Colombia

Colombia’s far-right, pro-Trump candidate, Abelardo de la Espriella, is in the lead after Colombia’s first round of elections. If he wins the June 21 runoff against left-wing Senator Ivan Cepeda, progressive policies could be reversed. Al Jazeera’s Hala Al Shami explains why US officials are invested in de la Espriella’s success and walks us through the stakes.

Less than two hours after polling stations closed on Sunday, it was clear that Colombia’s presidential race would be settled in a run-off between two finalists: hard-right political outsider Abelardo de la Espriella and leftist Senator Ivan Cepeda.

Though the overall result surprised few, de la Espriella’s strong showing upended pollsters’ predictions.

Cepeda, President Gustavo Petro’s chosen successor, had been expected to win the most votes, based on public opinion surveys.

But instead, de la Espriella came in first place, winning 43.74 percent of the vote. Cepeda trailed with 40.90 percent.

Supporters of de la Espriella, a criminal defence lawyer, held rapturous celebrations in the coastal city of Barranquilla, where the candidate has an office.

“Colombia won, and with more than 10 million votes, democracy won,” said Elsa Suarez, a de la Espriella voter living in Bogota.

The far-right candidate has modelled himself after politicians like Donald Trump in the United States and Javier Milei in Argentina, flamboyant media personalities who won the presidency despite having little to no political experience.

Like them, de la Espriella has pledged a return to “law and order”, as well as a pared-back national government and policies to support traditional family values.

Notably, he promises to use an “iron fist” to stamp out crime and build megaprisons to jail criminals, mimicking the policies of Salvadoran strongman Nayib Bukele.

Analysts say de la Espriella’s populist messaging resonated with voters in Colombia’s interior, where urban crime is a growing concern.

Electoral maps show de la Espriella besting Cepeda in 16 of the country’s 32 departments, primarily in the heart of Colombia and along the border with Venezuela.

“In more central areas and closer to the capitals, people prioritise security,” explained Laura Bonilla, the deputy director at the Peace and Reconciliation Foundation (PARES), a Bogota-based research nonprofit.

By contrast, de la Espriella’s security messaging failed to sway voters along the coast and in border areas afflicted by rebel violence.

Bonilla argues that people in these regions instead place greater value on the socioeconomic issues that Cepeda represents, as the continuity candidate for Petro’s Historic Pact party.

“Over the past four years, they have received constant attention from the government,” said Bonilla, citing state development projects under the Petro administration.

A blow to the conservative establishment

De la Espriella’s success also highlights growing anti-establishment sentiment in Colombia, according to experts.

The lawyer, who has never run for public office before, comfortably beat his main rival on the right, Senator Paloma Valencia, who was backed by former President Alvaro Uribe, the figurehead of Colombian conservatism.

Initially, Sunday’s election was predicted to be a close race between Valencia and de la Espriella, both of whom lagged behind Cepeda in the polls.

But as Sunday’s ballots were tallied, Valencia flopped with less than 7 percent of the vote.

Miguel Silva, a Colombian political consultant, credited some of de la Espriella’s success to his campaign messaging.

De la Espriella, he explained, used his campaign to draw a distinction between the haves and the have-nots, those who have benefitted from the government and those who feel ignored.

“He [succeeded] by portraying himself and the people he represents as ‘Los Nunca’ and by portraying Paloma and her followers as ‘Los Siempre’,” Silva said, using the Spanish words for “The Nevers” and “The Always”.

Pollsters predicted the right would be divided in the first round, paving the way for Cepeda to win the most votes, but de la Espriella captured millions of votes from traditional conservatives, marking a shift in Colombia’s political landscape.

In Bogota, the only province in the country’s interior to vote for Cepeda, the left-wing candidate’s supporters were shocked by Sunday’s results.

“Everyone is a little surprised,” said Juan Camilo Rodriguez, who voted for Cepeda. “These results don’t match the polls.”

Petro himself had hammered his base to flood the polls, warning that the left’s chances of success could be hampered by electoral fraud.

The outgoing president rejected last night’s results, which were based on the “pre-conteo”, or preliminary count, a non-legally binding process.

Instead, Petro called on the public to wait for the official, scrutinised count, which will be released in the coming days.

Cepeda echoed the president’s scepticism in a speech on Sunday night. “Only once the vote-counting committees have fully, clearly, and thoroughly clarified this matter, will we comment on tonight’s results,” he told supporters.

But the candidate appeared to mellow his stance this morning, acknowledging that there was no evidence of irregularities in the vote. He trailed de la Espriella by more than 670,000 votes.

Experts warn that Cepeda is losing precious time by focusing on fraud allegations and should instead concentrate on swaying moderate voters.

“By crying fraud so early, it’s hard to bring more voters to the table,” said Silva.

A second round of voting, between Cepeda and de la Espriella, is scheduled for June 21.

Up for grabs are more than a million votes for centrist candidate Sergio Fajardo and 1.6 million for Paloma Valencia. While Valencia endorsed de la Espriella, her running mate, moderate politician Juan Daniel Oviedo, did not.

Miguel Jaramillo Lujan, a Colombian political strategist, said the final two candidates must tread carefully in the next three weeks to prevail.

“As the saying goes, whoever makes fewer mistakes will be the winner.”

Far-right outsider Abelardo de la Espriella will face left-wing Senator Ivan Cepeda in the run-off for Colombia’s presidential election next month. Al Jazeera’s Teresa Bo explains what this means for Colombians.

Colombia’s election heads to a June 21 runoff after a tight first round between Abelardo de la Espriella and Ivan Cepeda. The night was marked by mutual accusations, with Cepeda calling for verification of results and De la Espriella celebrating his lead.

