Security, economy, and social reforms mark the proposals of three candidates for the Presidency of Colombia in 2026

Bogotá, Colombia. – A little over a year before the 2026 presidential elections, the proposals of the possible candidates for the Casa de Nariño reflect markedly different visions on the course that Colombia should take in terms of security, economy, and social policies. Senator Paloma Valencia proposes an agenda focused on strengthening security, economic growth, and fiscal discipline. Among her main proposals are increasing the State's presence throughout the national territory, strengthening the Armed Forces, and a stricter stance against illegal armed groups. She also promotes the reduction of public spending, the promotion of private investment, and a closer relationship with the United States on security and trade issues. Analysts believe that a possible Valencia administration would represent the return of policies associated with Uribism. For his part, lawyer Abelardo de la Espriella proposes a hard-line strategy against crime and a profound reduction in the size of the State. His program includes the construction of mega-prisons, the militarization of areas affected by organized crime, the elimination of public entities considered unnecessary, and a reduction in taxes to stimulate investment. He also supports fracking and the exploration of hydrocarbons as tools to boost economic growth. Experts point out that his eventual arrival to power would consolidate a right-wing agenda with an emphasis on security and economic liberalization.

We recommend reading: Colombia will have the largest deployment of observers during the presidential elections

In contrast, Senator Iván Cepeda is betting on the continuity of the policies promoted by President Gustavo Petro. His proposal includes expanding social programs, strengthening the implementation of the Peace Agreement, promoting progressive tax reform, and moving towards a health model with greater state participation. He also proposes strengthening the agricultural sector through land redistribution and the construction of rural infrastructure. Analysts believe that Cepeda would represent the option closest to Petroism, although with a style more oriented towards dialogue and concertation. The differences between the three political projects reflect the main debates that will mark the Colombian presidential campaign: security versus negotiation, free market versus greater state intervention, and continuity or change in the face of the policies implemented by the current government.