Colombia’s escalating, brutal internal conflict is defining its presidential election

Colombia's Deepening Internal Crisis Shapes Presidential Contest

Colombia s escalating brutal internal conflict - The tension between Colombia’s state and armed groups has reached a critical juncture, with violence and insecurity becoming central issues in the upcoming presidential election. In a support center for displaced families in Bogotá, Edilma Martinez Flores shared a harrowing story of her brother’s murder. “He was killed for refusing to pay an extortion fee—right in front of his children,” she said, her voice trembling. This incident is emblematic of a broader pattern: over the past five years, illegal armed groups have nearly doubled their ranks, intensifying the conflict that has already claimed hundreds of thousands of lives over six decades.

Escalating Threats and Forced Migration

Edilma’s experience reflects the daily reality for many Colombians. After armed factions distributed leaflets warning residents to flee or face violence, she left her home near Cali, a city in the southwest, with nothing but the clothes on her back. “They placed bombs along the roads people use to move,” she explained, highlighting the strategic terror employed by groups like the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) dissidents, the National Liberation Army (ELN), and the Clan del Golfo. These organizations now control key rural areas, particularly those vital for drug trafficking and illegal mining, which have become hotbeds of violence.

The conflict’s brutality is not new, but its intensity has surged. A recent offensive between the ELN and FARC splinter groups near the Venezuela border displaced tens of thousands, creating a wave of displacement that Isabelita Mercado Pineda, a Bogotá-based peace advisor, described as unprecedented. “Forced displacement has increased by 300% between 2024 and 2025,” she said. “This level of movement hasn’t been seen in two decades.” Her remarks underscore the crisis, which she attributes to factors such as rising cocaine production, the army’s inability to secure former FARC territories, and a perceived lack of enforcement in the government’s peace strategy.

The Two Fronts: Peace and Punishment

The presidential race pits two sharply contrasting visions against each other. Left-wing senator Iván Cepeda, a key figure in Gustavo Petro’s "total peace" agenda, advocates for negotiation with armed groups to achieve lasting stability. Supporters argue this approach minimizes civilian casualties and addresses root causes of violence, citing his role in the 2016 FARC peace deal that disarmed thousands. However, critics claim his strategy has allowed groups to exploit ceasefires, expanding their influence under the guise of cooperation.

Cepeda has pledged to implement “social transformations that the country urgently demands,” emphasizing economic equity and reconciliation. Yet, his opponent, Abelardo de la Espriella, the self-proclaimed “El Tigre” (The Tiger), promotes a harder line. A right-wing businessman and lawyer, de la Espriella has promised 10 massive prisons, a military crackdown, and an end to peace talks. “Any criminal who doesn’t surrender will be taken down,” he declared, framing his campaign as a decisive fight against organized crime. His backing by Donald Trump has further polarized the race, with opponents accusing the U.S. of meddling in Colombia’s domestic affairs.

De la Espriella’s rise is rooted in his strong regional ties to Colombia’s Caribbean coast, where he grew up and continues to command support. His strategy mirrors that of right-wing leaders who prioritize security over conciliation, a stance that resonates with voters frustrated by the persistent threat of violence. Meanwhile, Cepeda’s vision draws from a legacy of negotiations, though some question whether it has delivered the peace promised.

Personal Stories Behind the Statistics

For many Colombians, the conflict’s human toll is undeniable. Erin Gamboa, a resident of the Chocó region on the Pacific Coast, described the chaos in his community. “My half-brother was kidnapped by FARC guerrillas, and we haven’t heard from him since,” he said, emphasizing the territorial battles between paramilitaries, guerillas, and criminal networks. These groups vie for control of resource-rich areas, where illegal mining and drug trafficking fuel both economic and social strife.

Another anonymous couple recounted how their small food delivery business was targeted by a man claiming to be from the FARC. He extorted 5 million pesos (approximately $1,500 or £1,100) from their children, forcing the family to abandon their livelihood. “Crime has grown so much you can’t go out in peace anymore,” the woman tearfully said, capturing the pervasive sense of insecurity that defines everyday life for countless citizens.

Such stories highlight the intersection of personal tragedy and political stakes. The conflict’s impact extends beyond casualties, disrupting communities and livelihoods. For instance, the withdrawal of FARC from rural areas after their 2016 demobilization left power vacuums, which armed groups quickly filled. This has created a cycle of violence that keeps displacement rates climbing, even as the government struggles to enforce its peace policies effectively.

Global Implications and Domestic Divides

Trump’s endorsement of de la Espriella adds an international dimension to the election. The former U.S. president has framed the contest as a pivotal moment for Colombia’s relationship with the United States, stating that “if Abelardo wins, the country will have the total support and strength of the U.S. behind him.” He also labeled Cepeda a “radical left Marxist,” a critique that reflects the ideological divide shaping the campaign.

De la Espriella’s campaign has been criticized for politicizing symbols, such as the Colombian football shirt, which leftists argue is being used to rally support for his hardline agenda. This cultural reference underscores the broader battle over national identity, with voters torn between a progressive vision of peace and a conservative emphasis on security.

As the election approaches, the conflict’s legacy looms large. The stakes are high: a president’s decisions could determine whether Colombia continues down the path of negotiation or embraces a more punitive approach. For families like Edilma’s, the choice is personal. “We had no choice but to leave everything behind,” she said, her words a reminder of the cost of inaction. The question now is whether the next leader can bring the same resolve to resolve the crisis that has shaped the nation for generations.

The conflict’s trajectory also raises concerns about the future of Latin America’s security landscape. With the U.S. adopting a more interventionist stance, its influence in the region is growing, potentially reshaping how countries like Colombia combat organized crime. This dynamic adds complexity to the election, as voters weigh domestic priorities against global alliances.

In a country where the line between peace and violence is increasingly blurred, the presidential election represents more than a political contest. It is a referendum on Colombia’s ability to reconcile its past while securing its future. As Cepeda and de la Espriella vie for the presidency, their strategies will define the next chapter in a conflict that has left deep scars on the nation’s social fabric.