Colombia’s presidential election is headed to a runoff on June 21. Far-right outsider, Abelardo de la Espriella, will face leftist senator, Ivan Cepeda. Professor Jorge Restrepo describes de la Espriella’s rise in the polls as a punishment vote against Colombia’s long-established political class.

Far-right outsider Abelardo de la Espriella will face left-wing Senator Ivan Cepeda in the run-off for Colombia’s presidential election next month.

After polls closed on Sunday, the two candidates quickly surged ahead in the vote tally, extinguishing the hopes of right-wing Senator Paloma Valencia, a former frontrunner.

As of Sunday afternoon, with 99 percent of the votes tallied, de la Espriella took the lead, with 43 percent of the ballots cast in his favour.

Cepeda trailed him by more than 600,000 votes, earning 40 percent support.

Neither candidate breached the 50-percent threshold needed to avoid a head-to-head match-up on June 21. But the results are likely to buoy de la Espriella’s campaign going into the final round.

Cepeda had consistently topped public opinion polls in the final weeks before the vote. A May 24 poll from the National Consulting Centre (CNC) showed him with more than 33 percent support, ahead of de la Espriella’s 30.9 percent.

De la Espriella’s ‘outsider’ campaign

Questions about security were at the forefront of voters’ concerns going into Sunday’s election.

De la Espriella, a businessman and lawyer who has never held elected office, leaned heavily into fears of crime as he launched an outsider campaign, similar to the dark-horse bid of Argentinian President Javier Milei.

By contrast, Cepeda is a well-known quantity in Colombian politics. His father was a senator, too, before he was assassinated in 1994, in what was widely considered to be an act of political violence.

Cepeda himself has served as a senator since 2014. Before that, he served in the Chamber of Deputies, representing the capital, Bogota.

During his political career, he became embroiled in a long-running legal dispute with former right-wing President Alvaro Uribe, whom he accused of complicity with right-wing paramilitaries.

Uribe initially sued Cepeda for defamation, but in a dramatic twist, Colombia’s Supreme Court dismissed the charge and instead investigated Uribe for witness tampering.

While Uribe was initially found guilty and sentenced to 12 years of house arrest, an appeals court ultimately struck down the verdict, citing procedural errors, including insufficient evidence.

Security a top concern

Central to the rift in Colombia’s politics is the country’s six-decade-long internal conflict.

Since 1964, criminal networks, government forces, left-wing rebels and right-wing paramilitaries have all jockeyed against one another for power and territory.

Cepeda has been critical of right-wing efforts to solve the conflict through military might alone.

Instead, he has allied himself with Colombia’s outgoing president, Gustavo Petro, the first left-wing figure ever elected to the country’s highest office.

A former rebel fighter, Petro has championed a policy he calls “Total Peace”, which actively seeks negotiated solutions to the fighting.

While critics have questioned the efficacy of “Total Peace”, pointing to a recent uptick in violence, Cepeda has nevertheless pledged to carry it forward. He represents Petro’s left-wing Historic Pact party in this year’s election.

In an interview this month with CNN, Cepeda acknowledged the policy’s “immense challenges”, saying: “We cannot continue to develop conversations that do not yield clear results.”

But he rejected overly militaristic solutions, as well as the prospect of intervention by the United States. The US-led “war on drugs”, Cepeda said, has “failed spectacularly”.

De la Espriella, meanwhile, has embraced the kind of hardline security platform commonly associated with El Salvador’s leader, Nayib Bukele.

His platform includes a pledge to crack down on crime and build 10 megaprisons in Colombia.

Nicknamed “The Tiger”, he founded the Defenders of the Homeland political party and is known to rally with the slogan, “Stand firm for the nation”.

“The only peace process I believe in is one imposed by the force of arms and the laws of the republic,” de la Espriella told The Associated Press news agency this month.

Like US President Donald Trump, de la Espriella has also threatened to launch a bombing campaign to disrupt drug-trafficking, killing suspects by downing planes and shooting boats.

But such campaigns have been widely denounced as a form of extrajudicial killing, effectively denying suspects the chance of defending themselves in a court of law.

Narrowing odds for Colombia’s left

More than 23.6 million Colombians voted in Sunday’s election, though there was a high number of blank or nullified ballots.

Early estimates, with 99 percent of ballots tallied, indicate that 245,342 voting sheets were null, and another 406,830 were left blank.

The second round is likely to be an uphill battle for Cepeda. Colombia’s right-wing is expected to consolidate behind de la Espriella in the second round.

In Sunday’s vote count, more than 10.3 million ballots were cast for de la Espriella, compared with roughly 9.7 million for Cepeda.

A victory for the right would continue a regional trend in Latin America. Last year alone, left-wing governments in Chile, Honduras and Bolivia were all replaced by right-wing presidential contenders.

De la Espriella signalled his optimism about the second round in a social media post as the results rolled in.

“We are going to defeat tyranny and absolutism,” de la Espriella wrote. “We have advanced to the run-off thanks to the more than 10 million Colombians who answered the roar. In 21 days, we will make history!”

Colombians headed to the polls to choose a new president in a high-stakes election that will determine whether the country continues the left-wing agenda launched by Gustavo Petro or shifts back to the political right.

Ten years after Colombia’s landmark peace agreement, former president Juan Manuel Santos assesses its legacy. The Nobel Peace Prize laureate discusses renewed violence, political divisions and what Colombia’s experience can teach a world facing growing conflict.

In Colombia’s volatile Catatumbo region, FARC dissidents say they returned to war after a historic peace deal failed to deliver security and social change.

Al Jazeera’s Teresa Bo has exclusive access to the group as it fights rivals for control of territory and lucrative drug trafficking routes.

On Sunday, voters in the South American country of Colombia are facing a choice.

