On April 16, 2026, the Inter-American Dialogue hosted a private conversation on Colombia’s upcoming presidential election with Sergio Guzmán, founder of Colombia Risk Analysis, moderated by Amb. Brian A. Nichols, former assistant secretary of state for western hemisphere affairs and member of the Dialogue’s board of directors. The discussion offered a structured assessment of the electoral landscape, the challenges facing the next government, and the broader implications for Colombia’s institutional stability and foreign policy.
Guzmán opened by underscoring the high stakes in this year’s presidential election. Unlike previous cycles, he argued, this race is not a contest between competing visions of governance, but a referendum on whether Colombia remains a viable environment for private enterprise and institutional stability.
Guzmán framed the race around three leading candidates, each representing a distinct political trajectory for Colombia. He described Iván Cepeda as a leading figure on the far left, proposing a more radical agenda than that of Gustavo Petro’s 2022 campaign, including a National Constituent Assembly, unconditional dialogue with armed groups, and greater state control over the economy. He said Cepeda’s campaign relies less on detailed policy proposals than on political mobilization, particularly among voters who do not traditionally participate in elections. On the right, Paloma Valencia won the right-of-center coalition primaries in January and has since moved closer to the center through her alliance with Juan David Oviedo, a centrist who unexpectedly placed second. A third viable candidate, Abelardo de la Espriella, is a hard-right contender who has sought to build a governing majority by courting traditional parties, though his momentum appears to have slowed.
Guzmán emphasized three variables shaping the election: turnout, candidates’ ability to reach beyond their core bases, and the capacity of the next government to manage a difficult economic and security situation from day one. He noted that the incoming administration will face a large fiscal imbalance, including more than 64 trillion pesos in outstanding healthcare obligations, alongside a worsening security environment. He also warned that the current government may use executive measures before the election to bolster support for Cepeda.
During the Q&A, Amb. Brian A. Nichols noted his expectation that the Trump administration will signal its preferred candidate more openly. He added that it is unlikely Washington will reintroduce a major financial package, such as the $400 million in USAID support Colombia previously received. However, he underscored the importance of bipartisan support for Colombia in the U.S. Congress and how this could continue to benefit the country.
On China, Guzmán argued that a Valencia government would be poorly served by publicly withdrawing from the Belt and Road Initiative without securing something from the United States in return. He suggested that under Valencia, the Colombia-China relationship would likely be managed quietly, even as Washington continues to press for distance from Beijing.
Multiple corporate participants expressed their concerns about Colombia’s deteriorating investment climate under Petro and feared that, if Cepeda were elected, this would force them to make unprecedented decisions regarding their operations in the country. Nichols noted that two generations of voters in Latin America have lost confidence in governing elites, a trend reflected in Petro’s support among Afro-Colombian, Indigenous, and rural communities that view his government as more representative. Guzmán added that issues of representation also extend to the private sector, noting the very limited presence of Afro-Colombians in corporate leadership.
At its core, the discussion returned to a central concern: whether Colombia’s institutions can continue to act as meaningful constraints on executive power. Guzmán described the challenges facing the next administration as a “policrisis,” spanning fiscal, social, and security pressures. He added that a Cepeda victory would not replicate the experience under the Petro administration but would likely intensify pressure on institutional checks, increasing governance challenges.
This event was by invitation only.
