In “A Public Policy that Recognizes the Real Issues Regarding Children”, Juan Manuel Urrutia-Valenzuela, Director General of the Colombian Institute for Family Welfare (ICBF), makes a critical appraisal of the policies on children in Colombia, and puts forward suggestions for a new, more comprehensive approach. In his view, children confront not just an armed conflict, but a war waged on them by society. Sexual abuse of children and the exploitation of child labor are on the increase. More and more children seek protection from the ICBF. Although successive governments have implemented programs and public funds have been invested in favor of children, the reality is that these measures are utterly insufficient. “We must bring about a drastic change in our policy models regarding children, and the only way to do it is by adopting a public, not a governmental approach”, Mr. Urrutia says. It must be a policy that recognizes the real issues facing children; a policy that allocates public funds to the task of preventing abuse and the violation of children’s’ rights; that ensures transparency in the allocation of State funds; that does not aim solely at providing assistance and achieving target figures; that guarantees the full development of children; that focuses on education; that really ensures the rovision of health, nutrition and education; a public policy that is based on new forms of relationship, and breaks with the traditional scheme of domination vs. submission. In the meantime, we have to take immediate action to mitigate the effects of the conflict on children. It is indispensable to develop a plan for the demobilization of children from the ranks of the armed parties and their integration into society. It will have to be a plan worked out with the parties to the conflict. “We, somehow, have to promote social mobilization to drive a profound change in our public policies on children, and ensure the effective application of interim measures that cannot wait any longer”, Mr. Urrutia concludes.

Beatriz Linares, official in charge of the defense of the rights of the child, young people, women and the elderly at the Office of the People’s Advocate, shares the results of research carried out by her Office with regard to the recruitment and demobilization of children. Her presentation, “Demobilizing and Protecting Children Affected by the Armed Conflict”, is based on the assumption that the problem of children involved in the armed conflict requires special, priority attention by the State. The Office of the People’s Advocate has urged all State bodies to act without delay to prevent children from being recruited, and ensure that they remain inside the educational system and the family, or are provided with comprehensive care as soon as they leave the ranks. The research has uncovered that deep social conflicts are at the root of children’s direct participation in the conflict. Social exclusion, mistreatment, lack of educational opportunities, and lack of jobs in rural and marginal areas, drive children to abandon their homes and seek a better life with the guerrillas. Nearly 83% of children under 18 years of age who enlist in the illegal armed groups do so voluntarily, 34% of them seeking recognition, status and identity. Many children (8.3% of those participating in the survey) also seek revenge after seeing their families murdered and their homes set on fire. The war necessarily generates a leaning towards a culture of violence, particularly among children who have only known violence. International regulations, particularly the International Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Geneva Conventions and additional Protocols, have failed to prevent the illegal armed parties from recruiting children under 15 years of age, despite their claims that they respect international humanitarian law. They continue this practice based on the assumption that it is the State and not them who are bound by these rules. There is also a significant gap in the internal legislation, notably the Minors’ Code, which has no provisions relating to the participation of children in armed conflicts, or to the special protection that must be given to those who abandon the ranks of the armed parties. Therefore, the Office of the People’s Advocate urges the government and the parties to the conflict to reach a Humanitarian Agreement forbidding the recruitment of minors under 18 years of age. It must also be clear to the State that children who have cut their links with the illegal armed parties should be treated as victims to the war, and not as criminals. Consequently, they are entitled to the relevant benefits established by the law.
In “Children: A Peace Community that is a Priority to Colombia”, Carel De Rooy, Director of Unicef, surveys the facts surrounding the recruitment of children by the armed parties to the conflict, and makes suggestions based on Unicef’s experiences in other countries. Poverty and deprivation, he says, “create a breeding ground for society in general to suffer the negative effects of causes that principally attack children in appalling situations such as the armed conflict, displacement, street children, kidnappings, enforced disappearance, children who work, and children engaged in coca growing or prostitution”. Besides vaccination campaigns, Unicef’s interventions also include contributions to health care, nutrition, water supply and sanitation, basic education and psychosocial rehabilitation of traumatized children. In order to be able to bring humanitarian aid to children during armed conflicts, Unicef has created “Peace Days” and “Peace corridors” in many countries. Among his proposals for Colombia, Unicef’s director includes the reform of the Minors’ Code to adapt it to the CIDN; an open, committed discussion in the negotiating tables with the illegal groups on the issue of the separation of children from the ranks; the search for interim solutions to prevent the recruitment of children and ensure the reintegration into society of those detached from the ranks; the establishment by the guerrillas and self-defense groups of a minimum recruitment age of 18; an acknowledgement by the parties to the conflict of how many children are in their ranks, in order to measure the real magnitude of the problem; planning the way in which former combatants will be integrated into civilian life; special protection for children who abandon the ranks; the provision of real opportunities for socialization and development for these children; and respect for the “Peace zones and communities”, particularly those including children.

