Reconciliation sentiment among former perpetrators of violence during the Colombian armed conflict

• Author: Etienne Mullet,Wilson López López,Dario León Rincón,Claudia Pineda‐Marín
• Published date: 01 December 2018
• Date: 01 December 2018
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/crq.21232

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Reconciliation sentiment among former perpetrators

of violence during the Colombian armed conflict

Wilson López López

1

| Dario León Rincón

2

| Claudia Pineda-Marín

3

|

Etienne Mullet

4

1

Department of Psychology, Pontificia

Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia

2

Department of Psychology, Universidad Católica

de Colombia, Colombia

3

Department of Psychology, Fundación

Universitaria Konrad Lorenz, Bogotá, Colombia

4

Department of Ethics, Institute of Advanced

Studies (EPHE), Paris, France

Correspondence

Etienne Mullet, 17bis, rue de Quefes, F-31830

Plaisance du Touch, France.

Email: etienne.mullet@wanadoo.fr

This study assessed reconciliation sentiment among for-

mer members of Colombian paramilitary and guerilla

groups. A total of 103 participants who were detained in

rehabilitation centers were presented with an augmented

version of the Reconciliation Sentiment Questionnaire.

Overall, participants considered that they had achieved

some measure of reconciliation with the people they

harmed. Most viewed themselves as able to control their

nervousness and impulses in situations in which victims

were physically present or victims were simply evoked,

and most felt sure, to a reasonable extent, that victims did

not intend to seek vengeance. Nevertheless, a minority—

mostly former members of the guerillas and detainees

who did not attend rehabilitation programs—was not sure

that acts of vengeance would not be attempted. A majority

of participants was, to some extent, willing to trust and

cooperate with former victims and probably the society at

large. Only two, however, were totally convinced that it

would be possible to do so.

1|INTRODUCTION

Reconciliation is not a unitary concept (Alzate & Dono, 2017; Rettberg & Ugarriza, 2016). Its precise

meaning depends on the extent to which trust and cooperation—that is, relationships among former

belligerents—have been restored (McIntosh, 2014). According to Mukashema, Bugay, and Mullet

(2018), four levels of reconciliation can be usefully distinguished. First, and ideally, reconciliation

may mean the complete cessation of hostility between former belligerents, the restoration of friend-

ship, and extensive collaboration among former opponents for the attainment of common objectives.

Nadler and Liviatan (2004) called it socioemotional reconciliation. This level of reconciliation

implies mutual acknowledgment of past wrongs, mutual seeking and granting of forgiveness, and

critical examination of past values and political attitudes (Digeser, 2001).

Received: 25 February 2018 Revised and accepted: 18 June 2018

DOI: 10.1002/crq.21232

© 2018 Association for Conflict Resolution and Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Conflict Resolution Quarterly. 2018;36:163–175. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/crq 163