Four years ago, they elected the first left-wing president in the country’s modern history, Gustavo Petro. Now, they must decide whether to continue with Petro’s leftist push — or restore the political right to power.

Fourteen candidates will be on the ballot for the first round of voting in Colombia’s presidential election.  The packed field includes contenders from the left, right and centre, who are slated to face off over issues like security and the cost of living.

But Petro will not be among them: Presidents in Colombia are limited to a single four-year term.

The right wing is expected to have the advantage, particularly if the race proceeds to a second round. Petro is struggling with low poll numbers, and voters have expressed frustration with crime and violence, driven in part by the country’s six-decade-long internal conflict.

But leftist candidate Ivan Cepeda has surprised observers, consistently placing at the top of the polls ahead of the first round.

When is the election, who are the candidates, and which issues are top of mind for voters? We look at those questions and more in this brief explainer.

When is the election?

The first round of voting is set to take place on May 31, 2026.

Will there be a second round of voting?

A candidate would need to win more than 50 percent of the vote in the first round to avoid a run-off.

If no single candidate meets that threshold, a run-off will be held between the top two finishers on June 21.

Why is this election important?

In recent years, across Latin America, long-entrenched left-wing governments have met defeat at the ballot box.

Last year alone, right-wing candidates have been elected to replace left-wing presidents in Bolivia, Chile and Honduras.

But Colombia does not have a long history of left-wing presidents. Petro was the first. That makes this race one to watch, according to Gimena Sanchez, a Colombia expert at the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA), a human rights nonprofit.

“This is the first election to be held after the first-ever leftist administration in Colombia’s 200-year history,” Sanchez explained.

Colombia now stands at a fork in the road. One of the dominant issues in the election is how to resolve the country’s internal conflict, which forced more than 235,619 individuals from their homes in 2025.

Another 87,069 people were caught up in mass displacement events due to the fighting, according to the International Committee of the Red Cross.

Petro has embraced negotiation as a tool to end the conflict, which has seen government forces, criminal networks, left-wing rebels and right-wing paramilitaries all battling one another.

But the political right has advocated a return to the more militarised approach backed by the United States, according to Sanchez.

“The leading candidates fall into two camps: continuity with the leftist government of Petro and an approach to security that focuses on negotiations with armed groups, and right-wing candidates who very much want to go back to a hardline security model that Colombia had in the past,” Sanchez said.

“You have polar opposite visions for the country.”

Who is the main candidate on the left?

Senator Ivan Cepeda has emerged as the primary candidate of the political left, running as the head of the governing coalition, known as Historic Pact.

Cepeda has largely pledged continuity with Petro’s platform, including social and economic policies meant to reduce inequality.

He has also embraced Petro’s “Total Peace” approach, which aims to resolve the country’s internal fighting by negotiating with armed groups and criminal networks, as opposed to solely relying on military force.

Confronting state-backed violence has become a hallmark of Cepeda’s life and career.

His father, who was also a senator, is believed to have been assassinated by a government-backed paramilitary. For years, Cepeda was also embroiled in a legal battle for accusing former President Alvaro Uribe of connections to right-wing paramilitaries.

Who are the main candidates on the right?

While Cepeda has become the standard-bearer for the left, the political right has had to contend with a more fractured field of candidates.

Running on the far right is Abelardo de la Espriella, a lawyer for the Defenders of the Homeland Party who has generated comparisons with Salvadoran President Salvador Bukele and Argentina’s Javier Milei.

Like those leaders, de la Espriella has offered a hardline vision for his country’s security. If elected, he says he would end negotiations with armed groups, bomb rebel camps, and resume the aerial fumigation of coca ⁠crops, which produce the raw material for cocaine.

Senator Paloma Valencia, a candidate with the Democratic Centre Party, is running as a more moderate alternative to de la Espriella. She too has promised a stricter approach to crime. Her platform involves expanding the police and armed forces, while cutting taxes and promoting pro-business policies in the economic realm.

Their election-season competition has become a source of acrimony for Valencia and de la Espriella, who have accused each other of paving the way for a leftist election victory.

“There is a more familiar, establishment right, represented by Valencia, and a far right in the form of de la Espriella, who pitches himself as an outsider,” said Sanchez.

Valencia, for her part, has criticised de la Espriella as two-faced, defending criminals in his legal practice but advocating for tighter security on the campaign trail.

De la Espriella, meanwhile, has dismissed Valencia as a member of the country’s political establishment and chided her in a social media post, stating that the presidential election is “not for little games”.

What are the polls saying?

Polls generally show Cepeda ahead of his rivals, with de la Espriella in second place and Valencia in third.

A May 24 poll from the National Consulting Centre (CNC) and the publication Cambio suggested that Cepeda had drawn 33.4 percent of voter support, the most of any candidate.

But de la Espriella was on the upswing with 30.9 percent. Valencia, meanwhile, trailed with 12.6 percent.

The same surveys, however, suggest that Cepeda would struggle to win a run-off against either of the two right-wing candidates, with de la Espriella eking out about three points in a head-to-head contest, and Valencia coming within a percentage point of victory.

Undecided voters could play a key role in deciding the outcome, though. An analysis cited by the Spanish paper El Pais estimates that undecided voters could account for as much as 28 percent of the electorate.

Which issues are front and centre?

Concerns over crime, security and economic issues like unemployment and affordability have dominated the election.

In a poll from the firm Invamer, the highest proportion of voters — 37 percent — identified security as the top issue facing the country.

Basic needs and unemployment ranked second and third, with 17 percent and 16 percent, respectively. Eleven percent of voters, meanwhile, named corruption as a leading concern.

The threat of violence has lingered over the presidential campaign over the past year.

