RSS

Colombia is the stage of one of the oldest internal armed conflicts in the world. The EU and the US have been actively present in Colombia as donors since the end of the 1990s when the most significant peace process between the government and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia (FARC) guerrilla movement took place. Both donors have opposing visions and proposals for peace. The new US presidency offers an opportunity for more effective US-EU peacebuilding.

The US conceives of the Colombian conflict as a serious threat to its own security since drugs, refugees and instability in the Andean region can directly affect American national interests (oil, trade, and a military presence close to Panama). The Colombian state is seen as a democratic ally threatened by terrorist groups. Therefore, America supports its closest partner in the subcontinent with military and development aid mostly for the War on Drugs and on Terror through Plan Colombia.

The EU does not share this approach (although the UK and Spain hesitate). Europeans frame the Colombian conflict as a product of socio-political inequalities in a system in which the state is a democracy still under construction. The EU's support for peace materialises through development aid mainly for peacebuilding initiatives from civil society at the local level (the Peace Laboratories program). The objective is to transform the root causes of conflict and build a participative democracy from the bottom.

Both international actors are working with live and let live attitudes. The Bush administration pursued a rather unilateralist approach and the EU has not been ready to engage politically in the Colombian struggle for peace as a counter-balance to the US. This has implications such as demanding too much from the Colombian government (forced to lobby in Washington and Brussels), a lack of coordination of aid efforts, and not learning from each other's experiences. Both parties could gain significantly from pursuing peace in Colombia: benefits include securitization of American and European interests in the region, reduction of cocaine traffic, reinforcement of US influence after the Bush administration abandoned the hemisphere, and the creation of a political space for the EU as a global peace actor. The election of Barack Obama as president opens a window of opportunity for multilateralist actions.

Colombia has never been, and will not become, a priority for the US or for the EU. The US undoubtedly has more at stake in Colombia than the Europeans and Obama has stated his willingness to exert leadership in the region and to increase the defence of human rights, multilateralism and the development of democratic institutions. Nevertheless, he is ambiguous concerning the continuity of the War on Drugs and on Terror in the hemisphere. Furthermore, he may have a shrunk budget due to the current economic crisis and he is unlikely to be willing to deceive his single ally in leftist South America. However, Colombia appears as the perfect international stage on which to demonstrate the new adminstration's "change" in US foreign policy. The Colombian conflict certainly provides an easier test ground for new multilateralism than in the Middle East.

The challenge for future transatlantic relations in Colombia is sharing the burden of the peace struggle without losing leverage. In effect, a total alignment scenario supporting the current Colombian President (Alvaro Uribe) will not necessarily encourage peace. Efforts can be coordinated among donors and the central government for the macro policies, such as the transformation of the judicial system, more transparency for the legislative bodies, and a free and improved media. Nevertheless, the US and the EU have different leverages for peace that need to be kept separate. The US has a huge influence over the government that can be used not only for strengthening Colombia's security forces, but also for demanding respect for human rights and actions against "new" paramilitary groups. On the other hand, civil society peace organisations trust the EU. European aid has kept local civil initiatives alive, has forced the peacebuilding perspective onto President Uribe's agenda, and has helped the UN and international NGOs presence in Colombia despite official resistance.

Thus, the EU and US can work together for peace in Colombia by maintaining their differences but harmonizing their objectives. The Obama administration may well lead the way by transforming the war perspective of American aid.

Dorly Castaneda is a PhD candidate in International Relations at Sciences Po Paris. She has previously worked at the Senegalese Institute for Agricultural Research and for the Colombian Presidential Program Against Illicit Crops.

Related material from the Atlantic Community:

• Eckhart von Klaeden: The Need to Nurture the Latin-American-European Relationship
  
• Marek Swierczynski: Watch out for Brazil, Russia's New Buddy