The Subtle Charm of Biased Mediation: Cuba’s Involvement in the Colombian Peace Process (2012–2016)

The peace process that transformed the protracted internal conflict between the Colombian government and the far-left guerilla organization FARC during 2012–2016 yielded several surprising moments. Among them was the selection of Cuba as one of the two mediators in the process. The communist state hosted numerous rounds of peace talks and actively involved its diplomats in the negotiations. Its ties to one side of the conflict – FARC – challenge the widely held assumption that mediators must be impartial (Bercovitch, Anagnoson, & Wille, 1991), while Cuba’s minimal mediation skills contradict empirically supported conclusions regarding the superior performance of experienced mediators (Carnevale & Pegnetter, 1985; Pearson, Thoennes, & Vanderkooi, 1982). Nevertheless, the negotiations culminated successfully with the signing of a peace agreement. This research reflects on this unique moment in the history of third-party mediation efforts in peace negotiations and examines Cuba’s active involvement from multiple dimensions. It explores the motivations that led the conflict parties to select Cuba, alongside Norway, as a mediator; evaluates the extent of Cuba’s mediating role; and analyzes how it conducted its mediation throughout the peace process. The study draws on respected theoretical frameworks from J. Bercovitch, I. W. Zartman, and M. Kleiboer and applies R. J. Fisher and L. Keashly’s contingency approach to analyze Cuba’s mediating role. Using the process tracing method, the research systematically organizes and sequences individual events into a causal mechanism, enabling a chronological understanding of key steps in the peace process. The research argues that Cuba’s selection as a mediator was not only a necessary condition for initiating peace negotiations but also a decisive variable in the successful conclusion of a peace agreement. Despite the Colombian actors’ consistent framing of Cuba's role as limited to communicative and facilitative strategies, Havana leveraged its unique historical position and employed more active mediation strategies at critical moments in the negotiations.