USIP is supporting the efforts of civil society leaders to meet, discuss, and articulate strategies for putting peace in Colombia on the agenda of policymakers.  Beginning with an initial conference in 2008, USIP has convened a series of activities with civil society working on the Colombian conflict in both Washington, DC and Colombia.  Known as the Washington Group, the participants include some three dozen leaders of peace and human rights organizations in Colombia, and several NGO partners in the United States.

Colombia flags

Background

Analysts and policymakers have traditionally focused on the role of the armed actors in Colombia--primarily the FARC and the ELN guerrillas, and paramilitary organizations.  As unarmed civilians have become the major victims of the conflict, they are also seeking a more active role in the conflict’s resolution.  However, their activities are often fragmented, and relatively unknown. With a new administration in Bogotá and the possibility of renewed peace talks in the future, there is a need for non-armed civil society stakeholders to create strategies to ensure that their interests are considered in any future peace agreement.   This project thus seeks to:

  • Assist civil society leaders in articulating goals and policy proposals on peace more clearly
  • Facilitate Colombian civil society efforts to communicate their goals and strategies to policymakers
  • Advance the state of knowledge in the United States about non-armed actors and the role of civil society in relation to peacemaking and peace-building in Colombia.

Activities

USIP has convened and supported a series of meetings with civil society leaders, who in turn have convened numerous meetings and conferences among themselves and with their own constituencies.  Some highlights include:


Promoting Peace in Colombia: Ideas for the New Administration,” a day-long conference on December 2, 2008, co-sponsored with the Consultancy for Human Rights and Displacement (CODHES) and Colombia Committee for Human Rights (CCHR) 

"Administration Roundtable on Colombia,” December 2009

Three-day consultation with civil society leaders in Paipa, Colombia, organized by CODHES, August 2010

Related Publications

North Korea and China: The Endgame Behind the Headlines

North Korea and China: The Endgame Behind the Headlines

Friday, April 20, 2018

By: Fred Strasser

In the fast-moving diplomacy over North Korea’s nuclear program, the long-term interests of the country’s powerful neighbor China don’t make headlines. Yet behind China’s tactical moves such as President Xi Jinping’s meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un last month lie strategic questions about what China—vital to any resolution of the North Korea nuclear issue—envisions as a satisfactory end state for the Korean Peninsula.

Conflict Analysis & Prevention; Global Policy

What is Next for U.S.-Turkey Relations?

What is Next for U.S.-Turkey Relations?

Friday, April 20, 2018

By: Eric S. Edelman

Relations between the United States and Turkey have come under increasing strain in the past two years over the U.S. role in Syria and Ankara’s strengthening ties with Russia. American support for Kurdish forces battling ISIS has angered Turkey, which sees the cooperation as bolstering Kurdish nationalist elements inside its borders. USIP Board member Eric Edelman, a former U.S. ambassador to Turkey during the George W. Bush administration, and USIP International Advisory Council member Jake Sullivan, who served as Vice President Joe Biden’s national security adviser, provide some insight on the state of Turkish-American relations.

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

Osama Gharizi on U.S. Objectives in Syria

Osama Gharizi on U.S. Objectives in Syria

Wednesday, April 18, 2018

By: Osama Gharizi

From Lebanon, Osama Gharizi shares his analysis about the clarity of U.S. objectives after retaliatory missile strikes targeting the Assad regime’s suspected chemical weapons facilities. Gharizi says these strikes sent a signal to Assad and his allies that there are limits to U.S. and coalition intervention in Syria. In turn, these limits strengthen Russia, Turkey, and Iran’s roles as the diplomatic arbiters to negotiate a peace deal. Separately, Gharizi addresses the risks associated with the suggestion of setting up an Arab force in Syria that could create further obscurity in terms of U.S. intent and objectives versus those of Arab countries forming such a force.

Conflict Analysis & Prevention; Civilian-Military Relations

View All Publications