Two political staffers with de la Espriella’s campaign were killed by gunmen on motorbikes earlier this month. And in June 2025, presidential candidate Miguel Uribe Turbay was shot while leaving a campaign rally. The 39-year-old died two months later from his injuries.

Political violence is a serious concern in Colombia, and all of the frontrunners in the race travel with heavy security.

Venezuela is becoming increasingly important in Colombia’s presidential election, though not necessarily from a policy perspective. The three leading candidates are not offering radically new approaches toward Caracas. Instead, they broadly accept that Colombia will not shape Venezuela policy in a vacuum, but within a regional framework increasingly defined by Washington.

Even among the Colombian Right, the differences are narrower than the rhetoric sometimes suggests. Some candidates favor preserving parts of the thaw in relations initiated under Gustavo Petro, while others align themselves more openly with the Trump administration’s emerging three-phase approach toward Venezuela, combining pressure, negotiation, and eventual normalization while maintaining support for María Corina Machado and the democratic opposition.

The real competition is happening elsewhere.

As Bogotá increasingly adapts itself to strategic realities designed in Washington, Venezuela has become less a matter of concrete policy and more a source of symbolic legitimacy inside the Colombian Right. The question is no longer simply who has the best Venezuela strategy, but who is most closely aligned with the hemisphere’s most internationally legitimized anti-chavista figure.

Both Paloma Valencia and Abelardo de la Espriella have sought proximity to Machado, likely recognizing her growing political value among Colombian-Venezuelan voters and sectors of the Colombian Right that increasingly view her as a hemispheric democratic symbol after July 28, 2024. Early in the electoral cycle, both candidates publicized meetings with Machado and members of her team, presenting themselves as politically aligned with the Venezuelan opposition’s struggle. Valencia recently traveled to Panama to meet Machado personally, while De la Espriella has repeatedly emphasized his relationship with anti-chavista circles to position himself as part of a broader regional conservative realignment.

Yet the two candidacies embody very different political instincts.

Support from figures close to Machado, Trump-world Republicans, Miami exile networks, and conservative media ecosystems now carries political value extending far beyond Venezuela itself.

Valencia represents a more traditional conservative internationalism tied to institutional anti-chavismo, democratic legitimacy, and Atlanticist conservatism. De la Espriella, meanwhile, has increasingly embraced a far more populist style of politics, openly presenting himself as a Colombian version of Nayib Bukele that promises to build ten CECOT-style mega prisons in Colombia.

That contradiction becomes particularly striking when placed alongside one of the defining professional relationships of De la Espriella’s career: his representation of Alex Saab during the height of the CLAP era. Saab became one of the clearest symbols of late-stage chavismo’s corruption architecture, embodying the opaque financial networks, sanctions arbitrage, and humanitarian corruption that increasingly defined the Maduro era.

The irony of Saab’s former lawyer attempting to embody Colombia’s hardest anti-chavista and anti-corruption posture is difficult to ignore. But the contradiction also reveals something deeper about contemporary Latin American politics, where anti-establishment rhetoric and proximity to opaque power structures are no longer necessarily disqualifying contradictions.

The contradictions are perhaps most visible within parts of the Venezuelan opposition’s own media ecosystem. Some anti-chavista pundits spent years cultivating reputations as uncompromising anti-corruption crusaders, often accusing opposition figures of moral weakness, accommodationism, or hidden financial interests. Their enthusiastic support for Abelardo de la Espriella, despite his long professional relationship with Alex Saab during the height of the CLAP era, suggests that ideological affinity and political aesthetics are increasingly overriding the moral rigidity that once characterized parts of anti-chavista discourse.

Venezuela’s role in the Colombian election is not primarily about foreign policy. It is about political identity.

At the same time, other sectors of Machado’s broader international coalition appear more naturally aligned with Valencia’s institutional conservatism. The result is an increasingly visible fragmentation within the anti-chavista ecosystem itself, one that reflects broader tensions inside the Latin American Right between institutional conservatism, populist maximalism, and Bukele-style punitive politics.

Washington has only reinforced those dynamics. As the US once again becomes the principal external actor shaping Venezuela’s political future, different Colombian candidates increasingly compete to position themselves as the preferred interlocutors of the emerging regional order. Support from figures close to Machado, Trump-world Republicans, Miami exile networks, and conservative media ecosystems now carries political value extending far beyond Venezuela itself.

In that sense, Venezuela’s role in the Colombian election is not primarily about foreign policy. It is about political identity.

And perhaps more importantly, it may also offer a glimpse into the future political terrain of a post-transition Venezuela itself. If chavismo eventually collapses or evolves into some form of negotiated transition, the country will not emerge into a region defined by liberal democratic consensus. It will emerge into a hemisphere shaped by Bukele, Milei, Trumpism, social media maximalism, and deep public exhaustion with traditional political elites.

The rise of figures like De la Espriella suggests that the post-chavista Right may not necessarily resemble the liberal democratic opposition that spent decades fighting chavismo. It may instead reflect a harsher, more punitive, and more performative political culture, one forged not despite the region’s prolonged crises, but because of them.

Voters in Colombia will head to the polls on May 31 for a presidential election. Some of the main concerns for Colombians are healthcare, corruption, and security. Al Jazeera’s Teresa Bo reports from Bogota. 

Caracas, May 15, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – The Venezuelan government expressed “deep concern” on Wednesday over the “escalation of violence” in Colombia’s border region of Catatumbo.

Caracas’ reaction came one day after the Colombian Armed Forces announced the killing of seven combatants from the National Liberation Army (ELN) during a bombing operation that Colombian President Gustavo Petro said was carried out “within the framework of agreements” with Venezuela.

