Foreign Minister Bula asked to remove Comprehensive Rural Reform from Verification Mission

Foreign Minister Bula asked the UN Verification Mission in Colombia to remove the Comprehensive Rural Reform from its mandate. He proposed keeping its work on excombatant reintegration and security guarantees. The change matters because rural reform was added to the mission’s mandate in 2023 and covers a central part of the 2016 peace agreement.

Bula said rural reform is structural, multisectoral, and long term. He argued that Colombia’s Ministry of Agriculture has the tools to continue policies on land access, property formalization, and productive development. He stressed that the proposal would not change the state’s substantive obligations or international support.

The mission would therefore continue monitoring former combatants and security conditions, but not rural reform itself. The UN mission’s chief, Miroslav Jenča, presented a different emphasis, saying rural reform could help address insecurity by improving services, opportunities, and state presence in affected regions.

The Comprehensive Rural Reform is the first point of Colombia’s peace agreement with the Farc. It seeks to improve access to land, formalize property ownership, and support productive development in rural areas. The agreement treated it as urgent because lack of land access was identified as a structural cause of Colombia’s armed conflict.

Its mechanisms include policies for land access, formal property titles, and rural economic development. The article also identifies the PDET programs, the Agrarian Jurisdiction, and the Multipurpose Cadastre as instruments connected to this transformation. Together, they aim to improve regional conditions, legal certainty, and state presence.

The reform remains important because rural inequality and weak institutions are linked to insecurity in the regions. Bula wants the Agriculture Ministry to lead its continuation, while the UN mission’s leadership says implementation can improve services, opportunities, investment, and security.

Colombia described the post-2016 security crisis as both large and persistent. Bula cited 132,930 killings between July 2016 and August 2026, nearly 100,000 extortions, and more than 2,750 kidnappings. He used these figures to argue that peace was not experienced by many civilians or security forces.

The armed-group landscape also expanded. According to his intervention, members of armed groups increased from 6,000 to almost 30,000. He cited about 253,000 hectares of coca in 2023 and said verified UN data showed child recruitment rose 300% in five years, including a 64% increase between 2023 and 2024.

These figures frame security as a long-term national challenge. Bula said 70 days of government action could not resolve decades of violence. He presented captures, drug seizures, weapons removals, and extraditions as initial results, not a final victory.

Bula’s argument rests on a distinction between extraordinary verification and ordinary public policy. He says the UN mission should monitor peace-related commitments that require special international oversight, such as reintegration and security guarantees. Rural reform, by contrast, reaches across government and is intended to continue over the long term.

He identified land access, property formalization, and productive development as areas the Agriculture Ministry can manage. In his view, that ministry has the necessary tools and should provide continuity. He clarified that removing verification would not remove Colombia’s substantive obligations or its support for international partners.

The disagreement concerns the best oversight mechanism, not whether rural reform matters. Bula wants a narrower mission mandate. Miroslav Jenča argued that rural reform remains closely connected to regional security, because it can improve living conditions, public services, opportunities, and state presence.

If rural reform leaves the mandate, the clearest change is that the UN Verification Mission would no longer formally monitor its implementation. Oversight would shift toward Colombia’s own institutions, especially the Ministry of Agriculture. The state would still retain its obligations under the peace agreement, according to Bula.

The policies themselves would continue through measures on access to land, formalization of property, and productive development. The article also mentions PDET programs, the Agrarian Jurisdiction, and the Multipurpose Cadastre as instruments linked to rural transformation. Removing verification would change the mechanism, not the stated policy goals.

The article does not establish whether this would produce better or worse results. It does show a debate over international involvement. Bula favors a narrower UN role, while the mission’s leadership considers rural reform central to improving security and strengthening state presence in vulnerable regions.

The UN Verification Mission connects rural reform with security because conflict is shaped by conditions in the regions. Miroslav Jenča said better living conditions and opportunities can reduce insecurity. He also emphasized that stronger public services and continued institutional presence can help communities resist the effects of armed groups.

The article gives concrete examples. PDET programs aim to transform regions and expand the state’s presence. The Agrarian Jurisdiction and Multipurpose Cadastre can provide legal certainty over property. That certainty supports development, private-sector investment, and economic growth, while land policies address a major historical source of conflict.

This view differs from Bula’s narrower mandate proposal but does not reject security action. The mission’s position is that rural reform complements security measures. The article presents both approaches: immediate action against armed groups and longer-term improvements in land rights, services, opportunities, and institutions.

Secure land ownership can strengthen rural communities by clarifying who legally holds property. The article says this legal certainty is fundamental for development and private investment. Public services and a continuing institutional presence can also make the state more visible and useful in regions where armed groups have operated.

The proposed mechanisms are concrete. The Multipurpose Cadastre and Agrarian Jurisdiction can improve certainty over property. PDET programs can support regional transformation and expand state presence. Productive development can create opportunities, while better services can improve living conditions for communities.

The article does not claim these measures alone will end armed-group influence. It presents them as part of a longer-term security strategy. Bula insists security is a condition for peace, while Jenča argues that rural reform helps create the conditions in which lasting security and peace can develop.