One arrives and we all arrive—historic moment wrapped in hardline security
In Bogotá's final campaign hours, Senator Paloma Valencia offered Colombia a familiar but urgent proposition: that safety must precede all other progress. Backed by the enduring influence of former president Uribe and joined by figures from across the establishment, she closed her bid for the presidency by framing the nation's choice as one between resolve and surrender. Her candidacy crystallizes a tension Colombia has long carried — whether peace is built through dialogue or through the assertion of state authority — and the answer its citizens choose will shape the country's character for years to come.
- Valencia's campaign finale drew thousands to Bogotá, channeling deep public anxiety over violence and the perceived erosion of state control under the current government.
- Her direct assault on President Petro's 'total peace' negotiations — branding it a 'cartel of total peace' — sharpened the ideological fault line at the heart of this election.
- The presence of César Gaviria, Ingrid Betancourt, and other establishment figures signals that her coalition has consolidated around a shared alarm over the country's security and economic trajectory.
- Valencia is simultaneously campaigning as a historic first — Colombia's potential first female president — while anchoring her platform in hardline security and hydrocarbon-driven economic growth.
- The race now enters its final hours as a stark referendum: negotiated peace and social reform on one side, judicial pressure on armed groups and traditional economics on the other.
Paloma Valencia closed her presidential campaign in Bogotá on Sunday before thousands of supporters, delivering a message she has carried from the start: Colombia cannot build anything lasting while violence goes unchecked. Backed by former president Álvaro Uribe and the traditional right, she promised to strike hard against illegal armed groups and restore state authority in regions where organized crime has expanded its reach.
The sharpest edge of her closing argument was aimed at President Gustavo Petro's 'total peace' strategy — the ongoing negotiations with armed actors that Valencia dismissed as the 'cartel of total peace.' Where the current government sees dialogue as the path to stability, Valencia sees dangerous concession, and she vowed to pursue judicial action against armed groups rather than sit across the table from them.
Her rally drew notable figures who have aligned with her coalition, including former president César Gaviria, former hostage and political figure Ingrid Betancourt, and economist Juan Daniel Oviedo — a gathering that underscored how broadly establishment skepticism of the Petro government has coalesced around her candidacy. She also made a pointed appeal to women voters, framing her potential election as a historic milestone: Colombia's first female president.
On the economy, Valencia offered a vision built on lower corporate taxes and expanded hydrocarbon extraction — a direct counter to the Petro administration's push toward energy transition. Her opponent, Senator Iván Cepeda, represents continuity with the current government's progressive reforms and social spending priorities.
The election has become a referendum on two competing diagnoses of Colombia's troubles and two radically different cures. With campaigning now closed, the country moves toward a vote that will determine whether it turns toward negotiated peace or renewed pressure, toward transformation or restoration.
Paloma Valencia stood before thousands in Bogotá on Sunday, closing out her presidential campaign with a straightforward message: Colombia needs a harder hand against violence. The senator, backed by former president Álvaro Uribe and the traditional right, promised to crack down on illegal armed groups, restore public order, and reverse what she sees as a dangerous expansion of organized crime across the country.
Her closing argument centered on security above all else. Valencia told supporters her government would focus on "striking at the violent" and reasserting state control in regions where armed actors have gained ground. This has been the spine of her campaign from the start—not economic theory or social programs, but the restoration of safety as a prerequisite for everything else. She framed her candidacy as a defense of democracy itself, a bulwark against the criminality she argues has metastasized under the current administration.
Much of her fire was directed at President Gustavo Petro's "total peace" strategy, the ongoing dialogue with various armed groups aimed at negotiated settlements. Valencia called it the "cartel of total peace" and vowed to activate judicial orders against it—a direct repudiation of the sitting president's central policy. Where Petro sees negotiation as the path forward, Valencia sees capitulation. She positioned herself as the alternative for voters exhausted by violence and skeptical of talks with armed actors.
The campaign event drew prominent figures from across the political spectrum who have aligned with Valencia's coalition. Former president César Gaviria attended, as did Ingrid Betancourt, the former hostage and political figure, and economist Juan Daniel Oviedo. Their presence signaled that Valencia's candidacy had consolidated support among establishment figures wary of the current government's direction.
Valencia also made a direct appeal to women voters, arguing that her election would mark a historic moment—Colombia's first female president. "One arrives and we all arrive," she told the crowd, framing her candidacy as an inclusive milestone even as her policy platform remained firmly rooted in security-first conservatism. She outlined an economic vision centered on growth, lower corporate taxes, and expanded hydrocarbon extraction, a stark contrast to the Petro administration's push toward energy transition.
The race itself reflects the deep political fault line running through Colombia. Valencia faces Senator Iván Cepeda, the government-backed candidate who represents continuity with progressive reforms and social spending. The election has become a referendum on two competing visions: security and traditional economics on one side, social transformation and peace dialogue on the other. Citizens are anxious about both crime and economic stability, and the candidates are offering radically different diagnoses and cures.
With the campaign now closed, Colombia enters the final stretch before voting. The polarization is real, the stakes are high, and the country's future direction—whether toward negotiated peace or military pressure, toward energy transition or hydrocarbon development—hangs in the balance.
Citas Notables
Her government would focus on striking at the violent and reasserting state control— Paloma Valencia
One arrives and we all arrive—framing her historic candidacy as an inclusive milestone— Paloma Valencia
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why does Valencia's message about security resonate so strongly right now in Colombia?
Because violence is immediate and visible. When people can't walk safely at night or worry about their children, abstract policy debates feel hollow. Valencia is offering a clear diagnosis—armed groups have grown too powerful—and a clear remedy: state force. That simplicity appeals to voters exhausted by years of instability.
But Petro is also dealing with the same violence. Why does his approach—negotiation—seem weaker to voters?
Because negotiation requires patience and faith in a process that hasn't yet delivered results. Valencia's message is faster, more visceral. She's saying: we'll defeat them, not talk to them. For people living in fear, that's more compelling than a long-term dialogue strategy.
The hydrocarbon expansion she's proposing—is that just economic policy, or is it also a statement?
It's both. Economically, she's betting on growth through extraction. But it's also a statement against the current government's environmental direction. She's saying: we'll prioritize jobs and revenue over climate concerns. That appeals to business interests and working-class voters who see energy transition as a threat to their livelihoods.
What does her appeal to women voters tell us about her campaign?
It's clever positioning. She's claiming a historic milestone—first female president—while running on a traditionally masculine platform of force and order. She's trying to have it both ways: the symbolism of inclusion with the substance of hardline security.
Is there any daylight between her and Uribe, or is she essentially running his campaign again?
She's running his playbook, but she's not him. She's younger, she's a woman, and she's had to articulate her own voice. But the core ideology—tough on crime, skeptical of peace talks, pro-business—that's pure Uribe. She's the continuity candidate for that faction.