“Venezuela has been taken by surprise by these events and rejects any armed action that jeopardizes peace, stability, and the security of border communities,” Venezuelan Foreign Minister Yván Gil stated in an official communiqué. The statement added that Venezuelan authorities are concerned with “how this new escalation once again impacts the lives of people on both sides of the border,” causing “serious consequences” for local populations.

However, just 24 hours earlier, Petro had stated on social media that the Colombian army and air force carried out the attack against the ELN “within the framework of agreements with Bolivarian Government of Venezuela” led by acting President Delcy Rodríguez.

At the same time, Petro clarified that there is currently no peace process with the ELN, rejecting claims that the guerrilla organization resumed armed operations because of state noncompliance.

“Organizations that continue to seek total or partial control over illicit economies and reject agreements aimed at dismantling those structures are not part of any peace process,” he wrote.

Petro and Rodríguez met in Caracas on April 24, where they pledged to “combat organized crime” along the more than 2,200-kilometer shared border between the two countries. The meeting also resulted in plans for joint military coordination, intelligence-sharing mechanisms, and expanded security cooperation.

Details of the Operation

According to Colombian Armed Forces commander General Hugo López, the operation dealt a “major blow” to a unit of the Luis Enrique León Guerra Front, commanded by the guerrilla leader known as “Sucre,” which was reportedly responsible for providing security to the ELN’s Central Command and National Directorate.

The military stated that seven guerrillas were killed during the bombing operation. Nevertheless, insurgents reportedly abandoned the camps and removed the bodies of those killed, according to local outlet Blu Radio.

Colombian forces also reported discovering fortified camps, explosives, drone-launching devices, and materials used in the fabrication of anti-personnel mines.

The ELN, however, denied suffering casualties. In a video posted on Facebook, the guerrilla organization claimed that the attack “fell flat.”

“They attempted to surprise ELN guerrilla units fighting the 33rd Front, but this time they failed (…) We suffered no casualties as a result of this bombing,” the group stated. “Our forces remained active in responding to enemy aggression and continue to hold territory.”

The 33rd Front is a dissident faction of the former Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). The group joined peace talks with the Colombian government and currently maintains a ceasefire while Temporary Location Zones are established for regrouping under Resolution 161 of May 2026. Nevertheless, it is now facing an escalating conflict with the ELN in border.

The latest attack was the third bombing operation carried out in Colombia in 2026 and the twentieth such military strike under Petro’s administration. Of those, three targeted the ELN, five targeted the Clan del Golfo, and twelve were directed against FARC dissident groups.

Colombia’s armed conflict, which has persisted for more than six decades, has intensified again in 2026 amid growing fragmentation among armed groups competing for territorial control. Despite the 2016 peace agreement between the Colombian government and the FARC, as well as Petro’s ongoing “total peace” initiative, forced displacement and violence against civilians have reached record levels in regions such as Catatumbo and Colombia’s Pacific coast.

The porous and extensive border has also led armed groups such as the ELN to establish a significant presence inside Venezuelan territory, controlling territories and with documented involvement in drug trafficking and mining activities.

Venezuela on different occasions attempted to facilitate peace negotiations in the Colombian conflict. Caracas hosted dialogue rounds between the Petro government and the ELN before talks broke down.

Edited by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.

DAKAR, Senegal — It’s an existence that Congo’s president has described as “living the Congolese dream.” For the 15 Latin Americans deported to the African nation under the Trump administration’s widely criticized crackdown on migrants, it feels more like a nightmare.

The Associated Press spoke with one, a 29-year old Colombian woman who confirmed what people deported to other African nations have described: A shackled deportation despite a U.S. immigration judge’s protection order. Confinement in a hotel with supervised outings.

And an impossible choice: Return to a home country with the risk of persecution or stay in Congo, a country the Colombian woman had never heard of before she arrived.

“They treat us like we’re children,” she said as their three-month Congolese visas near an end, with no plan in sight.

“What would one do in a completely unknown place, without a place to live and without knowing what to do?” she added, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals.

It was not immediately clear what a new U.S. court ruling, saying the U.S. likely broke the law by deporting a fellow Colombian to Congo, will mean for her.

A United Nations-affiliated group plays a central role

In her interview from the hotel in Congo’s capital, Kinshasa, where she and other deportees are held, the woman gave new details about the central role that a United Nations-affiliated body, the International Organization for Migration, is playing.

She said deportees are allowed to leave the hotel about once a week and only accompanied by IOM staff. When they shop at a supermarket or withdraw money they are quickly ushered back to their vehicle, with IOM staff never out of sight.

“They choose where we go and what we buy,” she said.

At the hotel, she said, IOM staff have organized activities like painting, music and volleyball but many deportees have stopped participating, bored with the routine. She goes for meals and remains in her room otherwise, making late-night calls to her 10-year-old daughter in Colombia and worrying when she will see her again.

Most striking is the role IOM staff are playing in presenting deportees with their possible fates.

They have offered the woman two paths: Return to Colombia, where a U.S. judge has ruled she cannot safely be sent back, while receiving IOM “protection and assistance,” or remain in Congo with no support.

“They are given impossible choices,” said Alma David, the woman’s U.S.-based attorney. “By deporting them to a third country with no opportunity to contest being sent there, the U.S. not only violated their due process rights but our own immigration laws and our obligations under international treaties.”

Congo is one of at least eight African countries that have made deals with the Trump administration to facilitate deportations of third-country nationals, which legal experts say are effectively a legal loophole for the U.S. Most deportees had received legal orders of protection from U.S. judges shielding them against being returned to their home countries, lawyers said.

