Broken Promises: A Political Agony for the Petro Grovernment

Translated by Valeria D’Alessandro

On June 20, 2022, the Colombian presidential elections marked an historic moment: for the first time, the majority of citizens chose a leftist president. Gustavo Petro, a former guerrilla member and leader of the progressist movement, defeated populist opponent Rodolfo Hernández and entered the Palacio de Nariño alongside Francia Márquez, Colombia’s first Afro-descendent vice president.

During his campaign, Petro promised a radical transformation. His proposals included free university education, public support for the unemployed, an end to new oil and gas exploration, and a comprehensive fiscal reform to strengthen the healthcare system. All of this was in the name of a building a more equal Colombia, a country capable of listening to the “silent majority of farmers, Indigenous peoples, women, and young generations” who have historically been excluded from political decision-making.

Today, nearly three years after its inauguration, those promises have never seemed so distant. Petro’s government is now perceived as just another administration marred by scandals and inefficiency. A lefties party that one positioned itself as a champion of social justice is now accused of perpetuating the same power dynamics it vowed to dismantle. As a result, the hope for genuine transformation is fading under this government, making way for a possible resurgence of conservative ideas ahead of the 2026 elections.

Between Scandals and Resignations: Instability at the Center of Power

Gustavo Petro’s political project has been obstructed not only by institutional barriers and economic challenges, but also by internal instability within his own government – at times more reminiscent of a soap opera than a presidential administration. Since the beginning of his term, Petro has replaced over 50 ministries, including 13 in just the past four months – figures that reflect the tension and lack of direction that have characterized the Executive.

In 2025 the situation further deteriorated due to ongoing scandals and repeated political upheavals. In February, the appointment of Armando Benedetti as Chief of Staff sparked strong public backlash. Benedetti has long been considered a controverse figure, having previously faced corruption trials and once been accused—though later cleared—of domestic violence. Despite this, Petro continued to place his trust in him, having already assigned him prominent roles such as ambassador to Venezuela and representative to the FAO. Benedetti also played a key role in the rise of Laura Sarabia, who was appointed Minister of Foreign Affairs despite lacking any diplomatic experience. Just a few months later, Sarabia herself accused Benedetti of illicit enrichment and gender-based violence, igniting a fresh wave of political tension.

In response to the widespread criticism over Benedetti’s appointment, on February 4 Petro convened a televised Council of Ministers meeting that lasted six hours. During the broadcast, he directly accused his own administration of failing to fulfill electoral promises, stating: “I’m ashamed. The president is revolutionary, not the government.” His public defense of Benedetti only deepened internal divisions, leading to additional resignations – including that of the widely respected Minister of Environment.

This new cabinet reshuffle, announced on February 27, was intended to mark a turning point, but instead sparked further criticism. The appointment of General Pedro Sánchez as Minister of Defense broke a long-standing principle of the Colombian left: opposition to military figures holding government posts. Instability continued with the resignation of Finance Minister Diego Guevara, who opposed increasing the deficit to fund the administration’s reforms. He was replaced by Germán Ávila, an economist close to Petro but with no prior management experience. Ávila’s appointment unsettled markets, causing the Colombian peso to drop, while he attempted to calm investors by promising new fiscal measures.

No Reforms: Between Failures and Frustrations

Amid growing political chaos and a government plagued by chronic instability and crises, the failure of the bold promises that brought Gustavo Petro to power has become increasingly evident. A nation weary inequality and violence had placed its hopes in his vision for radical change, but nearly three years later, that initial enthusiasm has given way to disillusionment. The long-awaited reforms—especially the labor reform and the so-called “Paz total” (Total Peace) initiative—have stalled amid political conflict, strategic missteps, and a growing loss of credibility.

The labor reform, one of the pillars of Petro’s program, aimed to rebalance the relationships between workers and employers by strengthening trade union rights, limiting night work, and improving contractual conditions. However, criticism arose from several sectors—particularly small and medium-sized enterprises—highlighting the lack of concrete measures to integrate the vast informal economy and ensure economic sustainability. After a particularly troubled legislative process, the proposal was rejected, marking one of the most emblematic failures of Petro’s administration.

Meanwhile, the “Paz total” initiative –announced as a historic step toward national pacification – has revealed itself to be a confused and contradictory process. Negotiations with armed groups multiplied without a clear strategy, generating more uncertainty than results: ceasefire violations increased, as did violence in rural areas. Local communities, initially engaged and hopeful, are now denouncing a severe lack of coordination and tangible outcomes. The promises made were never fulfilled and have only fueled frustration in a population that, once again, is left without the long-awaited structural solutions.

Although Petro is trying to use these final months to salvage the political legacy of his government, the effort feels more like a desperate race than a structured relaunch. The recent rise in approval–which reached 37%, the highest point in the last two years—is largely attributed to popular mobilization, a strategy he has used before to reinforce his standing with his base. The president has returned to the streets, as shown by his participation in the May 1^st protests, where he one again pushed the issue of labor reform, openly challenging Congress. However, signals coming from across the country suggest a different reality: that of a weary population demanding fewer symbols and more solutions. Nearly three years into his term, Petro still oscillates between the role of street activist and Head of State, without managing to reconcile idealism with effective governance. If he truly wants to end his presidency on a positive note, he should focus less on campaigning and more on governing – seriously addressing the remaining possible reforms and correcting an administration that, so far, has been defined more by broken promises than by tangible change. Otherwise, his historic election risks being remembered only as a missed opportunity.

Mondo Internazionale APS - Riproduzione Riservata ® 2025