In the coming decades, insights from declassified CIA and Mossad documents may reveal how these organizations influenced election outcomes across Latin America during the mid-2020s.
Colombia held the first round of its presidential elections on Sunday, and similar to the recent elections in Argentina and Honduras, the process faced significant irregularities and notable interference. This meddling came not only from the United States but also from Ecuador, with unconfirmed allegations of widespread electoral fraud surfacing as well.
The stakes are incredibly high as the two candidates who emerged as frontrunners—Ivan Cepeda and Abelardo de la Espriella—prepare for a critical runoff election on June 21, each representing drastically contrasting visions for Colombia’s future.
A win for Ivan Cepeda, the second-place contender, would preserve the progressive economic, social, and environmental policies championed by his predecessor, Gustavo Petro, who has led Colombia’s first leftist government in over 200 years. Conversely, should Abelardo de la Espriella, the hard-right candidate who secured the most votes in the first round, prevail, Colombia risks becoming the latest Latin American nation to succumb to the influence of Trump’s “Donroe Doctrine.”
If victorious, Espriella—previously a defense lawyer known for his controversial stances—would likely initiate a security arrangement similar to Plan Colombia 2.0 in collaboration with the U.S., as proposed by the former Colombian president Andrés Pastrana last year. Drawing parallels to recent events in Ecuador, this could result in delegating effective control of Colombian territory to U.S. Southern Command and agencies like the DEA and FBI.
Espriella has already traveled to Washington to attend Trump’s Shield of the Americas summit and has been linked to substantial campaign contributions to members of the so-called “Miami mafia,” as noted by David Adler from Progressive International in the clip below.
“The number one threat comes from the financial ties between the Colombian far-right and the Miami mafia.”
🇨🇴 Watch David Adler (@davidrkadler), Co-General Coordinator of the @progintl, on @RadNalCo. pic.twitter.com/8H5jt6oAoA
— Progressive International (@ProgIntl) June 2, 2026
Espriella has also pledged to restart the mass fumigation of coca fields in Colombia and bomb guerrilla camps. Much like Argentina’s Milei, he seems to relish conflict and violence, even recounting how he tortured cats with fireworks as a child.
Here is right-wing Colombian 🇨🇴 presidential candidate Abelardo de la Espriella laughing about how he liked to torture and kill cats for fun as a childpic.twitter.com/sCwn3lk1Hh
— Michael Galant (@michael_galant) June 1, 2026
As reported by Lee Schlenker for Responsible Statecraft, the upcoming runoff on June 21 showcases “diametrically opposed visions for Latin America’s third-largest economy”:
De la Espriella has vowed to dissolve Petro’s “Total Peace” negotiations with various guerilla, paramilitary, and criminal factions; unleash military force to combat drug trafficking, and construct ten maximum-security prisons for minor offenders, mirroring the approach of President Nayib Bukele in El Salvador.
He also intends to cut taxes for the private sector, resume aerial fumigation of coca crops, join the Trump administration’s “Shield of the Americas” consortium, and introduce new concessions for fracking and oil exploration.
In contrast, Cepeda plans to reinforce the demobilization process with armed groups through peace talks and accelerate the transition to clean energy. Prioritizing human rights and combating illicit financing will be crucial elements of his counternarcotics strategy, while he aims to elevate Colombia’s leadership role in Latin America, invest in public education, and emphasize anti-militarism and international law in foreign relations.
A Multi-faceted Intervention
The U.S.’s overt intervention in Colombia’s electoral affairs began with the arrival of Colombian-born U.S. Senator Bernie Moreno in Bogota just two days before the election. Moreno, connected to Trump and Colombia’s conservative elite, visited alongside an 87-member U.S. State Department delegation.
While the U.S. delegation was officially there to observe the elections, it didn’t take long for them to breach Colombian election laws, as highlighted in Progressive International’s official statement:
The Consejo Nacional Electoral stipulates that internationally accredited observers must refrain from any demonstrations supporting or opposing parties or candidates.
Observers engage in activities of a “party-political character” at the risk of permanent expulsion from the country if found in violation…
However, Senator Moreno appears to have contravened these laws, as multiple Colombian and international reports indicate he scheduled meetings with leading right-wing candidates Paloma Valencia and Abelardo de la Espriella, clearly to facilitate their collaboration ahead of a possible runoff against Pacto Histórico on June 21.
This constitutes a direct political intervention by a foreign national masquerading as an observer.