The AP has interviewed others sent to African nations who were forced to make risky decisions, such as a gay Moroccan asylum-seeker deported to Cameroon, a country where homosexuality is illegal.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security did not respond to questions about the Colombian woman’s case, but it has asserted that third-country deportation agreements “ensure due process under the U.S. Constitution.” The Trump administration says the agreements are needed to “remove criminal illegal aliens” whose country of origin will not take them back.

Details of Congo’s deal with U.S. are unclear

The details of Congo’s deal with the Trump administration are not clear. Other countries have received millions of dollars to participate.

Earlier this month, Congolese President Félix Tshisekedi called the agreement an “act of goodwill between partners,” with no financial compensation. It comes as Washington has ramped up pressure on neighboring Rwanda over its support for the M23 rebel group that has seized cities in eastern Congo — a dynamic some analysts say may explain Kinshasa’s willingness to take deportees.

“We agreed to do so as a friendly gesture, simply because it was what the Americans wanted,” Tshisekedi said, adding that the migrants are free to leave Congo at any time.

“We understand that psychologically they must be unsettled because, at first, they dreamed of living the American dream, and now they are living the Congolese dream — in a country they probably did not know and may never even have noticed on a map of the world,” Tshisekedi said.

Congolese human rights groups have called it a violation of international refugee law. The Congo-based Institute for Human Rights Research described the situation as “arbitrary detention by proxy for the United States.”

The current U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement policy says if a government has made blanket diplomatic assurances that it won’t persecute people who are deported, no further process is required for deportation, not even giving deportees notice where they are being sent, said David, the attorney.

“When they told me they were going to deport me, I almost fainted,” the Colombian woman said. She was told about Congo the day before the flight.

She was detained at a routine check-in with ICE

She said she left Colombia in 2024, following threats from armed groups and abuse by a former partner who worked for the government.

She went to Mexico, where she waited for a border appointment booked with the U.S. government. When she presented herself at an Arizona port of entry in September 2024, immigration officials determined she had a credible fear of persecution, clearing her to apply for asylum, but kept her in ICE detention.

“You spend a year and a half locked up, living the same day over and over again. You see fights, punishments where people are locked in cells for many hours. You lose your privacy even to use the bathroom,” she said.

Some officers made racist remarks. “They made derogatory comments toward us as migrants, shouted at us all the time and sometimes denied basic things like showers as punishment,” she said.

In May 2025, a federal judge granted her protection under the U.N. Convention Against Torture, ruling she could not be safely returned to Colombia, according to court documents seen by the AP.

She filed a habeas corpus petition and won her release in February. She moved to Texas and was required to wear a GPS monitoring device, but at her first check-in appointment with ICE, she was detained again.

“All they told me was that I was under detention, as they had found a third country for me,” she said.

Less than three weeks later, she was put on a plane to Congo. She and the other deportees arrived on April 17 after a nearly 24-hour charter flight during which their hands and feet were restrained.

She doesn’t feel safe in Congo

Now they stay at a hotel near Kinshasa’s airport, in tidy white bungalows. Congo’s government covers the cost, the IOM said. It was not clear whether that would last after the deportees’ visas run out.

The hotel gates are locked according to one of the deportees lawyers. The Colombian woman also said security personnel do not let them leave on their own.

They were told they could apply for asylum, an option no one has chosen. “I don’t feel safe in Congo,” the woman said.

An IOM spokesperson said the organization has provided her with humanitarian assistance based on an assessment of her vulnerability. It includes “protection interventions, referrals, rights safeguarding and promotion of migrants’ overall well-being,” with no details.

The IOM also may offer “assisted voluntary return” — covering documents, flights, transit and temporary housing on arrival — with migrants’ consent.

The IOM said it plays no role in determining who is deported and reserves the right to withdraw its assistance for deportees if “minimum protection standards” aren’t met.

The Colombian woman remains in limbo, anxious. She said the food “has made us very sick,” with stomach ailments ongoing.

Local languages, like French and Lingala, are as foreign as her surroundings.

“The worst part is having to go through all of that without having committed any crime, simply for going to another country to ask for safety and protection.”

Banchereau writes for the Associated Press.

With snow-capped peaks tumbling towards the turquoise waters of the Caribbean, the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta National Park is one of the jewels in Colombia’s tourism crown.

But behind the picture-postcard views lies a more sinister reality.

Armed groups are holding local businesses to ransom and terrorising Indigenous communities.

The signing of a 2016 peace deal between the Colombian state and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) ended more than half a century of war and helped propel a country long associated with druglords and rebels onto the global tourism stage.

Since then, thousands of visitors have poured into the Sierra Nevada each day, trekking through pristine jungle to white-sand beaches or climbing towards Colombia’s mountaintop Lost City, which predates Peru’s Machu Picchu.

Few notice the men in camouflage watching from a distance.

They are members of the Self-Defence Forces of the Sierra Nevada (ACSN), a group of former paramilitaries that controls cocaine trafficking routes in the region and is also involved in illegal gold mining.

Extortion has become another lucrative business for the group. The “Conquistadores”, as ACSN members are often called, demand a cut of the earnings of hotels, tour bus companies and Indigenous communities, whose hand-woven hammocks and bags are snapped up by visitors.

“We are afraid and anxious about the future,” said Atanasio Moscote, the governor of the Kogui Indigenous people, who live high up in the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta National Park, which the Kogui consider “the heart of the world”.

In February, the government closed Tayrona National Park, a UNESCO World Heritage Site overlooking the Caribbean, for more than two weeks following threats against park rangers, allegedly issued by the ACSN.

Authorities have accused the group of pressuring Indigenous Wayuu residents in the park to resist a crackdown on illegal activities such as logging.

Together, Tayrona and the Sierra Nevada national parks received more than 873,000 visitors last year.

The influx of tourists marks a dramatic shift from the 1980s and 90s, when the region was a battleground for brutal clashes between paramilitaries and FARC rebels.

