A DELEGATION of trade unionists organised and led by Justice for Colombia (JFC) travelled to Colombia to hear from a wide range of groups about their hopes and fears for the 2026 presidential and congressional elections and how the 2016 peace agreement is faring.

The JFC delegation from the TUC, NASUWT, Forsa, Aslef, POA, PCS, Unison, Thompsons Solicitors and the FBU heard from ex-Farc combatants, peasant and indigenous groups, human rights lawyers, the British and Irish embassies, sectorial trade unions, politicians of the governing Historic Pact, the Comunes political party of former guerillas, and the Social Movement for Peace — to name a few.

Presidential elections are to be held in Colombia on May 31 2026. Incumbent President Gustavo Petro, elected in 2022, is constitutionally barred from standing again, despite his popularity. Petro is the first left-wing president in Colombia’s 200-year history. Petro is well know for his labour reforms, his online disagreements with President Trump and for his strong stance on Palestine.

Recent conflicts in Colombia began after the assassination of presidential candidate Jorge Eliecer Gaitan on April 9 1948. Gaitan was a populist leader who championed the rights of the working class and rural poor against the established oligarchy, and he had promised land reform to benefit peasants. After his killing, protests erupted across Colombia and the oligarchy cracked down hard, with help from paramilitary groups. The period 1948 to 1958 became known as La Violencia and it was only brought to an end by a deal between Liberals and Conservatives to alternate in power.

The turmoil, following the assassination, saw the creation of peasant self-defence groups aligned mainly to the liberal or communist parties. In 1959 the Cuban revolution inspired further Marxist insurgencies to fight for land redistribution and socialism. The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Farc) guerilla group was formed in 1964 by peasant leader Manuel Marulanda Velez. Many other armed groups followed, including the ELN (National Liberation Army) set up the same year.

The internal armed conflict in Colombia continued for decades. According to the recent Truth Commission report it is estimated that up to 500,000 Colombians died in the fighting, were assassinated or disappeared. The army murdered at least 6,402 innocent civilians during 2002-08 to boost war figures as part of the “False Positives” scandal — the killing of civilians by army or state forces who then presented them as guerilla combatants to evidence their success. Land inequality was one of the key drivers of conflict, with 65 per cent of land in the hands of less than 1 per cent of landowners — which is the case even today.

While the brunt of the conflict was borne by the masses, the ongoing conflict also had its costs for the elite, part of which decided to make a push on peace. Between 2011 and 2016 the Juan Manuel Santos government negotiated with the Farc to bring the long-running conflict to an end. The agreement was eventually signed in 2016, with six main points designed to tackle the root causes of the conflict and enable the modernisation of Colombian society.

Multiple failings in implementation of the Farc peace deal during the 2018-22 government of far-right president Ivan Duque led to the proliferation and expansion of armed groups. Currently there are eight different conflicts underway in Colombia, involving a plethora of armed groups. Since the signing of the 2016 peace agreement, pre-existing and new armed groups have continued to compete with one another and with state forces to control territory, resources and illicit economies. In response to this situation, the Petro government announced the “Total Peace” (Paz Total) policy, promoting dialogue as the means to reach lasting peace agreements with these groups. The concept of “Total Peace” rejects the attempts to resolve conflicts one by one, since they are all related by structural causes that affect armed groups, whether they are overtly political or not. There are currently multiple dialogues taking place, but it remains a much-criticised policy as it has yet to lead to any major agreement with the main armed groups. While some argue that there is no alternative to militarisation, some of the groups we spoke to talked of the need to build a grassroots movement for peace in the conflict regions, one which would bring together the communities and articulate a common vision.

Colombia’s political situation is made more difficult by the growing hostility of the United States. Trump tweeted an extraordinary set of accusations against President Petro on October 19, accusing him of doing nothing to stop drugs trafficking and threatening dire consequences, despite Colombia’s record captures of cocaine this year. He subsequently confirmed that he would impose tariffs on Colombia, which could deal a serious blow to the Colombian economy given that the US is by far its biggest export market.

The US has deployed forces near to Venezuela and has promised funds to undermine the government there, as well as in Nicaragua and Cuba, under September’s “America First” legislation. Colombia faces an election next year and Trump’s threats of tariffs seem to be aimed at creating instability and undermining the Petro government’s economic record at a crucial time, using drugs policy as a justification.

There is no doubt an ideological element to Trump’s hostility. Petro’s government has made significant progress in relation to labour reform, with unions telling us that it was the first worker-friendly labour reform in recent history, that it regulated the length of the working week, provided for overtime pay, and other measures that would benefit workers across the country, while also noting that the political balance of power in Congress meant that other measures to strengthen unions had not been pushed through. As Central Union of Workers president Fabio Arias said: “We have a government we can be proud of, that is fulfilling its promises to us, within the correlation of forces.”

We also spoke to many people living in conflict areas, and it is clear that the security of former guerilla combatants remains a huge issue, with almost 500 killed since 2016. More must be done on this, as government representatives admitted to us. But we also heard of government efforts to improve security, about transfers of land to peasants, about the formalisation of their title to lands, of government efforts to reduce inequality, and crucially, of their efforts to “build convergence on the different points of the peace agreement implementation” so as to deal with legacy issues and past mistakes. They made it clear to us that an immense financial effort has been going into implementing peace, with 34 billion pesos spent on it in three years (compared with 14 billion over the previous government). Whatever failings implementation may have, this government is the one that has done the most to bring implementation up to speed.

The government has also pushed through a pensions reform (currently only one in four workers qualify for a pension), healthcare reform, education reform, and new policies on the environment and foreign policy (on May 2 2024, Petro broke diplomatic relations with Israel). However, many of the reforms are being stalled in the courts by a recalcitrant right wing.

Colombia’s landed elites, the multinational corporations stealing Colombia’s mineral and environmental wealth and the hard-right politicians, want a return to the old days, the days when their entrenched privilege and wealth continued the self-perpetuating cycle of inequality in Colombia.

We should all have a sharp interest in next year’s elections. A hard-right government currently stating “security” as its main election pledge will undoubtably reverse many of President Petro’s social policies and return to military “solutions” to social conflict, creating more victims and destabilising Colombia. 

In Colombia military intervention over dialogue is proven not to work, the peace agreement for most Colombians remains a symbol of hope over bitter experience. Moreover, there are fears that the far right would lend Colombian territory for military action against Venezuela, which would have profound and unpredictable consequences for Colombia and the region more broadly. Under President Petro Colombia has taken important steps towards the implementation of peace, and the reforms needed to bring it into the modern era, let us hope the next government continues this work.

Mark Rowe is national officer at the FBU.