El Salvador and Colombia move toward tougher rule—what happens when “third terms” and “total war” collide with peace talks?

El Salvador’s ruling party has ratified President Nayib Bukele’s candidacy for the February 2027 presidential elections, effectively clearing the path for a third consecutive term. The decision was made despite criticism from lawyers and human-rights advocates who argue the move could further erode legal safeguards. Bukele’s political momentum signals that the administration intends to keep its security-first model at the center of the state agenda. In parallel, Colombia’s newly elected ultradireitista president Abelardo de la Espriella has promised a “total war” against narcos and guerrillas, framing a rapid crackdown as a core deliverable. Strategically, both stories point to a regional shift toward harder internal security postures, with implications for governance legitimacy and the balance between coercive capacity and rule-of-law constraints. In El Salvador, the ratification for a third term suggests continuity in the administration’s approach to public security and detention policy, which could intensify domestic and international scrutiny. In Colombia, de la Espriella’s pledge to end peace dialogues and eliminate the Presidential Council for Peace indicates a deliberate break with prior negotiation frameworks, potentially reducing incentives for armed groups to stay engaged in talks. The power dynamic is straightforward: governments are seeking to reassert control quickly, while armed actors and civil society face higher risks of confrontation and political marginalization. Market and economic implications are likely to be indirect but meaningful, especially through risk premia, investor sentiment, and the cost of security and compliance. In Colombia, a move away from peace processes toward “total war” can raise expectations of disruption in areas tied to illicit economies, affecting logistics, insurance, and local supply chains; this typically feeds into higher country-risk spreads and volatility in equities and sovereign debt. In El Salvador, prolonged political continuity may stabilize short-term policy expectations for security spending, but reputational and legal concerns can weigh on foreign capital appetite and development financing conditions. For both countries, the most sensitive instruments are likely to be local sovereign bonds, regional credit spreads, and FX risk perceptions, with potential spillovers into regional insurers and security-services demand. Next, the key watchpoints are whether legal challenges in El Salvador gain traction internationally and whether Colombia’s security escalation translates into measurable reductions in violence within the promised timeline. For Colombia, the trigger is the operationalization of ending the Presidential Council for Peace and the cessation of dialogue channels, followed by any retaliatory moves by guerrilla factions or criminal networks. For markets, monitor changes in security-related budget allocations, travel and shipping advisories, and insurance pricing in conflict-affected departments. Over the next 30 to 90 days, escalation or de-escalation will hinge on whether the new Colombian administration can demonstrate early results without provoking broader fragmentation among armed groups or undermining humanitarian access.

Geopolitical Implications

• 01

  Regional drift toward security-centric governance may intensify external scrutiny and complicate international cooperation on rights and justice.

• 02

  Ending Colombia’s peace dialogues could reduce negotiation leverage for armed groups and raise the risk of retaliatory violence.

• 03

  El Salvador’s continuity may sustain security policy and influence cross-border coordination and migration dynamics in Central America.

Key Signals

• —Legal and international responses to El Salvador’s third-term ratification.
• —Official steps in Colombia to abolish the Presidential Council for Peace and shut dialogue channels.
• —Early violence, displacement, and humanitarian access metrics in Colombia.
• —Insurance pricing and sovereign spread movements tied to perceived security escalation.