Colombia is navigating one of the most delicate security moments in recent history. While armed groups and criminal structures continue to expand across large swaths of national territory, the country’s armed forces, military police, and National Police are confronting mounting internal constraints. An internal report from the Office of the Inspector General, obtained by La FM, warns of a progressive weakening of these institutions, one that is already affecting their ability to respond effectively to today’s security challenges.
The findings arrive at a time when Colombia faces a complex and evolving threat landscape. Criminal organizations are not only surviving but adapting, fueled by illicit economies and increasingly sophisticated operational models. At the same time, reductions in troop numbers, budgetary limitations, and declining international cooperation are narrowing the state’s room to maneuver. Security analysts caution that this imbalance risks undermining territorial control, public trust, and long-term stability.
According to Javier Flores, a member of the Fundacion Ideas para la Paz (FIP), the current situation is the result of years of accumulated decisions rather than a sudden collapse. Speaking to La FM, Flores stressed that underinvestment in key areas such as intelligence and troop morale, combined with strained relations with strategic partners such as the United States, has left Colombia’s security institutions more vulnerable at a time when criminal groups are becoming stronger and more agile.
A system under strain: Fewer troops and limited resources
The Inspector General’s report outlines a sobering diagnosis. Colombia’s armed forces and National Police, it concludes, are operating with diminished capacity due to a sustained reduction in personnel and persistent budgetary constraints. These factors have directly affected the institutions’ ability to confront the security threats facing the country, particularly in rural and peripheral regions where state presence is often fragile.
A reduced force means fewer units available to secure territory, conduct patrols, and maintain a consistent presence in areas historically affected by violence. Budgetary limitations, meanwhile, have impacted everything from equipment maintenance and training to mobility and technological modernization. Without adequate funding, even experienced units struggle to operate at full effectiveness.
Flores emphasized to La FM that this deterioration has been unfolding over several years, noting that the gradual erosion of capabilities has weakened the institutional backbone of Colombia’s security apparatus. He pointed specifically to shortcomings in military intelligence and the morale of troops, both of which are critical for sustaining long-term operations against organized crime.
Responsibility for addressing these challenges, Flores argued, ultimately lies with the national government. The annual security and defense budget is approved at the central level, and political decisions about spending priorities have direct consequences for operational capacity. When investment in security institutions stagnates or declines, the effects are not immediately visible but accumulate over time, leaving forces less prepared to respond when threats intensify.
Criminal organizations gain ground as the state loses capacity
While state institutions grapple with internal constraints, criminal groups are moving in the opposite direction. Armed organizations and criminal networks continue to recruit, finance themselves, and expand their influence, particularly in regions where state presence has weakened.
According to Flores, the scale of the challenge remains substantial. “Today we have around 25,000 people under arms,” he told La FM, referring to members of armed groups and criminal structures operating nationwide.
These organizations benefit from robust illicit economies, including drug trafficking, illegal mining, and extortion. The financial resources generated by these activities allow them to replace losses quickly, acquire weapons, and adapt their strategies with speed and flexibility. In contrast, security forces constrained by reduced budgets and personnel face significant obstacles in sustaining prolonged operations.
The result is a growing asymmetry. As criminal groups consolidate control in certain territories, communities are left exposed to violence, coercion, and illegal governance. This dynamic not only threatens public safety but also erodes citizens’ confidence in the state’s ability to protect them. In areas where military or police presence is reduced, armed groups often step in to fill the vacuum, imposing their own rules and deepening cycles of violence.
Flores warned that confronting these organizations requires more than short-term deployments or isolated operations. Effective responses depend on strong intelligence capabilities, coordination between military and police institutions, and sustained investment over time. Without these elements, the state risks remaining in a reactive posture, constantly responding to crises rather than preventing them.
Strained U.S. relations and the cost for Colombia’s national security
One of the most significant factors highlighted by Flores is the decline in international cooperation, particularly with strategic partners such as the United States. For decades, Colombia benefited from close security and defense ties with Washington, including intelligence sharing, training programs, and financial assistance. That cooperation has diminished in recent years, and Colombia is already feeling the impact.
Speaking to La FM, Flores said that the weakening of military and police institutions has been compounded by a reduction in international support. Unfortunately, the frictions between President Gustavo Petro’s government and the United States have become a key factor complicating cooperation. These tensions, no doubt, have made it more difficult for Colombia to advance effectively in the fight against armed groups and criminal structures.
Reduced cooperation affects multiple dimensions of security. Intelligence sharing becomes more limited, access to advanced technology is constrained, and joint training initiatives lose momentum. Over time, these losses translate into fewer operational advantages on the ground, precisely when criminal organizations are becoming more capable and better financed.
The broader implication is that security challenges cannot be separated from foreign policy choices. As Colombia recalibrates its international relationships, experts warn that it must carefully assess the consequences for national defense and public safety. Flores underscored that security institutions do not operate in isolation; they depend on political backing, stable funding, and strong alliances to function effectively.
Looking ahead, Flores emphasized during his interview for La FM that security must become a central issue in the 2026 elections. In his view, voters and political leaders alike need to engage in a serious debate about the future of Colombia’s Armed Forces and National Police. The choices made in the coming years—about budgets, international partnerships, and institutional priorities—will shape the country’s ability to confront criminal violence and protect its citizens.
As the Inspector General’s report makes clear, the warning signs are already visible. Shrinking forces and growing risks are not abstract concepts but realities playing out across Colombia’s territory. Whether the country can reverse this trajectory will depend on political will, sustained investment, and a renewed commitment to strengthening the institutions tasked with safeguarding national security.