This intervention reflects a trend established even prior to the U.S. delegation’s arrival. Moreno, a Republican Party member, has documented ties to Colombia’s conservative elite and has openly opposed the Petro government.
Before arriving in Bogota, Moreno issued several thinly veiled threats, suggesting that “narco-terrorist” groups linked to Petro’s government were undermining the electoral process. He even warned that Washington would not endorse outcomes derived from intimidation.
Additionally, Trump’s former advisor, Roger Stone, published an article just days before the election endorsing de la Espriella, claiming he embodies the aspirations of Colombians seeking safety, national sovereignty, and economic recovery.
Colombia’s disgraced former president, Alvaro Uribe, whose candidate garnered only 5% of the vote, warned that voting for Cepeda could trigger an armed uprising against the country.
Vote for my preferred candidate or the US will bomb you is one hell of a closing campaign message. pic.twitter.com/tRJFw6BoN9
— Jake Johnston (@JakobJohnston) May 29, 2026
In addition to U.S. intervention, Ecuador’s government has also played a role. Just prior to the election, Ecuadorian President Daniel Noboa met with Espriella to discuss future collaborations. Clips from the meeting, shared widely, show Noboa pledging to eliminate all tariffs on Colombian goods should Espriella win.
Noboa appears willing to let Ecuador serve as a staging ground for U.S. military operations in the region, similar to Colombia’s historical role, even after a significant majority of Ecuadorians voted against the reestablishment of U.S. bases on their soil.
The most serious allegation concerning the election—though not yet proven—claims that substantial electoral fraud occurred during the preliminary counts to favor Espriella, who garnered 10.3 million votes, almost 44% of the total. Both outgoing President Petro and Cepeda assert that close to one million voter IDs were found at polling stations that did not match the electoral census.
Petro stated on X shortly after the election that “the count being transmitted is not legally binding,” asserting that its data lacks official status and he does not accept the preliminary count results as president.
In Colombia, the preliminary count, or “pre-conteo,” is conducted by officials tallying ballots and uploading results online. The official, scrutinized results, known as “escrutinio,” can take several days to finalize and require judicial ratification.
On Monday, Cepeda somewhat softened his stance, acknowledging that compelling evidence of fraud has yet to surface. He still prefers to wait for the scrutinized results before accepting the preliminary outcome.
Attempts by domestic and international mainstream media to debunk claims made by Petro and Cepeda have been notable. However, as reported by Colombia Reports, their concerns are not entirely unfounded:
Petro has repeatedly stated that the National Registry has failed to comply with a 2018 court directive to nationalize election software to prevent fraud.
The software remains owned by the controversial company Thomas Greg & Sons, which is linked to individuals with criminal backgrounds.
This company has claimed proprietary rights over its software, preventing IT experts from the Historic Pact from auditing it to ensure it hasn’t been tampered with.
“Without a proper audit of the election software, full confidence in the process cannot be assured,” the political party stated earlier this month.
The Historic Pact subsequently filed a lawsuit against the National Registry in a last-minute effort to secure tracking capabilities for tally sheets as they integrate into the full vote count.
This situation is not unprecedented; several Latin American countries have faced similar massive fraud allegations since Trump initiated his Donroe Doctrine. In Honduras, recounting votes took weeks, and Salvador Nasrallah, the presumed victor, claimed that certain disputed votes were ignored despite the prolonged assessment of various tally sheets.
Interestingly, the Colombian company Grupo ASD managed the preliminary counts in both Colombia’s first round and Honduras’ recent elections. Though the Petro government highlighted irregularities in Honduras’ elections, Grupo ASD continued its involvement in the tallying process.
Another Pro-Israeli Government?
Regardless of who manages the counts, on June 21, Espriella will face already over 9.6 million votes secured by Ivan Cepeda. While mainstream media presents the outcome as a significant defeat for the Historic Pact (HP), it’s actually the strongest showing the Colombian left has achieved in a presidential election’s first round.
Un dato del que poco se habla. La izquierda colombiana ha tenido un crecimiento exponencial en 12 años. Ahora solo falta vencer a la ultraderecha trumpista y seguir creciendo 4 años más haciendo políticas para el pueblo. pic.twitter.com/4HK4fZcTSL
— Aníbal Garzón 🌎 (@AnibalGarzon) June 1, 2026
This achievement for a party facing relentless opposition from Colombia’s elite and their media is noteworthy. Elvin Calcaño wrote for Canal Red that “elites like those in Colombia, whose power relies on land ownership, value command over financial gain”:
[W]ith the left in power, they have not ceased to generate wealth. Some evidence even suggests that certain Colombian economic conglomerates increased their earnings in recent years. But under Petro and the Historic Pact, they no longer hold the reins, and that’s intolerable for them.
