Ghost of far-right paramilitaries hovers over Colombia’s presidential runoff vote

Ghost of Far-Right Paramilitaries Hovers Over Colombia’s Presidential Runoff Vote

Ghost of far right paramilitaries hovers - As Colombia prepares for its presidential runoff election on Sunday, the next leader will face the enduring shadow of paramilitary groups that played a central role in the nation’s decades-long armed conflict, which has claimed nearly half a million lives. The personal journeys of Iván Cepeda and Abelardo de la Espriella, the two remaining candidates, are deeply connected to these criminal forces. While Cepeda, a leftwing senator, has spent his career exposing paramilitary atrocities, de la Espriella, a far-right advocate of Donald Trump, has built his legal reputation defending paramilitary leaders. The outcome of this election, set to take effect on 7 August, will determine whether Colombia continues down the path of peace or embraces a more militaristic approach to tackling crime.

A Legacy of Conflict and Crime

Paramilitary groups in Colombia were initially formed as private armies by rightwing landowners, drug traffickers, businessmen, mining magnates, and politicians to combat leftwing guerrilla organizations. Over time, these forces evolved into powerful entities that extended their reach beyond the battlefield, influencing politics and perpetrating widespread violence. The candidates’ histories reflect this legacy, with de la Espriella’s career rooted in legal advocacy for paramilitary figures and Cepeda’s driven by his father’s assassination by army officers linked to such groups.

“At its peak, these groups had more than 30,000 members. It was an enormous army spread throughout the country,” said Gustavo Duncan, a prominent scholar of paramilitary history in Colombia.

The paramilitary forces, known as the United Self-Defence Forces of Colombia (AUC), once operated with the tacit support of the military. By the 1990s, they had become infamous for orchestrating massacres—systematic attacks designed to instill fear and silence opposition. María Teresa Ronderos, a journalist who investigated these groups extensively, described their methods: “Their fighters would enter towns and rural communities, killing anyone suspected of supporting or aiding the guerrillas, including peasants, Indigenous people, and Afro-Colombians.”

From Drug Trafficking to Social Cleansing

As the cocaine trade became a cornerstone of the conflict in the 1980s, paramilitary groups also protected trafficking routes and drug lords like Pablo Escobar. This era saw the emergence of a new dynamic, where paramilitaries played a dual role in both combat and economic control. One faction even turned against Escobar, contributing to his downfall and seizing the power vacuum to expand their influence.

These groups not only engaged in direct violence but also implemented what they termed “social cleansing.” Targeting individuals deemed undesirable by their far-right ideology, they eliminated LGBTQ+ individuals, sex workers, homeless people, and drug users. The tactics were brutal, ranging from torture and rape to dismemberment with chainsaws and decapitations using axes. Such methods left an indelible mark on Colombian society, with victims often left without recourse.

“Massacres frequently involved extreme forms of torture, including rape followed by murder, dismemberment of victims with chainsaws while they were still alive, and decapitations carried out with axes,” Ronderos noted.

One of the most poignant examples of paramilitary violence occurred in 1994 when they and army members executed Senator Manuel Cepeda, a key figure in the Communist Patriotic Union party. His son, Iván Cepeda, later discovered his father’s car, bullet-riddled and abandoned in a rural area. This personal tragedy fueled Cepeda’s commitment to human rights, leading him to found a movement that represents victims of paramilitary death squads and investigates their crimes.

The AUC’s Demobilization and the Gulf Clan’s Rise

Though the AUC has since disarmed, its influence persists through the Gulf Clan, widely considered Colombia’s largest and most formidable illegal armed group. Established by former AUC members, the Gulf Clan inherited much of the former paramilitary organization’s territory and drug trafficking networks. Their continued dominance underscores the deep entrenchment of these groups in Colombian society, even as the country moves toward peace.

Security analysts argue that the strategies promoted by the current president, Gustavo Petro, have not fully addressed the surge in violence. Petro’s “total peace” approach emphasizes negotiations to dismantle all armed groups, including leftwing rebels and organized crime factions. However, critics claim this strategy has faltered, leaving communities vulnerable to paramilitary resurgence. De la Espriella, who has led the polls since defeating Cepeda in the first round, advocates for a return to full-scale military confrontation, a method that has historically failed to reduce violence but remains popular among rightwing factions.

A Nation in Transition

Colombia’s current political landscape is a testament to the country’s turbulent history. The 2016 peace agreement with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia marked a turning point, but the peace has been marred by renewed violence. The paramilitary forces, once seen as a necessary tool for combating guerrillas, have transformed into a persistent threat, undermining the progress made in recent years.

With the presidential runoff approaching, the nation stands at a crossroads. Cepeda, backed by Petro, seeks to continue the path of negotiation and reform, while de la Espriella promises a more forceful approach. The stakes are high, as the winner will inherit a country grappling with the complexities of peace and the lingering grip of paramilitary influence. The voters’ choice may determine whether Colombia moves forward with reconciliation or plunges deeper into conflict.

As the election nears, the ghosts of paramilitary past remain palpable. The legacy of these groups, with their brutal tactics and political maneuvering, continues to shape the present. Whether through legal defense or human rights advocacy, the candidates’ ties to this history highlight the unresolved tensions that persist. The election is not just about leadership; it is a referendum on Colombia’s ability to reconcile with its violent past and build a sustainable future.