Most of the Literature written about the armed conflict in Colombia focuses about what is known as “objective causes” of violence, amongst them, poverty and inequality come firsthand. However, this is a standing theory, the characteristics and conditions of our actual armed conflict show otherwise. In Colombia, the existence of mineral and natural resources and the dispute over their entitlement has been the cause for poverty, which in that manner has created inequality and has strengthened the conflict. This paper tries to prove this theory, from the study of several cases that show how the fight and dispute over the appropriation of natural resources has strengthened the conflict and increased poverty. These cases are located within the framework of the debate about economies of war and the role of natural resources and multinational investment in internal conflicts. The relationship between foreign investment, armed conflict and how they have demonstrated the economic interests of multinational corporations in some areas of the country (Sur de Bolivar, Choco, Cauca, Arauca) is an important factor that explains the resurgence of conflict in the period 1995- 2005 and consequently worsened the poverty of the Colombian population. The territorial conditioning, a consequence of the existence of mineral and natural resources and the dispute over its ownership, could represent flagrant violations to the physical, social, economic and cultural development of communities living there, causing displacement and thus becoming an important determinant of the situation poverty of the civilian population. Further research could be using this theoretical framework.