the paramilitary demobilization. Still, describing them as successors to something doesn't really say what they are. These groups don't have the same goals and motivations of the old groups.
Yet, to call them gangs or cartels or Bacrim (bandas criminales) seems to minimize the role Colombia's long running conflict had in their creation. While they don't have ideology and aren't really actors in Colombia's old conflict, they certainly aren't completely separated from it either. Many of the members are from the AUC or FARC and others are certainly influenced by the conditions created over four decades of conflict. Their recent emergence is a result of the government's security policies encouraging demobilization of the AUC as a group and thousands of FARC combatants individually without a strong reintegration program. The groups are playing a role in corrupting politics, even if they don't share the AUC's old "rightist" or "anti-communist" ideology. These aren't gangs like those in Central America or cartels like those in Mexico or elsewhere in Colombia.
So, long story short, I've been thinking about this problem on and off for years and I still don't know what to call them.
"Successor groups" may be the best description, but successors to Colombia's conflict more than just the paramilitary demobilization. It's not just the AUC that has gone and come back in another form. The FARC in many ways has declined, changed, reduced its ideological aims and become a strange cartel/gang/insurgency hybrid organization as well. Remnants of the AUC and FARC regularly mix and cooperate and groups that used to share "ideologies" now fight over drug trafficking turf.
Perhaps what we're seeing is Colombia's old conflict winding down, but a new conflict emerging with these "successor groups" that include former AUC and FARC fighting it out. It's less ideological than the Cold War framework and looks more like cartel or gang violence we see today in Mexico or Brazil, but is certainly influenced by the structures of the past. It's a successor to Colombia's conflict rather than a continuation. That would require a rethinking of the problem on all sides.
And yes, however you want to define the problem, the violence and terror these groups cause is very real. It's a human rights issue and a security issue and must be fought head on by the Colombian government and the region.
One of several previous posts on emerging threat here.
Labels: Colombia, conflict, human rights, latinamerica, terrorism |
