Armed dissident factions of the former Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) remain active in the weeks leading up to Sunday's national election.
The persistence of these groups highlights the fragility of Colombia's peace process as some factions pursue political power through ballots while others use violence.
These dissidents, who rejected the 2016 peace agreement, continue to operate across various regions. In southeastern Colombia, specifically San José del Guaviare, and the Catatumbo region, these groups maintain an armed struggle to press political demands [1, 5].
Recent escalations include a lethal strike on May 13, when dissidents killed four Colombian soldiers and wounded three others [4, 6]. This violence follows an attack on a police station in southwestern Colombia that left one officer dead and four others injured [2, 3].
Despite the bloodshed, some factions have engaged in gestures of disarmament. In one instance, dissidents handed over 14 tons of war material [1]. This contradiction suggests a fragmented strategy among the groups, with some seeking tactical concessions while others maintain a campaign of terror.
Parallel to the armed conflict, former rebels have transitioned into the legal political sphere. These individuals have organized as a political party to survive electorally in the upcoming vote [2]. They are now fighting for political relevance as the country prepares for the polls [2].
The duality of the FARC's legacy persists through these two paths: the legal pursuit of governance and the illegal continuation of guerrilla warfare. The government continues to navigate these conflicting signals as the election approaches [1, 2].
“Armed dissident factions of the former Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) remain active.”
The simultaneous occurrence of lethal attacks and disarmament gestures indicates a deeply fractured dissident movement. By maintaining both a military wing and a political party, the remnants of the FARC are hedging their bets, attempting to secure influence through both coercion and democratic participation. This volatility poses a significant security risk to the stability of the upcoming election cycle.





