The Colombian guerrilla group National Liberation Army (ELN) responded today to a potential military operation against it in Venezuela, which would reportedly be spearheaded by Colombia, the United States, and Venezuela, by proposing to the Colombian state the idea of building a “national agreement.”
The statement, made public just hours after rumors intensified about this possible joint military operation, seeks to recalibrate the group’s discourse and reposition itself in the national political debate. Far from merely denying military actions, ELN proposes a broader dialogue that, in its words, would address the roots of a conflict that has left deep marks on Colombian society for more than seven decades.
The context in which this proposal emerges is particular: Colombia is approaching a key electoral cycle, with legislative elections scheduled for March 8 and presidential elections on May 31, 2026, amid a campaign that has heated up due to the internal crisis and to regional dynamics. In parallel, Bogota’s relationship with Caracas and Washington has taken on a new dimension following a U.S. military operation that resulted in the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, an episode ELN describes as an “imperialist aggression.”
The armed organization has used this context to justify its call for an agreement that would supposedly make it possible to confront Colombia’s “structural crisis,” although the proposal has been met with skepticism by various political and social sectors.
Colombia’s ELN reacts to possible military operation targeting it in Venezuela
In its statement, ELN’s negotiating delegation urged that the current electoral campaign serve as a forum to debate the creation of a “national agreement” that, according to them, would be the basis for overcoming not only the armed conflict, but also the social and political inequalities that persist in the country.
The document underscores the need to build a future based on democracy, sovereignty, equity, and social justice “for the good of the majorities,” in language that seeks to resonate beyond its traditional supporters. This initiative, presented as a historic opportunity, suggests that the next government should devote itself from day one to building that pact.
However, ELN’s proposal is accompanied by a political discourse that places responsibility on external forces, especially the United States, for worsening tensions in Latin America. By framing its call in a context it describes as one of “imperialist aggressions,” the guerrilla group attempts to link its initiative to an anti-imperialist sentiment that transcends Colombia’s borders.
This approach seeks to give a regional dimension to an internal conflict that many analysts have interpreted as a strictly national phenomenon. At the same time, the document highlights what they consider an intensification of political confrontation within Colombia, noting that the current electoral campaign has exacerbated divisions and tensions that, in their view, only a broad agreement could mitigate.
“2026 begins with increased imperialist aggression on the continent, especially with the military operation against Venezuela and the kidnapping of its president, threats that have extended to Mexico, Cuba, Nicaragua, and Colombia, and that appear poised to spread to other latitudes. In Colombia, political confrontation is intensifying in the face of the electoral process in the first half of the year, which will elect a new parliament and president of the republic,” the document says.
“The National Liberation Army proposes to the country, to political and social forces, the construction of a National Agreement to overcome the structural crisis and the social, political, and armed conflict of more than seven decades, enabling Colombia to build its future in democracy, sovereignty, equity, and social justice for the good of the majorities,” it continues.
“We consider the current electoral campaign an opportunity to debate this proposal, so that at the start of the next government we can undertake the construction of said national agreement,” they add.
El ELN le propone al país, a las fuerzas políticas y sociales, construir un Acuerdo Nacional para superar la crisis estructural y el conflicto social, político y armado de más de 7 décadas, que le permita a Colombia construir su futuro en democracia, soberanía, equidad y justicia pic.twitter.com/5kpWRVZGJv
— DelegaDPaz (@DDPazELN) January 12, 2026
A complex national scenario shaped by distrust
Any new attempt at peace talks between the Colombian state and ELN would face a far more complex and eroded landscape than in previous processes. After years of failed negotiations, abrupt breakdowns, and a sustained escalation of armed actions, the political and social space for resuming talks is increasingly narrow.
ELN, the last historically active guerrilla group with nationwide reach, has maintained an ambiguous strategy that combines pro-peace rhetoric with the persistent practice of kidnappings, attacks on energy infrastructure, and territorial control through the intimidation of communities.
This behavior has fueled deep distrust not only among public opinion, but also within the government of Gustavo Petro itself, which came to power with “total peace” as one of its main banners.
Sources within the executive acknowledge that ELN has shown a limited willingness to comply with even minimal commitments, such as verifiable ceasefires or respect for international humanitarian law.
Each breach has weakened the credibility of the process and generated internal tensions within a government that is also under pressure from sectors calling for a firmer state response to violence. In this regard, a year ago, the country’s president himself, Gustavo Petro, openly lamented this stance. “ELN has no willingness for peace,” the president said in January 2025, shortly before ending the dialogue with the group.
Reviving talks with ELN would require stricter conditions, stronger verification mechanisms, and a clear strategy to prevent the dialogue from being perceived as a concession to a group that, so far, has shown greater capacity to sabotage peace than to build it.
Este artículo de @semana es relativamente objetivo.
En efecto en Colombia la actividad narcotraficamte es cada vez más difícil.
El aumento de los cultivos en todo lo que lleva mi gobierno, apenas es de un 6% mientras la incautación aumentó en 150% respecto al anterior gobierno.… pic.twitter.com/K5EzKAJcEH
— Gustavo Petro (@petrogustavo) January 12, 2026
A regional scenario that complicates the outlook
ELN’s proposal also unfolds in a context of regional realignments. After weeks of intense diplomatic and military maneuvering — including an exchange of signals between the United States and Venezuela regarding cooperation and military presence in the region — the dynamics among Bogota, Caracas, and Washington have become far more intricate.
The talks expected between Petro and U.S. President Donald Trump in February could clarify the stance of both capitals regarding ELN’s presence on Venezuelan territory, an issue that has been a source of tensions and mutual accusations. ELN itself has pointed to the role it attributes to these international players in the current “geopolitical confrontation,” seeking to position its proposal as part of a broader movement to defend regional sovereignty.
Although the call for dialogue and for building a national agreement may sound appealing in a country weary of decades of conflict, the viability of such an initiative at this moment appears limited, at least as long as distrust and a climate of political confrontation persist.
ELN’s proposal, beyond its stated intentions, revives questions about how peace can be negotiated in a period in which the specters of violence intersect with electoral tensions and pressure from external powers. The real challenge for Colombia will be to discern whether this offer is an opportunity to move toward sustainable peace or simply another strategy within a conflict that has already cost far too much.