In his two years as president of Colombia, Gustavo Petro has affirmed a style of governance characterized by his constant pronouncements. Speeches, interventions, and especially messages on social media, primarily on X platform. However, in the last 24 hours, this favored communication channel has been filled with silence. Since the polls closed in Venezuela, the president of the neighboring country, which has received 2.8 million migrants, has remained silent. While other regional leaders have reacted to the announcement of Nicolás Maduro’s re-election and the opposition’s fraud allegations, either supporting the opposition or the government, or calling for more transparency, Petro has chosen silence.
Throughout Monday, the leftist president did not deliver speeches, make public appearances, nor did he use his X account, an everyday activity for the president. There, he only shared a message from his foreign minister calling for a “total counting of the votes, their verification and independent auditing,” and another message from the Executive celebrating the opening of a bidding process for a railroad. Fixed on his X account is his previous message from the Friday before the elections. “Venezuela makes democratic decisions. Whatever its will will be respected by my government,” he states succinctly.
While Petro remains silent, events have unfolded rapidly, pushing the crisis in Venezuela into an increasingly dramatic situation. On Sunday, the electoral authorities took several hours to speak. They finally reported that with 80% of the polling stations declaring a victory for Maduro with 51.2% of the votes. But the opposition, led by María Corina Machado, claimed to have copies of 30% of the electoral records reflecting the voting, indicating that their candidate, Edmundo González Urrutia, won with 70% of the vote. The National Electoral Council’s website crashed, official records went missing, and the pro-government Venezuelan prosecutor accused the opposition of hacking.
The United States, through its Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, and Chile speaking through its president, questioned the results. “We demand complete transparency of the records and process, and that international observers not committed to the government account for the veracity of the results. From Chile, we will not recognize any results that are not verifiable,” said Australian president Gabriel Boric. It was then that the Colombian Foreign Ministry called for a total count, but voiced by its foreign minister. Andrés Manuel López Obrador, president of Mexico, stated in his morning press briefing that he would accept the result when 100% of the votes are known. Later, a group of right-leaning countries in the region (Argentina, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Guatemala, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, the Dominican Republic, and Uruguay) went further, issuing a joint statement demanding a complete review of the results “with the presence of independent electoral observers.” Venezuela responded by expelling its ambassadors and expressing gratitude to those governments that have recognized the re-election, from Cuba or Qatar to Spain or Nicaragua.
For experts, the silence can have several explanations, but in any case, it implies a high cost, both internally and externally.
Nastassja Rojas, a Venezuelan academic and professor of International Relations, explains that the time that has elapsed is too long if the intention is to achieve success as an international mediator. This, considering everything that has happened, and that the reaction of the Foreign Ministry does not replace that of a loquacious president who has shown great interest in Venezuela during his two years in office. “Everything that has happened makes it different from other silences, such as the one Petro took time to break concerning María Corina’s disqualification,” she says, referring to one of the most criticized episodes of the electoral campaign. “It may already be too late to influence.” She explains that the scenario has moved very quickly. International relations expert Sandra Borda agrees. “The delivery of credentials to Maduro, for example, or María Corina’s reiteration that there was fraud, creates fait accompli. The government has knocked the table over, making it more difficult for any negotiator to succeed.
Newsletter
The analysis of current events and the best stories from Colombia, each week in your inbox
SUBSCRIBE
One alternative possibility, rumored by many and confirmed by none, is that Petro is cooking up a joint position with Brazilian Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, and that the strength of the two countries could help mediate the growing crisis. But even that alternative sees a window of opportunity closing amid mass protests clashing with Venezuelan security forces, as Machado and Chavist Vice President Jorge Rodríguez call for more marches around midday on Tuesday, or when Nicolás Maduro accuses the opposition of being fascist, burning electoral material, and announces a civic-military alliance to defend the country from “the far right.”
On the internal front, Petro faces pressure from his own divided base. Some, like Congresswomen Clara López or Gloria Flórez, have come out defending Maduro and vindicating his re-election, while others, like the president of the Chamber Jaime Raúl Salamanca, have called for a recount with external verification. Polls in Colombia reflect massive rejection of Maduro — the systematic Invamer Poll shows disapproval of over 90% for more than a decade — and the presidential silence contrasts with the well-nourished statements from all political leaders in the country. The Colombian president took 66 days to criticize Machado’s disqualification, a pivotal event of the elections and the guarantees agreements that he had helped to construct. After the elections and with Venezuela in flames, the timeline is no longer measured in days but in hours.
Subscribe here to EL PAÍS newsletter about Colombia and here to the WhatsApp channel, and receive all the informative keys of the country’s current events.