Abelardo De La Espriella, a right-wing outsider, won Colombia’s presidential election by less than 1% of the vote, defeating leftist Iván Cepeda by running a campaign on a tougher security strategy and more aggressive anti-drug trafficking measures.
De La Espriella received 12.959 million votes (49.7%) compared to Cepeda’s 12.708 million (48.7%), according to the nation’s electoral authority. His victory reflected a highly polarized electorate and represents the most recent rightward shift in Latin America’s politics. Earlier this month, De La Espriella was endorsed by U.S. President Donald Trump.
Cepeda and his close ally, outgoing President Gustavo Petro, cast doubt on the results, alleging irregularities without evidence. This election had Colombia’s highest turnout since the presidential runoff system was established in 1994. While Cepeda won in more departments (18 versus 14), De La Espriella secured a higher concentration of votes in territories with significant electoral weight, local newspaper El Tiempo reported. De La Espriella will take office on August 7.
AQ asked analysts to share their reactions and perspectives.

Sergio Guzmán
Director of Colombia Risk Analysis, a political risk consulting firm based in Bogotá
Abelardo De La Espriella has emerged as the virtual winner of Colombia’s presidential election, securing 12.9 million votes in a historically competitive second round. However, his narrow margin (around 250,000 votes) over Iván Cepeda has triggered unprecedented institutional uncertainty.
Cepeda is contesting the preliminary results and demanding a full tally, which will likely end in a recount, opening a tense transition period. Despite left-wing claims of irregularities, the electoral authority’s historical precision makes a reversal highly unlikely, and De La Espriella has already received early backing from international allies, including U.S. President Donald Trump.
De La Espriella’s narrow lead does not guarantee a mandate and suggests he will have to tone down his incendiary rhetoric and potentially water down a part of his ambitious agenda to succeed. Once in office, De La Espriella will face severe governance hurdles; lacking automatic legislative majorities, his party must build coalitions with traditional moderates to advance a radical, pro-business economic shock plan that includes cutting the state apparatus by 40%, resuming fracking, and eliminating some taxes.
His preferred strategy of governing through unilateral executive decrees and states of exception poses structural risks to Colombia’s checks and balances, setting the stage for future legal battles with the Constitutional Court and the State Council. Furthermore, De La Espriella’s promises to purge public bureaucracy and penalize the outgoing administration threaten to paralyze state agencies and provoke sustained social mobilization led by President Gustavo Petro’s base.
Internationally, De La Espriella will seek tighter security cooperation with the United States, potentially aligning Colombia with Washington’s “Shield of the Americas.” Ultimately, his term promises a high-friction environment balancing market-friendly reforms against severe institutional confrontation, judicial resistance, and deep social polarization.

Brian Winter
Editor-in-Chief of Americas Quarterly
This was the closest runoff election in Colombia’s history. Abelardo was expecting a bigger mandate and even took the unusual step Saturday of issuing a written warning to Congress not to obstruct his agenda. The left emerges from this energized, aggrieved and where it’s often happiest — the opposition. It could be a rocky four years.
To understand how Abelardo will fare, I’d ask: Will he follow the path of Jair Bolsonaro, or Javier Milei? Both were outsiders who staged “hostile takeovers” of the establishment right in their countries, as Abelardo just has. Milei quickly formed an alliance with Mauricio Macri’s party, giving him a certain (if imperfect) ability to pass legislation and govern from Day 1. Bolsonaro, by contrast, spent his first year in office fighting the culture wars and lashing out at the traditional powers of Brasília, and never really recovered.
Abelardo has sent mixed signals about which path he might take. Given the narrow result, he may be wise to seek alliances not only with uribismo but other center and center-right forces, if he is to tackle Colombia’s tremendous security, economic and fiscal challenges.