Senator Rafael Orduz-Medina’s presentation, “Preventing Boys, Girls and Children from Taking Part in the War: A Priority for All of Us”, identifies the basic facts and factors surrounding the participation of children in the armed conflict, and offers a number of recommendations. His basic point is that all children involved in any way in the hostilities “must be considered as victims to the conflict, including those who enlist ‘voluntarily’, given the fact that they lack a real capacity of self-determination”. Deprived of educational or job opportunities, subjected to mistreatment, and growing in an environment where violence is a common language, many boys, girls and children find an alternative in the armed groups. “They are particularly useful in the war”, Senator Orduz notes, “for they seldom calculate risks, adapt easily to a violent environment, eat less, earn less, and are always ready to obey”. Combatant boys and girls “suffer one of the worst forms of violence against children, for they are transformed into ‘instruments for war’”. The effects of this are devastating in psychological and social terms. The institutional response is limited in several respects. In legal terms, there is a lack of unified criteria as to how to deal with youngsters who abandon the ranks of the armed groups or are captured. The State has an insufficient capacity to provide security to boys and girls detached from the armed groups, and psychological counseling is inadequate. The Reintegration Program continues to fail to coordinate its activities with those of other bodies responsible for protecting children. Senator Orduz’s recommendations include giving priority to public investment benefiting children, applying the principles of fairness and social justice; enacting a comprehensive legislation on children; coordinating the work of the Reintegration Program with that of the Colombian Institute for Family Welfare, and providing special care to children detached from the armed parties; implementing educational peace programs aimed at preventing children from being recruited; and promoting Humanitarian Agreements with the illegal armed groups to stop recruiting children. “Giving priority to the rights of the child, even in the middle of war”, Senator Orduz concludes, “is an ethical imperative for both the State and society”.

Commander Mariana, member of the FARC-EP’s Thematic Work Group, read her presentation by telephone from the demilitarized zone. Her talk, “The Children Taking Part in the War”, acknowledges and defends the FARC-EP’s continued recruiting of children: “We do have large numbers of young persons over 15 years of age in our ranks”, Commander Mariana says. “They dream of a better country for their families, for themselves, and for all those who endure similar conditions. Therefore they made the decision to enlist in the FARC. We even admit, in exceptional cases, persons under that age, because neither the State nor society, nor even their families, are prepared to offer them a chance to lead a decent life. Let’s not be shocked at this. Instead, let’s look at the options that this society that criticizes us offers them: street begging, joining delinquent gangs in deprived urban districts, helping drug trafficking organizations, being informers or accomplices of the security bodies that carry out the dirty war, being informal rubbish collectors, resorting to prostitution, joining gangs of paid killers... No child should be in the war; nobody should be in the war; there should be no war. Unfortunately, those who hold the economic and political power in our country have left the Colombian people no other option than an uprising”. Commander Mariana concludes her presentation by inviting all sector society to sit down and find a solution other than a cruel, long armed confrontation. This should necessarily include provisions for a better future for children. In her view, the establishment must start to demonstrate that it is truly committed to peace, for example by stopping the breakdown of the Colombian Institute for Family Welfare, ensuring proper conditions for community mothers, providing high quality education to all Colombian children. “It will be necessary to strengthen dialogue between the different sectors of the country... to bring about structural changes in the economic, social, political and cultural fields”, she concludes.

Mariana Schmidt, member of the Women for Education Group, discusses the realities facing children in Colombia in her presentation, “The War’s Children”, and suggests courses of action for the family, the school and the media. The key assumption is that the war affects all of the 17,000,000 Colombian children under 18 years of age. Ms. Schmidt describes six conditions that characterize their situation. (1) All Colombian children live in fear, as they watch images of war in the news, live in conflict zones or belong to families that suffer threats or persecution. (2) A million children lead a nomadic way of life, as their families are forced to leave their usual places of residence.(3) All Colombian children are being socialized into war-related stereotypes. Plurality is far from feasible in a country where people are divided into the categories of good or bad. (4) Many children are being used for war purposes. (5) Children are being deprived of stable social links. They are losing friends, neighbors, and teachers, who are forced to leave, disappear or are murdered. (6) Many schools turn their backs on the war, and fail to provide opportunities to talk about, analyze or understand the conflict. “Reality allows no wait. We must act now!”, Ms. Schmidt says. She proposes ways for adults to act in the main environments where children live. In the family, the subject of war must be discussed, no matter how painful it is. Children’s questions must be answered. Children should be allowed to paint the war, and play war games, in order to exorcise their fears. News programs must be watched and newspapers read and discussed with the children. Dialogue within the family must be encouraged, and rules of conduct reviewed. At school, the first suggestion is that an emergency situation should be declared in all schools, and not only in those located in conflict zones. The topic of war must be openly and critically discussed, including its political, social and economic implications. Remembering must be encouraged, even of painful events suffered by the children. All forms of discrimination must be eradicated from schools. Teachers must be provided with adequate training. The Media must be aware of national and international regulations regarding news involving children. Journalists should use multiple sources of information, and refrain from simply arousing pity for children and families affected by the conflict. All stereotypes regarding children and the armed conflict must be avoided. The achievements of those who work for a better country should be highlighted. In conclusion, all Colombian children must be declared “peace zones”.

“Children Made for War”, by psychoanalyst Guillermo Carvajal, M.D., member of the Colombian Psychoanalysis Society”, focuses on the psychological aspects of war. “There are two wars”, he writes, “one real, one imaginary. The first one is experienced from the outside, with concrete violent events. The second one is experienced exclusively in the mind, with violent mental objects generated by a violent environment”. Thus we can speak of a frame of mind for peace and a frame of mind for war. There are children made for peace, on a caring model, and children made for war, on a calculated, efficient deprivation model, Dr. Carvajal says. As regards the consequences of the war, he distinguishes a number of categories of children, according to the way in which the war affects them. These range from children who voluntarily or involuntarily “work for the war” and may have been trained to adopt a “warrior” frame of mind or were born in the middle of conflict, to children who suffer from a chronic psychological trauma caused by continuous exposure to information on the armed conflict. Traumas are different in each case, and vary between the more physical and real to the more mental an unreal. Traumas, after all, they have to be dealt with in different ways. For the first group of children the intervention may include lengthy educational processes and long-term psychological counseling, in order to modify their “warrior” character, with all its social and personal implications. The second group requires an essentially psychotherapeutic kind of help, to work the traumatic experiences out and restore a peaceful frame of mind. In this case, the emphasis is placed on the inner world and the mental categories triggered by the traumatic experience.