Ten years after FARC laid down its arms, the ACSN – founded by a paramilitary leader who was later extradited to the United States – holds sway in much of the area.

In recent months, Colombia’s biggest drug cartel, the Gulf Clan, has tried to muscle in, vying for control and prompting clashes with the ACSN.

Caught in the middle are Indigenous communities “who don’t speak Spanish, and who live off their crops and their traditional knowledge”, said Luis Salcedo, governor of the Arhuaco people, who also live in the Sierra Nevada.

Gustavo Petro, Colombia’s first left-wing president in modern history, included the ACSN in his bid to negotiate the disarmament of all armed groups in the country.

But four years after he launched his “Paz Total” (total peace) campaign, the ACSN still dominates the Santa Marta area, said researcher Norma Vera.

Extortion has now emerged as a key issue in the campaign to elect Petro’s successor in polls starting on May 31.

The Ministry of Defence says it has received more than 46,000 extortion complaints since 2022.

Omar Garcia, president of the hotel association in the coastal city of Santa Marta, a gateway to the Sierra Nevada, said he fears for Colombia’s fragile tourism boom.

“Any news affecting the image [of a destination] and visitor safety makes tourists think twice,” he said.

May 4 (UPI) — At least three people were killed and more than 38 others were injured during a monster truck show in the city of Popayán, southwestern Colombia, after one of the vehicles lost control and struck part of the audience, local authorities reported.

According to footage shared on social media and reports from Colombian outlets such as El Tiempo, the vehicle veered off the track following a maneuver, knocked down metal safety barriers and crashed into spectators.

Popayán Mayor Juan Carlos Muñoz confirmed the preliminary toll in a message posted on X.

“We deeply regret the accident …)which has, preliminarily, left more than 38 people injured and 3 dead,” he said.

Among those killed was reportedly a minor, according to local press reports. Several of the injured were also believed to be children.

Colonel Julián Castañeda, commander of the Popayán police, told El Tiempo that the crash was likely caused by a mechanical failure.

“It was a private event. There was a mechanical failure, it left the track. The vehicle accelerated, it could not be stopped,” he said. He added that the driver of the truck was injured but is in stable condition.

Local media identified the driver as Sonia Dilma Segura, who is reportedly the only woman in Latin America authorized to operate this type of vehicle.

Cauca Gov. Octavio Guzmán expressed condolences and said the injured were taken to public hospitals in the city. “We deeply regret the accident,” he said on X.

A local official cited by Colombian media said the event had the required permits, including liability insurance, and that the organizing company had experience in this type of show.

Distraught onlookers caught the moment a monster truck lost control at a car show and plowed into spectators in Colombia, killing at least three people, including a 10-year-old girl. Around 40 people were injured.

In this episode of Reframe, Varsha Gandikota-Nellutla, general coordinator of Progressive International, speaks with former Colombian Environment Minister Susana Muhamad about how Latin America should respond to the age of United States President Donald Trump. Muhamad argues that challenging a long history of imperial dominance begins with reclaiming sovereignty, particularly over natural resources like minerals and oil.

Muhamad is a Colombian politician and environmentalist who served as the minister of environment and sustainable development from 2022 to 2025.

Colombia’s President Gustavo Petro has blamed a ‘narco-terrorist group’ led by a former FARC fighter for the attack.

The death toll from a deadly highway bombing in southwestern Colombia has risen to at least 20, the governor of the Cauca region has said.

Governor Octavio Guzman said on Monday that the death toll included 15 women and five men.

There were also 36 people injured, including three who remained in intensive care as of Monday and “five minors who are out of danger”, Guzman said in an update shared on social media.

Some media reports put the death toll from the lethal explosion, near a tunnel on the Pan-American Highway, at 21 as of late on Monday.

A dozen of the victims were from a village near the town of Cajibio, where hundreds of mourners held a vigil on Monday.

The mourners were dressed in white and waved white sheets or balloons as a sign of peace.

“Please, no more death, no more violence,” Joao Valencia, 42, a relative of a woman killed in the attack, told the AFP news agency, holding up her picture.

“These kinds of women should die of old age, not have their lives taken from them in such a tragic way,” he added.

The bombing was one of the deadliest attacks in Colombia since the now-defunct Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) blew up a Bogota nightclub in 2003, killing 36 people.

Colombia’s President Gustavo Petro said a “narco-terrorist group” was responsible for the attack, specifically naming a group led by Nestor Vera, commonly known as Ivan Mordisco, one of Colombia’s most wanted men.

Mordisco is a dissident former member of FARC, which signed a landmark peace agreement with the government in 2016.

The attack comes just more than a month before national elections, in which voters will pick a successor to President Gustavo Petro.

Security is one of the central issues of the May 31 presidential election, with a suspect recently arrested in the assassination of young conservative presidential hopeful Miguel Uribe Turbay last June.

A highway bomb attack in southwestern Colombia has killed 19 people and injured at least 38, the latest spate of violence ahead of next month’s presidential election.

Buses and vans were left mangled in the blast Saturday on the Pan-American Highway, in the restive southwestern Cauca department.

Several cars were flipped over by the force of the explosion and a large crater was blown out of the roadway.

The department’s governor on Saturday evening provided a death toll of 14, with more than 38 injured, but the National Institute of Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences said Sunday morning it had begun the examination of 19 bodies.

Military chief Hugo Lopez told a news conference on Saturday that the bomb had exploded after assailants stopped traffic by blocking the road with a bus and another vehicle.

The attack comes just over one month ahead of national elections, in which voters will pick a successor to President Gustavo Petro.

Petro blamed the bombing on Ivan Mordisco, the South American country’s most-wanted criminal, whom the president has compared to late cocaine kingpin Pablo Escobar.

