Colombia faced the first hours of a new year with cautious optimism. The pledge of peace voiced by Gustavo Petro upon taking office in August unfolded into a concrete framework on January 1. A bilateral pause was proposed, potentially extending from January 1 to June 30, 2023, with the ELN, Segunda Maqueteralia, the Central Joint Chiefs of Staff, the AGC, and the Sierra Nevada Self-Defense Forces, contingent on progress in negotiations. The aim was to address the remaining ex-FARC groups and two far‑right drug‑trafficking–linked formations: the Clan del Golfo and the Sierra Nevada self-defenders.
“It’s a bold move. A bilateral ceasefire obliges armed groups and the state to honor it. It will require a national and international verification mechanism,” a government spokesperson stated. The left-wing administration sought to extend the pause until tangible goals enjoyed broad public support and regional stability was achieved.
The UN Secretary-General’s Special Representative for Colombia, Carlos Ruiz Massieu, welcomed Petro’s declaration and highlighted the effort to reduce violence in the regions most affected by conflict. Massieu emphasized the importance of sustained action to protect civilians while negotiations unfold.
We have agreed with the ELN, Segunda Maqueteralia, the Central Joint Chiefs of Staff, the AGC and the Sierra Nevada Self-Defense Forces on a bilateral recess from January 1 to June 30, 2023, which may be extended based on progress in talks.
The vision is clear: complete peace for the country could become a lasting reality.
reflections
Analysts noted that the move marks an extraordinary moment for Colombia. Camilo González Posso of the Institute for Development and Peace Studies observed that the plan would affect hundreds of municipalities where various fronts operate and that multilateral ceasefires are a key element, even as rival groups clash.
Alejo Vargas, head of the Security and Defense Research Group at the National University of Colombia, described the proposal as a brave step. Vargas cautioned that agreement would depend on the responses from groups with a history of fierce internal fighting and warned that patience would be essential as negotiations unfold.
Public commentary on the pause highlighted the critical need for safety guarantees for those who have suffered violence in conflict zones. Experts argued that the ceasefire should extend beyond state forces and armed factions, ensuring that civilians are the main beneficiaries of any agreement and that protection remains a central consideration as discussions proceed.