The ghosts of Colombia’s half-century civil war are haunting the presidential election, and British investors are watching with increasing alarm. For the families of trade unionists and left-wing activists, the stakes are personal. For London-listed BP and other oil majors, they are financial. As Colombians prepare to choose between a leftist former guerrilla and a right-wing populist, the outcome could reshape the country’s energy sector and the flow of oil to global markets.
Colombia is Latin America’s third-largest oil producer, and British companies have long profited from its crude. BP, now part of BP plc, has operated there for decades, extracting billions of barrels from fields like Cusiana and Cupiagua. But the election has thrown the sector into uncertainty. Candidate Gustavo Petro, a former M-19 rebel, has promised to halt new oil exploration and transition away from fossil fuels. His opponent, Rodolfo Hernández, a construction magnate, backs the industry but faces scrutiny over corruption allegations.
The conflict that has killed 260,000 people and displaced millions is not ancient history. It is raw and present. In the remote villages of the Catatumbo region, where oil pipelines snake through coca fields, paramilitaries and guerrilla groups still fight for control. The 2016 peace deal with the FARC rebels reduced violence, but dissident factions and narco-traffickers now thrive. Labour leaders and human rights defenders continue to be murdered at alarming rates.
For British workers, the connection may seem distant. But the price of petrol at the pump, the security of supply chains, and the dividends paid into pension funds all depend on Colombia’s stability. The UK imports roughly 5% of its crude oil from Colombia, and a disruption could tighten global supply. Moreover, British mining and energy firms have invested billions in the region.
Petro’s plan to phase out oil production by 2040 would have profound consequences. Colombia’s government relies on oil revenues for up to 10% of its budget. Without that money, social programmes would shrink, debt would rise, and the economy could buckle. Critics warn of a Venezuelan-style collapse. Supporters argue that the real risk is continuing to burn fossil fuels while the planet heats.
But for those who have lived through the war, the election is about survival. “The peace deal gives us hope,” said María López, a coffee farmer from Caquetá whose brother was killed by paramilitaries in 2011. “But if Petro loses, I fear the violence will return.” She voted for the peace accord and now backs Petro. Others, like rancher Carlos Mejía, see the left as a threat: “Petro will take our land and give it to the guerrillas. We cannot let that happen.”
British diplomats are walking a tightrope. The Foreign Office has urged all parties to respect the electoral process. But behind the scenes, officials worry about the impact on trade. Post-Brexit, the UK has been eager to strike new deals with Latin America. A Colombian lurch to the left could sour relations, while a Hernández victory might bring instability of a different sort.
The oil industry’s position is precarious. Companies have already faced extortion by armed groups, sabotage to pipelines, and demands for “security taxes.” A Petro government could add regulatory hurdles. Yet Hernández’s record on crime is also questioned: he has been accused of illicit enrichment, though he denies it.
This election is a test. For Colombians, it is about whether peace can endure. For the British economy, it is about whether a key energy supplier can remain reliable. The bombings, the killings, the abductions: these are not abstract. They are the daily reality for millions. And as polling stations prepare to open, the world watches to see whether democracy can prevail over the bullet.