Kidnappings and conservatives who defend minimum wage rises: Unpredictability defines the campaign in Colombia
The short-lived but high-impact abduction of a senator is just one of the daily events that are shaking up ‘the most open election in years’
A kidnapping on a mountainous road in southwestern Colombia on Tuesday served as a stark reminder that in this country, no one is truly safe. The victims were the Indigenous Senator Aida Quilcué and her security detail. A group of armed men intercepted their vehicle and made them disappear for hours. All levels of law enforcement were sent out to find them, and they re-emerged alive. But the message had been delivered. If a senator with bodyguards can be erased from the map, even for just a few hours, what hope is there for those without a well-known name or protection?
It happened right in the middle of the campaign. There’s less than a month to go before the legislative elections on March 8, and three months until the first round of the presidential election. It’s not an isolated incident. Last week, guerrillas, their faces uncovered, machine-gunned the vehicle of another senator’s security detail. They killed them while one of them filmed it. It turned out the victims had run through a guerrilla checkpoint; there wasn’t even a plan against the candidate per se, but it was a reminder that armed groups control a large part of the country. This same week, someone set fire to billboards for Juan Carlos Pinzón, one of the right-wing presidential candidates.
The data confirms this feeling. With the elections approaching, 170 of the country’s 1,100 municipalities present some level of risk, according to the Electoral Observation Mission. In 81 of them, including the capital, Bogotá, the risk is extreme. Armed control of the territory. Targeted violence against leaders, journalists and candidates. Open confrontations. Humanitarian crises that, in practice, exclude entire populations from the democratic process.
“Insecurity is no longer just about armed conflict. It’s cell phone theft, extortion, the feeling that no one is accountable. For an informal worker, losing their phone means going from poverty to destitution,” explains the analyst Miguel Silva. This daily experience has generated a “thirst for order” in all Colombians, regardless of social class. A kind of “Bukelization” of the public debate — after Nayib Bukele of El Salvador — is pushing votes toward whoever promises to bring immediate control.
In a country still scarred by last summer’s assassination of senator and presidential hopeful Miguel Uribe Turbay, the fear is that violence will escalate. And with it, that fear will dominate public discourse and that debate will narrow. And in that arena, the governing left, which is divided, starts at a disadvantage.
The right is on more familiar ground here: more police, fewer concessions, no negotiations. Prison. Law and order. Bombings. Millions of Colombians feel vulnerable, and the promise of a hardline approach is an easy message to understand and difficult to dismantle during a campaign. The left, on the other hand, comes to the elections burdened by two obstacles. First, the erosion of support for Gustavo Petro’s government, which has been unable to regain territory from armed groups or demonstrate clear progress in its peace policy. And, perhaps worse, its internal division.
Violence has permeated the debate this week, but it has barely caused a stir. What has truly shaken things up is the impact on people’s wallets. The real shock that has shaken the campaign climate came this Friday with the State Council’s decision to temporarily suspend the nearly 24% minimum wage increase decreed by Petro in December. The conversation quickly shifted to the workers. “In real terms, the suspension affects two million people, but it has a very strong impact on the narrative,” explains political scientist Gonzalo Araujo, from the Orza think tank. “It will be a dissonant element,” he asserts.
The decision, far from weakening the ruling party, has served to mobilize the left, which has found a new enemy. The right — critical of the historic increase in the minimum wage — surprised everyone by asking business leaders to maintain the increase no matter what. They also promised to lower taxes to make up for it.
In an already unpredictable campaign, each episode reshapes the debate and forces a reassessment of positions. Violence, judicial decisions, alleged betrayals, sabotage, and electoral calculations coexist in a scenario that shifts focus every week. In Colombia, often, every day.
March 8, the day of the parliamentary and senatorial elections, will be a decisive day for gauging the true balance of power. Three major inter-party primaries will also be held that day to determine the presidential candidates.
From there, three names will emerge — one from the left, one from the center, and one from the right — but they won’t be the only ones. Another 12 will reach the first round on their own, among those best positioned in the polls: the far-right Abelardo de la Espriella, who is a Colombian version of Bukele; the leftist Iván Cepeda, until recently considered Petro’s natural choice; and Sergio Fajardo, the mathematician who is trying for the third time to carve out a centrist space away from the extremes.
On the right, the script seems more orderly. Everything points to a primary win by Paloma Valencia, backed by former president Álvaro Uribe, with the rest closing ranks afterward. On the left, however, a war has broken out. Just over a week ago, the National Electoral Council prevented Iván Cepeda, the only candidate capable of defeating the far right according to the polls, from competing in the left’s primary. The decision doesn’t bar him from participating in the first round—he’ll run separately—but it has altered the initial plan and unleashed a battle of loyalties. Cepeda also loses the symbolic power of a primary victory and will suffer from a divided progressive movement. The winner of that primary will predictably be Roy Barreras.
Iván Cepeda and Roy Barreras are two figures with opposing trajectories and styles who have become political enemies. Cepeda, a senator and historical figurehead of the left, represents ideological consistency, the unwavering defense of the peace and human rights project that brought Petro to power. He is more radical and less charismatic, but so far he enjoys enormous popular appeal, fueled by some of the president’s decisions, such as the minimum wage increase, now in limbo. Barreras, former president of the Senate, is the operator, the strategist, the man who secured the support for Petro’s victory and the passage of key reforms. In recent weeks, he has been promoting himself as the president’s chosen candidate. More pragmatic, Barreras is less concerned with compromising the core principles of the left.
The outcome of the election is unpredictable. Unlike a couple of months ago, when the odds were clearer, now no one dares to bet on who will win. With the left divided, the right is gaining ground, but millions of Colombians still don’t know who they will vote for. “It’s the most open election in years,” says analyst Silva. Polls indicate 11% of voters are undecided. But that figure is misleading. “The truly volatile vote could be between 30% and 40%,” he explains. “There’s an electorate that says one thing today and might say another tomorrow. People aren’t just undecided. They’re available,” he asserts. Available to shift if the political climate changes, if a candidate gains traction in the March primaries, or if violence or any other scandal disrupts the narrative.
Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition