Colombia: Vote on Verification Mission Mandate Renewal*
Tomorrow afternoon (31 October), the Security Council is expected to vote on a draft resolution renewing the mandate of the UN Verification Mission in Colombia for another year, until 31 October 2026.
The negotiations on this year’s mandate renewal were the most difficult since the verification mission was established through resolution 2366 in 2017. All previous mandate renewal negotiations were generally smooth and resulted in unanimous adoptions. The main point of contention concerned a request from the US to remove three of the mission’s tasks related to the implementation of the 2016 Final Agreement for Ending the Conflict and Building a Stable and Lasting Peace between the government of Colombia and the former rebel group Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia-Ejército del Pueblo (FARC-EP). These are verifying compliance with the restorative sentences handed down by the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (SJP)—the judicial component of the Comprehensive System for Truth, Justice, Reparation, and Non-Repetition established by the 2016 agreement—as well as monitoring implementation of the comprehensive rural reform and ethnic chapters of the agreement. Most other Council members strongly advocated for the retention of these tasks.
Following difficult deliberations among Council members, the draft resolution in blue removes the two tasks related to the SJP and the ethnic chapter. It retains the task of monitoring implementation of the rural reform chapter, as well as the tasks mandated under resolution 2366 relating to the reincorporation of former FARC-EP combatants and personal and collective security guarantees, including for communities and organisations in conflict-affected areas.
The draft text in blue discontinues the mission’s task, mandated under resolution 2694 of 2 August 2023, to monitor and verify the implementation of the bilateral ceasefire between the Colombian government and the guerrilla group Ejército de Liberación Nacional (ELN) that began on 3 August 2023. It seems that all Council members agreed on removing this task, since the ceasefire between the government and the group lapsed on 3 August 2024, and the issue did not require major discussion.
Background
The shift in the US position on the file comes against the backdrop of significant strains in the bilateral relationship between Colombia and the US since President Donald Trump returned to office in January. Colombian President Gustavo Petro Urrego, the country’s first leftist president, and Trump have disagreed on a host of issues—including drug control, immigration, and the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza—and both leaders have publicly exchanged mutual recriminations. (For more information, see the brief on Colombia in our October 2025 Monthly Forecast.) In a recent sign of the fraying relationship, on 24 October, the US Treasury Department sanctioned Petro, accusing him of having failed to curb the drug trade from his country.
The negotiations on the verification mission’s mandate renewal also took place amid a complex political context in Colombia as the country prepares for congressional and presidential elections in 2026. Ahead of the negotiations, a prospective presidential candidate from Colombia’s political right sent a letter to US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, requesting that the US oppose the renewal of the verification mission’s mandate, criticising the 2016 peace agreement, and accusing the SJP of promoting impunity for former FARC-EP members who committed crimes during the country’s civil war. At the Council’s latest quarterly meeting on Colombia, held on 3 October, the US stated that the verification mission’s mandate has “broadened to reflect excessive political priorities, including transitional justice and supporting minority ethnic groups”. It added that Washington is “closely examining this mission’s mandate and whether it merits continued UN Security Council support based on an assessment of the contribution it makes to peace and security in Colombia”.
Negotiations on the Draft Resolution
Shortly after the Council’s quarterly meeting, on 13 October, the UK (the penholder on Colombia) circulated an initial draft of the mandate renewal text to all Council members. It convened two rounds of negotiations, on 16 and 22 October, during which the US insisted on the removal of three of the mission’s tasks and many other Council members called for their retention. While the first revised draft, which was circulated on 22 October, maintained the three tasks, the second revised draft, circulated on 24 October, removed the tasks related to the SJP and the agreement’s ethnic chapter but retained the task related to rural reform. This second draft was placed under silence procedure until Monday (27 October), which was broken by an unusually large number of 12 Council members—China, Denmark, France, Greece, Pakistan, Panama, Slovenia, Russia, and the “A3 Plus” grouping (Algeria, Sierra Leone, Somalia, and Guyana)—who requested the retention of the two tasks. After the silence break, the US reiterated the positions it had conveyed during the two rounds of negotiations.
On Tuesday (28 October), the UK circulated a third revised draft and put it under silence procedure until yesterday morning (29 October). This draft replaced a reference in the preambular section to indigenous and Afro-Colombian communities with the term “marginalized communities”. The US opposed the reference to indigenous and Afro-Colombian communities, which was strongly supported by many other members, particularly the A3 Plus and Denmark. Ten Council members—China, Denmark, France, Pakistan, Slovenia, Russia, and the A3 Plus—broke silence on this text, reiterating their call for the retention of the two mission tasks and requesting the inclusion of the reference to indigenous and Afro-Colombian communities. The vote on the draft text, which was initially scheduled for this morning (30 October), was subsequently postponed to tomorrow afternoon to allow more time for discussions among Council members. Eventually, no compromise could be reached, and the penholder proceeded this afternoon to place the unaltered third revised draft in blue.
