Humanitarian organisations have always realised that their activities have geopolitical consequences and that they are inseparably linked to the political world. However, since the 1990’s, humanitarian organisations have increasingly begun acting upon this awareness (Barnett 2005: 724). The watershed for this transformation from minimalist assistance provision to goal-oriented humanitarianism, was the decision of numerous humanitarian organisations to pull out of Rwandan refugee camps in Zaire. The argument was that these camps were being used by Hutu genocidaires to launch violent attacks on Rwandan soil (Fox 2001: 279-280, 285-288). The shift to goal-oriented humanitarianism has resulted in “a broad trend towards an increased use of humanitarian assistance as part of a more comprehensive strategy to transform conflicts and decrease the violence” (Uvin 1999: 8). This paper identifies three strategies in which humanitarian organisations can address the root causes of conflict in the 21st century: disaster risk reduction (DRR), the decision to withhold or focus aid in specific areas, and speaking out. DRR is usually executed pre-conflict or during periods of reduced violence, whilst the latter two are relevant at the time of conflict.
The main aims of this paper are to examine the phenomenon of civil war from a geopolitical perspective and identifying variables linked to both the onset and duration of civil conflict, specifically in the case of Colombia. The conclusions drawn here should assist humanitarian organisations present in Colombia, in identifying ways to implement the above three mentioned strategies so as to address the root causes of civil war. Halting conflict and preventing future reoccurrence of civil war is in the direct interest of Colombian based humanitarian organisations, as many of them work with internally displaced persons (IDPs). As Ibáñez and Vélez (2008: 672) note: “Violence and security perceptions are the major determinants of displacement and are, therefore, the key instruments in preventing displacement.”
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Colombia’s Civil War: Historical Context, Actors and Impacts
3. Using the IRLR Model in Addressing both Humanitarian Needs and the Causes of Conflict.
4. Grievance Theories of Civil War
5. Greed Theories of Civil War
6. Conclusion
7. Reference List
Research Objectives and Themes
The primary aim of this paper is to examine the civil war in Colombia from a geopolitical perspective, identifying variables linked to the onset and duration of the conflict to assist humanitarian organizations in implementing effective developmental relief strategies.
- Geopolitical analysis of Colombia’s civil war and its impact on civilians.
- Evaluation of "Greed" versus "Grievance" theories in the context of Colombian conflict.
- Application of the Impoverishment Risk and Livelihood Reconstruction (IRLR) model to humanitarian intervention.
- Assessment of conflict-induced displacement and the role of "micro-orders" in recruitment.
- Strategy development for disaster risk reduction and advocacy to address root causes of violence.
Excerpt from the Book
Colombia’s Civil War: Historical Context, Actors and Impacts
In order to adequately understand the current day internal conflict in all its aspects, one must first understand the historical context of Colombia’s civil war, its actors and its resulting impacts on the civilian population.
Colombia, South America’s fourth largest country, won its independence from Spain in 1819. Thirty years after independence, the Conservative and Liberal parties were founded. Disputes between followers of both parties led to small episodes of violence up until 1899. Ideological differences existed between landowners from Spanish descent who held both economic and political power. The peasants working on the farms of these landowners traditionally adopted ideologies similar to their employer. (BBC 2010a, BBC 2010b, Rogers 2002: 4-5)
From 1899 on there were a number of episodes of conflict, culminating in a particularly brutal period referred to as ‘la Violencia’, starting in 1948. (Rogers 2002: 5). The time period of ‘la Violencia’ sowed the seeds for the formation of the two most notable left-wing guerrilla movements: Ejercito de Liberacion Nacional (ELN) and the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC) (Minear 2006: 9, Rogers 2002: 5).
The 1970’s saw a dramatic rise in poverty, specifically in rural areas, in addition to the continued inability of the Colombian government to address inequalities of land distribution. At the same time the global demand for cocaine was on the rise, and many peasants moved into FARC controlled territories to grow coca plants (Leech 2002: 17). The seventies also saw the formation of right-wing paramilitary groups. They were formed as a result of land owners and businessmen wanting to defend their capital from guerrilla movements and advance their own interests in the absence of a strong state structure. These paramilitary movements were able to grow significantly through their involvement with the drug trade as well as being given free reign by the military. (LeoGrande & Sharpe 2000: 5).
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: This chapter outlines the shift towards goal-oriented humanitarianism and establishes the paper's aim to address the root causes of the Colombian conflict through specific strategic interventions.
2. Colombia’s Civil War: Historical Context, Actors and Impacts: Provides a historical overview of the conflict, tracing its roots from independence to the emergence of FARC, ELN, and paramilitary groups, and highlights the resulting humanitarian crisis of displacement.
3. Using the IRLR Model in Addressing both Humanitarian Needs and the Causes of Conflict.: Discusses the application of the Impoverishment Risk and Livelihood Reconstruction model to identify specific intervention areas for organizations working with IDPs.
4. Grievance Theories of Civil War: Explores theories of relative deprivation and horizontal inequality, arguing that in Colombia, these grievances are best understood through the concept of "micro-orders" and identity rather than strict ethnic lines.
5. Greed Theories of Civil War: Critically evaluates quantitative greed-based models, such as the Collier-Hoeffler model, and examines their limited explanatory power when applied to the specific context of the Colombian civil war.
6. Conclusion: Synthesizes the findings, concluding that both traditional greed and grievance theories require significant adaptation to explain the Colombian context, and advocates for a focus on landlessness and economic marginalization in humanitarian relief.
7. Reference List: A comprehensive bibliography of academic and institutional sources utilized throughout the research.
Keywords
Colombia, Civil War, Humanitarian Action, Goal-oriented Humanitarianism, FARC, Paramilitaries, Displacement, IRLR Model, Greed Theory, Grievance Theory, Micro-orders, Land Inequality, Economic Marginalization, Disaster Risk Reduction, Advocacy.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this publication?
The paper focuses on the geopolitical dynamics of Colombia's civil war and how humanitarian organizations can move beyond simple aid provision toward goal-oriented strategies that address the conflict's root causes.
What are the primary themes discussed?
Key themes include the historical evolution of the Colombian conflict, the impact of displacement on the civilian population, the debate between 'greed' and 'grievance' theories, and the practical application of the IRLR model.
What is the central research question?
The research asks how variables linked to the onset and duration of Colombia's civil war can be identified to better inform the relief and advocacy strategies of humanitarian organizations operating in the region.
What scientific methodology is utilized?
The author uses a qualitative analysis of historical context combined with a critical evaluation of quantitative models (specifically the Collier-Hoeffler model) and the application of the IRLR (Impoverishment Risk and Livelihood Reconstruction) framework.
What does the main body cover?
It covers the history of armed actors in Colombia, the socio-economic drivers of the war, a comparative analysis of civil war theories, and specific policy recommendations for humanitarian organizations.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
The work is characterized by terms such as humanitarian action, civil war, displacement, greed versus grievance theories, and conflict-induced poverty.
How does the author define the concept of 'micro-orders'?
'Micro-orders' refer to local environments where armed groups operate and exert influence, shaping individual identities and influencing recruitment patterns, often overriding broader ethnic or ideological divisions.
Does the Collier-Hoeffler model accurately predict the Colombian conflict?
The paper concludes that the model does not provide a satisfactory fit for Colombia, primarily because it fails to account for the unique role of illicit drug economies and the specific social dynamics of the country.
Why are horizontal inequalities considered less relevant in the Colombian case?
The author argues they are less relevant because the conflict does not follow traditional ethnic or religious lines, but instead functions through vertical inequalities and localized identity constructs.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Ralph Myers (Autor:in), 2011, Goal-Oriented Humanitarianism and Colombia’s Civil War, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/215493
