1

Colombia’s Violence Crises as a Historical Process:

A Comparative Study

Fernanda Cherini

POLS 2950

August 3rd, 2018

York University

*Applied for Assessed Grades

 2

Introduction

Throughout the twentieth century, Colombia was marked by various violence crises that

have destabilized the country to the point where many considered Colombia a failed state. By the

end of the twentieth century and beginning of the twenty-first century, the Colombian

government implemented a series of changes in order to solve the issues that have led to rampant

violence in the country. The Colombian society has considered these changes as positive and

violence does seem to have been diminishing in the country. However, this essay will argue that

the measures implemented by Colombia only targeted the surface of the problem, rather than

identifying the root causes of violence. Utilizing a social constructivist approach, it will be

shown that Colombia’s problem with violence started even before the country achieved its

independence and, thus, not addressing the causes that have been embedded in the society could

lead to a reoccurrence of violence crises.

Combined with a social constructivist perspective, a comparative with another country in

the region will be drawn. The paper will expose the main elements that have been crystallized in

Colombian society and that have contributed to a “culture of violence” by contrasting

Colombia’s history with Brazil’s history. Despite sharing a colonial past, Brazil had a very

different process of colonial organization and of state formation. Various processes were

implemented in the country which eventually led to a high level of order and diplomacy among

the political elites even after the colonial power was gone. For Colombia, however, once there

was a power vacuum, violence became the easiest method to solve conflicts about how the state

should be formed. Thus, this essay will look at the differences between Brazil’s and Colombia’s

colonial history and between their state formation; identifying the key elements that could have
 3

caused in the violence crises. Finally, it will briefly analyze Colombia’s current situation and

whether the elements identified are still present in the society.

The Colonies

As mentioned, despite being colonized by Iberian powers (Portugal and Spain), Brazil

and Colombia had a very different process of state formation. After independence, the

Portuguese colony, Brazil, remained unified as a stable monarchy and with a Portuguese king.

Meanwhile, the Spanish colonies separated into various smaller republics after a decade-long

war. Not only was Colombia’s independence marked by wars and violence, but its process of

state formation process was also followed by conflict due to different political ideologies for the

new republic. Considering the difference between the two countries after their independence,

analyzing the internal organization of the colonies can offer some insight about what are the

causes for the multiple violence crises in Colombia.

De Carvalho (1982) proposes that to understand the political transformations in the

colonies and their differences, we must look at those who made the political decisions: the elites.

Although seemingly unrelated to the maintenance of political order, De Carvalho (1982) found

that the fact that Portugal did not allow higher education institutions in its colonies; and that the

Spanish colony was divided into viceroyalties are the main reasons why both colonies had a

different state formation process. As there were no universities in Brazil, the political elites

would all go to study at the University of Coimbra, in Portugal (p. 383). There, they were taught

the Portuguese version of Enlightenment, an education that was focused on bureaucratic

practices that would work in favour of Portugal’s colonialism. As a result, in Brazil, the elite was

ideologically homogeneous and shared social ties, as they often studied in the same class (p.
 4

384). If tension between the political leaders of different regions emerged, their shared ties and

education would ensure that the problems were solved diplomatically most of the times, rather

than through violence.

In the Spanish colonies, however, universities were created since colonization, dating

back to 1551. The type of education and ideologies taught were decided by each viceroyalty. As

these viceroyalties were divided by natural barriers such as mountain ranges or rainforest,

communication between the viceroyalties was extremely limited (p. 384). For this reason, in

spite of all being under Spanish control, the political ideology varied considerably between each

viceroyalty (p. 388). Thus, there was no homogeneity, no social ties or even communication

between the elites, and no ideology of bureaucratic order maintenance as there was in Brazil.

After the Independence Wars in the Spanish colonies, the notion of solving conflicts through

war, rather than diplomatically, gained force in Colombia.

