Explore the vast range of titles available.

Este artículo explora la pluralidad de significados de la paz y sus encuentros para comprender los desafíos futuros en la fase de consolidación de la paz en Colombia. A través del análisis del discurso y sistematización de los principales discursos sobre la paz en el debate público en Colombia, se muestran los puntos de proximidad y distancia entre ellos. En particular, el texto deconstruye las visiones hegemónicas de la paz al contrastarlas con las propuestas alternativas o críticas de paz. El documento concluye que las negociaciones de paz fueron una oportunidad para darle a la paz un significado compartido por la gran mayoría de la sociedad colombiana. Sin embargo, por el contrario, la discusión sobre lo que significa y conlleva la paz ha permanecido abierta después de la firma del acuerdo de paz y, por lo tanto, está afectando su implementación. This article explores the plurality of meanings of peace and their encounters in order to understand the challenges ahead in the peacebuilding phase in Colombia. By mapping and systematizing the main discourses around peace in the public debate in Colombia, it shows the points of proximity and distance among them based on discourse analysis. In particular, the text deconstructs the hegemonic visions of peace by contrasting them with the alternative or critical proposals of peace. The paper concludes that the peace negotiations were a window of opportunity to give peace a meaning that was shared by a great majority of the Colombian society. Rather, on the contrary, the discussion about what peace means and entails has remained open after the peace agreement was signed and thus is affecting its implementation.

The Taliban, backed by Pakistan, emerged in Afghanistan in 1994, announcing their establishment of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. Initially appearing as the saviour of Afghanistan, they disappointed Afghans by introducing an unprecedented version and understanding of Islam. They restricted women's movement in the public, banning their education and work outside the home. Charged with harbouring Al Qaeda's leader, the Taliban regime was overthrown by the US in October 2001; they rose again and began their insurgent attacks against the foreign forces and the government after 2003. Their position towards women's education and work outside of the home has been fraught with ups and downs since then. Initially, in 2006, the Taliban instructed their fighters to attack any government-run schools, particularly girls' schools; Around 2010-2012, their position softened, allowing girls to attend schools and women to work as teachers and doctors. However, this purported modification was accompanied by hard-to-meet precepts that have continued to deprive women of education and work outside the home. Many studies postulate that the Taliban's position has altered regarding women's education and work outside the home, however, Taliban fighters' behaviour on the battleground and their leadership's actions in the peace talks say otherwise. The change in the Taliban's policy appears nominal, deceptive, and tactical, only there to attract the attention of national and international media and foster popular support for a return to power. Using secondary data, this article explores the Taliban's position regarding women's rights to education and employment, to determine if, how, why, and to what extent the Taliban's position has changed in this regard and examine the prospect of women's rights in Afghanistan if the current peace talks between the Taliban and the Afghan government bear results. Based on the findings, some recommendations are suggested to ensure women's voices are heard and that the probable peace-agreement is gender-responsive.

What is missing from the ongoing Afghan peace talks is public opinion: whether the Afghan people are in broad agreement with the peace process and its potential outcomes. The current study is based on the opinions of 704 people from across twenty-five provinces of Afghanistan. The study uses a quantitative and qualitative approach to delve into public opinion on the process. The general finding of this study is that while almost all Afghans want peace, most are unwilling to accept a peace deal that would cost them their constitutional gains, including human rights, minority rights, gender equality, and an Islamic republic. Besides this, most Afghans would be unwilling to vote for the Taliban in any elections.

Gender may have been one of the main reasons behind the rejection of the Peace Agreement in Colombia. A few hours after the narrow victory of those who opposed the deal, Senator and ex-president Álvaro Uribe Vélez gave a speech calling for the strengthening of religious family values. His words echoed an argument that gained traction in recent months in Colombia, particularly in the Evangelical Christian community: that the content of the Peace Accord dismantled traditional mores, such as the biological difference between man and woman, the importance of the heterosexual family, and the place of religion in public life.

In this short piece, I open a conversation over how the Colombian Final Peace Accord provides evidence of, and a contribution to, a more general lex pacificatoria or “law of the peacemakers” ( lex pax for short). In light of the Accord’s recent ballot defeat, I integrate into this assessment the merits of using a referendum to approve (in Colombia’s case “affirm or deny”) the Agreement as a whole. Throughout, I draw on a peace agreement database which has coded over one thousand four hundred peace agreements since 1990 for comparative insight.

One of the many roles played by international law in the Colombian Peace Accord is that of guarantor— that is, creating assurances that the parties will comply with their commitments. To this end, negotiators declared that the Final Peace Accord would constitute a Special Agreement (SA) in “terms of Article 3 common to all Geneva Conventions of 1949,” which “will be introduced [in the Colombian legal system] as part of the constitutional block” and deposited “before the Swiss Federal Council.” Furthermore, they stated, “a presidential declaration will be made taking the form of a unilateral declaration of the Colombian State before the Secretary-General of the United Nations,” and its incorporation in a Resolution of the Security Council will be requested.

European Union (EU) is currently confronting a series of challenges to its internal dynamics as well as its position on the international arena. However, EU continues to rely on its normative power in order to influence international order and build on its image as a strong global order. Our research therefore aims to contribute to the debate on the concept of Normative Power Europe, by analysing EU-Korea relations. In this manner, the framework emphasizes EU’s role as a global actor, in three main areas of interest for both strategic partners: economy and trade, development cooperation, peace and security. As such, the main findings revolve around maintaining a sound cooperation in the three areas analysed – and reflect, on one side, a strengthening of the “global actor” main trait of the EU, and on the other side, a consolidation of Korea’s position in world politics.

The results of the plebiscite suggest that Colombia’s international obligations regarding the right to justice will be a key issue in the new postplebiscite phase of the peace negotiation. Perhaps, then, the best starting point for an analysis of these obligations is the rejected Peace Accord. If it complies with international obligations, then it seems likely that any new agreement will also be in compliance: opponents focused much of their arguments on the high level of impunity supposedly embedded in the original deal.

Colombia es un Estado que históricamente se ha caracterizado por registrar múltiples conflictos y formas diversas de violencia. Lograr la comprensión de estos conflictos y su incidencia en la configuración territorial, es un verdadero reto para la consolidación de un periodo de pos negociación del conflicto. El presente es un artículo de reflexión, que tiene como propósito, desde una perspectiva geográfica, ofrecer al lector los elementos relacionados con el conflicto armado que han intervenido en la configuración de los territorios en Colombia. Las evidencias encontradas, resultantes del análisis espacial correlacional y la aplicación de métodos geo estadísticos de los datos referentes con el accionar armado y la violencia de los actores del conflicto armado en el periodo de tiempo 1986-2015, permiten afirmar que las relaciones de poder en el marco del conflicto armado de las Fuerzas del Estado, de las guerrillas involucradas, FARC, ELN, así como de los paramilitares, y en los últimos años de las bandas criminales, se ven reflejadas sobre el territorio de una manera diferenciada. La configuración de los territorios, es el resultado de las relaciones de poder de los actores armados que en él intervienen, bajo lógicas geoestratégicas.

What is missing from the ongoing Afghan peace talks is public opinion: whether the Afghan people are in broad agreement with the peace process and its potential outcomes. The current study is based on the opinions of 704 people from across twenty-five provinces of Afghanistan. The study uses a quantitative and qualitative approach to delve into public opinion on the process. The general finding of this study is that while almost all Afghans want peace, most are unwilling to accept a peace deal that would cost them their constitutional gains, including human rights, minority rights, gender equality, and an Islamic republic. Besides this, most Afghans would be unwilling to vote for the Taliban in any elections.