Exploitation of Natural Resources in Conflict Situations: The Colombian Case

Summary

‘Ninguna guerra tiene la honestidad de confesar: Yo mato para robar.’

Eduardo Galeano, ‘Guerras mentirosas’, Espejos, 2008.

INTRODUCTION

This article deals with the management of natural resources in armed conflicts from a human rights’ perspective. It analyses the impact on the rights of women and indigenous peoples of policies and operations affecting access to and control of natural resources, and also the damage to ecosystems caused by warfare. This analysis pays special attention to the processes of displacement and loss of habitat, as dimensions which can be used to assess the management of risks and damage, both to the population and the environment, as well as the responsibilities involved. The Colombian case has been analysed because it illustrates the relevance of addressing natural resource management in ongoing conflicts due to its effect on social and economic inequalities, as well as the need to insert this issue into debates on truth, justice and reparation. The article will highlight some dimensions which require more in-depth investigation in order to advance development of preventive measures, and accountability mechanisms. It will also explore the extent to which these abuses are justiciable in order to seek reparation and the implementation of equality and social justice policies.

In debates concerning ongoing armed conflicts and their possible outcomes, the issue of natural resources tends to be a dimension which is hardly touched upon, and even when raised, it is rarely linked to the demand for truth, justice and reparation. Despite the fact that in the emergence and prolongation of many current conflicts, it is easy to detect interests and operations associated with access to and control of natural resources, rarely are such interests and operationstransparently exposed to public attention. Their beneficiaries are concealed, as are the means employed to attain their objectives, in addition to their resultant environmental and human impact. In general, neither the agents nor the beneficiaries of these operations are accountable to the law, their activities are not examined, nor does the concept exist that they owe anything to the victims who suffered abuse during conflicts or that they ought to remedy the devastating impact of operations whose purpose and/or intention was to reap profits or benefits of whatever kind.