This first comparison between Brazil and Colombia shows an important element that has

led to Colombia’s violence crises. The lack of political unity as well as the lack of bureaucratic

training of the elites towards order maintenance resulted in the first period of violence in

Colombia soon after its independence. In the next sections, it will be demonstrated that these two

factors have been present throughout Colombia’s history and they have evolved throughout

Colombia’s modern history.

State Formation

Brazil, having a stable consolidation as an independent state saw no major violent

conflict, despite having groups with different ideological positions. After the country’s

independence, there was a long period of political unity and order under the control of an
 5

imperial elite for most of the 19th century. After dissatisfaction with such centralization of

power, the army took over the government and declared the republic. Civil leaders of the

republican movement assumed the position of presidents, and more decades of stability followed

in the country. That is not to say that internal conflicts and revolts were not occurring in Brazil,

as many attempts of revolt did occur. However, due to the autocratic and brutal education the

elites had received, which extended to the army, revolts were quickly suppressed and were not

enough to destabilize the country (De Carvalho, 1982, p. 390).

Colombia’s history could not had been more different, political divisions generated

turbulence and violence in the country since its formation, which became crystallized in the

society. As soon as the war for independence was over, the significance of not having a

homogeneous political elite becomes clear. The differences in ideologies between each elites’

regions rose between federalists and regionalists. Certain regions felt underrepresented and

opposed a central government and even rebellions emerged in present Venezuela. Thus, in 1830,

only nine years after its independence, Gran Colombia was separated and formed today’s

Ecuador, Venezuela, Colombia, and Panama (Blanco, 2007, p. 72). It is important to note that in

Brazil, certain regions also opposed the central government for being neglected. Nonetheless,

Brazil’s regional elites were not so ideologically or culturally different from the main regions,

which facilitated diplomacy and the maintenance of the government’s centrality.

Following the dissolution of Gran Colombia, in 1830, New Granada was formed (today’s

Colombia). The country continued to have problems related to ideological and regional

differences. In 1839, there was an incident known as “War of the Supremes” that happened

between different parties in favour of regional autonomy, lasting for two years. In 1851, another

two-year civil war arose between the conservatives and the liberals. A federative constitution
 6

was adopted in 1853 and the Republic of New Granada became the Granadine Confederation.

Tensions did not subside and another conflict between the Conservative and Liberal Parties

emerged and led, once more, to a two-year civil war (1860-1862). The Granadine Confederation

was replaced by the United States of Colombia with the 1863 constitution. Only three years later,

in 1866, the Conservative Party adopted a centralist constitution and created the Republic of

Colombia. Rigged elections by the Conservative Party resulted in another civil war, this time

lasting three years, which came to be known as the Thousand Days War (1899-1902).

Colombia is known for having the oldest political parties that still exist in the Americas.

The Liberal Party was founded in 1848, and the Conservative in 1949. However, as history

evidences, these two political groups are in the root of Colombia’s civil wars and crises related to

violence. Colombia had several civil wars, all caused by differences in ideology, especially

between the political elites and their representative parties. In comparison, Brazil remained a

monarchy until 1889, when a military coup installed a republican government which was passed

to civilians five years later (De Carvalho, 1991, p. 142). The rebellions or revolts that arose in

Brazil during the 19th century were all led by poor people or slaves, rather than the political

elite. Once again, the importance of the political elite’s role is evidenced. In Brazil, the political

elite was suppressing conflict while in Colombia it was provoking it.

Modern Colombia

Despite having the longest uninterrupted democracy in Latin America, Colombia’s

political elites have often resorted to authoritarian and violent actions when they felt their

interests were being threatened. Conflict between the two parties was carried into the 20th

century, and they often resorted to violence as the quickest means of sorting their differences.
 7

The assassination of a politician from the Liberal Party ignited Colombia’s most remarkable

violence crises, the period known as La Violencia (The Violence). It started in the 1940s and

lasted a decade that produced about 300,000 deaths (LeGrand, 2003, p. 172). In this period of

Colombia’s history, not only is the ideological difference between political elites important, but

also the use of paramilitary forces. The country has long relied on local armed civilian groups to

maintain order in the regions where the state had little presence (Tate, 2001, p. 165). Different

military officers created their civilian armed groups and soon paramilitarism became a standard

way to solve issues. La Violencia was mostly a result of the fight between paramilitary forces

from each party, as well as a guerrilla group from the Communist Party.

