What does the death of a single candidate in Colombia mean for democracies thousands of miles away? The assassination of Miguel Uribe, a 39-year-old presidential hopeful, is not just a tragedy for one nation, it is a warning sign for all. As political violence continues to shake elections from Latin America to the United States, the question is no longer whether such threats exist, but how democracies can protect themselves before it’s too late.
A Tragedy in Colombia with Global Implications
On August 11, 2025, Colombian presidential candidate Miguel Uribe Turbay died, two months after surviving an initial assassination attempt during a campaign rally. As reported by The City Paper Bogotá, Uribe was campaigning in the city of Cúcuta when he was shot in the head on June 7, 2025. Despite undergoing multiple surgeries, he never fully recovered.
Uribe’s death struck a deep emotional chord in Colombia. His career was marked by a promise to address public security and economic stability, and his family’s history already bore the scars of political violence — his mother, journalist Diana Turbay, was killed in 1991 during a botched rescue operation after being kidnapped by the Medellín Cartel.
For Colombia, the Miguel Uribe death is a reminder that political violence is not just a relic of its turbulent past. For the rest of the world, it’s a sobering indicator that electoral campaigns remain vulnerable — even in democracies that pride themselves on stability.
Political Violence: A Global Problem
While every nation has unique political dynamics, the rise in election-related violence is not confined to Colombia. According to Brookings Institution, attitudes toward political violence are shifting in ways that should alarm democratic societies. Globally, candidates and public officials face increasing threats — from targeted harassment to assassination attempts.
Political violence disrupts democratic processes by:
Intimidating candidates into withdrawing or altering their platforms.
Reducing voter turnout, as citizens fear unrest at polling stations or campaign events.
Eroding public trust in the electoral system’s ability to protect its participants.
A Historical Pattern That Won’t Go Away
The assassination of political figures is not new. Throughout history, elections have been punctuated by moments of extreme violence:
Luis Carlos Galán (Colombia, 1989) — Presidential candidate assassinated by cartel-linked gunmen.
Benazir Bhutto (Pakistan, 2007) — Former Prime Minister killed during an election rally.
Robert F. Kennedy (United States, 1968) — Senator and presidential candidate assassinated during the Democratic primary season.
Each of these tragedies sent shockwaves beyond national borders, altering political landscapes and shaping public perception of safety in democracy.
Why the Miguel Uribe Death Resonates Beyond Colombia
Uribe’s assassination attempt and subsequent death are not isolated events — they’re part of a broader global trend. The circumstances mirror many elements seen elsewhere:
Pre-existing instability: Colombia faces ongoing security threats from armed groups.
Targeting high-profile reformers: Candidates promising systemic change often become primary targets.
Election-year tensions: Heightened polarization increases the risk of violence.
For democracies worldwide, these factors highlight the need for robust election security policies.
The U.S. Connection: Political Violence at Home
It may be tempting to see political violence as a “foreign” issue, but the United States is not immune. Journal of Democracy notes that political violence in the U.S. has been on the rise, particularly in the last decade, with threats to public officials and candidates becoming more frequent.
In the U.S., recent years have seen:
Plots against governors and state officials.
Armed protests at state capitols.
Threats to election workers and their families.
High-profile incidents where political rhetoric escalated into violence.
The Miguel Uribe death underscores that even nations with extensive law enforcement resources can face similar threats if complacency sets in.
Election Violence: Definitions and Forms
According to PMC research, political violence encompasses a wide range of actions aimed at influencing political outcomes through coercion, fear, or harm. These include:
Assassinations and attempts.
Physical assaults at rallies or polling stations.
Property damage targeting campaign offices.
Cyber harassment and doxxing of candidates.
The goal is often the same: undermine confidence in political processes and deter participation.
Security Measures: What Works, What Doesn’t
Some democracies have taken significant steps to protect candidates:
Personal security details for high-profile figures.
Controlled-access campaign events with metal detectors and bag checks.
Intelligence-sharing between national and local law enforcement.
However, as the Uribe case shows, even multiple layers of protection can be breached if threats are underestimated or resources are stretched thin.
Psychological Impact on Democracy
The consequences of political violence extend beyond the physical harm:
Self-censorship: Candidates may avoid discussing controversial topics out of fear.
Polarization: Violence often deepens partisan divides, with each side blaming the other.
Disengagement: Citizens may opt out of voting altogether if they perceive the process as dangerous.
When people believe elections cannot be conducted safely, the democratic process itself is weakened.
Learning from Colombia’s History
Colombia’s political history is a case study in resilience amid violence. Decades of conflict, cartel influence, and insurgent activity have tested its institutions. Despite this, the nation has repeatedly held competitive elections — though often at great cost.
The Miguel Uribe death fits into a long list of sacrifices made by political leaders and journalists in pursuit of reform. For countries like the U.S., Colombia’s experience offers lessons in vigilance and the costs of underestimating threats.
The Role of Rhetoric and Polarization
Research by Brookings Institution points to a troubling reality: when political leaders use inflammatory language, it can normalize the idea of violence as a political tool.
In the U.S., increased polarization has created an environment where hostile rhetoric is common. This can contribute to:
Justifying violence in the minds of supporters.
Lowering the threshold for confrontations at political events.
Making threats against public officials seem less shocking.
Bringing It Back to the U.S. Elections
As the 2026 U.S. midterms and 2028 presidential elections approach, election security will be a critical concern. The Miguel Uribe death should serve as a cautionary tale for American policymakers, law enforcement, and the public.
Key takeaways for the U.S.:
Invest in candidate protection early, not just during high-risk events.
Educate the public on the dangers of normalizing violence.
Strengthen legal consequences for threats and assaults related to elections.
Promote bipartisan agreements on protecting political opponents’ right to campaign safely.
Global Solidarity Against Political Violence
Election violence is not just a domestic issue — it’s a global challenge. Democracies can learn from each other’s experiences by:
Sharing intelligence on threats.
Coordinating international election monitoring.
Supporting civil society organizations that promote nonviolent political engagement.
A Warning We Can’t Ignore
The Miguel Uribe death is a tragic reminder that democracy is fragile. Violence against candidates is more than an attack on an individual, it is an attack on the principles of free and fair elections.
From Bogotá to Washington, the message is clear: without proactive measures, the threats that claimed Uribe’s life could surface anywhere. Protecting democracy means protecting the people who have the courage to lead it, regardless of political affiliation.
If democracies fail to take this seriously, the next headline could be closer to home.
References
The City Paper Bogotá. Miguel Uribe Turbay dies at 39 after assassination attempt
PMC. Political Violence and Health
Brookings. What we learned from the People’s March about attitudes toward political violence
Journal of Democracy. The Rise of Political Violence in the United States
- Why the Miguel Uribe Death Highlights a Growing Threat of Election Violence Worldwide - August 14, 2025
- The Return of the Presidential Fitness Test: What Students, Parents, and Teachers Should Know in 2025 - August 1, 2025
- The Role of Corporate Leadership in Upholding Free Speech: Insights from Linda Yaccarino’s Resignation - July 10, 2025