Colombia’s Election Pits Climate Leadership Against Extractivism

In a quiet Caribbean neighborhood after dark, environmental activists gathered on plastic chairs between a mango tree and a courtyard wall that read “Colombia, respira!” (breathe Colombia). The turnout was so large that many stood. The speaker was Susana Muhamad, a globally admired socio-environmental campaigner, and the moment held profound historical significance.

Colombia’s upcoming presidential election will determine whether the nation remains a global climate leader and an exemplar of “popular environmentalism” or pivots toward fracking, mining, and fossil-fuel extractivism — essentially shifting from green to gray.

The movement is preparing for a tough fight. President Gustavo Petro of the Pacto Historico coalition is constitutionally barred from a second consecutive term, so his party selected Iván Cepeda to continue his policies. Far-right candidate Abelardo De La Espriella and center-right candidate Paloma Valencia both support reopening oil extraction and fracking. U.S. interference is a major concern, with President Donald Trump threatening military intervention in Colombia.

Muhamad, a former environment minister, told attendees: “We must win in the first round because the future of Colombia will be decided here, in this very complicated international context. If we don’t win, our country will be another in Latin America aligned with Donald Trump. We have to win. Otherwise, everything we’re talking about will be completely suspended for four years. Goodbye.”

She highlighted Colombia’s progress in declaring its Amazon rainforest a fossil fuel-free zone, and how Petro attempted to curtail mining, protect people from pollution, and realize the country’s potential as a “great power for life.”

Muhamad contrasted this with Bolivia, where the pro-business government sold parts of the Junín River basin to a lithium mining company, and Ecuador, where far-right President Daniel Noboa is weakening indigenous land defenders and opening protected lands for mineral exploitation, including a potential U.S. military base on the Galápagos Islands.

Colombia plays an outsized role in climate justice. Muhamad has become a familiar face internationally, advocating for a fossil fuel transition at COP29 in Dubai and later presiding over the biodiversity COP16 in Cali, Colombia.

Muhamad is not alone in the Pacto Historico government. Vice-President Francia Márquez won the Goldman Environmental Prize for stopping illegal gold mining in her ancestral community of La Toma. Environment Minister Irene Vélez Torres co-chaired the world’s first conference on transitioning away from fossil fuels, an alliance of countries accelerating the energy transition beyond the U.N. consensus system and oil producer vetoes. President Petro also demonstrated commitment at that Santa Marta conference, calling on Colombia to mobilize its population to overcome the “suicidal” economics and “fascistic” politics of the fossil fuel industry.

The leadership of Petro’s government moved the phaseout of oil, gas, and coal from the margins to the center of global diplomacy, according to Tzeporah Berman, founder of the Fossil Fuel Treaty Initiative. She said the presidential ballot will have international repercussions. “The implications of this election reach far beyond Colombia. At a moment of escalating climate disasters and geopolitical instability, the world is watching whether this leadership continues, or whether political pressure from the fossil fuel industry succeeds in pushing countries backward.”

U.S. interference remains a big concern, with Trump warning of military intervention in Colombia.

Environmentalists in Colombia believe their national commitment draws strength from grassroots activists. Colombia is one of the world’s deadliest countries for environmental defenders. Juan David Amaya, a 19-year-old climate activist and founder of the pan-Latin American youth organization Life of Pachamama, said the main difference between activists in Colombia and Europe is that “there, they don’t kill you.” After campaigning against oil palm plantations in his home region of San Carlos de Guaroa, Amaya received numerous death threats. “In Colombia, doing this is an act of rebellion born from hope, born from love. But it also comes at a very high cost,” he said.

“Colombia has made significant progress over the last four years in political discourse and action, which has mobilised many governments around the world. Today, governments like Panama, Mexico, Brazil, and Colombia stand out for their ambition, their political leadership, and once again for telling the world: we must take action.”

Paula Andrea Hernández, a Pacto Historico campaign manager, said: “We call it popular environmentalism because it comes from peasants and fishermen. We have suffered severe extractivism, often arm in arm with illegal militias, for so long that people realise the fight for territory and environment needs to be about power.”

Domestically, climate and environment rarely appear directly in campaign debates but shape hot-button issues like security and health. Drug trafficking often overlaps with illegal mining and forest clearance, and shortcomings in medical provision are highlighted by water contamination, rising temperatures, and floods.

“The environment has become a central issue,” political analyst Leon Valencia observed. It is not straightforwardly binary — “there are sectors on the left that favour oil exploitation, and sectors on the right that defend conservation and green markets. What both sides have agreed upon is that the relationship with nature has become a strong political identity … Colombia is experiencing a progressive environmentalisation of public opinion.”

Some campaigners complain that the Petro government’s rhetoric is not always matched by actions. Amazon deforestation has slowed since Pacto Historico took power but continues to rise, and illegal gold mining is widespread. Many parts of Colombia are virtually ungovernable due to armed groups.

Political opposition emerged in Bogotá, the world’s third-highest capital city, where the business lobby in Congress blocked the government’s most ambitious mining restrictions. Right-wing commentators warned that Colombia’s first left-wing government would be an economic disaster, especially after Petro promised to replace fossil fuels with avocados. In fact, GDP growth remained positive for the past four years.

Julia Miranda, a lower house deputy from the New Liberal party and an advocate for nature, insisted the Petro administration had proved ineffective domestically despite international talk of environmental leadership. “It is a false discourse – mere rhetoric while their environmental policies have been a failure,” she said.

Miranda supports Valencia but sees room for compromise on phasing out fossil fuels. “Colombia needs to work with complete seriousness and consistency on the energy transition, but in the meantime, we need to use our resources, for example, gas.”

That would be a setback for the transition, potentially causing Colombia to pull out or weaken its commitment to the global “coalition of the willing” it helped form in Santa Marta last month. Those goals remain to be fought for.

With two weeks until the election on May 31, the outcome is unclear. Polls suggest Cepeda, Petro’s successor as Pacto Historico candidate, will lead in the first round but fall short of the 50% needed for an outright victory. If there is a runoff, either of his two right-wing challengers would be favored.

“That would be an abysmal setback,” said biologist and congressman Renzo García. “A victory by Paloma Valencia or Abelardo de la Espriella would mark a return to an extractivist model, where we hand the country over to the economic interests of the world’s elites and serve as a pantry for minerals, oil, and agribusiness without taking into account the rights of nature.”