Why is Colombia’s election focused on ‘total peace’?

Because rising violence has put the government’s peace strategy under intense scrutiny, turning the campaign into a debate over how to handle guerrilla attacks and unfinished negotiations.

What did the 2016 peace deal achieve?

The agreement led the Farc to disarm and helped reduce violence substantially, but it did not end the wider conflict or win over every armed faction.

Why did violence continue after the peace accord?

Reports indicate that Farc dissidents and other rebel groups rejected the settlement, while later administrations did not fully implement key parts of the agreement.

Colombia Election Tests ‘Total Peace’ as Violence Climbs

Colombia’s next election has turned into a referendum on peace itself. As violence rises again, the promise to end decades of conflict faces its hardest test yet.

Colombia’s election campaign now turns on a brutal question: can the country still deliver peace as violence surges back into view?

Four years after the president pledged “total peace,” the political argument has sharpened around a stubborn reality. The 2016 accord with the Farc, once hailed as a historic breakthrough, did cut bloodshed and pushed the largest insurgent force in Latin America to disarm. But the deal never reached every battlefield, and it never persuaded every armed group. Reports indicate that dissident factions and other rebels kept fighting, while later governments failed to fully carry out key parts of the settlement.

The election has become a test not just of one promise, but of whether Colombia can turn a partial peace into a lasting one.

That gap between promise and execution now defines the national debate. Would-be successors appear divided over how to confront renewed guerrilla attacks and what to do with a peace strategy that has produced mixed results. One side sees negotiation as unfinished business that needs stronger follow-through. Another signals a tougher security response as frustration grows over worsening violence. Either way, the campaign reflects a country weighing whether the problem lies in the idea of “total peace” or in the state’s failure to make earlier commitments stick.

Key Facts

The 2016 peace deal led the Farc to lay down its weapons and reduced violence significantly.
Farc dissidents and other rebel groups rejected the settlement and continued fighting.
Subsequent administrations slow-walked implementation of the peace accord.
Rising guerrilla attacks have pushed security and peace to the center of the election.

The stakes reach far beyond campaign rhetoric. Colombia’s conflict has never hinged on a single agreement alone; it has depended on whether the state can extend authority, protect communities, and honor the terms it signs. Sources suggest that voters now face a choice between competing theories of how to restore control: deepen negotiations despite setbacks, or pivot toward force in hopes of regaining the initiative. Neither path offers an easy reset after years of fragmented violence.

What happens next will shape more than one presidency. The next government will inherit an unfinished peace process, armed groups that still see opportunity, and a public that wants security without surrendering the gains of 2016. That makes this election a defining moment: not a verdict on whether peace matters, but on how Colombia intends to fight for it now.

Colombia Election Tests ‘Total Peace’ as Violence Climbs

Key Facts

Frequently Asked Questions