Colombia is a country of sharp divisions and contradictions. Located in the northwestern corner of the South American continent, it is a richly beautiful and highly diverse country; the towering peaks of the Andes mountains and the teeming jungles of the Amazon also find themselves within its borders. Featuring a rich culture, indicative of its past as a former jewel of the Spanish Empire, people of Spanish, Native and African descent make their homes in Colombia, although socio-economically the colonizers have largely benefited over the colonized.

Colombia’s plural and multifaceted society has a dark side; since its independence, Colombian culture has been riven by divisions, political and cultural, and always mired by the violence that accompanies the illegal cocaine trade, particularly in light of the costly American War on Drugs. The current wave of conflict dates to the conclusion of a violent civil war that consumed Colombia for a decade from 1948 to 1958, known as La Violencia. Conducted between the paramilitary wings of the Liberal and Conservative Parties, and taking at least 200,000 lives, this catastrophe was only brought to its end by the formation of a national front government of solidarity between the parties; all other political movements were banned as a result. Predictably, this stifling of the public sphere led to frustration, and frustration led to the formation of militant groups such as the Leftist National Liberation Army (ELN) or the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), generally with a Leninist or Maoist shade to their politics. These groups became entwined with kidnapping, the cocaine trade and other criminal activities in order to keep themselves afloat in their struggle. As a result, Colombia has essentially existed in a state of low-level civil war for the remainder of the 20^th century and into the 21^st; although overtures of peace were made throughout the period of the conflict, they too often broke down, exacerbated by opportunistic politicians rising to power on platforms that involved the destruction of the rebellious elements. In turn, these same politicians empowered the military and paramilitary right-wing groups, who committed atrocities comparable to those committed by the ELN or the FARC. This violence was not contained to Colombia however; government action to eliminate high ranking leaders crossed borders, causing diplomatic dust-ups with the Venezuelan and Ecuadorian governments.

A constant presence in Colombian public life is the influence of drug cartels, intertwined with the country’s vicious political and ideological tensions. In a country still driven by economic inequality, the actions of drug lords such as Pablo Escobar count for more than an absent central state; before his eventual death, Escobar famously built a neighbourhood in Medellin where he housed families previously living in slums. Despite his brutal actions, Escobar was known as a Robin Hood-type figure by the residents of Barrio Escobar. Furthermore, this attracts international attention, particularly from the United States, which has a particular interest in the peaceful resolution of the conflict in Colombia. Using a variety of strategies, the United States has sought to bind Colombia and itself together through expanded bilateral trade deals and has also appropriated funds for the contentious ‘Plan Colombia,’ designed to strengthen Colombian institutions and combat drug trafficking and civil conflict. However, while some have hailed Plan Colombia for its contributions, critical voices have lauded it as fuelling the ongoing conflict. The political sphere in Colombia has long been bathed in blood and violence, and as is always the case, civilians will suffer most in these kinds of situations; Colombia has the second highest level of internal migration globally, after Syria. Meanwhile, civilians suffer from the repercussions of what amounts to 50 years of civil conflict. In the last 25 years alone, as many as 11,000 people have been killed or injured due to landmines placed in rural areas.

How can this destructive pattern be confronted? The current President of Colombia, Juan Manuel Santos, has been hailed for his commitment to finally bringing the long-standing conflict to a close, winning a Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts in 2016. Although serving as Defense Minister under the hawkish Alvaro Uribe, when elected President in 2010 Santos took a different tack. Where historically the Colombian government had responded to dissent through censorship, which ultimately served to funnel resistance into violent and illegal paramilitary groups such as the FARC and the ELN, Santos took a carrot and stick approach. His government took into account the relatively vague demands postulated by the FARC and the ELN, and worked to accommodate them in the political sphere. In return for a number of demands, such as the suspension of kidnapping as a tactic used by the guerrilla groups, the Santos government put into place ceasefires with both the FARC and the ELN, and began comprehensive negotiations with the FARC in particular. These involved a greater focus on rural communities that these guerrilla groups were claiming to be neglected by the government, as well as the establishment of special tribunals overseen by Colombian and international judges to take testimony regarding atrocities committed in the course of the civil war. Finally, the negotiations rectified the censorship that was a major trigger for the emergence of the guerrilla groups in the first place, by allowing for the political participation of demilitarized and demobilized members of the FARC movement. The basis for this approach to peace was a renewed focus on the tripartite aims of the sustainable development project, recognizing and aiming to consolidate economic, ecological and social needs in an integrated manner.

While conflict has a particularly detrimental impact on the natural environment, it also paradoxically serves to preserve various ecosystems, leaving them undisturbed by traditional industry. As a result, embracing the sustainable development project through the application of the ‘Payment for Environmental Services’ model opens the path towards the creation of new and legal alternatives for previously neglected communities who may have otherwise turned to guerrilla groups and the drug trade. In fact, Colombia’s nationally determined contribution to the COP 21 Paris Agreement includes a segment regarding the importance of climate action to the Colombian peace process. Essentially, pursuing a strength-based approach that takes advantage of Colombia’s environmental diversity, in line with the holistic sustainable development project offers a new path to peacebuilding. This approach has already borne fruit; after the acceptance of the peace accord with the FARC movement, the smaller ELN also agreed to enter negotiations with the government.

Challenges certainly remain. Recent tensions involving a number of bombings of police stations have soured negotiations; in response, Santos’ government has decided to suspend proceedings. While the wounds of civil war are unspeakably deep, and the Colombian people have suffered much, it is imperative for the future success of the country that this peace process does not falter as has occurred in the past. The potential successes of a new form of peacebuilding, based on the model of the sustainable development project are too great to be rejected at this stage. The current peace reached with the FARC movement, completely unthinkable at the beginning of the 21^st century, is a testament to the possibilities offered by this alternative. While it will take bravery and deep reserves of strength, it is imperative that Santos and the nation of Colombia look forward, building bridges and not walls. Only then will the country be able to heal.