On 31 May 2026, Colombia held the first round of its presidential elections. In a result that differed from many pre-election polls, Abelardo de la Espriella, Movimiento de Salvación Nacional (National Salvation Movement) the extreme right-wing candidate, secured 43.7% of the vote. He was followed by Iván Cepeda of the far left, Pacto Histórico (Historic Pact), who received 40.9%.  

The outcome surprised many observers, as the latest polls in the weeks leading to the election had predicted Cepeda would finish in first place. Meanwhile, Paloma Valencia of the Centro Democrático (Democratic Centre) who had also been considered a leading contender and was backed by former president Álvaro Uribe, received just 6.9% of the vote. Of the pool of eleven candidates, none secured the 50 per cent of votes needed to win outright. 

De la Espriella and Cepeda are two radically different candidates and the direction that Colombia will go in relation to the Peace Process will be determined by the outcome of the second round of votes.  

De la Espriella has stated that he will not continue with Petro’s “Total Peace” policy, but rather he will take a militarised hardline approach to address security in the rural areas. Cepeda, on the other hand, has been a part of the Petro Government, engaged in promoting a negotiated end to the conflict. He plans to continue to negotiate peace in Colombia.  

The second round of the election will take place on 21 June, when Colombian voters will choose between de la Espriella and Cepeda and determine the country’s political direction for the next presidential term. 

A militarised approach has failed for decades to bring an end to the longest running internal armed conflict. It was only through Peace Talks, that President Juan Manuel Santos achieved the 2016 Peace Accord with the FARC. Petro’s Total Peace Policy has only had limited successes – such as a reduction in the number of homicides, the creation of humanitarian corridors to assist vulnerable populations, amongst other things. Nevertheless, most analysts consider its limited successes were because the Petro Government was negotiating with too many groups at the same time, without sufficient resources and the lack of a legal framework for the demobilisation of criminal groups, and the unintended consequence of these groups exerting complete control over certain areas and populations where there was a lack of State presence.  

A negotiated end to the conflict is ultimately the only way forward, but what matters is how that is accomplished. This requires: 

• effective protection for communities;  

• the full implementation of the Colombian government’s Decree 0665 of 24 May 2024 on dismantling illegal armed and criminal groups – the policy is known as the “Public Policy and the Permanent Action Plan for the dismantling of criminal conduct or organizations that violate human rights defenders, members of social movements or political movements, or that participate in the implementation of the Agreements and the construction of peace”;  

• sufficient resources in place to sustain the negotiations; and that there are clear incentives for armed groups to negotiate meaningfully.  

According to Nelson Madela, the most powerful weapon in the world is “to talk” – and we would add to talk constructively.