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

Colombia's Escalating Brutal Internal Conflict Dominates Presidential Race

Colombia s escalating brutal internal conflict - Colombia’s escalating brutal internal conflict has become the defining issue in this year’s presidential election, with voters increasingly prioritizing candidates who promise to address the violence gripping the nation. Edilma Martinez Flores, a resident of Bogotá, described the harrowing death of her brother, killed by armed groups during a dispute over an extortion fee. "He was shot in front of his children, just for refusing to pay," she recounted, highlighting the widespread fear that fuels the campaign. Families across the country have been forced to abandon their homes, with some reporting that armed groups have placed bombs along key routes to instill panic and secure control over rural territories.

Decades of Strife and Evolving Threats

For over six decades, Colombia has grappled with a multifaceted conflict involving guerrilla groups, paramilitary forces, and drug cartels. The current surge in violence is attributed to the growth of illegal armed groups such as FARC dissidents, the ELN rebels, and the Clan del Golfo, which have expanded their influence in remote regions critical to coca production and mining operations. With their numbers doubling in the past five years, these groups are now entrenched in areas once dominated by the government, complicating peace efforts. A recent offensive near the Venezuela border displaced thousands, illustrating how the conflict has become more territorial and intense.

The conflict’s brutality is not just a historical trend but a growing concern in 2025. Reports indicate that attacks have become more frequent and sophisticated, targeting civilians and infrastructure alike. Analysts point to the role of drug trafficking as a catalyst for this escalation, with criminal networks leveraging the conflict to protect their interests. The tension between security-focused policies and negotiated peace agreements has created a polarizing environment, with candidates offering contrasting visions for the country’s future.

Political Divides Reflect Societal Fractures

At the heart of the election is a stark ideological divide between left-wing and right-wing candidates. Left-wing senator Iván Cepeda, the chief architect of President Gustavo Petro’s peace agenda, argues that sustained dialogue with armed groups is essential to ending the cycle of violence. His campaign emphasizes social reforms, including land redistribution and increased funding for victim support programs. However, critics claim his approach has allowed groups to exploit ceasefires, perpetuating instability in the countryside.

On the other side, Abelardo de la Espriella, a conservative businessman backed by Donald Trump, advocates for a stronger military response. He has pledged to build 10 new prisons and enforce stricter measures against rebels, framing his strategy as a direct counter to the left’s perceived leniency. "Any criminal who doesn’t surrender will be taken down," he declared, signaling his commitment to a hardline approach. His supporters see this as a necessary step to restore order, while opponents argue it risks alienating communities and prolonging the conflict.

The Human Toll of Escalated Violence

The humanitarian impact of Colombia’s brutal internal conflict is undeniable. Isabelita Mercado Pineda, a peace advisor in Bogotá, noted a 300% increase in forced displacement between 2024 and 2025, citing the conflict’s intensification as the primary driver. "This is the highest rate we’ve seen in two decades," she said, underscoring the growing crisis. In the Chocó region, residents like Erin Gamboa describe living in constant fear, with criminal gangs vying for control over lucrative drug routes. "My half-brother was taken by FARC rebels last month," he said, adding that extortion demands have risen sharply, leaving families with little choice but to flee.

Displaced communities are also facing economic hardship and social fragmentation. One anonymous couple recounted how extortionists linked to the FARC began demanding 5 million pesos from their children, forcing them to sell assets to survive. "You can’t go out in peace anymore," the woman said, wiping tears. These stories reflect a broader pattern: as the conflict escalates, ordinary citizens are caught in the crossfire, with their lives upended by the presence of armed groups. The lack of government control in some regions has created a vacuum where criminal networks thrive, further entrenching the cycle of violence.

US Foreign Policy and the Election's Global Context

Amid the turmoil, the United States has positioned itself as a key player in shaping Colombia’s political landscape. Trump’s endorsement of Abelardo de la Espriella has been seen as a strategic move to align with a candidate who promises to strengthen military operations against rebels. "If Abelardo wins, Colombia will have full US backing," Trump stated, contrasting this with the government’s current "carrot but not enough stick" strategy. This support is framed as critical to maintaining the country’s role in Latin America’s security architecture.

However, some argue that the US is overreaching, with its backing potentially sidelining local voices. The left wing has criticized Trump’s influence as an example of foreign interference, claiming it undermines Colombia’s sovereignty. Meanwhile, the conflict’s geopolitical implications remain significant, as neighboring countries like Venezuela and Ecuador are also affected by the violence. The election, therefore, is not just a domestic battle but a reflection of broader regional tensions.

Peace vs. Security: A Nation at a Crossroads

As the campaign intensifies, Colombia’s voters are being asked to choose between two competing narratives: one that prioritizes peace through dialogue and another that emphasizes security through military force. This divide mirrors the country’s historical struggles, with each side appealing to different segments of the population. Cepeda’s supporters highlight the human cost of prolonged conflict, while de la Espriella’s backers point to the need for decisive action to dismantle criminal networks.

Public opinion is split, with surveys showing a growing appetite for candidates who can deliver tangible results in the face of escalating violence. The conflict’s brutality has forced a reevaluation of traditional approaches to peace, as communities demand more protection and accountability. The upcoming election will likely determine whether Colombia continues down the path of negotiated peace or shifts toward a more militarized strategy, with implications for its future stability and international relations.