Colombian President Gustavo Petro said that the military plane crash that occurred last Monday in the south of the country, in which 69 people died, “does not appear to be an attack.” With that statement, the president has, for now, ruled out the hypothesis of an attack, one of the versions that began circulating after the tragedy.
The statement aims to provide an initial framework for the investigation amid uncertainty. As technical work progresses to determine the causes of the crash, the government is trying to contain speculation surrounding an event that has shaken the country and sparked a strong political debate.
Meanwhile, the 58 injured are recovering favorably, most of them at the Military Hospital in Bogota, although two of them, in less serious condition, remain at the hospital in Florencia, the capital of the department of Caqueta. Regarding the person who had been reported missing, it was confirmed late yesterday that they did not board the flight, so the final number of people traveling on the crashed aircraft was 127.
Colombia’s Petro says military plane crash ‘does not appear to be an attack’
Gustavo Petro was emphatic when referring to the possibility that the aircraft had been shot down or attacked by an armed group. As he explained, the initial indications do not point in that direction and there is no evidence supporting that hypothesis.
“It does not appear to be an attack,” the president said, stressing that, so far, no signs of an external explosion or impacts have been found that would indicate the aircraft was targeted by a violent act. His remarks align with preliminary analyses by military authorities, who have also, for now, ruled out the involvement of illegal actors.
The statement carries weight in a context like Colombia’s, where the presence of armed groups in several regions means such hypotheses arise immediately after tragedies of this kind. However, the government insists that, based on the information available, there are no elements to support that version.
With the possibility of an attack preliminarily ruled out, attention is now focused on the aircraft’s technical conditions and what occurred in the minutes before the crash. Petro made it clear that there is still no definitive explanation, but suggested that “something happens in the aircraft that causes it to fall.”
That statement reinforces the hypothesis of a possible mechanical failure or some internal problem in the aircraft. The president also highlighted the crew’s experience, which, in principle, reduces the likelihood of human error, although it does not eliminate it entirely.
“The crew had all the experience, twenty thousand hours across the entire crew. It’s difficult to attribute it to human error, with so many people and so much experience. The probability of human error is small. What the press said, that it was an attack—there are no signs of explosions. It does not appear to be an attack. What did happen is that an engine clipped a tree, but it was already going down,” the head of state said.
Another version that emerged after the crash, related to the length of the runway in Puerto Leguizamo, was also dismissed by the president. As he explained, the infrastructure was adequate for that type of aircraft and would not be a determining factor in the accident.
Investigations are now focusing on key aspects such as the aircraft’s maintenance, its operational condition, and the circumstances under which it took off. These elements will be crucial in establishing responsibility and understanding what happened in one of the country’s worst recent air disasters.
Intense political debate and questions about the aircraft’s condition
The president’s statements have not only set the initial direction of the investigation but have also fueled an increasingly intense political debate. Petro has questioned the condition of the military fleet, noting that for years the country has operated with aging aircraft.
The president has been critical of decisions by previous governments, suggesting that reliance on outdated equipment may have influenced the tragedy. These statements have prompted a swift reaction from the opposition, which accuses him of politicizing the accident—something that unfolded yesterday across the political spectrum, with multiple exchanges of accusations on social media.
In this exchange of claims, one of the most affected figures was former president Ivan Duque (2018–2022), whose government received the crashed aircraft as a donation from the United States in 2020. Duque rejected the insinuations and defended the decisions made during his administration. From that camp, it is argued that the current government also bears responsibility for the maintenance and oversight of the aircraft.
“The previous government bought a bunch of old planes, basically hand-me-downs. So we depend on outdated equipment. The armed forces are operating at 45% capacity out of 100%. And it’s not this government’s fault; it’s because for the past fifteen years they’ve only acquired donated equipment, and it’s outdated,” Petro said, placing responsibility for the poor condition of some equipment on previous administrations.
The president said that going forward “no obsolete equipment will be acquired” for the Armed Forces, emphasizing that the country will opt to purchase new weapons systems from different countries and, especially, prioritize domestic development and manufacturing.
What is known so far is that the aircraft was a Hercules plane, tail number 1016, manufactured in 1983 and acquired by Colombia in 2020. Military sources explained that the aircraft had undergone a major maintenance overhaul, a process that involves fully disassembling the plane, replacing parts, and ensuring its operability one year later.
This maintenance cost close to US$3 million and, according to the Colombian Aerospace Force (FAC), allowed the aircraft to continue in normal service with an “estimated service life of up to 40 additional years.”
Three days of national mourning and reconstruction of events
The country, meanwhile, remains in official mourning for three days following a presidential decree to that effect. The victims, most of them military personnel, have been honored in different regions, while their families await answers amid grief.
Petro’s words, ruling out an attack, provide an initial element of clarity. But they also make clear that there is still a long road ahead to fully understand what happened and to close one of the most tragic recent chapters in the country’s aviation history.
In the first reconstruction of events, the commander of the FAC, General Carlos Silva, provided a detailed report on the Hercules aircraft crash, describing how events unfolded, the nature of the mission, and the technical condition of the aircraft.
According to his account, the flight departed from Bogota at 7:00 a.m. bound for Puerto Leguizamo, in the Amazon region of southern Colombia, carrying cargo. The landing took place at 8:23 a.m., at which point military personnel boarded the aircraft.
On the next leg, already with 113 soldiers on board—bringing the total to 127 passengers including the crew—the aircraft took off again. Minutes later, at around 9:41 a.m., the crash occurred about 1.8 kilometers from the runway, following a descending turn whose causes are still under investigation.
The officer added that, after the impact, the aircraft was engulfed in flames due to fuel and other fluids, a situation that has complicated initial analysis efforts at the crash site.
The military chief highlighted the experience of the main pilot, Major Fernandez, who had more than 5,800 flight hours, as well as the participation of other officers and noncommissioned officers serving as copilots, navigators, flight engineer, and loadmasters, all with varying levels of experience and responsibilities within the operation.
The investigation into the accident is being conducted under international protocols, involving analysis of the black boxes (flight data and cockpit voice recordings), review of videos, interviews, and evaluation of technical, human, and environmental factors.
According to the head of the FAC, the entire process “may take time,” as even components such as the engines must be analyzed by specialized manufacturers to determine the possible causes of the crash.