During the negotiations, the US apparently explained its objection to the verification mission’s task related to verifying sentences handed down by the SJP by arguing that the Court’s model of transitional justice promotes impunity and that not all political actors in the country support its work. Many other Council members—including France, Denmark, Panama, and Russia—advocated for the retention of this task. It seems that, among other things, these members noted that the 2016 agreement envisioned a role for the UN peace operation in Colombia in verifying compliance with the sentences. These members apparently believe that support from the international community, through the work of the verification mission, is particularly crucial in this moment, considering that the SJP announced its first restorative sentences in mid-September—a long-awaited and potentially polarising step in the current political context in Colombia.
It seems that Denmark and Panama proposed some preambular language on the SJP, including text welcoming the issuance of its first restorative sentences. Text proposed by Denmark also apparently recognised the contribution of the verification mission in building confidence in the transitional justice process established by the 2016 agreement. It seems that while many other members supported these proposals, they were opposed by the US and were not taken on board by the penholder.
It seems that the US argued for the removal of the task related to the ethnic chapter by saying that support should not be prioritised for one set of people over others. It apparently did not provide specific arguments about its opposition to the task relating to the rural reform chapter. (The Council mandated the verification mission to monitor the implementation of these two tasks through resolution 2673 of 11 January 2023, at the request of Petro’s government.)
Many other Council members—particularly the A3 Plus grouping—apparently called for the retention of the ethnic chapter task, noting that successive reports of the Secretary-General have documented the disproportionate effects of violence on persons belonging to indigenous and Afro-Colombian communities. It seems that members such as China and the Republic of Korea (ROK) emphasised the importance of the rural reform chapter.
Over the course of the negotiations, it became apparent that while the US showed flexibility on the task relating to rural reform, it could not accept the retention of the tasks concerning the SJP and the ethnic chapter. It seems that the US conveyed to some Council members its readiness to veto the verification mission’s mandate renewal resolution if these tasks were retained. Therefore, despite the strong opposition from most other Council members, the second revised draft of the text removed the tasks relating to the SJP and the ethnic chapter. The penholder also added new language to this draft requesting the Secretary-General to ensure coordination and efficiencies, including by ensuring that other activities in the country are carried out by the most appropriate UN system entity. This relates to ongoing efforts under the UN80 initiative—a reform process launched by the Secretary-General in March to enhance the UN’s efficiency and effectiveness. It also alludes to other UN entities potentially having a future role in efforts relating to the tasks removed from the verification mission’s mandate.
Other parts of the draft resolution also required discussion. For instance, in a preambular paragraph noting the continued violence in conflict-affected areas, Denmark requested the addition of language referencing sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV). While numerous Council members supported this suggestion—including France, Greece, and Slovenia—the US opposed it. In an effort to find compromise, the penholder proposed text mentioning sexual violence and SGBV “targeting women and girls”, which was still unacceptable to the US. In the same paragraph, the US opposed language on the impact of violence on indigenous and Afro-Colombian communities, which other members, such as the A3 Plus grouping, sought to retain. In an attempt to reach compromise, the penholder changed the reference to “marginalized groups” in the third revised draft, which was unacceptable to many other members. The US also apparently opposed preambular language commending the role of civil society, including women and youth, in efforts to tackle structural factors underlying the conflict. Several other members—including Denmark, France, Greece, Panama, and the A3 Plus—called for its retention.
In an effort to accommodate differing positions, the draft resolution in blue does not include a reference to indigenous and Afro-Colombian communities, but retains the text on sexual violence and SGBV as well as the role of civil society including women and youth.
Language proposed by Panama welcoming progress made towards peace in Colombia was also added to the draft resolution in blue, as well as text reaffirming the Council’s support for Colombia in establishing peace, justice and security, based on proposals from Panama and the A3 Plus members. This amendment was retained, as was text emphasising the importance of the full implementation of the 2016 peace agreement, despite opposition from the US to the term “full”.
Colombia, which will serve as a non-permanent member of the Security Council in 2026-2027, in line with established practice was able to observe the negotiations but not to participate in the deliberations. It seems that Colombia would have preferred the retention of the two tasks but has acknowledged bilaterally that its top priority is for the mission to continue to operate.
Many Council members remain united in their support for the implementation of the 2016 peace agreement and view the verification mission as an important vehicle for the international community to support Colombia to achieve that end, regardless of the government in power. Some members may convey such messages in their explanation of vote tomorrow.
_________________________________________________________________
**Post-script: On 31 October, the Security Council adopted resolution 2798, renewing the mandate of the UN Verification Mission in Colombia for another year, until 31 October 2026. The text received 13 votes in favour and two abstentions (Russia and the US). It removed two of the mission’s tasks: verifying compliance with the restorative sentences handed by the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (SJP) and monitoring implementation of the 2016 agreement’s ethnic chapter.
In their explanations of vote, many Council members regretted the fact that consensus could not be reached on retaining the two tasks and expressed their continued support for Colombia in its efforts to fully implement the peace agreement.
