I regret that governments fighting drug trafficking are helping bring political crime to power
In the shadow of Colombia's June 21st runoff, President Gustavo Petro has leveled a grave charge against the United States: that Washington is lending its weight to a candidate whose legal career was built defending paramilitaries and drug traffickers. The unexpected first-round victory of Abelardo de la Espriella — openly endorsed by Donald Trump — has transformed a domestic election into a referendum on foreign influence, historical memory, and the enduring tension between Colombia's left and the forces that have long sought to suppress it. What unfolds in the coming weeks will speak not only to Colombian sovereignty, but to the question of who, in the end, defines the meaning of fighting crime.
- De la Espriella's first-round upset blindsided Petro's camp, elevating a millionaire lawyer who built his fortune defending paramilitaries and criminals to the threshold of Colombia's presidency.
- Trump's public endorsement transformed a national election into a geopolitical flashpoint, with Washington's fingerprints now visible on a campaign Petro calls a vehicle for political crime.
- Petro, speaking from the presidential palace, accused allied governments of hypocrisy — claiming to fight drug trafficking while backing a candidate he says embodies it.
- The far-right coalition forming around de la Espriella — echoing Milei, Bukele, Noboa, and Kast — signals a regional realignment that Petro's left-wing government is now racing to resist.
- With two weeks until the runoff, the campaign has hardened into a stark binary: two visions of Colombia's future, one shaped by Washington's embrace, the other by the memory of decades of right-wing violence.
On June 4th, Colombian President Gustavo Petro publicly accused the United States of backing a candidate with deep roots in narco-paramilitary networks. The candidate in question was Abelardo de la Espriella — a 47-year-old millionaire lawyer who stunned the political establishment by finishing first in Colombia's May 31st primary, ahead of Iván Cepeda, the leftist figure Petro had endorsed.
De la Espriella's background made his victory all the more jarring. For years, he had built his fortune representing paramilitaries, drug traffickers, and financial swindlers — figures drawn from the darkest corners of Colombia's criminal world. He had since rebranded as a successful entrepreneur, but his record followed him, as did inflammatory remarks about women and LGBTQ people. None of it, apparently, was enough to stop his rise.
What sharpened Petro's fury was the open endorsement of Donald Trump, who backed de la Espriella ahead of the June 21st runoff. The candidate, a self-described Trump admirer, had promised a relationship with the United States 'as never before.' For Petro — Colombia's first left-wing president and a survivor of political persecution — this was not a campaign setback but a pattern repeating itself: American power aligning with the Colombian right.
'I regret that figures and governments that claim to want to fight drug trafficking are helping to bring political crime to power in Colombia,' Petro said from the Casa de Nariño. His party's candidate, Cepeda, called de la Espriella's platform 'mafia fascism.' The language was harsh, but it reflected something real: de la Espriella had positioned himself as the Colombian node of a regional hard-right network including Milei, Bukele, Noboa, and Kast.
The June 21st runoff now carries weight far beyond Colombia's borders — a test of whether foreign endorsements can tip a democracy, and whether voters will reckon with a candidate's past or look past it entirely.
On Thursday, June 4th, Colombian President Gustavo Petro made a stark accusation: the United States government was backing candidates with roots in narco-paramilitary networks. His target was Abelardo de la Espriella, a 47-year-old lawyer and millionaire who had just shocked the political establishment by finishing first in Colombia's May 31st primary election—ahead of Iván Cepeda, the leftist candidate Petro had endorsed and expected to advance.
De la Espriella's victory was unexpected precisely because of his background. For decades, the lawyer had built his fortune representing a particular class of client: paramilitaries involved in drug trafficking, financial swindlers, and high-profile athletes. His wealth came not from abstract legal theory but from years spent defending figures entangled in Colombia's criminal underworld. Yet he had rebranded himself as a successful entrepreneur, attributing his fortune to his law practice and commercial ventures including a liquor business. He was also known for inflammatory comments about women and LGBTQ people.
What made Petro's accusations sting was their timing and their target. Donald Trump had publicly endorsed de la Espriella ahead of the June 21st runoff election. Washington's backing was explicit and unmistakable. De la Espriella, who counted himself among Trump's admirers, had promised that if elected, he would cultivate a relationship with the United States "as never before." For Petro, this was not merely a campaign setback—it was evidence of foreign interference on behalf of a candidate he viewed as fundamentally dangerous.
"I regret that figures and governments that claim to want to fight drug trafficking are helping to bring political crime to power in Colombia," Petro said during an interview at the Casa de Nariño, the presidential residence in Bogotá. He went further, calling de la Espriella's allies "genocides and drug traffickers." The president, who had survived multiple assassination attempts during the persecution of leftist movements, spoke from a place of deep historical grievance. He was Colombia's first left-wing president, and he saw in this moment a return to the old patterns of right-wing violence and American intervention.
Cepeda, Petro's party's candidate, had used similarly harsh language after the first round, describing de la Espriella's platform as "mafia fascism." The characterization captured something real about the candidate's appeal: he represented a hard-right turn, a rejection of Petro's social agenda, and a promise of closer alignment with Washington and regional allies like Ecuador's Daniel Noboa, Argentina's Javier Milei, Chile's José Antonio Kast, and El Salvador's Nayib Bukele—all figures Petro had criticized as right-wing and beholden to American interests.
The June 21st runoff would now become a referendum not just on Colombia's domestic direction but on the country's relationship with the United States and the broader question of whether foreign endorsements could sway an election. De la Espriella's unexpected first-place finish suggested that Colombian voters, or at least enough of them, were willing to overlook—or perhaps embrace—his controversial background and his ties to Trump. Petro's accusations of narco-state collaboration would frame the final two weeks of campaigning as a choice between two fundamentally different visions of Colombia's future.
Citas Notables
I regret that figures and governments that claim to want to fight drug trafficking are helping to bring political crime to power in Colombia— President Gustavo Petro
Mafia fascism— Iván Cepeda, describing de la Espriella's platform
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why did de la Espriella's victory surprise people if his background was already public knowledge?
Because he wasn't the frontrunner. Cepeda, Petro's candidate, was favored in the polls. De la Espriella's first-place finish suggested a real shift in voter sentiment—or at least enough voters willing to overlook his history.
What exactly did he do for these criminal clients?
He was their lawyer. He represented paramilitaries, drug traffickers, con artists. He built his wealth on that work. Now he claims his fortune came from his law practice and business ventures, but the record is clear about where the money came from.
Is Trump's endorsement unusual in Colombian politics?
It's not typical for a sitting American president to openly back a specific candidate in another country's election. That's what made it so inflammatory—it looked like exactly what Petro accused it of being: foreign interference.
Did de la Espriella ask for Trump's support?
Not explicitly in the reporting. But he's said to admire Trump, and after the endorsement came through, he promised unprecedented alignment with Washington. Whether he solicited it or Trump saw an opportunity is unclear.
What does Petro mean when he says he nearly died multiple times?
He's referencing the persecution of leftists in Colombia during the paramilitary era. It's not abstract for him—it's lived history. When he sees de la Espriella backed by Washington, he sees a return to that period.
Could de la Espriella actually win the runoff?
He won the first round. He has Trump's backing and Washington's support. Petro's accusations might energize his base, but de la Espriella clearly has momentum and powerful allies.