Violence subsided in the country after a coalition between the two parties. However, as a

consequence of La Violencia and use of irregular forces by government representatives in the

past, this behaviour caused a normalization of violence as a valid means of solving problems in

Colombian society. Once narco-traffickers, rebels, economic elites, and political parties all

adopted the use of paramilitaries, the country suffered from multiple armed conflicts that lasted

from the 1960s until the 1990s (Tate, 2001, p. 165). Usually, only the emergence of narco-

traffickers and guerrilla groups are blamed for this crisis in Colombia. However, the root causes

for the emergence of these groups and the role of the paramilitary are often overlooked.

The 21st Century

Lack of political unity has been the driving cause of civil wars during the 19th and 20th

century, as well as civilian led violence such as narco-traffickers and guerrilla insurgencies.

Around a decade ago, the government started a process to demobilize the paramilitary groups

and achieve peace in the country. However, recent research suggests that groups heavily
 8

influenced by the paramilitary still exist. Wienand and Tremaria (2017) acquired qualitative data

from interviewing people who live in the main urban and rural areas affected by paramilitary

activity. In addition to other research carried out in the area, the authors find that “paramilitary

successor groups” are still very present in Colombia and, although not exactly as paramilitary

groups, there are extensive similarities (p. 29). Thus, violence is still ongoing in Colombia, even

if masked from their original form. Thus, as these root causes of violence are not properly

addressed, it is very likely that violence crises will continue to erupt in the country.

Conclusion

After this analysis, it has become clear that Colombia’s modern period of violence is

actually a historical process. Contrasting Colombia’s history with Brazil’s past, it is clear that

certain elements have been constantly present in Colombia well before its independence, which

have led to several violence crises in Columbia. These elements are: the lack of political and

national unity by the elites; a reliance on irregular forces by the government and its army.

Certainly, it can be argued that most civil wars are a result of political disunity. However, in the

case of Colombia, most disagreements were solved with violence not only because there was no

ideological homogeneity or social ties among the political elite, but also a poor judiciary system

that was “replaced” by paramilitary groups. These three issues combined explain Colombia’s

difficulty in maintaining peace. Colombia has a historical problem with violence which keeps

resurfacing. It must be recognized that the problem is on how society was constructed over the

decades, instead of a single current issue. As research suggests, remains of the structure of

paramilitary groups seem to still be present in Colombia’s current society. If the core problems

identified are not addressed, it is possible that this current peace will not last.
 9

REFERENCES

Blanco, J. B. (2007). From gran Colombia to the New Granada, historical context of the

constitutional transition (in Spanish). Prolegómenos - Derechos y Valores, 10(20), 71-87.

De Carvalho, J. M. (1982). Political elites and state building: the case of nineteenth-

century Brazil. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 24(3), 378-399.

De Carvalho, J. M. (1991). The Unfinished Republic. The Americas, 48(2), 139-157.

LeGrand, C. C. (2003). The Colombian crisis in historical perspective. Canadian Journal

of Latin American and Caribbean Studies, 28(55-56), 165-209.

Tate, W. (2001). Paramilitaries in Colombia. The Brown Journal of World Affairs, 8(1),

163-175.

Wienand, S., & Tremaria, S. (2017). Paramilitarism in a Post-Demobilization Context?

Insights from the Department of Antioquia in Colombia. European Review of Latin American

and Caribbean Studies/Revista Europea de Estudios Latinoamericanos y del Caribe, (103), 25-

50.