When peace talks happen, they are meant to shape the future of a country. But one group is almost always missing from the table: children. This absence is striking.
Children are among those most affected by conflict, yet they are rarely included in decisions about how peace is built. And today, as peace processes themselves are changing, their exclusion may be getting worse. Recent research on children’s involvement in peace processes highlights a worrying trend. As peace negotiations become more fragmented and focused on short-term deals, there is even less space for groups like children to be included.
A changing landscape of peace
For many years, peace agreements were seen as opportunities to transform societies. In places like Colombia, peace negotiations aimed not only to end violence but also to address deeper issues such as inequality, justice, and political participation. In these more ambitious processes, there was at least some space, however limited, for civil society groups to advocate for children’s rights. In Colombia’s 2016 peace process, for example, organisations worked to bring children’s experiences into negotiations. Former child soldiers shared their stories, and child-focused groups successfully pushed for provisions on reintegration and protection.
But today, peace processes are increasingly shifting away from these inclusive models. In conflicts such as Syria, negotiations have become more fragmented and dominated by powerful states and armed actors. Talks have often prioritised short-term stability over long-term transformation, with limited involvement from civil society and almost no role for children. Similarly, in many contemporary conflicts, peace agreements are no longer comprehensive national settlements. Instead, they are smaller, local, or temporary deals focused on stopping violence rather than reshaping society.
Why children are being pushed aside
These changes have important consequences for who gets included. Modern peace talks are often elite-driven. Seats at the table are limited and typically reserved for those with political or military power. This makes it difficult for any marginalised group, especially children, to be heard. At the same time, the actors involved in peace processes are changing. Where international organisations like the United Nations once played a central role, newer mediators, including regional powers and individual states, are becoming more influential. These actors may place less emphasis on human rights or inclusive participation.
In some contexts, there is also resistance to the idea that children should be involved at all. Different cultural and political perspectives shape how childhood is understood. In some settings, children are seen primarily as needing protection, not as people who can contribute to political decisions. All of this reduces the already limited space for children’s voices.
The limits of traditional approaches
For years, advocates have argued that children should be included in peace processes. These arguments are based on international law, moral claims, and practical benefits. For example, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child states that children have the right to express their views on matters that affect them. Others argue that children bring unique perspectives and that participation can support their development and recovery.
But these arguments often assume a type of peace process that is becoming less common. If peace talks are no longer designed to be inclusive or transformative, then simply calling for participation is not enough. The challenge is not just that children are excluded. It is that the structure of peace processes themselves is changing in ways that make inclusion more difficult.
New opportunities beyond the negotiating table
Despite these challenges, new opportunities are emerging.
One is at the local level. In many conflicts, smaller, community-based agreements are playing an increasing role. These local processes may offer more space for participation, including for young people, because they are closer to everyday experiences and less dominated by elite actors. While some local processes may be limited to stopping violence rather than reshaping society, others may offer more space for participation, including for young people, because they are closer to everyday experiences and less dominated by elite actors. Even when children are formally included, limited decision-making power, tokenistic consultation practices, and adult-controlled agendas often constrain the substance and impact of their participation.
Another is through civil society networks. In Colombia, organisations working together were able to influence peace negotiations by amplifying children’s voices. Similar networks, especially those rooted in local communities, can help bring children’s perspectives into discussions, even when they are not directly present at the table.
Technology is also opening new possibilities. In Yemen, digital tools have been used to engage young people across conflict lines, allowing them to share their views despite security risks. In Guatemala, online dialogues have enabled young people to discuss national issues and contribute ideas for change. These approaches do not replace formal participation, but they can help ensure that children’s voices are not entirely excluded.
Rethinking inclusion in peacebuilding
The reality is that peace processes today look very different from those of the past. They are more fragmented, more political, and often less focused on long-term transformation. This makes the inclusion of children more challenging, but also more urgent. If peace agreements are shaping the future of societies, then excluding children means ignoring the perspectives of those who will live with the consequences the longest. The question is no longer just how to include children in traditional peace talks. It is how to ensure their voices are heard in a changing and often more restrictive environment. This requires new approaches, ones that are flexible, local, and adapted to the realities of modern conflict. Because even if the table is shrinking, the need to listen to children has not.
Keywords: peace talks, children, Colombia, Syria, Yemen, peace, conflict, conflict resolution, participation, inclusion
Sean Molloy
Sean is a NUAcT Fellow based at Newcastle Law School. Focused on children’s rights, Sean is currently working on a project on children’s rights in societies attempting to transition from conflict to peace. This work covers multiple areas of interest including child soldiers, child participation in peace processes, peace agreements and children, children and constitutional reform and children and transitional justice.
