Bogota is burning, but not from the usual political fire. Colombia's long-simmering civil war has crashed through the gates of its electoral process, as state authority disintegrates under the weight of cartel violence, guerrilla insurgencies, and paramilitary expansion. This is not a normal election. It is a referendum on whether the country can remain a functioning state.
For decades, Colombia has lived in the shadow of a low-intensity conflict. But the fragile peace deal with FARC has collapsed into a patchwork of violent fiefdoms. In the remote regions, local officials are being assassinated, polling stations destroyed, and candidates forced to flee. The state's monopoly on violence has evaporated, replaced by a digital-age warlordism where cartels use drones and encrypted messaging to coordinate attacks.
I have seen this before in my work on digital sovereignty. When a state loses its ability to enforce law through physical means, it often tries to build a digital fortress. But Colombia's problem is not a lack of data. It is a lack of trust. The people no longer believe the government can protect them, so they turn to local strongmen who promise order. This is a feedback loop of disintegration: violence erodes trust, which weakens the state, which invites more violence.
The election itself has become a target. Candidates are being kidnapped or killed at an alarming rate. Reports from the countryside tell of armed groups imposing curfews and demanding that voters support their preferred candidates. The electoral commission is overwhelmed, unable to verify the integrity of the vote in many districts. This is a crisis of governance, not just politics.
But here is where the story gets interesting for those of us who watch the intersection of technology and society. The Colombian government has begun deploying AI-powered surveillance systems to track insurgent movements. Drones with facial recognition, predictive algorithms that flag potential flashpoints. It sounds like a solution, but it is a dangerous game. These systems are only as good as the data they are trained on, and in a conflict zone, data is often weaponised. False positives can lead to massacres. The algorithm does not care about guilt or innocence, only patterns.
Meanwhile, the digital sovereignty of the average Colombian is under threat. Without a functioning state, there is no one to regulate the digital platforms that now dominate daily life. Cartels are using encrypted apps for logistics, spreading disinformation on social media to influence voters, and hacking into government databases to delete records of their crimes. The state's response has been to demand backdoors into these platforms, but that only invites more surveillance abuse.
Consider the user experience of a Colombian trying to vote. Imagine opening your phone to find a message from a cartel telling you which candidate to support. Imagine seeing a video of a neighbour being executed for supporting the wrong party. This is not a bug in the system. It is a feature of a collapsing state.
The international community is watching, but its response has been tepid. The US offers military aid, which only fuels the violence. The EU offers diplomatic support, which is ignored. As an observer, I worry that we are seeing the blueprint for future conflicts. When a state loses its authority, the vacuum is filled by non-state actors who are more agile, more ruthless, and more technologically savvy. The future of warfare is not between armies but between algorithms and ideologies.
For now, the election continues. But the result will be meaningless if the state cannot enforce it. Colombia stands on the edge of a digital dark age where power is fragmented and trust is broken. The question is not who wins, but whether the country can rebuild. And that will require more than a vote. It will require a new social contract, one that balances security with freedom, and technology with humanity. I am not optimistic.
