Abelardo de la Espriella Announces Dismantling of All Peace Talks with Armed Groups
By announcing this Friday, Sept. 11, that he was ending all dialogue processes and socio-legal spaces with ELN that had been inherited from the government of Gustavo Petro, Colombian President Abelardo de la Espriella provided a figure that also served as an argument to support that decision, which he presented with a blunt phrase: “The false peace is over.”
The president stated that during the four years of Petro’s total peace policy, more than 7 billion pesos (US$2.2 million) were spent on fees for spokespeople, representatives, and negotiators in the peace efforts.
De la Espriella ends peace talks: Criminal organizations continued to grow stronger
“I continue to find surprises. Waste. Those negotiators whom I am revoking today, such as Parmenio Cuellar Bastidas, Alvaro Jimenez Millan, Feliciano Valencia, and Gloria Cecilia Quiceno, were paid to help a false peace that brought nothing but terrorism, blood, and death. Every day they found more corruption, waste, and administrative disorder. But that is precisely what I came to correct,” De la Espriella said.
The presidency later clarified that this figure does not include expenses associated with security details, travel allowances, designated locations, and other resources paid for by the public treasury. Therefore, the figure corresponds only to the item for fees and not to the total cost of the mechanisms that operated during the previous government.
For the head of state, this favored the strengthening of criminal groups. He questioned the fact that, despite these resources, criminal organizations continued strengthening their structures and maintaining violent actions.
In fact, in its most recent report, the Ideas for Peace Foundation (FIP) states that “after four years of the government of President Gustavo Petro, one of its main bets, Total Peace, left more costs than gains for Colombia. … Total Peace is one of several factors contributing to a scenario with 28,802 members of illegal armed groups as of July 2026, which means that since 2022 this figure increased by 90%.”
For this reason, he stated that while approaches with armed groups and criminal structures were taking place, those organizations “were strengthening themselves, challenging the state and continuing to strike Colombians and our public forces.”
“In my government, criminals will have no political status, considerations, or impunity,” De la Espriella said, and assured that “the message is unequivocal: Submit to justice or face the full legitimate force of the republic. True peace is built with security, authority, and justice. Not by bringing the state to its knees before criminals.”
In turn, he said that he revoked the designation of the representatives of the national government at the table with ELN, which would be one of the last administrative decisions that remained to be signed.
The dialogue tables that were closed
After the president’s announcement, the presidency of the republic specified which processes were closed.
The decision covers the negotiation tables with the state major of the Magdalena Medio, Comandante Gentil Duarte, Comandante Jorge Suarez Briceno, and Frente Raul Reyes blocs. It also includes the National Coordinator Ejercito Bolivariano, the Frente Guerrillero Comuneros del Sur, and the National Liberation Army (ELN).
The socio-legal spaces for dialogue with the Conquistadores Autodefensas of the Sierra Nevada and with criminal structures operating in Medellin and the Aburra Valley (Antioquia), Quibdo (Choco), and Buenaventura (Valle del Cauca) met the same fate. The measure also includes the lifting of the Temporary Location Zone of Valle del Guamuez, in Putumayo.
The government stated that these decisions respond to the fact that the mechanisms did not demonstrate concrete progress in terms of peace, disarmament, or submission to justice from the perspective of the new administration.
It maintained that it will not keep institutional scenarios that could be used to prolong criminal activities, obtain procedural benefits, or evade the application of the law. On the contrary, it proposed that any subsequent process must be linked to an effective willingness to lay down arms and submit to justice.
From now on, the government draws a distinction between those who want to lay down their arms and those who maintain violent actions against the civilian population. The former must submit to justice, while the latter, according to the statement, will be confronted through the legal and legitimate capacity of the public forces.