The violence came after a bomb attack on Friday on a military base in Cali, Colombia’s third-largest city, injured two people and set off a string of attacks in the Valle del Cauca and Cauca departments.

According to Lopez, 26 attacks have been recorded in the two departments over the past two days.

Authorities have boosted military and police presence in the areas, Defence Minister Pedro Sanchez said.

Security is one of the central issues of the May 31 presidential election. Political violence was brought into sharp focus last June, when young conservative presidential frontrunner Miguel Uribe Turbay was shot in broad daylight while campaigning in the capital Bogota and later died from his wounds.

Leftist Senator Ivan Cepeda, an architect of Petro’s controversial policy of negotiating with armed groups, is ahead in polls.

He is trailed by right-wing candidates Abelardo de la Espriella and Paloma Valencia, both of whom have pledged to take a hard line against rebel groups.

All three have reported receiving death threats and are campaigning under heavy security.

Authorities in Cauca region demand ‘decisive’ government action after deadly explosion on Pan-American Highway.

At least seven people were killed, and 20 were wounded following a suspected explosive attack in the southwestern province of Cauca, Colombia, according to regional authorities.

Governor Octavio Guzman said that an explosive was detonated on the Pan-American Highway in the El Tunel sector of Cajibio on Saturday. He condemned what he called an “indiscriminate attack” against the civilian population.

“There are not sufficient words for the pain we feel,” Guzman said in a social media post, demanding a “decisive, sustained” response from the government against the “terrorist escalation”.

A video shared by the governor appeared to show the aftermath of the bombing, with ambulances on site and mangled vehicles and debris covering the road.

“Cauca cannot continue facing this barbarity alone,” he added, stating that other actions had also been carried out in El Tambo, Caloto, Popayan, Guachene, Mercaderes, and Miranda.

The deadly incident comes after a series of attacks on Friday, attributed to criminal groups formed by dissident members of the FARC rebel group, who split with the group following a landmark peace agreement with the government in 2016.

On Saturday, Minister of Defence Pedro Sanchez was convening a security council in Cali to assess the regional security situation when the latest attack occurred.

President Gustavo Petro responded to the deadly explosion by saying that powerful criminal groups are seeking to control the population through fear.

While details of the attack are still emerging, Petro appeared to blame a drug trafficker and FARC dissident leader known by the alias Ivan Mordisco.

“I want the maximum worldwide pursuit against this narco-terrorist group,” Petro said.

First all-women cohort of winners hails from Colombia, Nigeria, Papua New Guinea, South Korea, the UK and the US.

This year’s prestigious Goldman Environmental Prize has been awarded to six grassroots environmental activists from around the world for their efforts to fight climate change and save biodiversity.

For the first time since the prize was created in 1989 by philanthropists Richard and Rhoda Goldman, all recipients of the award are women: Iroro Tanshi, from Nigeria; Borim Kim, from South Korea; Sarah Finch, from the United Kingdom; Theonila Roka Matbob, from Papua New Guinea; Alannah Acaq Hurley, from the United States; and Yuvelis Morales Blanco, from Colombia.

Sometimes described as the “Green Nobel”, the Goldman Prize recipients are chosen from each of the world’s six primary regions. They each receive $200,000 in prize money.

“While we continue to fight uphill to protect the environment and implement lifesaving climate policies – in the US and globally – it is clear that true leaders can be found all around us,” said John Goldman, vice president of the Goldman Environmental Foundation.

“The 2026 Prize winners are proof positive that courage, hard work, and hope go a long way toward creating meaningful progress.”

Morales Blanco, the winner for the region of South and Central America, fought some of the world’s biggest oil companies to successfully stop the introduction of commercial fracking into Colombia.

The 24-year-old grew up in a family of fishermen along the banks of the Magdalena River in the Afro-Colombian community of Puerto Wilches. “We had nothing but the river – she was like a mother who took care of me,” she said.

She began organising protests after a major oil spill in 2018, which forced the relocation of dozens of local families and killed thousands of animals. Her activism, which made her a target for intimidation and forced her to temporarily relocate, helped halt projects and elevate fracking as an issue in Colombia’s 2022 election.

Two of the other five recipients of this year’s prize have also focused their efforts on fighting fossil fuels, which are causing both global climate change and more localised pollution around the world.

Borim, the winner for Asia who started the Youth 4 Climate Action organisation, won a ruling from South Korea’s Constitutional Court that the government’s climate policy violated the constitutional rights of future generations, the first successful youth-led climate litigation in the continent.

Finch, Europe’s winner, told The Times newspaper she will use her prize money to keep fighting fossil fuels.

Together with the Weald Action Group, she fought oil drilling in southeastern England for more than a decade, securing the “Finch ruling” from the Supreme Court in June 2024, stating that authorities must consider fossil fuels’ impacts on the global climate before granting permission to extract them.

Two other recipients have fought against the destructive environmental impact of mining projects.

Papua New Guinea’s Roka Matbob, winner for Islands and Island Nations, led a successful campaign that saw the world’s second-largest mining company, Rio Tinto, agree to address environmental and social devastation caused by its Panguna copper mine, 35 years after it was closed following an uprising.

And the award recipient for North America, Acaq Hurley, from the Yup’ik nation in the US, successfully fought alongside 15 tribal nations to stop a mega- copper and gold mining project that threatened ecosystems in Alaska’s Bristol Bay region, including the largest wild salmon runs in the world.

Meanwhile, Nigeria’s Tanshi, Africa’s winner, rediscovered the endangered short-tailed roundleaf bat and has been working to save its refuge, the Afi Mountain Wildlife Sanctuary, from human-induced wildfires.