The State, Ordering and Obstructing Actor of the Military Operations in the Colombian Conflict

This article describes the greatest strategic incongruity of the Colombian State in its security and defense policy to carry out military action against organized armed groups and consolidate the entire national territory. Using a qualitative analysis methodology, the problem and the proposed hypothesis were analyzed. The state of the art was analyzed from the general to the particular in search of relevant facts regarding the military action of the Colombian military forces in the armed conflict. The research determined that there is ambiguity or contrary efforts in the Colombian State to act as the organizer of military operations and at the same time, to deter, impede or punish such operations under a clear lack of harmony of state strategy, causing a growing operational abstentionism 2. Why does this dilemma arise? Through the Executive Branch, it orders its military forces to carry out kinetic military operations 3 against organized armed groups 4 and, at the same time, the Executive itself and some officials of the Judicial Branch and independent investigative bodies, obstruct the exercise of such a legitimate order, due to various non-institutional factors. This has caused an unofficial legal approach against military action, making it difficult to act under the international law of armed conflict. This article contributes to civil–military relations theory by conceptualizing the State as a dual actor that simultaneously legitimizes and delegitimizes military force. Finally, all the identified aspects that cause the obstruction of military action are concluded and actions are proposed to achieve the harmonization of state policies in the face of the conflict.