Over the past two and a half years, Petro has not only made enemies within Colombia but also faced hostility from Israel. As one of the most vocal critics of Israeli actions in Gaza, he has consistently attempted to translate his rhetoric into policy.
Under Petro’s leadership, Colombia severed ties with Israel in May 2024, banned coal exports, and expelled Israeli diplomats. Petro also signed Presidential Directive No. 07, outlining a pro-Palestinian stance for the Colombian government.
Both Israel and the U.S. likely hope to reverse these positions and may perceive Espriella as a vehicle for achieving this. He has already promised to restore diplomatic relations with Israel and relocate Colombia’s embassy to Jerusalem, seeking to enhance ties with both Israel and the U.S. as other right-wing governments in the region have done.
And just like that: Israeli flags are flown at the rally for Abelardo de la Espriella, Colombia’s ultra-right-wing frontrunner pic.twitter.com/hwBtHQP3ir
— David Adler (@davidrkadler) May 31, 2026
If Espriella achieves victory, Colombia will not only join Trump’s “Shield of the Americas” but will also align with the Abraham Accords, which would bind Colombia to deeper economic and military partnerships with Israel. As noted previously, Tel Aviv is rapidly enhancing its influence in Latin America, particularly in nations that have been vocal in opposition to its actions in Gaza.
Additionally, it’s noteworthy that Espriella is a naturalized U.S. citizen. Should he win the runoff, he would become the second U.S. citizen leading a Latin American government, following Ecuador’s Daniel Noboa. Bolivia’s newly elected president, Rodrigo Paz, was born in Spain. Does this signal the onset of a broader trend?
A Brief History of Interventions
This is not the first instance of U.S. interference in electoral processes throughout Latin America. For over two centuries, Washington has imposed, supported, and ousted governments in the region. However, the recent actions stand out for their sheer scale and impertinence.
In the past eleven months, the Trump administration has directly involved itself in electoral processes across at least four Latin American nations: Colombia, Honduras, Argentina, and Brazil. In Honduras, Trump not only supported the right-wing National Party candidate Tito Asfura but also threatened adverse consequences for the country should his candidate lose.
The New York Times investigated and concluded that Trump’s interference likely influenced voter behavior. A report by the Center for Economic and Policy Research determined the “electoral process was… affected by overt foreign interference,” remarking that the actions of U.S. political figures “exerted undue pressure on the electorate.”
This aggressive strategy bore fruit, with Asfura unexpectedly claiming victory. Accusations of electoral fraud emerged, even from National Electoral Council members, such as Marlo Ochoa, who stated:
“Continuing their tradition of illegalities, the representatives of the two-party system have hastily imposed an election declaration without completing the vote count or addressing concerns for a recount. It’s clear that the U.S. and elites allied with organized crime desire a president who will serve their interests, regardless of how he emerges.”
Last July, the Trump administration imposed 50% tariffs on numerous Brazilian goods and sanctioned a Brazilian Supreme Court Justice to protect former President Jair Bolsonaro from facing trial for attempted coup-related offenses.
Bolsonaro’s son, Eduardo, reportedly lobbied Washington to enforce the tariffs against his own country to safeguard his father. This has now resulted in his facing criminal charges.
Shortly afterward, Argentina became the next target. As the Milei administration appeared poised for financial ruin and likely defeat to the Peronists in the late October mid-term elections, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent promised substantial American support—but only if Argentina voted for Milei.
As Charlie Garcia noted in a recent op-ed for Market Watch, Washington employed its economic clout to manipulate the electoral outcome, aiding a few Wall Street moguls with close ties to Bessent, leaving the general populace to bear the costs.
The next focal point may be Peru, where Roberto Sánchez faces Keiko Fujimori in Sunday’s runoff elections, followed by Brazil, with Jair Bolsonaro’s son, Flavio, challenging incumbent President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva in October. The Trump administration is already hinting at preemptive measures, designating two criminal groups in Brazil as terrorist organizations.
As observed in the cases of Venezuela and Mexico, these actions could indicate upcoming interventions. Lula has criticized this behavior while also cautioning Trump against undermining Brazilian sovereignty. Yet since returning to office in late 2022, Lula has failed to uphold the sovereignty of neighboring nations, including Venezuela and Cuba.
